Where the Gaps Live with Traditional Museum Object Cataloging
Rachael Cristine Woody
Standard museum cataloging leverages the usual set of fields that are considered best practice. We tend to refer to this information as “the tombstone information,” meaning it is clear and concise in communicating the “need to know” information.
While this information is certainly important and serviceable for many of the use cases found in the museum, it can lack depth—and ultimately fall short of offering meaningful information for those wishing to engage with and learn from the object. This is where the gaps live—where traditional cataloging doesn’t meet the needs or expectations of its non-museum staff users.
Where the Gap Lives in Museum Collections Management
There are two areas where the gap can be found in museum data:
- Where the data exists but can be expanded upon.
- Where there’s an absence of a field and related data.
One of the benefits of being a collection steward (collection manager, registrar, curator, etc.) is that we have inherent knowledge of the overall collection, we know where to look for information, and we know what information is in the CMS. However, the challenge is that we often take our insider knowledge for granted. This, in combination with minimum cataloging practices, means we are at greater risk of leaving out meaningful information that our users might be looking for.
Understanding User Needs & Expectations
There is much to consider when it comes to user studies. For our purposes, we’ll keep it brief—it’s a focus on the non-staff member user who is seeking information that could be derived from the museum CMS. However, in order for the CMS to be helpful, the information has to be in the CMS and it has to be discoverable via searching or browsing.
The Gap: Expanding Existing Data
If we consult the Cataloging Cultural Objects standards, the following fields are considered required for minimum best practice:
- Object Name (1.1)
- Title (3.1)
- Creator (2.2.1); Creator Role (2.2.2)
- Creation Date (4.2.3)
- Work Type (1.2)
- Measurement (3.2.1)
- Materials and Techniques (3.2.2)
- Description (8.2.1)
- Classification (7.2.1)
- Current Location (5.2.1)
- Subject (4.1)
The fulfillment of these fields can be pretty sparse. The only field to hold any amount of narrative length in a minimum best practice record is the description field. A minimum data practice does not allow a lot of room to provide additional information that could add further meaning to the item and better meet user needs and expectations.
The Gap: The Absence of Data
Then there is the gap of fields not included in minimum best practice, but which could facilitate discovery by the user. The following fields are examples of common enhancement areas. They may be called different names depending on your CMS, but their purpose is the same.
- Appraisal
- Catalog Memo
- Comparisons
- Condition
- Curatorial Memo
- Exhibit Label
- Exhibit Panel Text
- Literature Reference
- Past Exhibits
- Provenance
- Publication Text
- Related Resources (with link)
- Research Note
These fields (and many more) are available in the majority of museum collections management systems, but they may not be filled in with any regularity—almost always due to limited staff capacity. However, they are worth considering for prioritization given their potential to increase discoverability. Data enhancement is an optional activity for museum staff to consider when the balance of benefit gained and available staff capacity can be achieved.
Enhancing How We Use Our Museum CMS
Now that we’ve explored the gaps that may exist between minimum cataloging practices and enhanced cataloging, we’ll continue the mini-series with an exploration of where immediately available information can be found, how newly available information can enhance object data, and how the museum archives can support the enrichment of object records.
Additional Reading
- What Does Museum Data Enhancement Mean?
- An Overview of Common CMS Data Areas to Enhance
- How to Assess Museum CMS Data for Enhancement Opportunities
- How to Create a Plan for Museum CMS Data Enhancement
- How to Perform Museum CMS Data Enhancement
Rachael Cristine Woody
Energized by this post? Please join us for the companion webinar, Enhance Museum Collections Online with “Hidden” Troves of Information, October 30, 2024 at 11 a.m. Pacific / 2 p.m. Eastern. (Can’t make it? Register anyway and we will send you a link to the recording and slides afterwards). Online registration opens soon or call 604-278-6717.
**Disclaimer: Any in-line promotional text does not imply Lucidea product endorsement by the author of this post.
Never miss another post. Subscribe today!
Similar Posts
Considering AI as an Empathy Generator in Museum Spaces
Museums are well established as “empathy generators”, meaning the museum space in combination with artifacts and storytelling can help humans emotionally connect to (or at least better understand) other human groups that are different from their own.
The Application of AI for Museum Collections Online
What excites me the most about Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) application to museum work is its potential to improve discoverability of museum collections online.
AI Application to Museum Exhibitions
If you have a smartphone, have used a customer service chat, Googled, or asked Siri something, you have used Artificial Intelligence (AI). What about within the museum physical space?
What Does AI Mean to Museums?
The museum field is not one that considers itself “cutting edge” or even very technical, and yet AI can have a tremendous positive impact on our work and how we engage with our audiences.
Leave a Comment
Comments are reviewed and must adhere to our comments policy.
0 Comments