Third-Worst Case

Sure, it’s smart to plan systems using the “worst-case scenario”. But that doesn’t work when the worst case is extreme. For example:

– We want to accommodate the largest exhibitions. So we plan all our galleries that big. But that size rarely comes.

– We want to show tall objects. So we make all vitrines that height. But we only have two tall objects.

– We want to show any media, vertical or horizontal. So we make all screens square. But vertical content is rare.

In extremes, planning well for the 1% means planning badly for the 99%. Plan around the third-worst case scenario instead. (The second-worst is usually extreme too.)

Figure out how extreme those worst cases will be. Now, plan sets and systems starting with the third-worst case, or thereabouts. Then, use one-off, non-systematic approaches for worst cases:

– Two galleries you can combine if a big exhibition comes. 

– One vitrine that extends for tall things. 

– Some media screens that rotate if vertical content gets made.

Here’s the thing:
Planning systems by worst case is wise, unless it’s extreme. In that case, plan your system for the third-worst case — and handle the worst another way.

Warmly,
Jonathan

- - - - - - - - - - - -

MtM Word of the Day:
Accession number. An identifier, like a social security number, permanently assigned to an object when it becomes part of (aka accessioned into) a museum's collection. For example, 2018.12.9 might mean the 9th object in the 12th group acquired in 2018. Accession numbers can appear in tombstone labels for artifacts on display.