The Most Important Outcome of the LUME Project Was Not Web3 – It Was the Courage to Face the Next Technological Shift
When the LUME project was launched in 2024, Web3 raised more questions than answers. Technology was evolving faster than project plans, artificial intelligence dominated the headlines, and many professionals in the creative industries wondered whether this transformation had anything to do with them. At the same time, the rapid pace of technological change challenged us to consider how different generations and professionals with diverse digital backgrounds encounter the next generation of the internet. I later explored this perspective in my blog post Are You Ready for the Web3 World? Meeting of the Digital Generations in the Cultural Sector (Halonen, 2025a). I admit that, as the project manager, I also felt uncertain. Although I was surrounded by an experienced project consortium and colleagues from every Finnish University of Applied Sciences offering a degree in Cultural Management, none of us could rely on established practices. Together, we were exploring a phenomenon that kept changing throughout the project. Looking back, I now believe this uncertainty became the project's greatest strength. While writing the final report, I realised that the most important outcome was not Web3 competence itself. Instead, it was the decision to begin embedding change already during the project planning phase rather than waiting until the results were ready for dissemination (Halonen, 2021). This approach offered a new way of engaging with a rapidly evolving phenomenon: creating a shared language around it, making it understandable, and finding ways to integrate it into education, professional practice, and the development of the creative industries. We Did Not Just Create Content The project produced a remarkable number of tangible outputs: more than forty blog posts, a facilitator's handbook, webinars, podcasts, learning materials and innovation experiments. They can all be easily found online. Yet, in retrospect, these were not the project's greatest achievement. They were tools. The real work was making a rapidly evolving phenomenon understandable and usable in different contexts. We quickly realised that Web3 could not be taught like a finished software application or a digital tool. First, we needed to build a shared language. That required dialogue, examples, experimentation and, above all, space for questions. Our discussions repeatedly revealed uncertainty, technology anxiety and, at times, outright resistance. As a result, the project's most important task gradually became the pedagogical translation of emerging technologies—far more than we had anticipated during the planning stage. Over time, we realised that uncertainty was not an obstacle to learning but its natural starting point. Similar concerns about Web3 technologies were discussed by Mayreth Wolff in her blog Web3: Concerns About Digitalisation Are Understandable, where she highlights the importance of education, concrete examples and user-friendly approaches in supporting the adoption of new technologies (Wolff, 2024). One Solution Did Not Fit Everyone Another important lesson was that the same approach did not work in every environment. Students, teachers, entrepreneurs and cultural professionals approached Web3 from very different starting points. This became evident, for example, in the fact that engaging entrepreneurs proved more challenging than expected, while educational institutions quickly began integrating the discussions into curriculum development. Rather than promoting a single predefined model, we continuously adapted our content to the needs of different target groups. This made the project itself a learning process—not only for participants but also for us as project developers. The diversity of perspectives also became visible in the ways different audiences perceived the opportunities offered by Web3. Some were fascinated by digital communities, others by digital ownership, while others focused on new business and revenue models. For example, I explored the changing role of fan communities in the creative economy in my blog Your Fans Are the New Patrons. Here's How Web3 Makes It Possible (Halonen, 2025b). The Greatest Change Happened in People European Social Fund reporting focuses heavily on participant numbers, materials and publications. For me, however, the most significant outcome was found elsewhere—in people. Throughout the project, teachers strengthened their expertise, collaboration between universities deepened, and conversations about technology gradually shifted from technical discussions to pedagogical ones. Web3 was no longer viewed simply as another emerging technology but as a phenomenon that challenged us to rethink community building, digital ownership, cultural accessibility and new value creation models. Countless small shifts in thinking emerged during the project. They cannot be measured by quantitative indicators alone, yet they become visible when new ideas begin influencing everyday teaching and professional practice. Such change is difficult to capture through project metrics. It becomes evident in the ways people start thinking and acting differently. Shared understanding does not produce identical solutions; instead, everyone develops their own interpretation of a new phenomenon. One person becomes interested in digital communities, another explores NFTs or virtual worlds, while a third adopts just a single new tool that feels useful—or at least less intimidating than before. These different variations demonstrate that new knowledge has begun to take root in people's thinking. The Project Ends, but the Conversation Continues One aspect of compiling the final report brought me particular satisfaction. The project's outputs did not remain confined to the project itself. The learning materials were published openly, collaboration networks continue to operate, and many of the ideas developed during the project are already inspiring new initiatives. I am especially pleased that the project also produced an extensive blog series. Across more than forty articles, project experts examined Web3 from multiple perspectives—culture, pedagogy, community building, digital ownership, accessibility and new business models. Together, these blog posts form a collective learning diary of how a rapidly evolving phenomenon can be understood through dialogue, experimentation and multiple perspectives. That was the moment I felt the project had truly succeeded. Not because Web3 is somehow "finished", but because the work continues beyond the project's lifetime. The LUME Blog (2024–2025), the openly available learning materials and the networks established during the project continue to provide opportunities for discussion and for developing new interpretations of our evolving digital environment. When the project came to an end, I realised I had learned something I had not anticipated when we started. In a world of constant technological change, the most important competence may not be keeping up with every new technology. More important is creating learning environments where uncertainty is welcomed, emerging phenomena can be explored together, and diverse perspectives have room to flourish. We do not yet know what the next technological shift will be. But perhaps we are now a little better prepared to face it. And the creative industries have exactly the strengths this requires: curiosity to experiment, the ability to imagine alternatives, and the capacity to build the future together. Sources Halonen, K. (2021). Projekti loppuu, mitä jää? Sosiaalisten innovaatioiden juurruttaminen. Metropolia ammattikorkeakoulu, Oiva-sarja 33, Helsinki 2021. https://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-328-292-6 Halonen, K. (2025a). Are you ready for the Web3 world? Meeting of the digital generations in the cultural sector. Metropolia ammattikorkeakoulu, Lume-blogi 22.5.2025. https://blogit.metropolia.fi/lume/en/2025/05/22/are-you-ready-for-the-web3-world-meeting-of-the-digital-generations-in-the-cultural-sector/ Halonen, K. (2025b). Your fans are the new patrons. Here’s how Web3 makes it possible. Metropolia ammattikorkeakoulu, Lume-blogi 25.3.2025. https://blogit.metropolia.fi/lume/en/2025/03/25/your-fans-are-the-new-patrons-heres-how-web3-makes-it-possible/ LUME-blog (2024–2026). Explore more than 40 expert blog posts on Web3, digital culture, pedagogy, and the future of the creative industries. Metropolia ammattikorkeakoulu, Lume-blogisto. https://blogit.metropolia.fi/lume/en Wolff, M. (2024). Web3 – huoli digitalisoitumisesta on ymmärrettävää. Miksi uusi teknologia herättää epävarmuutta ja miten oppimisen kynnystä voidaan madaltaa. Metropolia ammattikorkeakoulu, Lume-blogit 17.12.2024. https://blogit.metropolia.fi/lume/2024/12/17/web3-huoli-digitalisoitumisesta-on-ymmarrettavaa/
LUME Does Not End with Results, but with a Transformation in Thinking
Projects are often evaluated through their outputs and outcomes: what results were pursued, what kinds of outcomes were achieved, what was published and communicated about the topic, and how different outputs are implemented after the project ends. But perhaps we should also pause to consider what does not appear in publications, reports, blogs, or handbooks, yet still remains as a lasting part of the thinking of those involved, such as us teachers and experts working in universities of applied sciences. Perhaps the most significant contribution of a project is not its individual outputs, but rather the hidden expertise it generates: the kind of knowledge, skills, and ways of thinking that are difficult to name, measure, or productize. This article argues that the LUME project has also played a major role in transforming ways of thinking and developing tacit knowledge. From Tacit Knowledge to Visible Expertise Hidden expertise can be understood through the concept of tacit knowledge. Polanyi (1966, p. 4), one of the first scholars to study the concept, described tacit knowledge with the statement: “we can know more than we can tell.” According to him, a significant part of human expertise is of a nature that cannot be fully verbalized or documented. Polanyi (pp. 9–13; 25–32) also emphasized that tacit knowledge is built through experience and action. Tacit knowledge has become an important concept especially in organizational studies. As Hadjimichael et al. (2024, p. 546) note, whether a task is practical or expert-oriented, simple or complex, routine or creative, its successful execution always depends partly on tacit knowledge. Tacit knowledge is particularly evident in context-sensitive, experience-based judgment, where individuals recognize essential situational factors, respond intuitively, and learn within uncertain and changing environments. From this perspective, the learning process within the LUME project, along with all the materials produced and experiments conducted, created a strong foundation for tacit expertise. This expertise enables us to approach new technological phenomena critically and identify new, essential needs, problems, and solutions—especially in situations where no ready-made answers yet exist. Hidden expertise can also be examined through the lens of situated learning. This perspective emphasizes that expertise does not emerge as isolated individual activity, but through participation in shared practices and communities. According to Lave and Wenger (1991, pp. 29–33; 67–69; see also Ackermann et al., 2024, pp. 596–597), situated learning develops gradually within communities as part of everyday practices. In this sense, expertise is not only visible in outputs and results, but also accumulates as collectively shared ways of thinking. Tacit knowledge becomes social, context-bound expertise. Many of my own views, assumptions, and attitudes related to Web3 technologies changed through regular project meetings. By discussing, exchanging ideas, and experimenting together, I learned far more collectively than I ever could have alone. My own, at times perhaps even childlike, enthusiasm and curiosity toward the new topic certainly supported this learning process. Learning manifested itself, for example, in the courage to admit to others that I did not understand something. The expertise produced together was not tied to any specific role or organization. Rather, it was based on shared ownership that continues to live on and spread as tacit knowledge among us participants even after the project has ended. Web3: An Object of Learning or a Catalyst? When reading a project report focused on Web3 themes, attention is easily drawn to technologies, tools, or applications. Naturally, one tends to ask what was learned about technological concepts such as blockchains, NFTs, DAOs, or smart contracts. However, as the LUME project progressed, it became increasingly clear to me that the most important learning was not related to any specific technical solution. Many of the learning transformations that emerged during the project were subtle in nature. The project fostered new enthusiasm for asking questions and experimenting, new ways of relating to technological change and constantly evolving operational environments, and new ways of understanding commercialization opportunities in the creative industries. At the beginning of the project, Web3 appeared to me primarily as a new phenomenon that I, as a teacher, should explain, clarify, and make understandable. Gradually, however, this perspective shifted. Web3 was no longer primarily something to be taught. Instead, it became a catalyst that forced us to rethink our perspectives in new ways. Web3 highlights many questions related to ownership, value creation, and revenue models (Perboli et al., 2026). These are not entirely new issues unique to the Web3 world, but the technology gives concrete form to otherwise rather abstract concepts. Instead of technology itself, the core of learning becomes user-centeredness, values, and choices. At the same time, Web3 loses some of the technical mystique surrounding it, which in turn makes it more approachable. One of the most important lessons concerns teaching itself. When dealing with emerging and rapidly evolving technologies, complete mastery of the subject is simply unrealistic—at least if you are not teaching in a technology field. Nevertheless, as a teacher, you inevitably found yourself outside your comfort zone: how can you teach something that is entirely new even to you? Yet this discomfort did not prove to be a problem. On the contrary, it may actually have created space for shared learning, critical discussion, and acceptance of incompleteness. This mindset certainly does not apply only to Web3 themes, but can also be transferred to future technological disruptions—ones that teachers and educators in the creative industries will inevitably continue to encounter. When the Hype Fades, the Expertise Remains – How Can It Be Sustained? The hype surrounding Web3 has been intense, but according to Gartner’s Hype Cycle model, the decline of hype is a typical and expected phase for emerging technologies (Stephan, 2025). From the project’s perspective, however, this is not necessarily a problem. The rise and fall of hype can actually function as a gateway to deeper learning. The hidden expertise developed within LUME represents precisely this more enduring form of capital. It appears as a readiness to approach new technologies critically yet openly, an ability to distinguish the essential from the irrelevant, and the courage to leave some solutions unused. Not everything must be adopted, and not everything requires participation—this too is part of expertise. Not all expertise can be productized or documented within systems, because a significant part of professional expertise is based on tacit knowledge that cannot be fully verbalized or formalized (Hadjimichael et al., 2024, pp. 546–547). This does not mean that such expertise lacks value. Hidden expertise can be nurtured by recognizing it, allowing time for it, and enabling it to develop as part of everyday practice. This transformation cannot easily be demonstrated or quickly measured; its effects are long-term. LUME does not end with the outputs produced during the project, but continues to live on as a transformation in ways of thinking. References Ackermann, F., Pyrko, I., & Hill, G. (2024). Mobilizing landscapes of practice to address grand challenges. Human Relations, 77(5), 593-621. Hadjimichael, D., Ribeiro, R., & Tsoukas, H. (2024). How Does Embodiment Enable the Acquisition of Tacit Knowledge in Organizations? From Polanyi to Merleau-Ponty. Organization Studies, 45(4), 545–570. https://doi.org/10.1177/01708406241228374 Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press. Perboli, G., Merlo, F., & Vandoni, C. (2026). Decentralizing the future: Value creation in Web 3.0 and the Metaverse. Horizon Europe. https://open-research-europe.ec.europa.eu/articles/5-226 Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. Doubleday & Company. Stephan, C. (8.9.2025). Get Grounded With the 2025 Gartner Hype Cycle™ for Emerging Technologies. https://www.gartner.com/en/articles/hype-cycle-for-emerging-technologies Author:Satu Lautamäki is a Principal Lecturer in Cultural Management at Seinäjoki University of Applied Sciences (SEAMK). She works as an expert in the LUME – Creative in the Web3 Era project, co-funded by the European Social Fund of the European Union.
Digital Presence, Identity and Avatars in Creative Production
How does digital presence reshape creative work and art? This text is a summary based on an interview with internet historian and artist John Reis. In the discussion, he explains how game worlds and avatars are evolving from mere entertainment elements into building blocks of professional identity. Digital identity and the use of avatars are no longer limited to entertainment. They have become part of creative work, art, and cultural production. At the same time, they are transforming how people present themselves and build their presence online. This is not only about technology, but also about new ways of understanding existence in digital environments. Avatars are no longer just profile pictures or game characters. They are tools for constructing social, temporal, and spatial experiences. Digital presence no longer adapts to the limitations of the physical world in the same way it once did. It can stretch, layer itself, and transform across different contexts. However, understanding digital identity in creative production requires a broad perspective. Internet historian, designer, and digital artist John Reis (known online as Chaize) offers his own viewpoint on the subject. His expertise lies at the intersection of product design, sociology, and internet art. For six years, Reis has explored what digital existence means for contemporary creators, and in recent years these theoretical reflections have merged into practical experimentation within his own artistic work. From Virtual Theme Parties to Art Concepts Reis’s journey into using sandbox games as tools for cultural production began from a social need during pandemic lockdowns. At first, it involved virtual themed parties organized with friends, where the walls of game spaces were decorated with inside jokes. These experiments quickly expanded into graphic design and immersive concepts, such as a virtual cat exhibition where guests presented imaginary pets that defied the laws of physics. Later, the platform became a meeting place for a long-distance relationship, where Reis recreated, together with his partner, a fake terrace inspired by a photograph taken in Italy. These intimate experiments led to an important realization: game environments attract audiences who are genuinely curious and eager to explore content presented within digital spaces. Years later, Reis’s early sandbox experiments evolved into prototypes for presenting art, eventually leading to the inclusion of his work as part of the Helsinki Festival. Virtual Space as Part of Identity IMAGE: Screenshot by John Reis, Tower Unite (PixelTail Games, 2016) In Reis’s work, the virtual gallery space is not merely a backdrop, but a direct extension of the avatar and digital identity. As a tool for cultural production, the game environment enables the multiplication of the creator’s presence. Visitors entering the exhibition are greeted by a digital guide character (NPC, Non-Player Character) modeled after the artist’s own avatar. Identity and self-portraits are therefore not simply hung on walls; they come alive through the interactive elements of the environment. Space also becomes a tool for shaping identity when physical and digital histories merge together. Reis has, for example, reconstructed his former apartment in Tampere within a game environment. This creates a disorienting illusion between two- and three-dimensionality, blurring the line between real-world history and the digital present. Game mechanics, such as teleporting through walls into hidden rooms, can become methods for choreographing how audiences experience the artist’s digital world. Professionalism and Freedom in a Surreal Environment One of the most fascinating questions surrounding digital presence is how to maintain professional integrity within surreal environments. How does an audience react to an artist who communicates with strong professionalism while operating through an avatar? According to Reis, the absurdity of the environment can actually become an advantage. In game worlds where everyone is already performing some kind of role, the traditional “gallery curator character” can appear surprisingly restrained. In virtual spaces, people often ask more direct and professional questions than they would face-to-face, even when conversing with a flying game character. The digital body also enables faster fine-tuning of one’s personality and communication style. Online, there is freedom to experiment and perform in ways that are much harder in the physical world, where social codes and physical cues are considerably more rigid. In this environment, trolls and disruptive individuals can simply be muted or excluded — the digital gallerist always retains control over their own space. John Reis’s Three Pieces of Advice for Building a Digital Identity Drawing from years of experience designing digital spaces and identities, Reis offers three practical building blocks for creative professionals who want to develop their online presence as a professional tool: The power of rebranding.When thinking about your online persona, remember that you can always rebrand yourself and change direction at any time. Do not worry about whether others notice the changes. It does not matter. Think outside the “human box.”Online, you can be anyone or anything. How would your understanding of yourself change if you began to think of yourself as something other than human? Does that feel good? Play!I believe you can present yourself as anything online and still remain professional. Personally, I draw inspiration from the furry community, which I see as one of the best examples of serious professionals fully expressing themselves through internet personas. Sources Reis, J. (2026). Haastattelu 13.05.2026. Haastattelija: Anna Puhakka. [Julkaisematon aineisto]. Steam. (i.a.). Tower Unite -pelin kauppasivu. Haettu 18.05.2026 osoitteesta https://store.steampowered.com/app/394690/Tower_Unite/
Tämän blogin kirjoituksia ja toimitustyötä on tuettu vuoden 2023 loppuun asti Euroopan unionin sosiaalirahaston Luovat metaversumissa esiselvityksen osarahoituksen avulla ja vuoden 2024 alusta Euroopan unionin sosiaalirahaston osarahoittaman LUME – luovat web3-ajassa -hankkeen avulla.
Tässä blogissa käydään ammattilaiskeskustelua web3 kehittymisen myötä avautuvista uusista toiminta- ja ansaintamahdollisuuksista sekä ajankohtaisista ilmiöistä. Blogissa julkaistaan asiantuntijatekstejä, haastatteluja ja kantaa ottavia tekstejä, videoita, podcasteja tai niiden yhdistelmiä. Kirjoittajat ovat Metropolian ja sen yhteistyöorganisaatioiden asiantuntijoita. Haluatko julkaista Luovat web3 ajassa -blogissa? Ota yhteys päätoimittajaan sähköpostitse.
– Katri Halonen (päätoimittaja), yliopettaja, Metropolia Ammattikorkeakoulu, katri.halonen@metropolia.fi, p. 050 362 6407
– Leena Björkqvist, lehtori, Metropolia Ammattikorkeakoulu
– Jyrki Simovaara, lehtori, Humanistinen ammattikorkeakoulu
– Mayreth Wolff, lehtori Humanistinen ammattikorkeakoulu
Sähköpostiosoitteet: etunimi.sukunimi@metropolia.fi
Toimituskunta toimittaa Luovat web3 ajassa -blogin sisällöt ennen julkaisua.
Haluatko julkaista Luovat web3 ajassa -blogissa? Lue oheiset ohjeet (pdf) ja ota yhteys päätoimittajaan sähköpostitse.
Termipankki on tehty navigointiohjeeksi Metaversumiin.
AI ansaintalogiikka bitcoin Coldplay DAO Digital heritage digitalisaatio esineiden internet ESR osarahoitus fani fanit ikäpolvet inkluusio IoMusT IoT johtaja kesä2025 konsertti krypto kulttuurituotanto lippu lohkoketju luovat alat metaverse Metaversumi musiikki NFT satoshi sijoittaminen sustainability tasa-arvo tekoäly tokeni web3 Web3.0 yhteisöllisyys älysopimus