NOTES for a presentation given at Wikimania 2014 in London, sharing the genesis of Open Authority to Wikipedians in an effort to provide more confidence in speaking the language of the cultural sector. This talk detail the theoretical background behind Open Authority, as well as the spectrum of Open Authority, and elements that make up an Open Authority project.

1. Open
Authority:
A
New
Way
to
Talk
to
GLAMs
Saturday,
August
9,
2014
Hello.
I’m
Lori
Byrd
Phillips.
And
today
I’m
going
to
share
a
new,
or
more
nuanced,
way
for
you
to
talk
to
museum
professionals
as
you
pursue
Wikipedia
partnerships.
I’m
hoping
that
my
research
into
open
authority
can
be
a
useful
tool
for
you
to
more
confidently
speak
the
language
of
GLAMs.
Feel
free
to
tweet
me
@LoriLeeByrd.
Many
of
you
probably
know
me
as
the
former
US
GLAM
Coordinator
for
the
Wikimedia
Foundation,
and
a
founder
of
the
GLAM-­‐Wiki
U.S.
Consortium.
I
now
work
full
time
as
the
Digital
Marketing
Coordinator
at
The
Children’s
Museum
of
Indianapolis,
the
largest
children’s
museum
in
the
world.
The
Children’s
Museum
is
also
where
I
served
as
the
second-­‐ever
Wikipedian
in
Residence
from
2010-­‐2012.
That
said,
I’ll
be
talking
a
lot
about
museums,
specifically.
But
that
doesn’t
mean
that
these
things
don’t
also
apply
to
libraries
and
archives.
There
may
be
some
subtle
differences,
and
I
can
help
point
you
in
the
direction
of
those
who
can
chat
with
you
more
about
the
other
parts
of
“GLAM.”
They’re
all
around
you!
A
few
years
ago,
there
was
a
buzz
in
the
air
over
user-­‐generated
content
and
what
this
means
for
museums.
And,
on
the
user
side,
it
was
really
excited
buzz,
but
on
the
traditional
museumist
side
there
was
much
more
resistance.
At
that
time,
museums
were
terrified
of
the
idea
of
“the
crowd”,
fearing
that
curatorial
authority
would
be
sacrificed
in
the
name
of
crowdsourced
content.
Now,
slowly
but
surely,
museums
are
beginning
to
embrace
the
crowd,
with
Wikipedia
projects
being
one
of
the
best
examples.
But
there
are
still
fears
about
what
it
all
means
for
museum
authority.
So
I
became
interested
in
figuring
out:
How
can
museums
best
integrate
visitor
contributions
and
still
maintain
their
authority
and
established
reputations
as
experts?
Wikimania'2014'|'London'
Open%Authority%
A new way to talk to
GLAMs
Lori'Byrd'Phillips'|'@LoriLeeByrd'
The Children’s Museum of Indianapolis
ccby-sa3.0,TheChildren’sMuseumofIndianapolis
ccby-sa3.0,SarahStierch

2.
I’m
going
to
describe
two
established
metaphors
that
led
me
to
my
answer.
First,
a
metaphor
from
the
museum
world.
In
my
museum
studies
graduate
program,
the
1971
article,
“The
Museum:
A
Temple
or
the
Forum”
was
pounded
into
our
heads
so
much
that
it
essentially
became
its
own
meme.
(This
was
actually
our
class
t-­‐shirt.)
But
this
graphic
is
kind
of
misleading,
because
the
author
wasn’t
saying
that
museums
shouldn’t
be
temples.
It
was
that
museums
should
be
both
revered
temples
AND
forums
for
dialogue.
The
two
should
be
related
but
distinct.
This
was
an
important
moment
in
museum
theory,
because
it
expanded
on
the
idea
of
the
museum
as
a
keeper
of
objects,
to
also
become
a
place
where
a
community,
the
“crowd,”
could
come
and
share
their
ideas.
And
remember,
this
was
1971!
I’ve
learned
that
museums
aren’t
slow
to
come
UP
with
the
big
ideas,
but
they
can
sometimes
be
slow
to
implement
them.
My
work
with
Wikipedia
had
already
inspired
me
to
think
about
where
museums
fit
into
the
world
of
open,
collaborative
communities.
And
this
led
to
the
other
half
of
my
answer.
It
didn’t
take
me
long
to
discover
that
the
open-­‐source
movement
had
its
OWN
temple
and
forum
metaphor,
which
some
of
you
may
have
heard
of-­‐-­‐
it’s
called
the
Cathedral
and
the
Bazaar.
I
really
was
shocked
by
how
closely
these
metaphors
fit
together,
at
first
glance.
And
I
was
glad
when
these
lessons
from
the
cathedral
and
the
bazaar
really
could
be
applied
to
the
temple
and
forum.
Eric
Raymond
wrote
The
Cathedral
and
the
Bazaar
in
1997-­‐
&
it
compares
the
Cathedral
-­‐
which
is
top-­‐down
software
development
(like
Microsoft),
with
the
Bazaar
(Linux),
where
everyone
is
free
to
adapt
and
improve
open
source
software.
and
ccby-sa2.0Hades2K
Microsoft
Linux

3.
As
Wikipedians,
you
may
already
know
Raymond’s
most
important
point-­‐
“given
enough
eyeballs,
all
bugs
are
shallow.”
Or,
The
more
people
you
have
looking
at
a
problem,
the
more
quickly
you’ll
find
a
solution.
While
this
may
seem
obvious
to
you
all,
this
is
still
something
that
museum
professionals
need
to
better
understand.
Raymond’s
ideas
led
me
to
the
conclusion
that
museums
should
go
one
step
beyond
the
idea
of
the
forum,
and
embrace
the
collaborative
bazaar,
instead.
So
that
means
that
museums
can
be
temples
and
bazaars!
But
since
it
takes
a
lot
for
me
to
explain
what
I
mean
by
“temple
and
bazaar,”
all
the
time,
this
phrase
evolved
to
become
“Open
Authority.”
I
define
Open
Authority
as:
The
coming
together
of
museum
expertise
with
community
contributions,
both
online
and
on-­‐site.
“Authority”
is
still
important
in
all
this,
because
museums
should
still
maintain
that
level
of
respect
as
a
“temple,”
but
in
a
way
that
makes
sense
for
the
world
we
now
find
ourselves
in.
Rob
Stein,
a
leading
museum
technologist
and
enthusiast
for
open
content,
recently
described
the
state
of
authority
in
museums,
pointing
out
that
museums
should
remain
authoritative
in
their
expertise,
but
avoid
being
authoritarian.
They
should
move
away
from
being
an
omniscient
voice
or
final
“truth.”
Instead,
museum
professionals
should
be
at
the
center
of
an
open
discussion
with
the
public.
Again,
authoritative,
not
authoritarian.
In
reality,
the
increase
in
user-­‐generated
content
has
made
the
role
of
the
museum’s
authority
even
more
important.
There’s
so
MUCH
information
out
there,
that
someone
needs
to
sift
through
it
all,
and
also
take
part
in
the
conversation.
Maintaining
authority
and
being
open
do
not
have
to
be
mutually
exclusive.
It’s
not
all
or
nothing.
It’s
not
that
the
museum
is
necessarily
always
right,
or
that
the
crowd
is
always
right.
It’s
that
we
can
make
it
even
better,
together.
This
is
open
authority.
GIVEN ENOUGH EYEBALLS,
ALL BUGS ARE SHALLOW.
Linus Law — Eric S. Raymond
Museum
Community
&
contributions
expertise
Temple & Bazaar
Open Authority
!!
!!
Authoritarian
Authoritative
ccby-sa3.0,AndrewDunn

4.
Open
Authority
is
another
way
of
talking
about
a
broader
paradigm
shift
in
the
cultural
field,
which
GLAM
professionals
are
already
grappling
with.
By
putting
a
name
to
it,
they
can
become
more
comfortable
with
the
idea,
and
be
more
prepared
to
consider
how
their
work
fits
into
this
new
community-­‐focused
trend.
Partnerships
with
Wikipedia
are
just
one
way
that
museums
are
opening
up
to
their
communities.
But
there
are
many
other
ways
that
museums
can
embrace
Wikipedia.
To
better
illustrate
the
types
of
projects
that
encompass
“open
authority,”
I
came
up
with
a
spectrum.
The
spectrum
of
Open
Authority
begins
with
more
conservative
approaches
(often
what
museums
are
doing
now)
and
leads
to
more
progressive
approaches.
More
conservative
projects
are...Contributory,
where
the
public
contributes
data
to
a
project
designed
by
the
organization.
The
spectrum
then
moves
on
to...
Collaborative,
where
the
public
helps
refine
project
design,
with
the
project
still
led
by
an
organization.
At
the
far
end
of
the
spectrum
is...Co-­‐Creative,
where
the
public
can
take
part
in
all
processes,
and
all
parties
design
the
project
together.
Generally
the
spectrum
is
moving
from
having
less
dialogue
between
the
museum
and
the
community,
to
having
more
dialogue
and
interaction.
Contributory
projects
are
often
what
we
consider
crowdsourcing.
Crowdsourcing
involves
asks
directed
toward
a
shared
goal
that
cannot
be
done
automatically,
and
they
usually
have
inherent
rewards
for
participation.
This
can
include
projects
that
require
Voting,
Tagging,
Identifying
objects,
Transcribing
documents.
Community
Sourcing
is
a
more
nuanced,
collaborative
approach
to
crowdsourcing,
and
involves
bigger
asks
made
of
a
more
committed,
loyal
community
Community
sourcing
can
include
Memory
Sharing,
Community
Blogging,
Idea
Generation
and
Dialogue,
or
Sharing
Media
ccby-sa3.0JamesAlexander
Open
Authority !"
Contributory Collaborative Co-Creative
Tagging
Voting
Identifying
Transcribing
Community Sourcing Participatory
Interpretation
Crowdsourcing
Memory Sharing
Community Blogging
Idea Generation / Dialogue
Sharing Media
Reggio Emilia
A Spectrum of Open Authority
Open
Authority !"
Contributory Collaborative Co-Creative
Tagging
Voting
Identifying
Transcribing
Community Sourcing Participatory
Interpretation
Crowdsourcing
Memory Sharing
Community Blogging
Idea Generation / Dialogue
Sharing Media
Reggio Emilia
A Spectrum of Open Authority

5. And
at
the
end
of
the
spectrum
is
true
participatory
interpretation,
or
co-­‐creation.
The
Reggio
Emilia
educational
approach
is
the
best
model
of
co-­‐creation
in
museums,
but
I
won’t
have
time
to
talk
about
that
today.
There
will
be
plenty
of
time
later
for
that,
if
you
come
find
me.
So
where
on
the
spectrum
are
GLAM
partnerships?
GLAM-­‐Wiki
projects
are
clearly
an
example
of
open
authority,
and
not
just
online,
but
offline
too.
Because,
whether
it’s
on
a
GLAM
WikiProject
page,
or
sitting
side
by
side
at
an
Edit-­‐a-­‐Thon,
GLAM
partnerships
bring
together
the
expertise
within
museums
with
amateur
experts
and
enthusiasts
in
the
Wikipedia
community.
GLAM
partnerships
are
really
the
quintessential
example
of
“community
sourcing.”
Many
have
described
Wikipedia
as
crowd-­‐sourcing,
but
this
drives
me
crazy.
Because
Wikipedia
isn’t
just
crowdsourcing
–
it’s
so
much
more!
Crowdsourcing
is
just
dropping
in
and
out
to
contribute
content
to
a
project
that’s
been
created
by
some
outside
entity.
When
museums
work
with
Wikipedia,
they’re
working
with
a
thriving
community,
made
up
of
tens
of
thousands
of
active
Wikipedia
volunteers.
We
can
help
museums
better
understand
what
we
are
if
we
begin
describing
it
as
community
sourcing
instead
of
crowd
sourcing.
But
why
is
Wikipedia
not
co-­‐creation?
That
would
be
a
great
goal,
but
GLAM-­‐Wiki
partnerships
aren’t
fully
there
yet.
Co-­‐creation
requires
both
the
organization
and
the
community
to
be
a
part
of
building
a
collaborative
project
from
the
beginning.
For
now,
the
Wikipedia
community
is
the
one
that
has
a
little
too
much
authority
and
makes
it
difficult
for
new
editors
to
lead
in
creating
a
new
program.
When
cultural
professionals
begin
to
take
an
active
role
in
developing
GLAM
projects
alongside
Wikipedians,
we’ll
be
on
the
more
co-­‐creative
end
of
the
spectrum.
As
more
cultural
professionals
become
involved,
this
is
happening
more
often.
But
it’s
not
yet
the
norm.
Wikipedia, in real life.
So much more than crowdsourcing.
ccby-sa3.0,AdamNovack

6.
Wherever
they
land
on
the
spectrum,
many
museums
you
may
collaborate
with
are
probably
already
embracing
open
authority,
but
they
just
don’t
realize
it.
To
help
better
visualize
what
makes
a
project
“open
authority,”
here
are
some
elements
to
be
aware
of.
Open
Authority
projects
include
Access
to
Expertise
as
well
as
Community
Participation.
We’ve
already
talked
about
Open
Authority
being
a
combination
of
institutional
expertise
and
community
contributions.
So
these
are
the
first
two,
basic
elements.
Open
Authority
requires
a
Platform
or
a
method
for
your
community
to
engage
with
you.
It
could
be
an
existing
platform,
like
a
Wikimedia
project,
of
course.
But
it
can
also
be
a
newly
created
platform,
if
not
a
GLAM
project.
The
project
also
needs
Content
or
a
topic
that
motivates
your
community
to
participate.
In
GLAM
projects,
this
content
must
be
openly
available
for
use,
but
in
other
projects
this
may
not
be
the
case.
Open
Authority
always
needs
Shared
Control
and
Dialogue.
The
museum
should
be
a
continued
part
of
the
conversation.
In
a
GLAM
project,
Wikipedians
and
the
GLAM
professionals
should
have
a
shared
sense
of
ownership
over
the
project.
There
should
be
a
focus
on
process,
not
product.
Early
on
with
crowdsourced
projects,
the
focus
was
on
the
end
result
(like
how
many
letters
were
transcribed),
when
the
more
valuable
aspect
is
the
community
and
the
process
behind
that
product.
Finally,
there
should
be
Evidence
of
Collaboration.
There
needs
to
be
some
way
of
illustrating
that
the
community
played
a
key
role.
If
in
the
end
the
museum
alone
takes
credit,
then
that
defeats
the
purpose
of
open
authority.
We’ve
come
far
over
the
past
years
in
connecting
with
GLAMs,
but
for
those
who
need
to
feel
more
comfortable
with
the
idea
of
opening
up
to
Wikipedia,
I
hope
that
open
authority
can
help
bridge
that
gap.
Thank
you!
! Access to expertise
! Community
participation
! A platform
! Content to engage with
! Shared control &
dialogue
! A focus on process, not
product
! Evidence of
collaboration
Elements of Open Authority
ccby-sa3.0,Fae
Lest we forget…it all started at the British Museum.

7. Since the GLAM-Wiki initiative organized in 2010, great strides have been made in
strengthening the relationship between Wikimedians and the cultural sector. In spite of
this progress, being "open" in regards to access and community collaboration is still far
from the norm in most GLAM institutions. When pursuing a partnership, it is
increasingly important to be able to speak the language of the cultural sector, and
understand the nuances of their needs and concerns. Within the cultural sector,
developments in the realm of online access have dovetailed with the concept of co-
creation, leading collaborative online communities and the open source movement to
inspire a reexamination of authority within the museums, libraries, and archives.
"Open authority" is a term I established to describe the future of the cultural sector—
the coming together of GLAM expertise with the insights and contributions of diverse
audiences, both online and on-site. The open GLAM sees the visitor as a collaborator
and active contributor in creating and interpreting content, and the curator as an
engaged, expert facilitator. The Wikimedia community serves as inspiration for this
model of open authority, which depends on dialogue from participants of all levels of
expertise in order to create a more complete representation of a topic. The theory of
open authority illustrates that an institution's traditional authority need not be swept
away in the name of "crowdsourcing," but is instead even more valued. Authority can
and should be combined with an open model of collaboration with the community, be
they Wikipedians, a cultural group, or local visitors. Open authority will make the
interpretation of our cultural heritage better, together. Wikipedia is one important facet
of this broader paradigm shift.
In this presentation I will share tips for initiating and sustaining a partnership with a
cultural organization within the context of the cultural sector's current notions of
openness in regard to digital access and community co-creation. Understanding the
elements of open authority is a useful step toward speaking the language of GLAMs,
and more effectively reaching our goal to bridge the gap between Wikimedia and the
cultural sector.
https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submissions/Open_Authority:_A_New_Way_to
_Talk_to_GLAMs