Buy Prozac Online No Prescription

I walked into the Lunar and Planetary Institute on the outskirts of Houston the other day and immediately looked up. The design and scale of the entry lobby of the building encouraged that and I was immediately rewarded. Someone had thought to arrange the recessed light fixtures in the ceiling into a constellation rather than placing them on a grid or a single cluster as would so often be the case. Since it's been a few (cough) years since I've had an astronomy class, and I can only routinely recognize a handful of constellations, I couldn't discern the significance of what I was seeing right away. However, I was prompted to ask one of the many astrobiologists wandering the lobby about which constellation and stars were being shown and my question initiated a fascinating discussion on the probability and possibility of life on other planets and the origin of life on this one. Wow. All that from a light fixture. I bring this up because I thought it was an excellent example of how making thoughtful decisions about your facility during the planning and design stages can help reinforce or lead people to your main messages. Although there was no "interpretation" (no sign, no brochure that I could find) of the cleverly placed lighting, it was an obvious statement about what was going on in this facility that helped me take the next steps to self-discover how it applied to me and my visit there. In short, it was provocative - one of the hallmarks of good interpretation. The tricky part is to make such architectural decisions in such a way that the message or connection to the message is fairly clear. If it's clear only to the architect, it misses the mark and many facilities are far too subtle in weaving in thematic elements. So next time you have the opportunity to create a space in which you hope people will be getting a message, think about and plan for all the opportunities - look up, down, all around - because those messages could be coming from anywhere.  

Very often, in a resource-based approach to planning, the attempt is to get people to the resource. I've watched planners attempt to take this approach with an actual resource (such as a particular mountain or stream or historic building) and with built facilities (such as a zoo, a nature center, a museum). The only problem with this approach is that it forces the audience to make a commitment to come to where the message is or the message is not delivered. In some cases, it may not be desirable or possible to have everyone that you would like to have that message come to the resource. There is the danger of the resource being "loved to death" or the physical constraints of the site (building size and condition, parking facilities, etc.) don't allow large or consistent crowds or maybe the potential for drawing people to a visitor center or museum that is not immediately adjacent to the resource itself is problematic. Or it may be that the only people who go to the resource are the ones who already know the message. So in some cases, it may be necessary or even preferable to take your message to where the audience is. I was recently reminded of the value of this approach while on vacation in Hawaii. Sitting on the beach at Kahaluu Beach Park on the Big Island, I witnessed the Reef Teach program of the Kohala Center making full use of being at the beach instead of expecting people to go to the actual facilities of the Kohala Center  which are nowhere near the beach. With their van as a focal point, they offered impromptu programs and reference tools so that beachgoers could learn more about protecting the coral reef environment of Kahaluu Bay while enjoying their snorkeling activities. To help create a draw, the program offers rental of snorkel gear and boogie boards with built-in masks. The only caveat is that before you rent, you get to hear from the volunteer staff about the most responsible ways to enjoy the beach and keep the marine life healthy. Some volunteers wade into the shallow water to talk to those who have rented gear from other sources, using a laminated photo book and the approach "would you like to know what you're going to see?" as an opening for delivery of a quick thematic message related to appropriate snorkeling behavior. For those who obviously have their own snorkel gear, they give a simple greeting and thanks for protecting the reef and don't focus on trying to deliver a more in-depth message. I've watched this program evolve over the course of several years and it fascinates me every time to see the positive reaction of the people who most need to hear the message. Those people would not likely seek out a visitor center positioned away from the beach (say, in a nearby or distant town elsewhere on the island). The people who would do so have most likely already made a personal commitment to protecting the reef environments they enjoy. It's often easier to preach to the choir, but I'm not sure that's the most effective use of operational resources if you have a conservation message to share. I love to see innovative approaches that take messages to the people who have an interest, but who are unlikely to seek them out if they are difficult to get to in any way. If you've used an innovative technique to reach your audience, please feel free to share it with others on this blog by leaving a comment.

I'm attending a conference at the moment with about 250 museum professionals. One of the session speakers, Lisa Baxter from The Experience Business (Yorkshire, England), took the individuals in her session through a small group exercise in creative thinking and problem-solving. Interestingly, when asked to articulate the things that aren't working in their museum settings, each group came up with many of the same items. Most of the things that weren't working centered around the common themes of visitor services (our ancillary services aren't really serving visitor needs); management (my director doesn't understand me or the visitors or what we're doing); staff (morale is low, we're in a rut, floor staff aren't fully trained); stovepipe syndrome (different departments don't talk to each other); and the quality of the interpretive experience overall (there's too much text on the wall and not enough to engage people). The facilitator gave the small groups at each of five tables the opportunity to not only identify the problems, but to brainstorm creative ways to address the issues that had been raised. Not surprisingly, the groups came up with suggestions that involved training, ways to make the staff and visitors happier with their experiences, and refocusing the mission of the organization to make sure everyone is working towards the same ends. I was struck by two things in this session: one, that we all seemed to know what the problems were and they were all similar; and two, that in spite of the energy the surrounded the activity nobody seemed to feel empowered to actually create change at their organization. When the facilitator asked if the activity could be used at their site to start the discussion about needed changes, one participant said it was a great activity, but "we can't." That answer is perhaps the easiest one, but it makes me incredibly sad to see someone take the easy way out on this. I have to wonder if it's not that we can't, but that we really don't always want to. Change isn't always easy. It takes energy to identify the need for change, and energy to effect change. It seems to be easier to sit back and let things be mediocre or even nonfunctional than to expend the energy to make things work better. Worse yet, I often see people expending more energy on complaining than attempting productive change. Perhaps the only thing worse than that is attempting change for the sake of change, instead of using the energy of change to solve a real, not imagined, problem. So in discussing this session with another participant, his comment was "if everyone knows the problem with the way museums work, why do we still have one (problem, not museum)?" I thought that was an insightful comment, but I had no answer. Clearly, someone has to start a ripple to create a wave a change, and empowerment is key. I thought Lisa Baxter did an excellent job of starting the ripple for the workshop participants - I hope their employers will encourage the wave.  

The life span of an American newt is roughly three years. An American box turtle has a reported life span of 123 years. According to the CDC, the average life span of an American person in 2009 was calculated to be 78. Life spans of living creatures are based on averages and must take all sorts of variables into consideration - lifestyle (whether imposed or free choice), genetics, gender, etc. But nonliving things have life spans also. Appliances and vehicles have warranties (and I guarantee the life span is one day past warranty expiration in almost all cases). Plan documents have a life span also. The good news is you, as the planner, get to determine what that life span is, based on the variables involved in your process. Generally speaking, plans fall into one of two categories: terminal (short-term project) or long-range (strategic direction over time). In either case, the plan's life span should be whatever is required for successful implementation. In the case of a project-based or terminal plan, the document will most likely contain very specific action items for a finite period of time that carries the project through an identified implementation date. For example, an exhibit plan for a new nature center might have a life span that runs through the planning, design, fabrication, installation, and evaluation phases. Based on evaluation, a new planning effort might be advised and that plan would have its own timeline. There is no "right" life span - some projects might be very short-term so the plan is effective for less than a year while others may be major efforts that will span several years. Still, the project has specific items that need to be accomplished for success. A long-range plan, such as a strategic plan, usually provides more general direction over a period of time and so may be less specific in its action items. Many organizations use strategic planning to guide their efforts over a five to seven year period. Within that time frame, a number of individual project-based plans may be created and implemented according to the general direction provided in the long-range plan. A comprehensive master plan would also fall into the category of a long-range plan and may provide direction for a decade or more. Again, within that time frame, shorter-term project plans would become part of the picture as needed to implement specific aspects of the long-range plan document. Regardless of whether your planning effort is short or long term, the life span of your plan should be made clear within the document or it may simply linger on the shelf and eventually die from neglect, negating the intended life span altogether. The way to ensure successful implementation is to be clear about deadlines and responsibility for action items, even if that action item is to prepare a project-based plan during the life of the long-range plan. A summary of action items, along with the date by which they must be completed and who is responsible for seeing that they are completed, can be added to the front or back of your plan document (preferably as a pull-out so it can be posted somewhere visible as a reminder of what needs to happen) to help keep the implementation of your plan on track. If you find that the plan is so fuzzy that it becomes difficult to define specific action items in such a summary, you may need to refine your planning process so that you are clear about what you want to achieve by when. Good plans deserve a fulfilling life - getting you and your organization further down the road to success. Keeping your plans alive means defining a life span right from the start, so everyone knows what to expect and how to work towards implementation.

One of the very cool things about using WordPress for a blog is that it allows you to track the search terms that people use to get to your site. Sometimes I use those to guide what I write about and such is the case today. The search term was "what means interpretive media." That's a great question and can be answered in a variety of ways. As a planner, I view media as anything that helps support or convey a thematic message. That means "media" can be programs, tours, informal roving interpretation, exhibits, signs, playscapes, food services, sales items, promotional pieces, architectural elements - just about anything at all could fall into this category as long as it helps support or convey a thematic message. For example, let's say your food service at a location that is focused on the story of Great Plains bison uses only sustainably-harvested bison meat for its burgers and snacks and interprets that practice in support of its central theme. That food service would now be considered "media." If the same site offers food service, but there is no relationship to the central theme (for example, providing only prepackaged cookies, popcorn and bottled water), then that qualifies as a service, but would not be considered "media" because it does nothing to advance or support the story. The first example would be included in an interpretive plan's media descriptions as an important way to convey a story, but the second example might not be included in the interpretive plan or it might be in an addendum that refers to "other services to enhance the visitor experience" or something similar. Because media provides the means by which we convey the story, it is always tempting to start thinking about it first when faced with the opportunity of a new planning project. It is arguably more fun to talk about, dream about, and play with than crunching numbers on visitor statistics or crafting a logic model for objectives. However, I would suggest that if you understand what you're trying to achieve and who you're trying to communicate with, as well as what you're trying to communicate, you are more likely to come up with media ideas that will show some measure of success. So the time spent on the front end of the planning process to help determine those factors is time well spent and may end up saving hundreds, thousands, or even millions of dollars as it may keep you from making choices that won't ultimately serve management needs or audience interests. Recently, I learned about a facility that plans to install video as the only medium throughout the visitor experience. Why? Because the boss likes video. Not because it makes sense for the audience or the budget or any written objectives. Not because it allows a specific way to convey the message that seems most valuable. Because the boss likes video. And if the boss likes it, then it must work for everyone, right? This approach to interpretive planning rarely results in success unless you measure success by whether the boss is happy. Even then, I doubt the boss will be happy for long when audiences begin to lose interest, attendance declines, and gate fees and donations fall to levels that fail to support the organization. Media is not magic. And neither is the planning process. Taking a thoughtful approach may not always be easy or fast, but it should yield better results. What means interpretive media? If you've been thorough in your planning, it means that your message gets across.  

First, to all my regular readers, I apologize for the long hiatus from blog updates. I should be back to more regular weekly updates now that a long two months of almost constant travel status is coming to a close. Since many planners find themselves also in the predicament of being overscheduled and overtraveled, I thought I might offer my top five tips on how to keep yourself healthy during road warrior stints, as that is uppermost in my mind right now. Tip #1 - Keep a reasonable schedule. Of course, if you do this, you probably won't be traveling too much so may not need to read further. Most of my travel these days is spent in speaking engagements to promote NAI and interpretation as a profession or conducting training workshops on behalf of NAI. Very often, I have no choice of when these gigs are done - someone else is controlling the schedule. But if you do control your own schedule, try to avoid being on the road for more than ten days in any one stretch (unless, of course, you are on a real vacation). Working nonstop for weeks on end will drain you to the extent that you can no longer be productive. Tip #2 - Sleep full nights whenever you can. Try never to schedule flights that leave before dawn and try to avoid staying out late even if it curtails some of your social life. You'll be glad to get the rest, especially if you are unable to sleep on airplanes. Tip #3 - This relates somewhat to Tip #2. Take your own pillow wherever you go. You will find yourself in good beds, terrible beds, and sometimes no bed at all. If you can find a way to squeeze a good pillow in your luggage, do it. I use Brookstone's travel size tempurpedic pillow and it helps me get a good night's sleep regardless of the condition of the bed. Tip #4 - Watch what you eat and drink. Light on alcohol, heavy on water. Staying hydrated will keep you feeling like yourself. Whenever you can, take the opportunity to eat light salads and vegetable protein (nuts, soy, avocado, etc.) rather than heavy meals of meat, cheese, and starches. Your body will thank you (and so will your scale when you get home). Tip #5 - Keep your cool. Attitude is everything when you're standing in lines at the airport, when the rental car agent can't find your reservation, when the hotel isn't exactly where or what you thought it would be, when your client or trainees give you grief. Practice at least 30 minutes of meditation or meditative exercise each day. If you can stay calm while all else is going crazy around you, you will at least live long enough to share the stories you'll collect along the way. And that's what makes it all worth it, isn't it?  

I'm often asked by organizations if they really need a vision statement. Of course, the answer is that it depends . . . There is no hard and fast rule about vision statements. Most nonprofits and some government agencies are required to state a mission or purpose for their organization in their articles of incorporation or enabling legislation. Many companies also prepare a mission statement although there may not be a legal requirement for it (different states treat this differently when applying for business licenses or status). But mission statements are different than vision statements. A mission statement is about what you do, but a vision statement is about what changes if you're successful in your work towards that mission. For me, as a planner, a vision statement helps to clarify where the organization is headed so generally speaking, I like to see a thoughtful discussion among key players (board, executive staff, managers, etc.) about what they think is the "end game" for their organization. What happens if you're successful? Very often, a lack of consensus about that topic becomes the fodder for major conflict among those players and that can be disastrous for an organization. Think of your organization as a wagon pulled by a team of horses. Pulling that wagon is your mission or purpose and you can define what's in the wagon or who is going to receive the goods in your mission statement. The destination, then, is your vision - where you'd like to be in a given time frame. And, of course, the staff and volunteers who will further your mission along the road are those hardworking horses. I frequently see vision statements that are fairly unrealistic given the resources of the organization (anything with "world's best" comes to mind). But what makes a good vision statement? There are two ways (perhaps more) to look at it. Given a mission statement that is clear about your purpose ("to inspire conservation of the world's oceans"), an internal vision tells the world what you'd like your organization to be (we want to be a leading resource for oceanographic research results). An external vision tells the world what you'd like the world to be if your work is successful (our vision is a planet with healthy ocean ecosystems). Can you have both an internal and external vision? Of course. Do you have to? Of course not. You should do what works for your organization given the leadership and resources you have available. But whichever way you land on determining what sort of vision you want, be sure that everyone in key leadership roles agrees on that vision. Imagine what would happen if your wagon's horses begin pulling different directions. All of a sudden, you will be going nowhere fast with no progress towards your mission and some very tired horses that get confused with the lack of direction. I have seen organizations with multiple vision statements - usually, I find that when this happens, the "visions" are simply a restatement of goals and not really a solid vision of the desired future. Sometimes when a laundry list of vision statements is presented, some of them may even conflict with each other - a clear indicator that there is already disagreement among key players about where the organization should be headed. If you see this situation, it may be time to bring in a strategic planner to help facilitate the group's thought process and achieve true consensus. Although there are no rules for the appropriate number, I usually advise organizations to stick with one or two vision statements (other strategic planners may disagree with terminology here - some like to use the word vision for a goal or vice versa, but ultimately, clarity of thought is what we're after, not a set pattern of word usage). Remember, we don't want to send that wagon into a bunch of different directions. There may be multiple ways to accomplish the mission, but if the vision is clear, then the preferred route for getting to the destination should also be clear. This is especially important when you come to the inevitable crossroads and must make decisions about how to proceed with your products, programs, or services. Having a concise mission and clarity of vision helps to establish appropriate goals and objectives that can then inform your daily practices.

I just returned from teaching an interpretive planning class in Silver Spring, Maryland for the good folks at NOAA. One of the questions that kept coming up was "how do we connect people with what NOAA does so that they understand their role in protecting themselves and their planet?" I thought this was a great question - it wasn't about NOAA for NOAA's sake, it was about NOAA for the sake of the public and the planet. That was a refreshing concept when dealing with a government agency and one that I felt was genuinely represented by the NOAA staff in the class. But in terms of answering the question, it opened up a real can of worms. In thinking about how to connect audiences with any message, you first have to understand your audience and your message and make sure that there's a solid match there. Part of what going through a planning process will tell you is whether your message is appropriate for the intended audience. If not, one or the other of those variables may need to be tweaked a bit or entirely rethought to have a chance of creating successful connections. If you're sure you have a match between audience and message, the selection of media should become relatively easy. Not because your choices will be limited, but because knowing your audience can help you better understand how to reach them, with relevant information and with relevant technology. I was amazed at the very cool technology currently available with NOAA's Science on a Sphere (see Tim Merriman's July 22 blog at http://interpnet.com/naiblog/). But I was also intrigued by the suggestion of one group to use some of the emerging "augmented reality" programming in connection with the SOS component. It got me thinking about what helps make connections for people - I thought about it for the entire four-hour plane delay in the airport that night and came to the conclusion that technology offers all sorts of new opportunities that are going to work great for some people and not so well for others. I don't think it has to do with age or education demographics, so much as it has to do with the way individuals are wired. Some people are never going to connect with a concept or a resource without that personal experience that involves a more sensory-based approach. Others will look at a technological approach like augmented reality as a tool to launch from, and having their interest aroused, will look for additional opportunities to interact with the real thing. Still others will connect at some level with the technology itself and may never venture beyond their smart phone to see or experience the resource first-hand. And personally, I don't think that's a bad thing. After all, many people who watched Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom have never been to Africa but may still enjoy supporting habitat conservation projects as a result of their armchair connection to something they've never experienced in real life. Whatever it takes to get people thinking is the medium you should use. We can plan interpretive opportunities to do just that, but even under the best of circumstances, we won't get it right every time. Good interpretive planning should provide our audiences with the opportunity to forge those emotional and intellectual connections through whatever means it takes. The danger, of course, is that planners will forget to match the most appropriate media to the message and the audience, getting carried away by whatever seems to be the latest and greatest technology. Just remember that people connect in different ways and what works for one may not work for another. Even if everyone owns a smart phone doesn't mean that they prefer to use that device to experience new things. Remembering to plan a variety of experiences will surely help everyone find the way in which they would like to form their own connections and that connectivity is what it's all about.

I just found a great, free, iPhone app that every interpretive planner should have (assuming, of course, that you're one of the millions of folks who have an iPhone or iPad). It's called "World Customs and Cultures" and it's a great little tool for getting a quick handle on other cultures. Why is that important for interpretive planners? As the world gets smaller, and people are more able to travel both physically and virtually to other places, understanding other cultures becomes more critical to planning and creating successful interpretive opportunities. Depending on what sort of site you're working with or at, you may have increasing numbers of international visitors who may have specific requirements that will be necessary to address for them to enjoy the experience. What sorts of languages do you want to accommodate? If over 75% of your audience comes from Germany, France, and Japan, you may want to consider hiring tour guides who speak those languages, designing an audio program that can be programmed in a variety of languages or printing multiple brochures in a variety of languages. Is personal space an issue? For an American audience, figuring a circumference for personal space of roughly three feet per person in an exhibit gallery is probably adequate, but for a predominantly Chinese audience, you might be able to plan a circumference of as little as half that. Knowing how other cultures tend to learn in their school environments and their general level of comfort with technology may influence your choice of media when your audience is largely international. Obviously, the best possible way to learn about other cultures is to visit other countries and spend time with local people who can help you understand the subtle intricacies of their lifestyles and languages so that you can apply that knowledge to your own planning situations. When that's not possible, take the time to do some research, learn as much as you can and then test your ideas with a native of the country you're trying to accommodate (especially important when translating signs or other written materials). The iPhone app, "World Customs and Cultures" is an easy first step in that direction. If you know of other apps that might be helpful to interpretive planners, please feel free to leave a comment with your suggestions.

If you run an interpretive facility of any sort (museum, nature center, zoo, aquarium, botanical garden, historic site, cultural center, etc.), chances are good you've been approached at some point by someone who has a traveling exhibit they would love for you to rent. Traveling exhibitions come in all sizes, shapes, content, and costs. The trick, if you hope to use a traveling exhibition, is to find the right one for your facility. Like any new venture, bringing a traveling exhibition to your site requires some thoughtful planning. Once again, the 5-Ms are a good filter to use to make sure that you have the ability to be a good host and get your money's worth out of the proposition. Some of the questions you should ask related to those Ms are listed below: Management - Why do you want this exhibit at your site? What are you hoping to accomplish with it? Do you have the budget to support the rental, even if you don't make a profit? Is it mission-related or will its sudden appearance be confusing for your constituents? How will you measure success? Markets - Who is the target audience? Is this an existing audience for you or are you trying to use this to expand your audience? How will you promote it and does the exhibition's owner provide promotional materials? Will any of the promotional materials create conflicts with your current promotional efforts? What sort of pricing structure is recommended and how will that work with your current audiences? If you have members, will they receive a discount? Message - What is the theme? How does this message relate to the central theme of your site? Have you read all of the content and are you comfortable that all content reflects your site philosophy, and is accurate? Mechanics - What space is required? Will you have to rent additional storage or display space either on-site or off-site? Is it possible or desirable to bring in partners to help share costs and what are the implications of doing so? Are there sales items associated with the exhibit and how will you integrate those with your regular sales or create a sales area if you don't already have one? What is the most effective placement of that sales area (preferably where people exit the exhibit) given your available space? Will you need additional parking to handle the hordes of people who will attend? Will you need additional volunteers or staff to set up, run, or take down the exhibit? How and when will it be delivered and will all the pieces fit through your doors? Media - Is this a high-tech, low-tech, or mixed exhibition? Will your audience be able to use the media? Will you need to "train" visitors to use a different type of approach, particularly if new technology is used? What arrangements will be made for maintenance if anything doesn't work or is damaged? Certainly, these questions are only a start. Traveling exhibitions can be a great way to energize your operations, bringing something new and interesting to your audience and perhaps even making a profit from gate receipts and additional sales. But if you pick the wrong one, and it could be wrong for all sorts of reasons, you may be in for an unhappy surprise that turns out to cost more than it was worth. Be as thoughtful with your planning for a traveling exhibition as you would be for a permanent display or new building and you should have a smash hit on your hands.