The chairwoman WG 2.3: Francesca Guerrera The experts WG 2.3 are: Ez Yuan, Ghislaine Boddington, Petja Janžekovič, Aleksandra Kostič, Tadej Vindiš, Jasper Ceelen, Bram Elewaut, Andre Selton, Marco Streefkerk The Working Group 2.3 Future in Mind of the VIMM Thematic Area 2-Directions has provided the outcome of work: a vast list of 41 best practices and state of the art examples of platform, collaborative projects and business models in order to gain sustainability used in cultural heritage VR/AR. It included an analysis of some bad practices and examples too. Even though far fewer posts were written about the future, we do feel this subject is of paramount importance if we want to work on future-proof solutions and advice for legislation that can be applied for longer than a few years.
Museums don’t traditionally have much access to early-stage investment expertise. Unless led by experienced startup investors, what is already risky becomes even riskier. With some asserting that an estimated 90 percent of startups fail, that’s a tough pill to swallow. To exaggerate the point, now imagine the flavor of an investment going into a company like Theranos. Despite the hype and allure of venture investing, it’s been widely reported that the majority of VCs underperform the market. There are plenty of companies already addressing the needs of museums, and the overall downside might be too much for most institutions to bear. None of this is core to the museum’s mission. Straying too far from the basics, conceptually and financially, can have a negative impact.
Cultural heritage should collaborate with existing technological platforms, models and already implemented solutions offered online (Google), challenging the boundaries, expand the relevance of museum practices, foster creative cultural production, reinforce the museums as a place for innovations.