As a former Shedd employee (I left on good terms in March -- well before
the current cuts, but the writing was beginning to appear on the wall), I
can offer my perspective on some of the questions recently raised.  There
was no one cause, but rather a combination of factors which led to the
recent layoffs.

Attendance was down at The Shedd, and has been for about a year.  Why?  A
combination of higher ticket prices (a newspaper survey last year showed a
family of four would have to plunk down 90-some dollars for admission,
parking, food, etc. on an average trip); construction on the Museum Campus;
and competition with Sue the Dinosaur at The Field Museum, just across the
way.  (Some people also cite a recent change in ad agency as a contributing
factor.)

Why does low attendance hurt The Shedd?  Well, for one, they seem (in my
opinion, at least), to have a relatively small endowment for an institution
of such size.  Two, they have a large Operating budget (those whales eat a
lot of sardines!).  And three, they have historically avoided seeking
government funding for capital projects (not entirely, of course), and rely
more on provate philanthropy.  In recent years, that fund-raising has
focused on capital projects, putting more pressure on attendance to fund
Operating.

Why this situation?  The Shedd has always been a very hierarchical, top-
down kind of place.  This desire for control and self-sufficiency meant
they generally didn't want money if there were strings attached.  The
Shedd's CEO, Ted Beattie, comes from outside the museum world, and is
trying to break that "tight-control" mindset.  In my experience, he did
very little to interfere with the departments, employees, and managers.

However, the top-down corporate culture thrives at most other levels.  I
witnessed a lot of micro-management and other controlling behavior.  This
leaves employees powerless and feeling vulnerable, and more likely to lash
out against managers when things go bad.  (Well, who else do they have to
blame?)

(Also, the decisions as to who would stay and who would go were made behind
closed doors without employee input.  Then everyone was basically
told "you'll find out Oct. 1 whether you've still got a job."  Involving
the employees, seeing if anyone would be willing to take a sabbatical or go
down to half-time, etc. would have given folks some sense of control over
their own fates.  But such arrangements had to be done haphazardly, on the
fly, rather than planned out in advance.)

Resources were also tightly controlled, and centrally controlled.  Most
projects required approval from many levels of bureaucracy.
Entrepeneurship suffered, as did the ability to respond flexibly to
changing conditions.

Not that this is necessarily a slam.  There are many ways to run a museum,
and this system worked very well for The Shedd for a long time.  However,
it also left them vulnerable.

Finally, I would add that, while there is never a *good* time to suffer a
drop in attendance, September is historically one of the slowest months for
museums.  (My own institution actually closes for a week every fall for
maintenance.)  A huge percentage drop may actually translate to a
relatively small drop in absolute numbers.  It was enough to push The Shedd
over the edge (and it's worth mentioning: they haven't closed down.  They
are going to survive.  And it was good to hear that managers took pay cuts,
too.)  But only because they were teetering there to begin with.

-- Eugene Dillenburg
safely (for now) in Minnesota

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

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . 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).