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).