Category Archives: Governance and management

Reimagining Historic House Museums: Two Workshops Coming Up!

House museums across the country are confronting difficult questions about relevance, sustainability, and meaning in the 21st century. What worked twenty years ago—traditional tours, decorative arts displays, and carefully preserved interiors—often isn’t enough today to engage visitors or generate financial stability. Communities are changing, audiences have new expectations, and historic sites are under increasing pressure to demonstrate their value.

That’s why Ken Turino (formerly at Historic New England) and I developed Reimagining the Historic House Museum, an intensive one-day workshop that helps professionals and volunteers tackle these challenges head-on. Over the past decade, we’ve led this program at sites across the United States, working with hundreds of staff, board members, and volunteers to think creatively about interpretation, audience engagement, and business models. Each workshop is highly interactive, blending case studies, small-group activities, and practical exercises. Participants leave not only with new ideas, but with concrete tools to implement change at their own sites.

This fall and next spring, we’ll be offering two opportunities to join us in person:

Continue reading →

The VRIO Framework: Looking Inward, Thinking Forward

When I was chatting with John Wetenhall, director of the GW Museum, he mentioned a business analysis tool I had never heard of: VRIO. It was a surprisingly lively conversation about whether this corporate framework could apply to museums and historic sites—and it piqued my curiosity. Developed by Birger Wernerfelt in his landmark 1984 article “A Resource-Based View of the Firm,” and later refined by Jay Barney in “Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage” (1991), VRIO offers a way to evaluate whether an organization’s internal assets truly contribute to long-term success. The acronym stands for Value (does it help the organization exploit opportunities or neutralize threats?), Rarity (is it scarce among competitors?), Imitability (is it difficult to duplicate or substitute?), and Organization (is the organization structured to fully leverage it?).

What began as a theoretical framework for corporations turns out to have practical potential for cultural institutions as well. Tools like logic models and Porter’s Five Forces are helpful, but what about the museum’s internal capabilities? How do we know if our collections, staff, or community ties are truly strategic advantages? Two articles by Paul Knott at the University of Christ Church (New Zealand) offer guidance by critically examining the popular VRIO framework—and how it can work better for cultural institutions.

Insight #1: Strengthening Strategy with an Expanded VRIO Model

In “Integrating Resource-Based Theory in a Practice-Relevant Form” (2009), Knott builds on the traditional VRIO model—Value, Rarity, Imitability, Organization—to create a more actionable and dynamic approach. He emphasizes that internal resources (like a museum’s brand, reputation, or community partnerships) are only strategic if they are used under the right conditions. Critically, he introduces a matrix that shows how the same resource can be a strength, weakness, missed opportunity, or rigidity depending on how it’s managed. This is a significant improvement over the traditional SWOT exercise because it requires you to evaluate each asset or resource with specific questions.

Continue reading →

History Redacted? What Museums Can Do About Censorship and Content Restrictions

Across the United States, museums and historic sites are feeling the pressure of growing efforts to limit how history is interpreted and shared with the public. Whether it’s school boards restricting curricula, exhibitions removing stories about women or African Americans, or state legislatures targeting specific narratives, the landscape for public history is shifting. Two recent statements—one from national associations of professional historians and another from a leading association of history organizations—offer timely guidance for navigating this challenge.

Upholding Academic Freedom and Public Access to History

In their joint statement, the American Historical Association (AHA) and the Organization of American Historians (OAH) raise alarm over federal directives aimed at censoring public-facing historical content. Specifically, they object to restrictions on the use of terms like “diversity,” “equity,” and “inclusion,” as well as efforts to remove access to resources about gender, race, and immigration history across government platforms. These actions, the associations argue, “deny the American public access to the complex, nuanced, and evidence-based historical knowledge that is essential to democratic society.”

For museum professionals, this serves as a reminder that we are not only stewards of collections but also of public understanding and trust. AHA and OAH call on historians–including those in museums and historic sites–to resist these pressures by reaffirming their commitment to historical accuracy, critical inquiry, and public service. The practical takeaway? Review interpretive plans, online content, and programs to ensure they are grounded in evidence-based scholarship, even–and especially–when the topics are politically charged.

Standing with the National Park Service: A Sector-Wide Response

Continue reading →

Why Board Diversity Matters for Museums (and When It Doesn’t)

Museums are facing a period of transformation—shifting visitor expectations, financial uncertainty, and growing pressure to be more inclusive and socially responsible. But who is making the decisions that shape how museums navigate these challenges?

A museum’s board of directors plays a crucial role in setting strategy, securing funding, and guiding institutional priorities. While board diversity has become a major talking point, research suggests that simply adding diverse voices isn’t enough. The type of diversity, how it’s measured, and how boards function together all influence effectiveness.

Three recent studies offer key insights into how board diversity affects decision-making, resilience, and institutional success. Together, they provide a roadmap for museums looking to build stronger boards.

Insight #1: Measuring Board Diversity Matters but Not All Diversity Is the Same

Behlau and colleagues provide a systematic review of how board diversity is measured and highlight a key problem: diversity is often discussed in broad terms without precise definitions. They categorize board diversity into three dimensions:

Structural diversity, which includes factors like board size, term limits, and leadership roles.
Demographic diversity, which includes observable characteristics like gender, age, and ethnicity.
Cognitive diversity, which includes unobservable attributes like expertise, education, values, and skills.

Continue reading →

Rethinking Goals in History Organizations: A New Framework for Internal and External Impact

For many years, history organizations—including history museums, historical societies, house museums, and historic sites—have measured success using a traditional planning framework focused on outputs (what an organization produces). By the 1990s, there was a growing recognition of the importance of outcomes (how visitors change because of that work), over merely completing tasks.

While the confusingly-named outputs and outcomes framework have improved museum projects, they often overlook how history organizations themselves evolve—how their staff, volunteers, and boards gain knowledge, shift perspectives, and take action to improve their work.

I’d like to introduce a new way of thinking about goals in museums, distinguishing between internal change (within the organization) and external change (within the community and visitors). Using the Know, Feel, Do framework, this model helps history organizations better understand their impact—both inside and outside the institution.

The Know, Feel, Do framework is a structured approach to understanding how individuals and organizations learn, experience emotions, and take action. It is based on Benjamin Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning Domains, which classifies learning into three categories:

Cognitive (Know) – Intellectual engagement and knowledge acquisition.
Affective (Feel) – Emotional and attitudinal responses.
Behavioral (Do) – Actions taken as a result of learning.

This model is widely used in education, marketing, nonprofit management, and project evaluation to design experiences that lead to meaningful change.

The Traditional Model: Outputs vs. Outcomes

Continue reading →

Building Lasting Museum Connections: The Four Levels of Audience Engagement

Imagine this: you’ve spent weeks planning a concert at your local history museum. You’ve arranged every detail, from booking a fantastic band to setting up the stage. The chairs are perfectly aligned, the lighting is just right, and the atmosphere feels full of possibility. But as the start time approaches, your excitement gives way to nervous glances at the clock. The parking lot remains empty. You keep hoping someone will arrive late, but after ten minutes, the seats are still vacant. The band—thankfully understanding—decides to use the time to practice, and while their music fills the room, you’re left grappling with embarrassment and frustration. Just a week earlier, a similar concert you organized thirty miles away had a packed house. What went wrong this time? How could the results be so different?

That happened to me early in my museum career and it was a humbling lesson. Perhaps you’ve faced similar moments—community events that fell flat, partnerships that fizzled, or publicity that didn’t attract attention. It’s easy to feel defeated when a community group declines to collaborate because their priorities don’t align, or when a business association’s objectives clash with the mission of interpreting artifacts rather than hosting public events. Sometimes, the problem is simply bandwidth—not enough staff to attend community meetings or follow up with volunteers. Community engagement can feel like a puzzle with a lot of missing pieces. But with the right tools, those challenges can transform into opportunities.

Continue reading →

Preserving History or Playing Politics? Marco Rubio Takes Over National Archives

In a significant reshuffling of federal leadership, President Donald Trump has appointed Secretary of State Marco Rubio as the acting Archivist of the United States. This move follows the abrupt dismissal of Colleen Shogan, the former head of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), earlier this month. The decision has raised concerns about the potential politicization of an agency traditionally known for its nonpartisan role in preserving the nation’s historical records.

The National Archives has recently been at the center of political tensions, particularly concerning its involvement in the Justice Department’s investigation into President Trump’s handling of classified documents post-presidency. The agency’s referral led to an FBI search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate, culminating in a federal indictment that was later dismissed. In the wake of these events, several senior staff members at NARA have resigned or been terminated, further intensifying debates about the agency’s future direction and independence.

To delve deeper into these developments, the podcast 1A hosted a discussion today titled “The National Archives and the Trump Administration.” The episode explores the implications of Secretary Rubio’s appointment, the recent upheavals within NARA, and what these changes mean for the preservation of America’s historical records. Listeners can access the episode on WAMU’s website.

As the situation continues to evolve, stakeholders and observers alike are closely monitoring how these leadership changes will impact the National Archives’ mission to safeguard the nation’s documentary heritage.

Sources

Gerstein, Josh and Kyle Cheney, “Trump Fires National Archives Chief,” Politico,(February 7, 2025).

Swenson, Ali and Gary Fields, “The National Archives Is Nonpartisan but Has Found Itself Targeted by Trump,” Associated Press (February 26, 2025).

Job Announcements Should Inspire, Not Confuse

Recently, I came across a job announcement for a senior position at a museum that left me more frustrated than inspired. Despite the important role it advertised, the description was riddled with vague language, overused phrases, and an overwhelming list of responsibilities. If it weren’t for the letterhead, this could have been a job at nearly any museum in the country. Here’s what went wrong—and how we can do better:

1. Clear, Specific Language Beats Buzzwords

Phrases like “championing change management,” “leveraging opportunities,” or “fostering growth” sound impressive, but what do they actually mean? Without clarity, these terms are open to interpretation, leading to confusion or disagreements down the line. A good job description uses concrete language to convey expectations. For example, instead of “fostering growth,” specify what kind of growth: increasing visitor numbers? Expanding programming? Generating revenue?

2. Prioritize, Don’t Overwhelm

This particular job description listed a dozen “essential” duties and responsibilities, each with multiple sub-points. While comprehensive, such an exhaustive list signals a lack of prioritization. No one can excel at everything, and candidates may be deterred by the sheer scope of the expectations. Instead, focus on the top three to five priorities that are most critical to success in the role.

Continue reading →

Exciting News: Expanded Services for Museum and Historic Site Management

At Engaging Places, we are committed to helping museums and historic sites engage audiences and preserve our shared heritage. We are excited to announce the expansion of our services to include collections stewardship documents that align with the ethics and professional standards set by the American Alliance of Museums, as well as governance materials—essential tools that equip their board members with the necessary knowledge and resources to govern effectively and advance the organization’s mission.

These new services are led by Mary van Balgooy, Vice President of Engaging Places. Mary brings extensive experience as an executive director of both local and national nonprofit organizations and as a collections manager for history museums and historical societies of all sizes. Her expertise allows us to offer customized solutions tailored to each organization’s unique needs. Whether you are a newly established nonprofit or a long-standing institution, we will provide the necessary documentation and best practices to support your collections management and equip your leadership team with effective governance tools. Learn more about Mary’s impressive background here.

Services Provided:

Continue reading →

Navigating New Federal Policies: What Executive Orders Mean for History Museums and Historic Sites

Museums are no strangers to navigating shifting policy landscapes, but recent executive orders issued by the White House signal significant changes that will affect funding, interpretation, and educational outreach. Whether you work in a history museum, a historic preservation organization, or a community-based historical society, understanding these policies is crucial for adapting to new challenges and opportunities.

Key Themes Across the Executive Orders

1. A Shift Toward Patriotic and Nationalist Narratives

Executive Orders 14190 (Ending Radical Indoctrination in K–12 Schooling) and 14189 (Celebrating America’s 250th Birthday) prioritize “patriotic education” and reinforce a government-endorsed interpretation of American history. This shift is exemplified by the reestablishment of the 1776 Commission and the creation of Task Force 250, which will oversee programming related to the 250th anniversary of American independence. “Patriotic education” is defined as “the history of America grounded in:

(i) an accurate, honest, unifying, inspiring, and ennobling characterization of America’s founding and foundational principles;
(ii) a clear examination of how the United States has admirably grown closer to its noble principles throughout its history;
(iii) the concept that commitment to America’s aspirations is beneficial and justified; and
(iv) the concept that celebration of America’s greatness and history is proper.”

2. The Elimination of Federal DEI and Environmental Justice Programs

Executive Order 14151 (Ending Radical and Wasteful DEI Programs and Preferencing) eliminates all federal support for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. This includes the termination of DEI-related grants, plans, contracts, programs, initiatives, training programs, offices, positions, and employment policies within federal agencies, “under whatever name they appear.” Museums that have benefited from federal DEI funding or programs may need to reassess their funding strategies and institutional policies.

3. Renaming and Monument Preservation

Executive Order 14172 (Restoring Names That Honor American Greatness) renames Denali back to Mount McKinley and designates the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America. Additionally, the reinstatement of the National Garden of American Heroes and the protection of existing monuments signal a renewed emphasis on traditional historical figures. Museums may face increased scrutiny when interpreting contested histories, particularly around geographic names and public commemorations.

Continue reading →