Digital Interpretation in Museum: From Real-Time Learning to a Digital Strategy

Gürsan Acar, Managing Director of tonwelt GmbH Berlin and tonwelt Group International, and Daniel Franz, Corporate Communications, tonwelt GmbH Berlin, in conversation with Monika Holzer-Kernbichler, Head of Art and Architecture Education at Kunsthaus Graz and Neue Galerie Graz at Universalmuseum Joanneum and National Correspondent of ICOM CECA Austria, and Anita Thanhofer, Art Historian, Cultural Mediator and Social Media Strategist, Durchblick Kommunikation im digitalen Raum, Salzburg

Daniel Franz (DF): The Covid pandemic accelerated digital developments in museum interpretation. But what is actually the core topic when it comes to digital interpretation?

Monika Holzer-Kernbichler (MHK):
We have been working with media-based interpretation for a long time. At Universalmuseum Joanneum, we were able to enter the crisis with a certain level of experience – over the years, we had already offered both paid and free apps and guides, available in-house as well as via our website.

What was new, however, was the complete replacement of personal on-site interpretation caused by the pandemic. Transforming interpretation entirely into the digital space is a challenge – without personal contact and without the original objects.

Many museums started, rather unreflectively, about a year ago by publishing all available digital material externally. Much of this ultimately represented an anachronism, as it meant a return to one-way communication.

From the very beginning, we tried to remain in dialogue with our audiences through Zoom. Of course, this approach is not manageable for everyone, but it also allows us to reach new visitors. The first phase was ultimately very experimental.

Since then, however, we have gradually become more professional: with expertise and technical equipment on site instead of private devices used from home.

The greatest challenge remains maintaining interaction and exchange, and creating safe spaces. How do we deal with reproduced artworks in the digital space? How do we approach the transformation of museum spaces into digital environments, and what impact does this transformation have?

DF: Creating a space for resonance appears to be one of the key challenges. In the physical museum environment, we know the tools that create and support these relationships and interactions. But how can this experience be transferred into the digital realm?

Anita Thanhofer (AT): In the broader discussion, I consider it essential to first define the terminology we use, so that we have a common starting point.

I would initially advocate making a distinction between digital interpretation and interpretation in the digital space – even though these approaches should not only be considered in parallel but also as interconnected.

Due to the sudden changes and challenges caused by the Covid pandemic, museums had to react quickly. As a result, strategic and conceptual thinking often took a back seat to immediate action.

Digital tools can help initiate and facilitate dialogue, participation and interaction.
The core purpose of interpretation is communication with visitors – with people interested in art, as well as with people who are not necessarily interested in art. Interpreters operate at the interface between institutions and people.

After a period of action and experimentation, it is now time – and it is already happening – to develop strategies for the digital space.

In the digital realm, we can work with concepts such as collaboration, cooperation, co-creation and partnership. However, before this can happen, both human and financial resources must be established.

Only then does the question of content arise: within which framework, in which spaces, and using which methods and tools?

DF: “From real-time learning to an overall strategy” seems to be the motto. This inevitably leads to the fundamental question: What needs to come first – infrastructure or content?

Gürsan Acar (GA): The Covid pandemic certainly triggered a great deal of change. From a technical perspective, museums had to move so quickly that even we were surprised.

But ultimately, it is always about communicating content. Content remains the focus – even when visitors are standing in front of closed museum doors.

We also considered how we could support museums quickly and enable virtual museum visits. However, we immediately recognised that the analogue museum space and the experiences connected with it cannot simply be transferred into digital form.

People want to see the original!
At the same time, we are learning that the digital space follows completely different rules. For example, the effectiveness of interpretation is significantly different.

For an on-site visit, we can classify this relatively clearly: when reading, visitors absorb around 10 percent of the information presented on average; when listening, around 20 percent; when seeing and reading, around 30 percent; and when seeing and hearing, around 50 percent.

Ultimately, we always have to consider how we can engage as many senses as possible. We still lack comparable empirical knowledge for interpretation in the digital space.

MHK:
For me, interpretation is not only about transferring knowledge. We are not simply preparing and presenting content – the central element is building relationships.

The way we interact with audiences is different in the digital space. Some formats even forget that they actually have an audience and simply “broadcast” content.

However, the museum as a social space is missing without interpretation and events. This is a fundamental aspect: creating a shared experience in a physical environment.

But there are also opportunities in the digital world.

It is equally important that interpreters feel confident using the respective tools. This is still a learning process, but we will get to where we want to be: creating spaces for resonance and exchange in the digital environment as well.

DF: Could it be that we simply do not yet have the right tools available for the museum sector?

AT: We are currently in the middle of a digital transformation. This means that new possibilities are continuously emerging. Everything is changing and evolving.

Learning is an ongoing process, and new tools are constantly being developed. Things will continue to improve.

What remains important is not to position the analogue space against the digital space, but rather to combine and make use of both environments.

Our possibilities have virtually doubled. And communication works particularly well in the digital space.

GA: The digital approaches museums have taken to reach visitors are important and valuable. However, rushed solutions without an underlying concept are unfortunately often nothing more than a waste of resources.
Museums should consider how much an interpretation unit costs and how many people it can reach.
Free audio or multimedia guides, which are effectively included in the ticket price, are used by up to 90 percent of all visitors.
I often compare this to a key that we place in visitors’ hands – a key that allows them to enter and explore the world of the museum.

Despite the considerable effort involved, the usage rate of apps often remains below 1 percent. Paid apps are practically not used at all. This continues to be the case.

Multi-platform systems that can distribute information across different media – audio guides, multimedia guides and web apps – are a meaningful and time-efficient solution, especially because maintenance efforts are significantly reduced.
But if we are talking about costs: after the implementation of an on-site system, the financial effort is remarkably low.
Over six years of use, the cost per usage unit for on-site audio and multimedia guides amounts to slightly more than one euro – approximately a few cents per year. A standard app solution, by comparison, costs around six euros per usage unit, or about one euro per year.

This raises the question of whether such investments might not be better allocated elsewhere within the museum.

MHK:
Many museums and their expertise are still strongly rooted in the analogue world. Digital expansion requires investment and comes with costs.
An important step in development is recognising analogue and digital interpretation work as equally valuable.
Above all, it is important to understand the so-called generational question not simply as an issue of age, but as a question of mindset.
Museums need to provide education, reduce hesitation and uncertainty, and integrate the new activities created by digital transformation into everyday museum practice.
Because museums now need to think beyond traditional boundaries and connect the analogue and digital spaces.

Limits can be overcome more easily and quickly than before. It no longer matters whether an event takes place in Vienna or Berlin.
The key point in interpretation practice is understanding the audience.
Many museums are often senders – both in the analogue and digital worlds – but less frequently receivers.
We all need to become more interested in our audiences.

Who are exhibitions and events actually created for?
What English-speaking museums have demonstrated for many years must finally become established here in Europe: visitor orientation and audience development supported by appropriate tools and methods.

Museums must take their audiences seriously and understand the people they are engaging with.

DF: In any case, it is important to actively shape these developments. But when we think about the future: What do we hope will come, what will remain, and what will disappear?

AT: The supposedly most popular format – the guided tour led by a person – is only one possible format.

Following Carmen Mörsch’s approach, alongside this affirmative discourse there are also other forms of interpretation: the reproductive approach, which introduces new audiences to art and culture; the deconstructive approach, which critically examines institutions and their practices; and the transformative approach, which positions art and cultural interpretation as an important actor within society.

We should finally move away from the stereotype that “interpretation equals guided tours”.
I would like to see more transparency and openness at eye level, as well as the courage to develop and embrace change.

MHK: Exactly. Interpretation work needs to be understood much more broadly.

I would also like to emphasise that appropriate conditions must be created for interpreters – across all Austrian museums. Their role as educational professionals needs stronger institutional recognition, with success not measured solely through short-term economic indicators, but through an understanding of the museum’s long-term social relevance as a place of education.

Interpretation work must continue to be diverse and multi-perspective, using multiple methods – both in the analogue and digital environments.

GA: Overall, we will also take positive outcomes from this crisis.

The expansion of museums into the digital space is ultimately only at the beginning.
I hope that museums and cultural institutions will maintain their enthusiasm for new formats and developments.
At the same time, I hope that decisions will not be driven solely by fear of limited reach or by political pressure, but by genuine interest in visitors and their needs.

I believe this is a good compass for assessing which approaches will successfully make the transition into the next stage of digitalisation – and which will not.

tonwelt – guiding solutions (www.tonwelt.com) tonwelt is one of Europe’s leading providers of interactive visitor guidance systems. As a full-service provider, tonwelt combines creative content production with reliable hardware and software solutions to enable sustainable, engaging and innovative knowledge transfer.

This article was originally published in German and has been translated using AI.