Showing posts with label business of workplace learning and communication—business management. Show all posts
Showing posts with label business of workplace learning and communication—business management. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 18, 2012

The Next Wave of EdTech: 12 Years After the Last Bubble, Have Investors Figured Out the Market As We Enter the Next One?


Over the past few weeks, the technology press has focused on a new wave of investments in online learning.  (It's interesting, those of us in the field moved from using the term online learning to e-learning in 2000; investors have remained with the term online learning.  But that's another discussion.)

For example, the Chronicle of HIgher Education has been running a series on new educational technology startups and the New York Times has run a series of similar features. Its series highlights a variety of startups, including one that helps professors manage e-mail from students.  (See Students Endlessly E-Mail Professors for Help. A New Service Hopes to Organize the Answers at http://chronicle.com/article/Students-Endlessly-E-Mail/131390/).

Many of the features in the Times focus on services providing online courses, like a feature on a series of online services that provide training on various languages for writing Internet applications (see A Surge in Learning the Language of the Internet at  http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/28/technology/for-an-edge-on-the-internet-computer-code-gains-a-following.html?_r=2&ref=business&pagewanted=all).  

In today's edition, the New York Times reports on a large investment in Coursera, a company founded by some professors at Stanford and that provides university-based courses for free online (see Online Education Venture Lures Cash Infusion and Deals With 5 Top Universities at http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/18/technology/coursera-plans-to-announce-university-partners-for-online-classes.html?ref=business).

Nestled between the enthusiastic reporting for these new ventures are some troubling details:
  • The founder of the e-mail company has
"no plans to generate revenue—the service is free and does not carry advertisements. Ms. Sankar said that she didn't write a business plan for the site, because she doesn't believe in them, and that she believes that once a critical mass of students and professors are signed up, revenue models can emerges" (quote from the article from the Chronicle cited above).  
Isn't that how the tech bubble burst the last time?
  • The quality of the free and low-cost courses for writing Internet applications mentioned in the New York Times article sounds pretty poor. An expert acknowledged that most students who complete these courses still cannot write applications.  One company quoted in the article admitted publicly that its courses could be improved.  
  • If one reads the fine print, the free university courses offered by Coursera and its competitors don't fully compete with those from universities. If students want feedback, they only receive it from other students. Sounds like a good plan but the article never explores the participation rates of students in these students-evaluate-students programs. Avoiding teaching assistants reduces costs, but if participation rates of students in evaluating one another are low, then many students might go wanting for feedback. (This is a real concern; the courses are voluntary, after all.)
Students also do not receive university credit; they receive certificates of completion.
The courses have no measures to protect against cheating.
And, most significantly, when the article cites the impact of courses on students, they have no figures to report. They provide qualitative data.  That's fine, because it provides insights into whom and how the courses affect students.  But both of the students mentioned are working professionals, rather than degree-seeking students.

Perhaps, then, these services are not really meant to replace universities; they're the beginnings of an online system for continuing professional education.  The only problem is, it doesn't sound like the founders of these companies have figured that out yet and, even if they have, the courses might need extensive rework before they can help workers really develop the skills and knowledge they need to succeed on the job.  

Thursday, January 05, 2012

Good News for Education Graduates

In a posting on the Economix blog of the New York Times, of 15 majors, education had the lowest unemployment rates: of recently graduated BAs/BEds, of BAs/BEds with work experience, and MAs/MEds.

Admittedly, few get rich on an education degree.  But they do stay employed.

View the details at:
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/want-a-job-go-to-college-and-dont-major-in-architecture/?ref=business

Friday, June 17, 2011

Pleased to Announce a "Promotion"

I recently received a note from TripAdvisor, saying that I had been designated as a Senior Reviewer. It made me feel like one of those correspondents on the Daily Show, which only employs senior correspondents.

Seriously, I thought the TripAdvisor approach was a rather clever way of acknowledging volunteer contributors to the website.

And the criteria for promotion are clear:

1-5 Reviews: Reviewer
6-10 Reviews: Senior Reviewer
11-20 Reviews: Contributor
21-49 Reviews: Senior Contributor
50+ Reviews: Top Reviewer

Of course, the quality of reviews is inconsequential to this scheme.

But it's a great way of recognizing voluntary contributors to the site and encouraging them to contribute more. I'm already working on my promotion to "Contributor."

Thursday, June 09, 2011

An Infant with Great Potential

Yesterday's post explored that, despite the hype, e-books are still in their infancy.

But everyone has high hopes for them.  Some of those hopes are admittedly hype.  But some are based on actual data and experience. Here are three cases:

  • A partner approach to online and print
  • Signs of life in the nonfiction market for e-books
  • New online course packs

Case 1. A Partner Approach to Online and Print

Some publishers are discovering that the path to e-books takes a journey through hybrid approaches, much like the route to e-learning involved a journey through blended learning.

The conversion of much workplace and university learning programs to electronic formats ended up involving blended formats, in which parts of programs were presented online and other parts remained in the classroom. This allowed all stakeholders to become comfortable with learning online. It reduced (but did not eliminate) instructor and learner resistance, and provided skeptical executives with an opportunity to try e-learning before making a full-fledged commitment to it.

Some evidence is arising that print media might be re-thinking their options along the same lines. The New York Times recently published a profile of the re-worked Hollywood Reporter. Until recently, the Reporter published a daily newspaper. Much of its news became redundant with the increasing myriad of Hollywood news sites. And it lost its focus on its core readers--Hollywood insiders--rather than Hollywood obsessed fans (OK, me).

To shift the focus back--while acknowledging the current realities of the entertainment news industry--new editor Janice Min reconceived the Hollywood Reporter as a combination of online and print contents:

  • Online news outlet, where breaking news was published on an ongoing basis
  • Glossy, weekly print publication, which publishes feature articles of interst to the traditional core audience of the Hollywood Reporter

The initial results after a year or so of publication suggest the transition has succeeded. Ad revenues--a key metric of performance in publishing--and which had fallen prior to the makeover, have--is up by 50 percent over the old daily version.

Min believes that only an outsider could have remade this publication (she came from US Weekly). Perhaps insiders could not have conceived of it; perhaps entrenched interests would have prevented an insider from implementing this vision.

So many visions of online publications approach them as clones of their print versions. Perhaps more publications will explore this partner approach.

Case 2. Signs of Life in the Nonfiction Market for e-Books

Industry figures suggest that early adopters of e-books primarily use them to read fiction.

But I always though that the real benefit would be in non-fiction.

Update-ability. Non-fiction titles feature time-sensitive information and electronic formats allow for easier updating of content.


  • Quantity. To keep up, many professionals and academics need to read many books and, ideally, have access to many of them simultaneously. e-Book devices provide readers with relatively easy access to several books on a single device.
  • Price. Because non-fiction titles are often highly specialized and intended for small slices of business and academic markets, the market potential for these books is limited, print runs are limited and--most significantly for consumers--prices are high. (An early article about e-books mentioned that one medical book that costs $US 3,600).

Now comes the first evidence that, perhaps, my hunch has some steam. e-Books seem to be waking the sleepy academic publishing market. Academic publishers specialize in research-based books that receive reviews similar to those of peer-review journals. Most of these books have small market potential, although a few become hits--at least, wihtin the disciplines they represent.

For the most part, print runs of these books are small and, once they're sold out, the books become rare books, difficult to find through book sellers and, sometimes, libraries.

Well, in a report on recent sales figures in the academic publishing industry (mostly represented by university presses) for the website Inside Higher Ed, Steve Kolowich reported that, although sales of print books are down, sales of electronic books have substantially risen since the first of the year.

For some presses, the rise has been as high as 1000 percent (from about 1.6 to nearly 11 percent of sales). Others have seen more modest gains.

The growth in e-book sales has two unqiue characteristics:


  • Most of the sales are for back-titles. Backtitles are books that are no longer available in print.

  • Most of the sales have occurred despite next to no marketing. In other words, readers are finding these books on their own.

Kolowich speculates that these results have implications for the marketing of e-books, which probably involve substantially different marketing schemes that used for printed books. As Kolowich notes, big displays of cardboard cut-out characters probably have no place in the marketing of e-books.


Case 3: New Online Course Packs

Two University of Chicago students realized that they were paying for something they had already bought--the readings in their course packs.

Students essentially pay three times for those readings. They pay twice for the readings in the course pack:

  • A per-page royalty for each reading, which goes to the publisher (at my university, they cited $C .21 per page)
  • A copying fee of about $C .05 pe page
    (plus Markup)

In addition, the student fees that students pay with their tuition also entitles them to an online copy of the same content through their university libraries.

Put in practical terms, students might spend as much as $C 6.00 for a 20-page article in print through a coursepack, when they could download it themselves from their university library (no additional cost) and print it on their own printers (let's say it's $.03/page) for a total cost of $C .60 for the same 20-page article (a savings of 90 percent).

That's one of the reasons I no longer provide course packs and just indicate to students that the article is available in the library and point them in the right direction. The other reason I do that is to help students become familiar and comfortable with the online library resources. Most of the students in one of my courses are first-time graduate students and, by directing them to the library weekly, I hope that the online journals become their first source of content and that the students become equally comfortable with peer-reviewed journals as a key, trusted source of information.

But I digress. The two University of Chicago students came to the same realization. But they also recognized that many students like the conveninece of a course pack.

So they devised an alternative--an online course pack, which Ben Weider describes in a recent posting on the Wired Campus blog of the Chronicle of Higher Education online.
The two students compile the readings for a course into a single online source.

And, in an innovation that could have positive impacts on education, the students who run the service also let professors who teach similar courses see one anothers' course packs so they can compare readings and, ideally, share the ideas.

The two students wondered whether their idea was legal and consulted a number of attorneys. The attorneys seem to believe that the students have not broken any laws.

Right now, the idea has received some funding and its business potential is being explored. Assuming that it succeeds, the coursepack could be reinvented for the electronic age.

Some Thoughts on What this Means

As both of these cases suggest, e-books show promise in non-fiction categories, both for periodicals and books.

But both cases also suggest that publishers need to do more work in re-conceiving of the ways in which people kinteract with print and electronic publications, and the means of marketing to potential readers.

These human processes take time--perhaps more time than was needed to develop the e-book readers.

And these are just two cases. I believe they signal something, but time might suggest otherwise.

Wednesday, June 08, 2011

e-Books: The Hottest Infant on the Market?

e-Books grows in interest among professional communicators and instructional designers.

  • Several sessions at the most recent Society for Technical Communication Summit addressed the topic.  
  • Furthermore, the most recent Horizon Report from EduCause and the New Media Consortium names e-Books as a trend that is likely to affect education in the next 12 months.  


But several pieces of evidence suggest that e-books is still in its infancy.

One has to do with hardware and software formats.  They still proliferate. Two broad categories exist and, even within them,  standards compete for supremacy.

Purpose-built e-book readers, such as the Kindle, Nook, Kobo, and Sony e-Reader. Each has its own market.  For example, according to the New York Times (published May 22, 2011 at http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/23/business/media/23nook.html?src=recg&pagewanted=all), the Barnes & Noble Nook has a strong appeal to women.

Although many believe that EPUB is the file format used on all e-reader devices, it is not.  In fact, the Kindle does not support it.

Tablets, such as the iPad and Playbook. The iPad has its own proprietary bookstore with iBooks, but the makers of other devices make compatible software for it.  For example, Kindle has an app that works on the iPad, so people can read Kindle books on an iPad.   Similar apps are available for tablets running under Android and Windows.

Another has to do with the definition of an e-book. Some people see the future of electronic books as interactive, multimedia experiences like the demonstration version of Sports Illustrated prepared by Wonderfactory.  Yet despite those images and claims like those by a recent tweeter at the STC Summit that “PDF is not an e-book,” many of the magazines for the Nook are PDF files.  And readers do not appear to be complaining about them.

Perhaps that gap between the potential and what readers are willing to accept can be explained by acceptance issues.  Several research studies suggest that, despite the acknowledged benefits of e-book readers—portability and lower cost of books—readers are still having difficult y giving up printed books.  That includes young readers.

A recent study noted that students believe that tablets will transform college—but most down own one.  And when they have used them, the study found that students had some practical problems, like writing notes in books.  (Chronicle of Higher Education online,  http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/students-say-tablets-will-transform-college-though-most-dont-own-them/31465 ).

Furthermore, business models for e-books are still being defined—and publishers of books have different allegiances than those of magazines.  Publishers of books embraced the iPad and iBooks because Apple was going to charge more for e-books than Amazon, which had insisted on $9.99 for popular titles.

In contrast, magazine  publishers are as frustrated with Apple as book publishers were with Amazon.  Until earlier this year, Apple would not let publishers offer subscriptions.  Even when they do, Apple won’t provide magazines with information on subscribers, which is essential for advertiser-sponsored publications as advertisers demand demographics of the audience to verify that the magazine is helping advertisers reach their intended customers.  In contrast, Barnes & Noble has partnered with magazines in offering subscriptions and provides magazines with data on their subscribers.

The last piece of evidence that, despite the increasing interest in them, e-books remain  in their infancy is the lack of empirical research on them.  Few studies exist and, of those that do, most explore attitudes towards e-books.

Monday, November 22, 2010

CSTD Thought Leader Presentation

Last winter, the planners of the 2010 CSTD Conference asked me to give a "Thought Leader" presentation.  Although my ego was boosted by the invitation, my mind was a bit flummoxed, as the conference planners let me choose the topic.   So someone considers me a thought leader, but about what  no one has any idea.

Of course, the planners wanted a topic soon after inviting me so I made up something broad and general--staying relevant--hoping that clarity would hit me as I actually prepared the presentation.

That was last spring, when I was finishing up my sabbatical and immersed in data from others' and my studies that paint a startlingly different view of the current state of training than is generally acknowledged.  That data points to a training system in which employers are increasingly less invested in developing their employees and in which workers assume the balance of the investment--that is, if they want to remain employed.

Although the situation scares me a bit, I also see a lot of opportunity for training professionals, although much of that opportunity will be outside of the employer-provided network of trainers.  I also think that this situation can empower workers to take more control of their own careers.  That, in turn, can lead to more satisfying careers.  But I think that we also need a system that provides that support and, as far as I can tell, no such system really exists.

At least, not yet.

The result was a presentation about whose technical content I feel quite secure.  But I had no idea how others would react to the presentation.

The e-Learning Guy posted the first reaction online and it's generally positive.
http://elearningguy.blogspot.com/2010/11/cstd-reflections-saul-carliner-and.html 
I'm anxiously awaiting the official survey responses to get a sense of how the rest of the audience felt.

A copy of the visuals is provided here, though I'm not sure that, on their own, they fully deliver the message.
http://education.concordia.ca/~scarliner/recentmaterials.html

Sunday, November 21, 2010

Professional Memberships--Fees Worth Paying

As part of its series, "Beat the Fees," Toronto Star reporter Chris Carter identifies 10 that are actually worth paying.


Among them:
10. Professional fees

Paying an annual fee to belong to a professional organization in your career field can provide valuable networking, educational or information-sharing opportunities. It also looks good as a résumé item.
See the entire list of fees worth paying at http://www.moneyville.ca/article/888723--10-fees-worth-paying

Wednesday, August 25, 2010

Corporate Responsibility, Possible Money Grabs, and the ROI of Tutoring: News Stirring Thought about Workplace Learning

  • Business owner Paul Downs wonders "Do I owe my employees a career path? Although he wants to retain employees and found that specialist workers are the most productive, he wonders what happens when workers "top out" on the career paths within his company.  He voices a concern that many employers feel--but concludes the value of supporting his workers outweighs the costs.  Read his thoughts at http://boss.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/12/do-i-owe-my-employees-a-career-path/?ref=business.
  • Jeanne Meister and Karie Willyerd make 10 predictions about the future of training in a recent posting on ASTD's Learning Circuits.  Most of the post focuses on the of technology in the future of workplace learning.  But they present more of an enthusiastic rather than critical look at the technology. For example, they see 3-D applications as a low-cost alternative to labs, without addressing the sometimes considerable cost of developing the software-based simulations.  Similarly, they talk about the increasing role of mobile apps but fail to link it to the larger--and ongoing--conversation about supporting performance and transferring training, which is the real process by which these applications for mobile devices offer value to learning.

They also note the role that public policy plays in encouraging workplace learning, and talk about individual learning accounts that some jurisdictions are offering their taxpayers.  But once again, they fail to demonstrate critical thinking about these accounts.  Meister and Willyerd present the accounts as additional revenue sources for tuition for workplace learning.  Why should workers pay their own cash for training on proprietary skills and products that only benefit the employer, when they could invest those funds in a neutral third-party provider who would provide the worker with durable, transferable skills that would make the worker attractive to all employers?  
In terms of the future of trainers, Meister and Willyerd advocate for mostly clerical role: accrediting workers' skills, saying that workers won't necessarily demonstrate competency through courses but, rather, through on-the-job activities. Meister and Willyerd present that certification responsibility as an exciting role--and the primary viable option for trainers.  But they only partially describe exactly what that role is for trainers.  Reading between the lines, if this role is similar to the role that Meister saw for in-the-trenches trainers at corporate universities, one real possibility of this view is that primary role of in-the-trenches trainers under this vision is to serve as contract administrators and trainers of on-the-job coaches—kind of like a specialized purchasing team for training.  This is hardly the "strategic partner" who has a "seat at the corporate table"  view advocated by the trade press and actively explored by strategic HRD research and theory.
Read the full article at http://www.astd.org/LC/2010/0710_meister.htm.

  • Although, ostensibly about parents purchasing tutoring services for their children (a booming industry, which grew 5 percent last year, despite the recession and cuts to schools), Paul Sullivan’s exploration of the “returns” on such tutoring offers some glimpses into the challenges of tallying the ROI of training.   For example, some parents come to tutoring with unrealistic expectations—that the only successful outcome is acceptan999ce to an Ivy League school. I was also surprised by the fees that some of the Manhattan-based tutors charge—as high as 8 times the rate of many contract instructional designers and technical writers. Check out Sullivan’s analysis at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/21/your-money/21wealth.html?hpw=&pagewanted=all. Visited August 21, 2010.

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

Scandals, Unnecessary Expenses, and $320K Kindergarten Teachers: News Roundup about Research, Schools and Higher Education

This second posting of news focuses about

  • Research 
  • Schools
  • Higher education

New from the research front: The recent announcement about a test for Alzheimer's disease is one of the first fruits of an unprecedented willingness among researchers in government, universities and industry (including pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers) to share data immediately.  This limited the amount of unnecessary duplication in research, thus allowing researchers to act on findings more quickly.  Apparently, the next area on which researchers have agreed to share data is the fight against Parkinson's disease.  Another plug for the "open" movement.  Check out the entire story at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/13/health/research/13alzheimer.html?hp=&pagewanted=all.

News about  schools

  • My former home town of Atlanta is giving high-stakes testing a whole new meaning.   Seems that the improvement in some of the public schools is too good to be believed, resulting in widely believed accusations of cheating on the standardized tests, with the superintendent of schools receiving the most of the blame.
An independent investigation has made significant inroads into clearing the superintendent of schools but that's not good enough for some.  A recent New York Times article provides an outsider's take on the situation: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/08/education/08atlanta.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=all .
  • On a brighter note, David Leonhardt reports on an economic analysis showing that the most effective kindergarten teachers have a strong--and quantifiable--long-term effect on their students.  In one long-term study of former kindergarteners from Tennessee, the research suggests that the impact is $320,000.  Read "The Case for $320,000 Kindergarten Teachers" at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/28/business/economy/28leonhardt.html?src=me&ref=business for details.

(Note to teachers:  Don't expect the pay raise any time soon.)

Meanwhile, higher education is taking quite a rap in the press.

  • In his OpEd piece, Academic Bankruptcy, religion professor Mark C. Taylor explores the real cost of the high-cost, high-stakes game of competition in higher education.  I'm not sure that he gets at all of the issues driving up academic costs, but he certainly identifies some key ones.  Read the piece at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/15/opinion/15taylor.html?hp.  
Also check out readers’ responses to Taylor.  Most challenge his arguments based on their personal issues, rather than meaningfully extend it.  
  • But a couple of authors are asking a more fundamental question: is a college education even worth the cost.
    • Time author Ramesh Ponnuru wonders whether Society "should help more kids go to college — or that we should make it easier for people who didn't go to college to make a living?"  (Visit http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1967580,00.html for the complete argument.)
    • New York Times reporter Kristi Oloffson suggests that an oversupply of college graduates exists on the job market--an oversupply that goes beyond the current recession--and many graduates face the real possibility of not being able to replay their student loans.  Certainly some Canadian research by the WALL team at the University of Toronto's Ontario Institute for the Study of Education suggests that many degreed people are over-educated for the jobs they have.  Read Oloffson's article at  http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1946088,00.html?iid=sphere-inline-sidebar.

Friday, August 06, 2010

Reflections on Museums 2: What Museums Cost Visitors—and Lessons for Information Architects and Information Designers

Although individual museums may wonder what to charge visitors, and some museum organizations consider the issue, for the vast majority of visitors, we primarily consider the issue on a case-by-case basis.  That is, we decide to visit a museum and, when we learn about the admission fee, we decide whether or not to pay it.

Admittedly, I haven’t looked for it, but I can’t say that I’ve seen much widespread discussion of the cost of museum visits.  Although most tour books include admission costs in their descriptions of museums, most reviews do not.  Nor have my museum reviews mentioned admission costs.

But the issue of cost quickly went top of mind when I began my marathon of museum visits this winter.  After visiting nearly 30 museums in as many days, museum admission costs admittedly became a daily issue.  In this post, I explore these costs—then relate the implications to information designers and information architects.

Basic Admission Fees Are Competitive within Their Markets
And in the process of facing it that frequently, I quickly observed that, although admission fees would vary among specific institutions, basic admission fees in a community were remarkably similar.  For example, in Paris, museum admissions typically ran between 8 and 10 euros; in Spain, admissions were slightly lower--6 and 9 euros.

That said, museum admissions in Europe seem remarkably similar to those in Canada, but significantly higher than many museums in the U.S., as many American museums do not charge admission (like the Smithsonian) or only charge admissions to special exhibitions (like the Baltimore Museum of Art and Minneapolis Institute of Arts).

Discounts Aren’t Easy to Come by 
Of course, being the tightwad that I am, I’m always looking for a discount.  So I paid attention to some of the discounts on offer:

  • People who receive public assistance can, in some countries, receive reduced or free admission.  
  • Student discounts are really young people discounts.  Most are restricted to students under the age of 30, even if the person can produce documentation verifying that he or she is a full-time student.  Given the focus on mature students and the fact that many of them would benefit from museum visits but have foregone income for a year, this age limit is both arbitrary and discriminatory; it should really be named “Traditional student discount.”  
Furthermore, some student discounts are limited to students studying within the country, as is the situation in France, Germany, and Turkey.   Although this is discriminatory, it is a bit more understandable, as visits to state-sponsored museum s are an extension of state-sponsored educations.  Students studying in other states are not sponsored.  It’s not nice, but it’s a bit more understandable.  
  • Teacher discounts are, available on an even more limited basis.  Spain is the most generous with its discounts; most Spanish museums offered me free admission when I showed my faculty identification.  Otherwise, only one other museum offered complimentary admission to teachers:  the Jewish Museum of Paris. All of the museums offering complimentary admission  did not ask what I taught or at what level.   
  • Membership in a national museum association only works within the country.  For example, I am a member of the Canadian Association of Museums.  One of the benefits is complimentary admission to museums throughout Canada.  When I was a member of the American Association of Museums, that membership card often worked in Canada, but as the Canadian association strengthened, that happened less frequently. 
An International museum association exists, called ICOM.  A benefit of membership in that organization is complimentary admissions throughout the world.  Figuring out how to become a member, however, is another story.    
Museum Passes Are Often a Deal Worth Passing On
To mitigate museum admission costs, my partner and I explored museum passes.  These are tickets that are good for a large number of museums for a limited number of days.  To be honest, consumers need to be cautious about these.  In some instances, they can be a good deal but, in others, they could actually wind up increasing admissions expenses.   For example, we bought passes in Berlin but did not buy them in Paris.

When deciding whether or not to purchase a pass, consumers first need to consider which museums they want to visit, then check the list covered by the pass.  If the pass does not cover some of the museums on the list, then its value is reduced.

Next, consumers need to figure out how many of those museums they might visit during the time period covered by the pass.  Visitors can typically visit just 1 or 2 museums per day; perhaps even fewer when trying to discover massive museums like the Louvre.

Last, consumers need to figure out the actual admission costs of the museum.  In our case, at a rate of about 1.5 museum s per day, we paid less by paying individual admissions (even without discounts) rather than paying for the pass.  I reached the same conclusion a year earlier with the New York Museum pass, which is promoted by the same company as the Parisian pass.

In contrast, we saved money with the Berlin Museum Pass.  (Not surprisingly, the pass appears to be promoted by a different organization than the Parisian and New York passes.)  Its cost was about that of three museums and we visited 5 on the pass. But the pass  did not cover every museum we wanted to visit, such as the commercial DDR Museum and Story of Berlin, and one historic church.  We found that, as a result of purchasing the pass, we actually selected museums based on whether or not they were included on the pass.

What Does this Mean to Information Architects and Information Designers
On the surface, museums and websites are unrelated phenomena.  After all, museums are cultural institutions that exist in three dimensions; websites are informational and educational institutions that exist in two dimensions.

But, as a great speaker (whose name escapes me right now) once observed, sometimes the best ideas come from non-competitors.  And as websites struggle with the challenge of generating revenue from users, information architects and information designers might learn a few lessons from museums.

The ability to charge for content seems to have some contextual basis.  That is, museums in Europe and Canada, have similar admissions fees, and are able to charge across the board.  In contrast, museums in many American markets do not charge admission fees, perhaps making it harder for other museums in their markets to charge anything other than nominal admission fees.

In other words, market conditions might determine whether a website can charge users a general entrance fee.  In markets where most competitors do not charge fees, only a concerted action by all will change the rates. Airlines have tried this with only mixed results; when several airlines raise fares, often one will not, to skim off the rest of the business from price-conscious consumers.

When basic fees are constrained by market conditions, a la carte fees offer an alternative. For example, although many American museums do not charge a basic admission fee, they do charge fees to see special exhibitions.  These fees are often as high as, if not higher than, regular admission fees to comparable museums in other markets.  For example, special exhibitions at the Baltimore Museum of Art require separately purchased tickets.

But the practice is not limited to American museums that do not charge a basic admission fee.  The Prado in Madrid, for example, had a general admission fee and separate fees for special exhibitions.

Information architects and designers might consider this as an alternate approach; providing access to some content either for free or for a lower general price, and providing access to other content only after purchasing a “special ticket.”  Generally, most professional associations adopt this model, providing some general information about the profession for free, but providing articles, research studies, and similar intellectual property only to paying members.

Memberships offer benefits to both parties.  For people who want to frequently visit a particular museum, or merely want to show their support, they can become a “member” of the museum.  All levels  of membership offer free admission to the general collection and special exhibitions (though they might limit visits to special exhibitions).  More costly memberships provide additional privileges, such as invitations to exhibition openings.  For those who have income limitations, like students, seniors, and families, special prices make membership affordable.

Information architects and designers might also consider such approaches to charging for their websites; a one-time visit fee (like a one-time admission fee to a museum) as well as memberships for frequent visitors and supporters.  Similarly, information architects and information designers might consider offering different levels of membership with different levels of access to information, as well as discounted memberships for groups who have limited incomes.

In some ways, this resembles the approach to websites taken by professional associations, except theirs is an all-or-nothing approach.  This approach might work better with magazines and other subscription materials, as they can charge for one issue (as some are starting to do for the iPad) and general subscriptions.

When several related websites want to reach the same groups of users, they might collaborate with passes.  As the museums of Berlin, New York, and Paris collaborated to offer a single pass that provides admission to several museums, so information architects and information designers who work with several websites trying to reach the same group of users might collaborate with one another by offering a “ticket” that lets users visit all of the sites for a period of time by using a single pass.  This is an idea that is being considered by the community that publishes online periodicals; news reports suggest that they are considering subscriptions that provide access to several publications at once (much like cable companies offer “packages” of specialty stations).  When creating such passes involves several publishers, the challenges are admittedly daunting, as participants need to determine what to charge, how much access to provide, and how to divide the revenue—among other questions.

And how should websites deal with “donations” of content (also known as user-generated content)? On the one hand, user-generated content—that is, tips, insights, ideas, and similar information that users contribute to the website, appears to be a gift.  On the other hand, whenever anyone can contribute to the site, usually anyone does—including people trying to advertise professional services (without paying for the privilege), sell reliable and dubious products (once again, without paying for the privilege) and people offering advice who, in reality, have a stronger need for it.  Museums face similar challenges; people want to donate items that may or may not relate to their collections and, even if they do, might not strengthen that collection.  As a result, most museums have acquisitions policies, which govern which artifacts they seek and the conditions under which they accept them.  Similarly, many online press outlets as well as specialty websites—plagued by flaming or irrelevant posts—have increasingly adopted policies regarding these “gifts” of content, limiting them to registered users whose identities they can always track.  In some instances, contributors may need to join the website (at a fee) to continue receiving the privilege of contributing.

What does this mean?  As information architects and information designers struggle with the challenges of which content to provide for free and which for a fee, and whether to allow the general public to contribute comments or only registered users, we might look to museums for models of how to approach these challenges and adapt them to our needs: general admission fees, a la carte fees, membership, passes, and gift privileges.
Next post:  Different ways of learning from museums.