While accepting the proviso that this is a topic much larger than the 30-sec.
word bytes you will get from Museum-L, the first definition of what is
special about museums is a clue.  Museums are about collections.  Acquired
objects, both inanimate and animate, require that the institution care for
them, display them for a wider audience and provide a basis for the public's
understanding of the objects.  This applies to art, natural science, objects
of historical significance, plant and animal life, and even specialty
collections which have popped up from time to time on our "chat line."

With this in mind, a director of such an institution should be able to
provide the vision, set the tone for the institution and carry out the
supervision of the many daily operations which impact the museum's ability to
accomplish its stated mission statement.  And while fiscal health is
paramount to the perpectual nature of our museums, the fiscal health of a
museum institution resides solely in the responsibilities of governance, or
trustees.  When this role is abdicated to a director who's background is
based solely in accounting or business and completely lacking in a
museum-discipline based education, then I feel that it is the start of a
board and the staff losing touch with why they are there in the first place.

Now, with that sermon done, a modern museum director needs to be conversant
with fiduciary matters which impact the approved budget set and adopted by
the trustees.  In some museums, such as Philadelphia and MOMA, the
complexities of staff and business management have benefitted from the
addition of a v-p for administration or in some cases a president for
finance.

If one reverts back to the real business world, the Chairs or CEOs usually
come from a creative background or possess strong creative skills which
enables them to bring broad vision to the formula in setting long range
plans.  Not to be overly critical, but "numbers crunchers" frequently are
charged with the annual health of a company and their vision is not as
important as their daily fiscal control.

So back to your question.  Which are better?  From the large number of
museums in serious financial trouble, it would appear at first that MBAs
would be preferable, but in the final analysis, Museums are not for profit
businesses and our inventory - our collections -- deserve the guidance of a
discipline-based humanist and not a n office manager or accountant.  The
passion to acquire, preserve and interpret collections for the good of
society is a weighty charge which requires a person be totally dedicated to
the profession, and I believe that person should come from the academic ranks
of the museum's collecting discipline.