You know, we're bumping up against two schools of
management in this discussion:

1.  Those who believe that the best candidates have to
come within with a real understanding of the intricate
details of the profession.

2.  Those who believe that a good manager doesn't need
to know how things are done.  (S)he only needs to know
how to hire quality people and inspire them to do it.

I've worked with both types.  The problems with the
former include the fact that they're often too
involved with the intricate details and cannot let go.
 They micromanage and second guess.

Those in the latter category can be guilty of not
being able to know whether things are being done
correctly because they haven't got a clue.

I'm sensing from what I'm reading that there is a
sense of job frustration.  How can one promote and put
their best skills to work and be rewarded for their
efforts if the bigwigs come from the outside?  What
good does it do to stay and tough it out if they're
only going to put someone from the outside atop?  Is
that what is going on?

The other problem I've seen with the outside
candidates--especially in this era of the MBA
President (and I'm thinking of the Smithsonian as an
example here)--is the frustration in putting a
business only mindset in a field that is a lot more
complex than just numbers.  How does one attach a
value to an exhibit that is beyond monetary?

Am I correct in assessing the frustrations on this
one?  If yes, I'll tell you it is not unique to the
Museums field.  These same arguments frequently are
heard in many a profession.

I can well relate to this, but I will tell you that my
personal preference is the manager who is the people
person, who can motivate and inspire, delegate and let
go, but hold you accountable in the end for that to
which you commit.  The micromanager who did your job
before and now won't let you do it your way frustrates
the (well you know what the word is that fits in this
spot) out of me.





--- Amy Kleinert <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Dear Ross & friends,
>
> You said "One does not need to know how to screw in
> a
> light bulb in order to be successful at the helm of
> General Electric."
> This is only true if you have "quality control"
> within
> your organization.  If you don't understand how the
> bottom level does it job and seek input in
> decision-making from these individuals your likely
> to
> institute procedures and policies that could impair
> the production rate/efficiency resulting in an
> increase in costs and a reduction in quality. Your
> statement is qualified only if the people on the
> lower
> end of the organizational chart are empowered in the
> decision-making process.
>
> So while a museum executive might have little to no
> museum experience, I don't think categorically he
> will
> run the museum into the ground if he is a smart
> manager and involves the organization the
> decision-making process.
> Take it easy,
> Amy Kleinert


=====
Indigo Nights
[log in to unmask]


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
NEW from Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1

=========================================================
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).