Ten years have passed since “The Case for Holistic Intentionality” appeared in Curator. On the one hand, 10 years isn’t that long ago, but on the other hand, a lot has changed in how I think about intentionality. The article (actually written 12 years ago) presents a concept about the characteristics of an intentional museum and makes a case for such organizations. What the article had not benefited from—since it was only a concept rather than proof of concept—was my experience helping museums move towards intentional practice.
My colleague, Stephanie Downey, suggested I write 12 blog posts this year—one each month—to share the Intentional Practice strategies we developed and continue to hone and implement with museums. She thought that this year of reflection and sharing would support the work I already will be doing as I spend this next year writing a book on Intentional Practice. This undertaking has been in my mind for a while, and I’m excited that I have finally committed myself to this task.
Honestly, what is difficult about applying words to ideas is that the very nature of Intentional Practice presumes nothing is stationary. Ideas are fluid, strategies are ever changing, the external environment is in constant flux, and learning is continuous. Much like the law of physics that says everything is in constant motion, my ideas about intentionality and Intentional Practice are forever changing—not in big discernable ways (I might be the only one who notices), but in little ways. My thinking changes almost daily, which isn’t a bad thing, except if I want to write about it! At some point I will have to say the acronym, ELMO, “Enough, Let’s Move On”—something I learned from a museum professional who was in one of the first Intentional Practice workshops. ELMO comes in very handy, as you can imagine!
The Cycle of Intentional Practice, presented in a blog posted on January 2, 2013, has changed considerably, at least to me. Ten years ago, Curator didn’t want to include the graphic in the article, and it is only now that I am grateful. This is what it looked like in 2013:
And this is what it looks like today:
The most significant shift (aside from its cleaner look) (thank you Amanda Krantz and Cathy Sigmond) is that there are quadrants. I always described the cycle as having quadrants but only recently does the cycle have them. The order of the quadrants is also different, align now follows reflect instead of plan. How odd it seems to me now that this wasn’t the original order. Alignment makes sense after reflection—when you ask how you can align your actions to achieve impact—after reflecting on evaluation results. Three concepts are unchanged: impact remains the centerpiece of the cycle; one can start anywhere on the cycle; and none of the quadrants are mutually exclusive, as one can reflect when planning, evaluating, and aligning.
While those ideas seem stationary today; what will I think tomorrow? ELMO!
I look forward to the coming months when I will be sharing my thoughts about how my intentional practice work has evolved.