Of course, every museum that can get away with it seems to favor bringing
in someone as a non-permanent (hourly wage) person.....assessing the
chemistry & performance...and then this person, by virtue of experience and
familiarity, automatically becomes "the most qualified" for the job once
it's advertised.

For the tough jobs that are highly sensitive and extra-stressful, someone
from outside the community does indeed have a leg up.  Sometimes, it's not
because of special capability -- it's because the 'outsider' is easier to
get rid of than a homegrown sort.

Except perhaps for religious parishes, museums are too often still
dominated by concern over "what people think"


----------
> From: Hodcarry <[log in to unmask]>

> To argue the other point of view, it is a lot easier to base a hiring
decision
> based on several months of observation rather than a couple of brief
> interviews.  Of course, we all have faults and those are bound to show up
> during the course of several months.  I have observed that boards often
favor
> the relative unknown from out of town over a local person for a
director's
> position.  I call it the magic of the man (woman) on horseback.