I agree with Ross Week's point of view.

I would like to add this: executives and museum directors - large or small -
are caught in between two forces that often resist change: on one side, staff
members, who often pay the price of change; on the other side,
trusteed/directors who often joined the board because of the traditional values
the institution held and the standing ot brought them in the community.  It's a
losing battle, really: we are expected to implement changes to meet new demands
and will ultimately be blamed for it.

Hervé Gagnon
Director-Curator
Colby-Curtis Museum

Ross Weeks a écrit:

> David's point is well taken, i.e., that all change is not necessarily
> merited.
>
> However, sometimes change for change's sake is seen as valuable,
> particularly when it may be beneficial to start putting a particular museum
> in a different light to help attract the resources to survive.   Good,
> indeed excellent, professionals are often the victims of this approach to
> institutional survival.
>
> Corporations and governmental bodies often change top-level,
> high-performing career executives simply to try to assure shareholders and
> politicans that "new blood" is being pumped in to see if the organizations
> can perform better and/or solve one problem or another.  That trend may
> have begun at the universities, where presidents (and their key staff)
> turned over regularly during the 1970s and 1980s.
>
> And unfortunately all of the non-profits, including museums, are now caught
> up in that kind of thinking.
>
> Ross Weeks