Category Archives: Performance measures

What Happens When You Apply Museum Standards to a State Capitol?

Leave a reply
The Virginia State Capitol offers guided and self-guided tours to visitors.

When I agreed to conduct a Museum Assessment Program (MAP) review for the Virginia State Capitol, I knew it would be an unusual assignment. MAP is designed for museums—institutions with clear missions centered on collections, exhibitions, and interpretation. The Capitol, however, is not a museum. It is the active seat of the General Assembly of Virginia. That distinction matters.

At the Capitol, the “museum function” is secondary—sometimes tertiary—to the work of governance. I’ve completed several MAP assessments but only choose those that relate to my expertise and interests—and the unusual environment engaged me immediately and made me wonder what would happen. Tours, exhibitions, and school programs operate within an environment defined by legislative sessions, security protocols, and shifting public access. I suspected that some museum standards wouldn’t apply. Others—especially those related to education and interpretation—would, but required adaptation. What I discovered is that the most useful part of my visit wasn’t evaluating against museum standards—it was a workshop.

As part of MAP, I facilitated a session to develop guiding principles for the visitor experience (called Education and Interpretation in MAP). Think of them as a set of best practices—but ones developed by the staff themselves, grounded in real situations rather than imposed from outside. Rather than start with abstract values (e.g., diversity, education, creativity) or a series of broad questions (e.g., why does the museum exist? what is the museum’s educational vision?), I used scenarios—real situations staff face every day.

Continue reading →

AASLH’s Workforce Report: Redesign the Field—or Just Endure It?

Title page of the "Understanding the Public History Workforce" report.

AASLH has released Understanding the Public History Workforce, a major new study examining who works in history organizations and how they experience their jobs. Read on its own, it offers important insights into burnout, compensation, inclusion, and professional climate. But its full significance becomes clearer when placed alongside two earlier field-wide studies: the National Museum Salary Survey (AAM, 2017) and the National Census of History Organizations (AASLH, 2022). 

Together, these three efforts give us something rare in the cultural sector: a layered dataset. The Census tells us the size and structure of the history organization field. The Salary Survey establishes a compensation range for the museum field as a whole. The new Workforce Report adds the human experience dimension in history organizations.  They don’t align perfectly, but sufficiently to make some findings and recommendations for history museums, historical societies, preservation organizations, and historic sites. 

Start With Scale and Structure

The 2022 Census identified 21,588 history organizations in the United States —more than all other museum types combined. History organizations are ubiquitous, present in nearly every community. The Census also emphasizes the field’s distinctive “hybrid” character: it’s often a partnership between government agencies and nonprofit organizations.

This structure matters. A field composed largely of small, community-based institutions operating within hybrid public–nonprofit governance systems will behave differently than corporate sectors or centralized public systems. Authority is diffuse. Revenue is mixed (appropriations, philanthropy, earned income). Asset accumulation is limited. Management is complex.

The structure shapes the results.

Continue reading →

From Standards to Spectrums: Why Museum Practice Is Better Understood as a Matrix

One of the things I keep returning to in my teaching and consulting is how much museum work actually lives along a spectrum—not in binary terms of success or failure, right or wrong, compliant or noncompliant.

This is one of the persistent challenges of working with professional standards. Standards are essential. They articulate shared values, define public trust, and help the field hold itself accountable. But by their nature, standards can imply an all-or-nothing logic: either you are doing the thing or you are not. And if you are not, that’s a problem.

Museum management, of course, is far more complex.

Museums and historic sites operate with widely varying levels of capacity, expertise, staffing, governance maturity, and external pressure. Boards change. Funding fluctuates. Crises intervene. Even within a single organization, some areas of work may be highly developed while others lag behind—not because of neglect or incompetence, but because of constrained resources and competing priorities.

Over time, I’ve become interested in how we might better describe and normalize that reality for the field—without lowering expectations or abandoning standards altogether.

Why a Matrix (Not a Scorecard)

In different contexts, I’ve heard similar tools described as rubrics, spectrums, continuums, or maturity models. In my own work, I’ve settled on calling this a matrix, for a very specific reason: it allows us to look across multiple areas of practice at once.

Once you do that, patterns start to emerge.

Continue reading →

Who Does What? Clarifying Roles for Nonprofit Boards and Staff

One of the most common challenges for nonprofit organizations—whether museums, historic sites, or community groups—is understanding who does what when it comes to decision-making, planning, and day-to-day operations.

Board members sometimes worry they are getting too involved in management or don’t know enough about what’s going on. Staff members, on the other hand, can feel their authority is being questioned when board members step into operational details. Yet when everyone understands their distinct responsibilities, organizations thrive.

We would never expect a new volunteer to suddenly step into a historic house and deliver a flawless tour. They need orientation, resources, and time to develop their skills before they feel confident leading visitors.

Continue reading →

What Should Stay, Grow, or Go? Let the Impact–Sustainability Matrix Help

Back in 2014, I shared a classic business matrix as a tool to help museums and historic sites think more strategically about their programs and activities. It plotted mission alignment on one axis and financial sustainability on the other, providing a quick visual way to categorize whether something was worth continuing, needed revision, or should be reconsidered altogether, using metaphors of stars, hearts, cash cows, and bunnies.

The response was strong—many found it useful for internal discussions, staff retreats, and board meetings. But since then, my thinking has evolved.

Over the last decade, I’ve come to see that we need a broader lens. It’s not enough to think about money and mission alone. Sustainability today must account for more than just dollars, and impact is shaped not only by mission statements, but also by vision and values.

A Matrix for Today

Here’s the updated version:

  • The vertical axis is now Impact, encompassing not just your mission but also your vision and values—your full organizational purpose.
  • The horizontal axis is now Sustainability, which considers financial, social, and environmental dimensions.

This updated Impact-Sustainability Matrix helps museum professionals assess whether a program or initiative is aligned with what matters most and whether it can endure in a resource-constrained world.

A Living Metaphor: From Bloom to Root

To make the matrix easier to understand and more memorable, I’m using a botanical metaphor. Every program or initiative can be thought of as a kind of plant—some deeply rooted and thriving, others beautiful but short-lived, and a few that are sadly distractions.  I’m not sure if the metaphor is as clear and apt as my previous star/heart/cash cow/bunny matrix, so I’d love your thoughts and suggestions in the comments below. 

Below are descriptions of each quadrant using this metaphor:

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:

  1. Structural diversity, which includes factors like board size, term limits, and leadership roles.
  2. Demographic diversity, which includes observable characteristics like gender, age, and ethnicity.
  3. 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:

  1. Cognitive (Know) – Intellectual engagement and knowledge acquisition.
  2. Affective (Feel) – Emotional and attitudinal responses.
  3. 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 →

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 →

AI in Action: Enhancing Museum Programs with Audience-Driven Insights

In museums and historic sites, whether you’re designing school programs, workshops, docent training, or exhibitions, understanding the needs and interests of your audience is key to success. But how do you efficiently analyze diverse feedback and connect it to your goals? Recently, I experimented with a creative process that combined audience input and AI to revise the learning objectives for my graduate course, Creating Sustainable Museums. The results not only improved the course but also offered insights into how AI can be used to enhance museum work.  

This approach was inspired by research conducted by Conny Graft at Colonial Williamsburg decades ago, which revealed that the goals of museum educators for school field trips often didn’t align with those of teachers. When those misalignments went unaddressed, they could lead to disappointment for both parties. Graft’s work emphasized the importance of finding common ground between institutional goals and participant expectations—a principle that remains essential in museum work today.

Start with Your Audience’s Goals

My course revision process began with a pre-course online survey, asking students to share what they hoped to know, feel, and do by the end of the semester. Using GPT, I quickly synthesized and categorized their responses to reveal predominant interests in financial, social, and environmental sustainability, as well as a strong desire to gain practical, job-ready skills. This step is akin to understanding your audience in a museum setting: what do your participants want to know, feel, or do? Are they looking for historical context, practical skills, or a new way to connect with the past?

Continue reading →

Sustainable Museums in Action: Key Takeaways from the NEMA Conference

This session on the sustainability initiatives at the Rhode Island School of Design Museum was among the first sessions at NEMA 2024.

Last week I attended the New England Museum Association 2024 Conference in Newport, Rhode Island. About 800 museum professionals attended over the three days of sessions, vendor displays, professional affiliation group meetings, and receptions. The weather was sunny and sixties, surprisingly warm for the first week of November. Without the crowds of summer, it made Newport much more pleasant.

The conference offered numerous sessions on sustainability, and I’m attending as many as possible in preparation for my upcoming course, “Creating Sustainable Museums,” at George Washington University this spring.

In the session “Climate Emergency and Sustainability Taskforce at RISD,” several staff members from the Rhode Island School of Design Museum shared insights on their in-house sustainability efforts. What began as informal conversations among a few staff members evolved into a formal task force that resulted in the “Take Care” exhibition. Staff from all areas of the museum—not only curators and educators—selected objects from the collection and created interpretive labels addressing sustainability themes. In addition to this curatorial approach, the museum implemented practical sustainable practices, including standardizing frame sizes, reusing exhibition cases, turning off cameras in virtual meetings, and eliminating admission stickers and vinyl lettering.

Continue reading →