hi all

And how about folks climbing onto boards of Historical Societies
(many of which maintain museums) so they can tap into the
dollars for a book they would like to have published?  We have had
board members quit the board because they couldn't get their
first time book, no less, a guarantee of publication BEFORE anyone
had even seen anything that looked remotely like a book.

Or how about the folks that join boards only so their house, or
whatever will receive a free historic site marker from the Society?
Or how about the folks that join with absolutely no intention of
EVER doing any work, ever raising any money, hardly ever
showing up at a board meeting, never give a penny to help
maintain the museum, but still expect to be treated like some
sort of God because "after all, I am a Board Member."

I could go on, but you more than get the point I'm sure.
A paid Curator sitting on the board is usually only the tip of
a rather nasty iceberg.

Most boards do not have enough people interested in being
a member - so most boards jump at anyone who would like to
be on it.  Many boards need to keep the numbers up because
they will lose their affiliation with the State Historical Society
if they don't - so in short, they cook the numbers.

From personal experience, I no longer believe the numbers
presented to me about membership. If a Board Member tells me
they have 14 on the Board, I know that in essence they have
probably 6 or 7 active Board members that are there for more
than self aggrandizement.

If they tell me they have a general membership of 400, I now
assume that less than 100 is more accurate.

If I ask what the average age is of their volunteers and am told
it is in the 60 range, I know this is a society/museum that has
done little to encourage younger than 60's to find a reason to
join.  I.E. the president has been the president since creation -
the same goes for most of the other Board members too. New
blood is not encouraged. New blood and younger blood is a
threat.

There are many good societies and great museums out there.
There are also many, many bad ones. These are the ones that
pay next to nothing - in fact are supremely proud of the fact that
they have all volunteers running the show. For those of you looking
for jobs in the museum field, I would suggest looking at the Board
composition, make up of the volunteer list, the salary range etc
before jumping in - it will save you a lot of frustration. It will
save you quitting the job because you are not appreciated for what
you are able to contribute.

You can be sure too that if a paid Curator is on the Board, that is
a board not doing its job. A paid Curator can sit in on meetings of
the Board but should not have a vote.

As a matter of fact, in many of these vest pocket museums I am
talking about, a Curator is equivalent to janitor and the Board
treats
them as such.

My two cents worth!

regards

Mary Haegele
who has been on several Boards
and is the member of a couple
of Historical Societies
www.joes.com/home/book_list


On 19 Nov 98,, Hervé Gagnon delivered:

> theoritical sense, the board's job is to supervise the director,
whom in turn supervises all other employees. The board's functions
are to
implement policies, to allocate and raise funds, to do some p.r. on
behalf
of the museum and to exercise a general surveillance on spending. The
director's job is to implement the board's policies, to reach the
long-term goals set by the boards and to ensure the museum's
professional
functions. The curator's job is to exercise one of those functions.
Confuse jobs and you'll end up with a lot of chiefs in the place...

All in all, something to avoid at all cost.