Emily,
    Could you give us some reasons why you think it would be useful to
have dealers serving on your collection committee?

    From everything I've read, I think it's really not a good practice
to have dealers involved with a museum at anything other in a very
professional relationship (and, if that, very carefully handled).

I'd agree that there is great potential conflict of interest.  The
dealer could advise you that something shouldn't be collected (or,
worse, should be deaccessioned)  in order to go after it her/himself.
(I've personally been involved with a collection in which this happened,
and the results were not pretty.)

It also provides the dealer with an 'insiders' opportunity to get to
know potential sellers, and even provides him or her with a 'connection'
that they are likely use to try to legitimize themselves to enhance
their own business.

Finally, I think that having a dealer closely connected with your
collecting activities casts a shadow on the museum --in addition to the
other arguments, it creates a perception to the world that you are
interested in artifacts for their monetary value more than for their
historic (or artistic) significance.

I, personally, would feel very, very nervous having a dealer on my Board
or any committee related to collecting.  It just has too many
possibilities for negative consequences.  No matter how nice that person
is or how much you trust him/her, the public perception thing will be
there.

With all that bias now exposed and vulnerable, I do still really, really
want to hear about the 'pro' arguments.  Perhaps there is something that
I'm missing.

Lucy Skjelstad