A Google Search is NOT Exhibit Development

First, let me state that I really like Google --- I've even been to the Googleplex.

But Google has a tendency to erode exhibit research and let some museum folks think that a Web-infused shortcut is a substitute for the tricky work of actually understanding and connecting ideas.

The Web is a great purveyor of information. Still, bits and bursts of information do not necessarily equal knowledge --- the type of deep understanding of a subject that leads to compelling stories and exhibitions. (This is also why many "digital panaceas" like AI applied to exhibition development are often so trivial, but that's for a future posting ...) 

Recently, I've been bumping up against three types of Google abusers during the exhibit development process. These are perfect examples of the axiom that "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing."

1) The Google "Expert" This first googly-eyed abuser is really someone who should know better because they are often experts in their respective fields. I've recently worked on several science-related exhibits where content experts on the exhibition team just sent links or URLs (or cut-and-paste sections of web pages) as responses to specific questions about scientific content.

Ummm ... I could do that Google search myself! How about providing nuanced advice or expertise if you're an advisor or exhibit team expert? Otherwise, why bother having exhibition advisors in the first place?

2) But Google says ...  The second miscreant always does a quick Google search of a particular exhibit content topic or material, and if the first (or first few) Google "hits" somehow differ from the direction the exhibition is heading, they'll pipe up with, "But Google says .." whether they actually have the foggiest notion of what's actually being considered.

Recently, a museum administrator claimed we couldn't use a particular item in an exhibit demonstration because "Google says it's dangerous."  Even though I produced the correct references and material safety data sheets, that particular idea was dropped from the exhibit programming.

Here's a news flash: The top results in a Google search (or Wikipedia entry or AI query) can often be misleading, if not completely incorrect. Web searches are a place to start, but to set Google as the ultimate arbiter of exhibition content, design, or activities is just plain silly.

3) The Google "Quick Draw Artist"  This last item is as much an etiquette issue as an exhibit development one.  Namely, people whipping out their screen-based devices to poke and search on -- even in the middle of a conversation.  Checking email and taking "Google potshots" during exhibit team meetings or discussions is just plain rude.  If we're taking the time to schedule an in-person meeting, can't we just turn off the screens for a bit?

What do you think?  Is Google gumming up your exhibit development process?

Let us know in the Comments section below!

Don't miss out on any ExhibiTricks posts! It's easy to get updates via email or your favorite news reader. Just click the "Sign up for Free ExhibiTricks Blog Updates" link on the upper right side of the blog.

Paul Orselli writes the posts on ExhibiTricks. Paul likes to combine interesting people, ideas, and materials to make exhibits (and entire museums!) with his company POW! (Paul Orselli Workshop, Inc.) Let's work on a project together!

If you enjoy the blog, you can help keep it free to read and free from ads by supporting ExhibiTricks through our PayPal "Tip Jar"

Creative Inspiration: Chrome Music Lab

Chrome Music Lab is a nifty collection of interactive "experiments" that lets users explore the fundamental elements of music like rhythm, chords, and harmonics.

Google has assembled these collaborations between musicians and coders into one place for anyone with a Web browser to try out.   And best of all,  the Music Lab examples were built with the freely available Web Audio API, so anyone with the time, and some technical know-how, can put together similar interactive explorations into sound and music.

Even as a non-musician, I really enjoyed playing and experimenting with all the Music Lab modules, but two of my favorites were "Voice Spinner" (pictured at the top of this post) and "Rhythm" (pictured below.)

In Voice Spinner, you use your computer's microphone to capture your voice and create "sonic circles"  that can then be played backwards or forwards at different speeds.  Not only is it super fun, but the Voice Spinner interface really lends itself to repeated experimentation.  (I had fun trying to recreate the backward-tracking sections of old Beatles songs!)

The "Rhythm" module lets you choose among sets of different cartoony animal musical combos. Each set of animals plays different percussion instruments that you can then control by clicking or un-clicking dots (like musical notes) onto a set of parallel lines.  Once you set everything into motion the animals play different rhythms in time to the dots you placed.   It's a deceptively simple interface that let's you set up really complex rhythmic patterns!  It's also really fun to use to collaborate with someone else.

So bravo to Google for turning Chrome Music Lab loose into the world!  It's worth clicking over to the website to play with all 12 current modules --- each one of which can easily serve as creative inspiration for museum/exhibit/design folks!



Don't miss out on any ExhibiTricks posts! It's easy to get updates via email or your favorite news reader. Just click the "Sign up for Free ExhibiTricks Blog Updates" link on the upper right side of the blog.

Looking for fun and innovative ways to integrate technology into your museum? Contact POW! today to discuss how we can turn your good ideas into great exhibits!


P.S. If you receive ExhibiTricks via email (or Facebook or LinkedIn) you will need to click HERE to go to the main ExhibiTricks page to make comments or view multimedia features (like videos!)

Can Social Psychology Predict Successful Museum Project Teams?

Did you ever notice how particular teams or working groups at some museums always seems to produce interesting, successful projects, while other museums filled with equally likeable and intelligent people never quite seem to get their projects to fly?

I kept coming back to memories of successful (and unsuccessful!) museum project teams as I read the fascinating article in the New York Times about the research conducted by the Project Aristotle group at Google, entitled "What Google Learned From Its Quest to Build the Perfect Team."

The article is really worth reading for yourself, but I'll give you a bit of the punchline in this post.  (SPOILER ALERT!)

After looking at over a hundred groups at Google, the Project Aristotle researchers determined that the key factor for project teams to become successful was "group norms."

Roughly translated, that means that each group's "culture" determined the outcome of the group's work more than any other factors --- not age, gender, education, experience, even overlap between group members on different teams.

From the article:

"What interested the researchers most, however, was that teams that did well on one assignment usually did well on all the others. Conversely, teams that failed at one thing seemed to fail at everything. The researchers eventually concluded that what distinguished the ‘‘good’’ teams from the dysfunctional groups was how teammates treated one another. The right norms, in other words, could raise a group’s collective intelligence, whereas the wrong norms could hobble a team, even if, individually, all the members were exceptionally bright."


Successful project teams shared two common qualities.  On good teams, members spoke in roughly the same proportion:

"As long as everyone got a chance to talk, the team did well.  But if only one person or a small group spoke all the time, the collective intelligence declined."

Secondly, all the good teams had something the Project Aristotle researchers called high "social sensitivity."   Which means that successful team members were skilled at picking up on nonverbal cues --- like tone of voice, or facial expressions, to determine how other team members were feeling.

So given their findings, and Google's strong desire to improve the success of project teams, did the researchers draw up a list of prescriptions for teams to follow?  Not at all!  Rather, the Project Aristotle group shared their data and findings with people and assumed groups and their leaders were smart enough and motivated enough to incorporate the findings into each working group's "culture."

But most importantly, even for a data-driven company like Google, everyone in the organization came to realize that success was not always something that could be "optimized" or driven strictly by some one-size-fits-all business principles.

Again, from the article:

"Project Aristotle is a reminder that when companies try to optimize everything, it’s sometimes easy to forget that success is often built on experiences — like emotional interactions and complicated conversations and discussions of who we want to be and how our teammates make us feel — that can’t really be optimized."

And I think that is what holds tremendous promise for the future of museums and our projects --- that our interactions with each other as museum workers, and our interactions with the people who visit museums, can be grounded in rich (and yes, sometimes complicated) emotional experiences.

Onward!

Don't miss out on any ExhibiTricks posts! It's easy to get updates via email or your favorite news reader. Just click the "Sign up for Free ExhibiTricks Blog Updates" link on the upper right side of the blog.

P.S. If you receive ExhibiTricks via email (or Facebook or LinkedIn) you will need to click HERE to go to the main ExhibiTricks page to make comments or view multimedia features (like videos!)

Is Google Ruining Your Exhibit Development Process?

First off, let me state that I really like Google --- I've even been to the Googleplex.

But Google has a real tendency to erode exhibit research and let some museum folks think that a Web-infused short cut is a substitute for the tricky work of actually understanding and connecting ideas together.

The Web is a great purveyor of information, but bits and bursts of information do not necessarily equal knowledge --- the type of deep understanding of a subject that leads to compelling stories and exhibitions. (This is also why many "digital panaceas" like QR codes applied in exhibitions are often so trivial, but that's for a future posting ...) 

Recently I've been bumping up against three types of Google abusers during the exhibit development process that are perfect examples of the axiom that "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing."


The Google "Expert" This first googly-eyed abuser is really someone who should know better, because they are often an expert in their respective field.  I've worked on several science-related exhibits recently where content experts on the exhibition team just send links or URLS (or just cut-and-paste sections of web pages) as responses to specific questions about scientific content.

Ummm ... I could do that Google search myself! (In cases like this, I've been sorely tempted to send back a link from this website) If you're an advisor or exhibit team expert, how about actually providing some nuanced advice or expertise --- otherwise why bother having exhibition advisors in the first place?



But Google says ...  The second miscreant always does a quick Google search of a particular exhibit content topic or material, and if the first (or first few) Google "hits" somehow differ from the direction the exhibition is heading, they'll pipe up with, "But Google says .." whether they actually have the foggiest notion of what's actually being considered.

Recently, I had a museum administrator claim we couldn't use a particular item in an exhibit demonstration because "Google says it's dangerous."  Despite the fact that I produced the correct references and even material safety data sheets, that particular idea was dropped from the exhibit programming.

Here's a news flash --- the top results in a Google search (or Wikipedia entry) can often be misleading, if not completely incorrect. Web searches are a place to start, but to set Google as the ultimate arbiter of exhibition content or design or activities is just plain silly.



The Google "Quick Draw Artist"  This last item is as much an etiquette issue as an exhibit development one.  Namely, people whipping out their screen-based devices to poke and search on even in the middle of a conversation.  Checking email and taking "Google potshots" during exhibit team meetings or discussions, is just plain rude.  If we're taking the time to schedule an in-person meeting, can't we just turn off the screens for a bit?


What do you think?  Is Google gumming up your exhibit development process, or can it "do no evil"?

Let us know in the Comments section below.


Don't miss out on any ExhibiTricks posts! It's easy to get updates via email or your favorite news reader. Just click the "Sign up for Automatic ExhibiTricks Blog Updates" link on the upper right side of the blog.

P.S. If you receive ExhibiTricks via email (or Facebook or LinkedIn) you will need to click HERE to go to the main ExhibiTricks page to make comments or view multimedia features (like videos!)

Exhibit Designer's Notebook: SketchUp and Project Spectrum

SketchUp is a great free tool from Google that makes it easy to present ideas visually.

I've used SketchUp for several years now and really love its flexibility and simple learning curve.  I even started a Museum and Exhibits SketchUp group (which could use a little more traffic and interest --- so please join if you're not already a member.)

But today I'd like to highlight a program called "Project Spectrum".   Project Spectrum gives people along the autism spectrum, especially young people, an opportunity to use SketchUp to develop ideas and express their creativity while also learning a marketable life skill.

You can find out a little bit more about Project Spectrum by watching the video at the top of this posting (or here on YouTube.)

As noted on the Google for Educators website:  "The idea for Project Spectrum originated when we began getting phone calls and emails from users telling us about how much kids on the autism spectrum were enjoying SketchUp. As the calls kept coming in, we learned that people with autism tend to be visually and spatially gifted—that, in fact, they think in pictures. When people with these gifts get their hands on powerful, easy-to-use 3D design software like SketchUp, sparks tend to fly."

If you're not already familiar with the many other resources Google provides for educators check out the Google For Educators website.

And if you don't already use SketchUp, download your free copy today!

Don't miss out on any ExhibiTricks posts! It's easy to get updates via email or your favorite news reader. Just click the "Free Updates" link on the right side of the blog. P.S. If you receive ExhibiTricks via email (or Facebook or LinkedIn) you will need to click HERE to go to the main ExhibiTricks page to make comments or view multimedia features (like videos!)

Google Grants

Here's something that may help museums increase their online presence --- Google has a grants program that offers in-kind advertising through its AdWords product to selected grantees.

Here's a quote from Google: "Designed for 501(c)(3) non-profit organizations, Google Grants is a unique in-kind advertising program. It harnesses the power of our flagship advertising product, Google AdWords, to non-profits seeking to inform and engage their constituents online. Google Grants has awarded AdWords advertising to hundreds of non-profit groups whose missions range from animal welfare to literacy, from supporting homeless children to promoting HIV education."

You can find out more at this Google Grants website.