Descriptive standards and collection management software for documentary heritage management: attitudes and experiences of information professionals

Renshaw, Chelsea; Liew, Chern Li

doi:10.1108/gkmc-08-2020-0129

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The approach of bringing professionals from different fields into contact with each other should be accompanied by a modification of university curricula referring metadata specialists to make them less stratified and more interprofessional (Renshaw and Liew, 2021), so that metadata experts are able to adapt to a biodiversity collection, to a human heritage catalog and even to working in a library or archive.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, some authors (Alexiev, 2018; Freire et al , 2019; Smith-Yoshimura, 2020) have identified linked open data and semantic data integration as key elements in this process. At the same time, it is important to consider the perspectives of authors such as Renshaw and Liew (2021), who suggest that convergence is increasingly being viewed as problematic because of the very different contexts of the various types of institutions involved.…”

Section: Introduction and Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

GLAM metadata in museums and university collections: a state-of-the-art (Spain and other European countries)

Salse

Guallar-Delgado

Jornet-Benito

et al. 2022

GKMC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this study is to determine which metadata schemas are used in the museums and university collections of the main universities in Spain and other European countries. Although libraries and archives are also university memory institutions (according to a Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums perspective), their collections are not included in this study because their metadata systems are highly standardized and their inclusion would, therefore, skew our understanding of the diverse realities that the study aims to capture. Design/methodology/approach The analysis has three components. The first is a bibliographic review based on Web of Science. The second is a direct survey of the individuals responsible for university collections to understand their internal work and documentation systems. Finally, the results obtained are complemented by an analysis of collective university heritage portals in Europe. Findings The results of this study confirmed the hypothesis that isolation and a lack of resources are still major issues in many cases. Increasing digitalization and the desire to participate in content aggregation systems are forcing change, although the responsibility for that change at universities is still vague. Originality/value Universities, particularly those with a long history, have an important heritage whose parts are often scattered or hidden. Although many contemporary academic publications have focused on the dissemination of university collections, this study focuses on the representation of information based on the conviction that good metadata are essential for dissemination.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introduction and Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

GLAM metadata in museums and university collections: a state-of-the-art (Spain and other European countries)

Salse

Guallar-Delgado

Jornet-Benito

et al. 2022

GKMC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The need to improve the quality of cultural heritage metadata and collection management systems (CMSs) is stressed [35]. Metadata enrichment through crowdsourcing annotation services [32] and machine learning techniques [36][37][38][39] is recommended.…”

Section: Digitisation and Archivingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Novel Ways of Discovering, Capturing and Experiencing Cultural Heritage: A Review of Current State-of-the-Art, Challenges and Future Directions

Pappa¹,

Makropoulos²

2022

Heritage - New Paradigm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present chapter investigates the emerging paradigm of cultural heritage experience, as shaped by the continuous advances in information technologies. Recent years have seen the growing digitisation of cultural heritage, leveraged by innovative information technologies (imaging technologies, multimedia, virtual reality etc.). Advanced digitisation, and digital preservation and accessibility have been instrumental in transforming conservation and scientific research methods in the field of cultural heritage, as well as people’s experience of cultural heritage assets, relics, and monuments. Digitisation and immersion technologies are already in use in the context of cultural tourism in museums and on location. At the same time, a manifold of new applications and services can be generated from the adoption and adaptation of relevant technologies already applied in other sectors (e.g. 2D/3D digital scanning technologies applied in the construction industry). The present chapter will provide a thorough review of relevant digital technologies and existing work in the field, highlighting important research efforts and achievements; and will discuss the current challenges and promising avenues for future work. Following a literature review methodology, our research will provide a critical appraisal of carefully selected work from recent scientific literature and contribute to the systematisation of the current knowledge in the field towards the identification of key challenges and the extraction of new insights in terms of potential for practical applications and future research directions in the area.

show abstract

“…Memory institutions, especially those that function at a national level, are inherently political anyway by what they have historically selected to collect and preserve, and what they prioritise in their curation. The decisions they make about whose memories and history they preserve (Davidson, 2015), transmit and communicate, and how those records are represented and organised in their collections (Renshaw and Liew, 2021) are not necessarily apolitical. National memory institutions such as national libraries and national archives have a responsibility to the diverse communities they purport to represent through their collections.…”

Section: Social Media Risk Management For Memory Institutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Let's talk about risks: a pillar framework for social media risk management in memory institutions

Liew

2021

OIR

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeWhile memory institutions' use of social media has proliferated, research and scholarly literature on risks, resulting from social media use, memory institutions' social media risk-aware culture and, in particular, social media risk management remains scant. This study addresses this knowledge gap and identifies aspects of social media risk management from other sectors that could inform the cultural heritage sector.Design/methodology/approachThis research involves a review of the scholarly and professional literature that contribute to social media risk management discourses. These include those that discuss the different categories of social media risks, social media policies, risk-aware culture and social media risk management strategies and processes. Works discussing social media risk management models and frameworks are also included in the review. Based on the insights gained from these reviews, a pillar framework to guide social media risk management in memory institutions is developed.FindingsThe proposed framework outlines the baseline components relevant for the cultural heritage sector and underlines the evolving and continual nature of these components. Elements particularly important to memory institutions are highlighted. Notably, that social risks as a risk category must be recognised. Also noted is that the conventional apolitical stance still taken by many memory institutions need to be reviewed. The importance of memory institutions to be not overly risk-averse to the point of failing to take advantage of the affordances of social media platforms, thereby stifling potential innovations around services and engagement with their users/audience is discussed.Originality/valueThis research offers an extensive review of the social media risk management literature, both scholarly and professional across different domains. The ensuing insights inform the development of a pillar framework to guide social media risk management in memory institutions. The framework outlines a baseline mapping of the governance, processes and systems components. The expectation is that this framework could be extended to account for contextual and situational requirements at more granular levels to reflect the nuances, variances and complexities that exist among different types of memory institutions and to account for varying attributes, mandates and priorities in the cultural heritage sector.

show abstract

Descriptive standards and collection management software for documentary heritage management: attitudes and experiences of information professionals

Cited by 5 publications

References 30 publications

GLAM metadata in museums and university collections: a state-of-the-art (Spain and other European countries)

GLAM metadata in museums and university collections: a state-of-the-art (Spain and other European countries)

Novel Ways of Discovering, Capturing and Experiencing Cultural Heritage: A Review of Current State-of-the-Art, Challenges and Future Directions

Let's talk about risks: a pillar framework for social media risk management in memory institutions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About