Responding to this point:

"Specifically, how people want us to present collections online, and
whether a wholesale approach to 'Web 2.0' type applications like UGC is
really justified without a clear purpose, audience and justification in
mind."

We've been doing a lot of research with educational audiences recently
through the DTI-funded Project Silver (http://www.silvereducation.org/). 
We've done a number of focus groups with teachers (and are starting to do
some with students - the project has a couple of years left to run).

So far, the feedback has shown:

- teachers want access to raw assets from trusted and recognised
collections (images, audio, video) that are contextualised to some degree
(with captioning, metadata, etc)
- they want to be able to use tools to 'personalise' these assets to fit
their own teaching requirements
- they want to be able to do this in an environment that fits the
infrastructure they have to live with at school and home (i.e. online tools
that integrate with school learning platforms)

It's obviously a specific audience with a clear purpose, but it does
indicate an appetite for web 2.0-type tools that support 'UGC', albeit
built on an existing base of knowledge.  The key is establishing the
trusted content 'feeds' into the web2.0 tools that can can support this
usage in education.

Hope this helps

Martyn


On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 12:08:05 +0100, Dylan Edgar <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> 
> We've been looking at stats quite a bit lately, and this culminated in
> Monday's dissemination event here at LTM that Bilkis and Richard
> mentioned. We wanted to explore some of the practical issues around
> different organisations taking a more strategic approach to collecting
> stats, and see how they could be used more effectively by the London Hub
> partners.
> 
> It's easy to dismiss stats as being pointless. There are issues around
> their accuracy, and they can provide a misleading picture of use. I
> suspect that Nielsen's remarks about bounce rates are probably more
> suited to e-commerce type environments, where a single page view is
> unlikely to result in a purchase. So from that point of view they
> probably are a problem. However, as Mia points out a single page view on
> a museum web site may result in the user achieving their particular goal
> perfectly well. This is the problem of course, they don't tell you
> anything about the user's reasons for being there and whether they got
> what they wanted. But then the same can be said of museum visitor
> numbers, which we've been happily using for years now...
> 
> However, I do think that the "stats are worthless so we shouldn't
> bother" argument is a bit too convenient, and rather misses the point in
> many ways. I think stats can work and do have a role to play, but it's
> important to recognise their limitations and see them as part of a
> bigger picture. The main conclusion we came to as a result of our work
> here in London was that the type of data you collect really depends on
> what you're trying to do.
> 
> In terms of stats, we found that there are some simple figures that can
> (and are) be used as 'headline' data, for the purposes of internal and
> external advocacy and reporting. This can be collated and used pretty
> consistently by different organisations like the Hub partners, and it's
> relatively easy for non-technical people to get their heads round. So
> for example, here at LTM we've recently become a charitable trust. As
> part of this process we now use a Balanced Scorecard type approach to
> report different aspects of museum performance to staff, Board and other
> stakeholders. This includes headline figures like:
> 
> - Visit to the museum, broken down by ticket type
> - Late openings visits
> - Gift Aid donations
> - Web Visits
> - Admissions Income
> - Retail Shop Income
> - Catering Income
> - Guide Books sold
> 
> I'm sure other museums take a similar approach. In this context, I think
> it makes perfect sense for web visits to be included. They give an
> overall indication of the level of use that the our online offering is
> experiencing, just as the museum visitor numbers do for our physical
> offering. Apart from anything else though, it makes it clear that the
> web is an important delivery mechanism for the museum and we're willing
> to be assessed on that.
> 
> I think this sends an important message. As IT professionals, we can't
> on the one hand endorse the web as an essential tool for museums, but
> then hold our hands up in horror when we're asked to actually be
> measured on it.
> 
> Once you get into the more detailed stuff - as Jeremy says - it's more
> difficult to do this sort of thing because the data is much more closely
> tied to site purpose, audience, architecture and so on. So broad
> comparisons are much less meaningful, but we found that the stats can
> still tell us a lot about how the site is used and inform developments.
> This kind of data is more generally suited to internal organisational
> use rather than the external advocacy and reporting.
> 
> Evaluating the 'impact' and 'value' of web offerings does seem to be a
> hot topic at the moment, and its important to see stats as part of this.
> The work we've been doing has been complemented by more qualitative
> audience research as well. As with the stats work, we wanted to look at
> practical ways in which the London Hub could approach market research in
> a more joined-up way. So we used online questionnaires, in-gallery
> visitor surveys and focus groups to try and get a decent picture of who
> our online users are, what they want, and try and work out whether they
> are getting it or not.
> 
> I think it's important to see the statistical data in the context of
> this more qualitative market research and as part of a broader package
> of measures and methodologies - both web related and otherwise - that
> help to establish a museum's overall performance.
> 
> We found that using different techniques to actively find out more about
> our online audiences can give us an insight into users' motivations and
> expectations and fill in many of the gaps left by web stats. The
> research was pretty broad-brush and did seem to raise more questions for
> us than it answered. However, here are some of the main findings from
> the market research at the London Hub, pasted in from a summary
> document:
> 
> 
> - By far and away the main reason for visiting our museum web sites is
> to plan a visit to the physical museum. This appears to be the case
> across the Hub museums, and was confirmed through feedback during the
> focus groups.
> 
> - Educational uses represent the exception to this rule, with teachers
> and families using the sites to look for teaching materials and ideas,
> online games, and material to help with homework.
> 
> - In general terms, the demographics of the Hub's online visitors
> broadly reflect those of the people who visit the museums.
> 
> - Overall, the research revealed that people would like more information
> about what they can expect to see and do when they visit the museum. 
> Information on the museum's objects, and details of events and
> exhibitions also ranked highly. These all relate to visitor information,
> and reinforce the view that people see the primary role of the museum's
> web presence as enabling and supporting the museum visit. 
> 
> - There's very little appetite for user-generated content on our web
> sites. In fact it consistently scored lowest in surveys and this was
> confirmed in focus groups. (We need to do more work on this, but it
> seems to support Linda's recently published findings about apparent lack
> of demand for 'Web 2.0' type services from HE and FE audiences).
> 
> 
> I'm sure that others will disagree strongly with a lot of this and will
> have different findings, and we've realised that we need to do more
> research to understand why people are telling us this. But this work so
> far has certainly raised questions in my mind about a number of areas.
> Specifically, how people want us to present collections online, and
> whether a wholesale approach to 'Web 2.0' type applications like UGC is
> really justified without a clear purpose, audience and justification in
> mind.
> 
> Hope this helps,
> 
> Dylan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Museums Computer Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Mike Ellis
> Sent: 03 July 2008 09:20
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Jakob Nielsen says '"Unique Visitors" Must Die'
> 
> 
> It's a really familiar refrain: stats don't work. What I'm not seeing is
> anyone actually doing anything about it.... :-)
> 
> 
> Mike Ellis
> Professional Services Group
> 
> Eduserv 
> [log in to unmask]
> tel:   01225 470522
> mob: 07017 031522
> fax:   01225 474301
> www.eduserv.org.uk
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Museums Computer Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Ottevanger, Jeremy
> Sent: 02 July 2008 16:00
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Jakob Nielsen says '"Unique Visitors" Must Die'
> 
> How many pages does the average Facebook user see on an average visit?
> Their own, perhaps? They can see what their mates are up to right there.
> Lots of Gmaps activity also takes place in one page view. For some
> sites, as Mia says, a higher number of page views probably indicates
> failure rather than success, in that the user should have been able to
> do what they wanted in fewer clicks. It all depends how the site works.
> As ever, there isn't a statistic that is meaningful in all situations
> (or indeed most). 
> 
> Perhaps Nielsen has a point, and some bounce rate measure would be an
> appropriate KPIs to report to DCMS or whoever. But to my 
> mind most stats are best suited to use by site owners/developers for
> their own purposes of evaluating and improving the effectiveness of
> their services, knowing the specific peculiarities of their offering. I
> can't think of a single (automated)indicator that won't mean opposite
> things for different sites. But I think Dylan is itching to say
> something....;-)
> 
> Cheers, Jeremy
> 
> 
> 
> Jeremy Ottevanger
> Web Developer, Museum Systems Team
> Museum of London Group
> 46 Eagle Wharf Road
> London. N1 7ED
> Tel: 020 7410 2207
> Fax: 020 7600 1058
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> www.museumoflondon.org.uk
> Museum of London is changing. Visit www.museumoflondon.org.uk to find
> out more.
> Explore how the Great Fire shaped the city
> www.museumoflondon.org.uk/londonsburning
> Jack the Ripper and the East End a major new exhibition at Museum in
> Docklands, opens 15 May
> Before printing, please think about the environment
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Museums Computer Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Ridge, Mia
> Sent: 02 July 2008 15:46
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [MCG] Jakob Nielsen says '"Unique Visitors" Must Die' 
> 
> Bilkis wrote:
> 
>> I don't know if you have come across this, but given the discussions 
>> that took place at the MCG in Leicester in June and the Museums Hub 
>> workshop on Monday, this makes some interesting reading:
>>  
>> Reduce Bounce Rates: Fight for the Second Click:
>> http://www.useit.com/alertbox/bounce-rates.html
> 
> Thanks Bilkis! 
> 
> Nielsen says, "bouncers should be considered a negative statistic: the
> site failed to engage them enough to entice even a second pageview."
> 
> Maybe.  But could it also be the case that some users have very simple
> needs (for example, is the museum open tomorrow, and until what time if
> so?) and that a good 'visit this venue' page answers that need entirely?
> In that case, is a 'bouncer' a positive statistic?
> 
> While it might be nice to entice these visitors to spend more time on
> our site, they simply may not be looking for an online experience at
> that time.  He does at least say "it's important to realize that there's
> no such thing as a single bounce rate" but then he focuses on referrer
> source rather than user requirements.
> 
> Nielsen's always good fodder for debate.  Am I the only one who can
> never quite agree with him?
> 
> cheers, Mia
> 
> **************************************************
> For mcg information and to manage your subscription to the list, visit
> the website at http://www.museumscomputergroup.org.uk
> **************************************************
> 
> **************************************************
> For mcg information and to manage your subscription to the list, visit
> the website at http://www.museumscomputergroup.org.uk
> **************************************************
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Visit Last Stop, an art exhibition of Ralf Obergfell's beautiful
> photographs that celebrate the Routemaster bus. The exhibition runs until
> 27 July and in London Transport Museum's CBS Outdoor Gallery
> www.ltmuseum.co.uk
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 
> This email and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for
> the use of the addressee. If you have received this in error please
notify
> [log in to unmask] and delete immediately. Any use, disclosure,
> forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited.
> London Transport Museum (LTM) hereby excludes any warranty and any
> liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and
> any attached transmitted files. 
> 
> LTM may monitor all email communications through its internal and
external
> networks. 
> 
> London Transport Museum Limited is a charitable company registered in
> England and Wales (company number 6495761 registered charity number
> 1123122) whose registered office is at Windsor House, 42-50 Victoria
> Street, London SW1H 0TL. London Transport Museum Limited is a subsidiary
> of Transport for London and as such is a company controlled by a local
> authority for the purposes of Part V Local Government and Housing Act
> 1989. VAT No. 756 2770 08
> 
> Copyright in this email and attachments belongs to TFL. 
> 
> This email and attachments have been swept for the presence of computer
> viruses and LTM accepts no responsibility for any virus imported with
this
> document.
> 
> **************************************************
> For mcg information and to manage your subscription to the list, visit
the
> website at http://www.museumscomputergroup.org.uk
> **************************************************

**************************************************
For mcg information and to manage your subscription to the list, visit the website at http://www.museumscomputergroup.org.uk
**************************************************