Summary findings
The pilot (questionnaire and interview) findings started the conversation by pointing out the positive relation of knowledge artefacts in people’s daily practices and organi-sational performance. The presence of up-to-date knowledge artefacts in university-managed cultural heritage sites, a) reduced the stress associated with managing a very broad and fast changing package of operations under limited resources and ca-pacity, and b) significantly improved performance across all four objectives. The pilot showed that while operating under limited capacity, simpler knowledge artefact media, like templates, are easier to adopt in the new environment, and to use. Access to the creators or experts of the knowledge artefact content makes these more user-friendly and effective. As an extension to such practical networking, the accreditation and other similar schemes, provide more credible knowledge resources (knowledge artefacts, socializing channels, training, and access to expert support); schemes act as altruistic incentives and legal obligations. Finding and accessing the right knowledge resources at the right time, was, however, a significant challenge, and better coordi-nation, potentially through a knowledge sharing platform, was called for.
The findings from the main phase concurred with the pilot (17% performance increase) regarding a positive relation, showing a 15% increase ((54.97%-47.93%)/47.93%) in overall performance related to 20.26% present and 9.51% updat-ed knowledge artefacts across the operations.
The main phase also provided greater detail on the role of networks, support schemes, knowledge artefact media types and variation across organisational forms. Findings showed a positive association of knowledge artefacts with performance. But also raised many questions, as this research demonstrated that knowledge artefacts have not been as impactful as they could be in enhancing processes and organisational sustainability. Certain combinations of support provision are associated with much higher potential performance compared to the observed average.
Several factors appeared to hamper the positive potential of knowledge artefacts. The overall presence of knowledge artefacts across the operations was a mod-est 20.26%, and fewer than half of them were up-to-date (9.51%) (questionnaires). It was difficult for participants to find knowledge artefacts or even work out whether the knowledge artefacts they needed actually exist (methodology pilot interview, inter-views). The fragmentation of the cultural heritage ecosystem, misalignment of priori-ties, technological upgrades culture, and the competitive funding environment, all seem harmful to creating, updating, storing, sourcing, and sharing knowledge.
Planning for a suitable, wise, intervention requires situational understanding. Drastic transformational change is not applicable, or suitable in cultural heritage. The data in the Economic development objective highlights the financial difficulties across the cultural heritage ecosystem in all participating countries and nations. There simply aren’t enough financial or human resources available, but treating public-good, curating organisations as competitive businesses is a fallacy. A balance is needed for financial, artistic, political, and processual independence, without compromising human rights to cultural participation.
Participating organisations were realistic about the difficult current performance and predicted that overall performance in ten years will improve from just above aver-age towards good (from 54.97% to 60.87%), particularly in Economic development. Participating organisations aspired to move from average to above good performance (user organisations 75.62%, provider organisations 80.51%), many, however, were fearful for the sustainability of their sites and their habitats.
The hidden potential is revealed in the complementarity of the social demo-graphic forms. Particularly, as the four operational objectives, and the associated knowledge contained in the knowledge artefacts, are interdependent (chapters 4, 5, and 6). The participants would like to see a joined-up, strategic ap-proach to mapping gaps and needs, creation and distribution of knowledge artefacts. These need to be easy to access and easy to use, in a variety of quality knowledge artefact formats, that are a knowledge collection, a curated quality package of knowledge resources aiming to enable continued professional development in the ECHAsystem.
The participants would like to see a joined-up curation of the knowledge re-source stocks and flows. The following sections show how the findings informed an operational knowledge curation design that enables such comprehensive curation.