This is why it's best for employees to declare their personal collections
and collecting--so that the museum administration can figure out up-front
what does and does not constitute a conflict. Common sense and a
case-by-case approach will help; an inflexible policy won't (and I say that
reluctantly as a true policy wonk). Most people I have worked with on this
and related issues are less worried about an employee who collects than,
say, an employee who also deals in collections-type items, or an employee
adding to his own collections in violation of the law.

Many archaeological, ethnographic and natural history specimens cannot be
privately owned if they are protected by national or international law, and
it is useful to know that an employee is aware of this and has not built up
what are effectively illegal collections (if only because you want your
employees to know and comply with applicable laws).

On the other hand, many museums have libraries and many museum employees
have personal book collections; many museums collect the same sort of folk
art that is for sale to anyone at festivals and public exhibitions; some
employees have art and decorative arts objects that are family heirlooms and
have never left the private sector; etc. This is where policy fails and
common sense comes in.

If an employee legally owns objects in a private collection, and has
provably not competed with the museum in acquiring them, the museum gains
nothing from a heavy-handed assertion of dubious rights. Unless there is
evidence that the employee uses the information and connections from his
museum position to acquire more objects, objects that the museum was
provably already interested in for its own holdings, or that the employee is
pilfering from the museum for his own benefit, it is very difficult to make
a case for conflict of interest just from the existence of a personal
collection. You can reasonably ask that the employee disclose information on
personal collections and collecting activities, and some places also require
an annual update disclosing new personal acquisitions of significance. You
can (though this is more problematic) ask that the employee cease from
adding new items to a personal collection that duplicates a sphere of the
museum's holdings, for the duration of employment. Some places have
experimented with a requirement that significant objects offered to the
employee be brought to the museum's attention for first refusal. That gets
draconian, and can lead to very bad feelings (especially when such items are
personal gifts or bequests).

If an employee actually has objects illegally in his possession and the
museum becomes aware of this, it's time to bring in the legal experts.
Options may include donation to the museum in return for a one-time amnesty
from prosecution or retribution (all sides, including enforcement agencies,
must agree in writing to something like this); prosecution (if the offense
is egregious and the museum needs to distance itself from the employee's
collecting activity); and/or firing (ditto).

A disclosure from employees protects them in the event of loss or theft from
the museum: it can be proved that their collections were not pilfered from
their employer. That's the best reason for requiring disclosure, I think.
Rather than worrying about every little possession an employee has, I would
keep an eye out for the real warning signs: a history of buying *and*
selling such objects, especially where that provides significant outside
income; a collection that is blatantly illegal (human remains, post-Act
endangered species, items that could only be in your country by crossing a
border but for which no records exist, etc.). Most of your employees (and
board members, and volunteers) will not cross those lines. Disclosure
enables you to focus on the few who do.

Since it's a love of collecting and collections in the first place that
attracts people to the museum field, this issue will never go away. I'd
hazard a guess that 80-85% of what people have in personal collections is
legal, does not constitute a conflict of interest, and is not acquired in
competition with the museum. The other 10-15% can be of great concern.
Knowing what your people own, and how, can really help you make sound
decisions on how to proceed.

Cheers,
Sally Shelton
Collections Officer
National Museum of Natural History
Smithsonian Institution

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ museum-l.html. You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to
[log in to unmask] The body of the message should read "Signoff
Museum-L" (without the quotes).