I think about 90% of those working with cultural institution collections don’t really understand the difference between a digital asset management system (DAM) and a collections management system or even what a content management system is (CMS). Take a look at this chart to understand just how much I am going to simplify the very complex topic of content technologies for your reading enjoyment. I also believe there are people out there that can explain it a lot better than me, but no one really has (yet) in any succinct, oversimplified and layman way. So here I go jumping off into what is really a super, messy, overlapping sea of applications that make up only part of content technologies. I’m going to focus on the difference between a digital asset management system (DAM) and a collections management system, I’ve thrown in content management (CMS), specifically web CMS for good measure. Anytime you try to wrap something up in a tiny package, you are bound to overgeneralize. However, I think the risk of over generalization is worth the price in the hopes that out there to get an inkling of an idea about what makes these systems different. You may also realize after reading this, that what you thought you needed might not be really what you need. You may also realize there are some serious gray areas and some systems overlap in scope and try to be all things to all people. Also, remember content technologies are applications that help you mange information, however if you do not also put the business practices and workflows around those applications to make them successful all you will be managing (or not) is your bottom line. At the end of the day content management is not just installing an application, its something that changes the business practices and workflows of the entire organization for the better (albeit a very painful change to some). Now to the “what’s the big diff?” part of this.

I will first try to explain the difference by using a stimulating example…

Idealized, fantasy-land, super simplified museum example:
For each object you have the object itself and any number of digital representations attached to that object. The Collections Management System (TMS, CollectiveACCESS, eMU) manages information about the “object” and associated metadata (CCO, CDWA, VRA). All of the images that depict this awesome object are stored in the DAM system which gets its own little set of metadata (Dublin Core, XMP/IPTC). This metadata however relates to the digital representation of the object and should be much more minimal than what you are storing in the collections management system. Some of this metadata is shared between both the collections management system and the DAM, but not all of it is in both. Each system has their own specific types of metadata. This sharing can even include the collections management system linking to the images in the DAM and not just data and vice versa (data to the images). Then you have the museum website, which stores all the website content in the content management system (CMS). Drupal is an example of a web CMS*. The CMS system is the back-end to the website it keeps all our information nice and tidy and enable a non-tech savvy person to create and edit content, manage users etc. It also manages the navigation, webpages, content (among lots of other things). For example to display the museum collections online Drupal “talks” to both the DAM (where it gets the object images) and the collections management system (for object data) and displays them online in a very pleasing manner (again, ideally). Through APIs all these disparate systems talk to one another delivering content where needed/requested.

*The CMS system type referenced above is a web focused CMSs – there are other kinds such as enterprise cms systems which focus on documents, details, and records related to the organizational processes of an enterprise. Get it?

Now for the breakdown…

DAM:
Digital asset management is all about the digital. The focus here is on access and retrieval. These systems fit well into busy production environments. The DAM system in a museum for example, would contain both object images as well as administrative images (museum interiors, gallery shots) as well as merchandising assets (product imagery, catalog layouts .indd files). Just in the type of content stored, you see how the DAM differs from a collections management system. The DAM is a hub for all the creatives (designers, photographers) to get to their assets, move them around and work with them. Its a dissemination platform, it gets that file from point A to point B quickly. It’s also the system that is the source for images delivered to the web. The DAM creates a centralized area for users to access assets. The assets that go into the DAM should be assets where the amount of resources required in managing them is equal to the need/demand for them. When low on resources, the assets that make their way into your DAM, should be your Rock Stars. These assets should be ones that are output agonostic (print, web) and the most flexible medium. Sometimes workflow systems are built upon DAM systems, enabling enterprises/institutions to fulfill requests for images in scenarios where the requestee does not have access. This can also include workflow systems that come from the content creators (photography studios and graphic designers) enabling them to get assets into the system efficiently and in a consistent way.

CMS
CMS covers a lot of territory so we going to speak in terms of a web CMS. A web CMS, enables the management of different types of web content. It basically helps users with no technical knowledge to easily create and edit content that is delivered onto the web. Examples of popular web CMS systems include: Drupal, Joomla and WordPress. Wikipedia explains it pretty succinctly here, so I’m not going to waste too much space on it. Now, Enterprise CMS is a bit different. Again, Wikipedia does a good job at explaining that as well here.
There is a world of CMS systems to navigate through, its pretty impossible to be an expert in them all.

Collections Management Systems:
As stated above, the Collections Management System (TMS, CollectiveACCESS, eMU) manages information about the “object” and associated metadata (CCO, CDWA, VRA). Interestingly enough, even Wikipedia doesn’t want to touch this application type by providing us with a nice definition. Objects/artifacts can be anything tangible 3D, 2D or born digital objects(!). Notice the different use of the words “object” and “assets”. When we talk collections management we are talking about “objects”. When we talk about DAM we are talking about “assets”. You would store information about objects in a collections management system when you need to record information about the original object itself such as: provenance, bibliographic references, constituents and conservation information. Basically, lots of complex and extensive data about an object goes into a collections management system and a DAM is where you place information specific to a digital asset. Hopefully, you are starting to understand that a collections management system is really good at storing text based information about “objects”. Now, sometimes you can *use* a DAM as a collections management system. However, I will warn you that this really just muddles the waters between information about the digital asset and object information. This is explained in more detail in the next section.

DAMs and Collections Management Systems:
Why even separate the two, you might ask? Well, in the case where you have extensive amounts object information (i.e museums/archives). You do not want to store this same information with every single instance of the digital asset and vice-versa. Mainly because that digital asset itself has all kinds of its own metadata (technical and administrative) associated with it such as: how the digital image was captured, who did the capturing, usage parameters, rights etc. Digital assets also have life-cycles and a DAM makes this process more efficient. You can setup triggers to retire certain images when usage rights run out or when an asset has ceased from popular use. Information about the digital asset is specific to the asset. So in short, you want one container to manage everything about the object. While you use the other (DAM) to keep track of all the digital representations and their complicated life-cycles.

What about “Born-Digital” for cultural instituions?
Yes, things can get even more complicated. In other industries most of your content is “born-digital” (advertising design, web design etc) as these materials began as digital files. For cultural institutions however, born digital is where it gets interesting/complicated (warning: gray area). The “object” information approach can apply to born digital items when you need to store more information about the item that would be outside the scope of a DAM or when it would require the replication of too much data associated with each individual object. In other words you could treat the born-digital like an “object”. I would use the DAM to manage the original digital file without trying to duplicate to much “object” specific information, as that’s the duty of the collections management system. Just enough to make it findable in the DAM. All this while trying to keep the types of information/metadata stored specific to the application solution. Metadata about the born-digital object itself in the collections management system and asset specific metadata in the DAM (where it belongs). Sometimes if your a purely digital archive/collection, you might be able to skip the collections management solution, provided your not going to wind up with 400 metadata fields attached to one asset with lots of duplication of the same information across namespaces.

In reality, there are a ton of gray areas and endless ways to marry these systems together and some systems even overlap. This is hard, complex stuff and people spend a lot of time trying to figure it all out. Consultants get paid lots of money to provide solutions to all complexities involved with collections/content management. Its hard to wrap-it up in a tiny nutshell without going off on a tangent about one particular aspect or changing my mind all together in the middle of the thought (post). The important part is understanding what your REAL needs are and which system will allow you meet these needs in the most pragmatic, efficient, cost-effective way possible.

Here’s some more where that came from:

DAM vs. WCM – do you really understand the difference?
DAM Talk: Scott Seebass CEO Xinet Webnative DAM
What’s the DAM Difference?: Content Management’s Best Tool is Digital Asset Management

I recently had a colleague return from an Archives Conference abroad that focused on Digital Asset Management and to put it lightly her mind was blown. She’s not an archivist, she’s not a digital asset manager, but she is an administrative assistant in a cultural institution. Her reactions to what she learned further confirmed some of my own feelings I had after recently speaking at both a Digital Asset Management conference and an Archives conference. Which is that, technology has changed our work environments and roles more than most people are aware. It is no longer acceptable to operate in a silo and remain unaware of how other professions cross-over into your own. You might be saying “that’s great, but what do you mean by this?”.

One of the best examples is that Digital Asset Management, which is a product of the “corporate” world, now exists within libraries, archives and museums. However, many people involved in those projects at those institutions are unaware of the existence of the profession of digital asset managers or the world of digital asset management. From the start they are cut off from both those networks and the resources available to those working in the field of DAM. So, they are forced to reinvent the wheel when it comes to DAM within their institution and tend to only source other “like” institutions for help cause that’s all they know.

Also, many corporate digital asset managers and their years of experience do not work for cultural institutions. Therefore, the person who ends up being the digital asset manager, for all intents and purposes, at the institution is not trained in that profession. Yet they are being asked to take on that role as well as its responsibilities They then begin to apply their analog collections management practices to a digital process that already has rules and standards and often times do not understand the repercussions of certain decisions. This causes the inexperienced to use applications outside of their intended purpose and warp the scope of what certain applications are meant to do, creating a bastardized implementation. These types of technology implementations will never solve the problems they were intended to, because the products have been implemented outside their scope.

When I gave my talk to the New York Archives Conference, I spoke about interface design. Crazy topic to bring to a forum where most people don’t even think about design or just thought I was giving a talk on “websites”. However, it was relevant. The people in that room are the same people that are being tasked with choosing a digital asset management system and even designing the “look and feel” of websites used to expose their digital collections to the world. Yet, some of them don’t even know basic design heuristics or that such a thing even exists. Not to mention there is a whole profession of people out there doing usability and interface design specifically for information retrieval applications. They don’t understand the differences between applications, websites, software, webapps etc. They also miss the mark on understanding searching and how the semantic web plays an integral role in how they should structure information. There are fundamental concepts here that cannot be ignored.

These less savvy folks, working in their professional silos, are then forced to approach a project with little to no training and absolutely no scope on how giant of a task they are actually being asked to do. Sure, you can stay up to date and read blogs, but not having the years of experience that digital media and digital asset management professionals have behind in order to successfully execute those types of projects is a VERY tall order. Bravo to those that do it well, but have you visited a Library or archives website lately? There are so few elegantly executed ones to pick from. Aren’t librarians and archivists supposed to be information retrieval/representation professionals? It’s shocking how so many miss the mark completely. Blaming it on available resources is a cop-out. It’s the result of not staffing your institution appropriately and recognizing when some roles cease to be relevant, then making those hard decisions. Luckily, for some folks CMS systems came along (WordPress, Drupal etc) and some brave souls (probably operating alone and against much resistance) rescued their institutions websites from the world of geocitites-esque design and architecture.

Library Science Education isn’t doing much to lessen this professional divide. So often I’ve seen curriculum trapped in the “working in a library” scenario, when that barely even scrapes the surface at what Information Science covers and the applications of Library Science to the outside world. One exciting development is the addition of digital asset management and interface design courses to Library Science programs. However, this is not enough. Unless the christened “digital asset manager” sees beyond the professional silos the project will undoubtedly fail due to implementation issues and poorly specked out scopes. Harsh yes, but realistic.

One thing that will help them get there is EDUCATION. I can’t stress this enough. Education is needed in order to help people understand technology and its touch points within their professional realm and where those touch point cross over into other professions. Without this “awareness” the wrong solution will be implemented to solve a particular need. This is dangerous, as once something is implemented it is very hard to turn back the clock and do it properly.

Another repercussion to being unaware is this. Folks, the implementation of technology is not an opportunity to mirror that analog workflow or analog collections structure and replace it with an exact digital copy. You have to entirely revisit your workflows and collections and determine the new way to implement and represent them. “Going digital” isn’t just an intensive scanning project with some metadata in a database thrown in. “Going digital” requires an entire shift in thinking and a complete overhaul of institutional processes. There is no digital “paperclip” holding those relevant materials together. Nor do you need one, there are better tools for that now. Don’t approach your digital projects thinking its just a representation of the analog. Don’t implement technology just for the sake of doing so. You must have a really clear strategy and understand the relationship between the information and its digital representations as well as your users in order to execute a project well.

“Going digital” also requires a shift in business process and professional roles. You need to hire different people with skills sets you’ve never worked with before (professional photographers, digital technicians, usability and design people). Your programmer is not a designer, please don’t make him/her do it. Don’t ask your 20 year veteran archivist, to now completely shift and become a “digital archivist”. It just won’t work, they don’t have the time to catch up. That period is over. They may have vast institutional knowledge, but that does not make them the right fit for taking on a role that requires specific technical skill sets. Leverage this person in other ways, but don’t expect them to deliver you great digital content. The professionals that have resided in libraries, archives, cultural collections for years, now have completely different demands placed upon them and need to be able to perform tasks involving technology effectively, not just adequately. Last time I checked, the responsibility of the institution is not to create an oasis of job security, but deliver content to the public and their constituents. Otherwise, the burden is placed on that one lone staffer who “gets it” (if they even exist) to solve all the institutions digital woes.

The realm of Digital Asset Management is starting to look toward Library and Information Science for help (metadata/taxonomies being one of those areas), but Library Science is not looking enough to Digital Asset Management or any other professions for that matter (Usability, Design, Business Analytics, Information Architecture). What gets me is, many cultural collections are far more complicated to scope and manage than any corporate asset management project! The tools that librarians and archivists are now using are the tools that have been developed and in use for some time in other professions. Want to know who uses Digital Media well? Advertising/Marketing folks! Dearest Librarians, why not ask someone in advertising and marketing about “Tweeting” and what it can do for your institution? They know better than anyone else. I would caution taking advice from anyone about how to use social media (please stop calling it “web 2.0″, it’s beyond that now) who isn’t in touch with or came from those worlds.

Library Science as a profession has outgrown its original scope some time ago and its time we start catching up. Unfortunately, that’s easier said than done as there is a chasm of knowledge separating those in-the-know from those that are not. If you are working outside your scope, save time and just admit it. Give yourself the opportunity to learn, and concentrate on what you’re good at. Then hire someone to fill in the knowledge gaps, the reality is that it might require letting go of someone else. Technology costs real money, therefore every seat must be filled with skilled professionals or you are losing money. Spending money without accountability is irresponsible. Furthermore, give that skilled hire the freedom they need to do their job. Trust them and give your talent the space they need to make things great, not just good. Finally, my best advice, reach outside the walls of your profession and see the common threads that tie all of us together. You will find that thread looks remarkably familiar.