Five or six years ago my boss at the time related a story to me. He just returned from a conference sponsored by a major museum organization. One of the main reasons he went was to try and learn more about development techniques, you know, fund-raising. At a reception following the day’s sessions he was chatting with a colleague who asked him, “How big is your staff?” He replied, “I have a staff of six.” In an amazed tone the colleague replied, “Wow! You only have six people in your development department. That must be a challenge.” My boss didn’t bother to tell him that the six employees were the entire staff of the organization and there was no one dedicated solely to development.
This illustrates what I see as one of the main challenges facing small and medium-sized history organizations. The gulf between the “big guys” and us in terms of resources is so great it is hard to for professional organizations to meet the needs of everyone. For example, several weeks ago at the behest of AAM (American Association of Museums) president Ford Bell, I completed a survey relating to the services they provide and the expectations of their members. As a director of an AAM-accredited institution, I felt it was important for me to put in my two cents. It was clear from some of the questions that they were trying to identify ways of serving smaller institutions. I am glad to see they are aware one size does not fit all when it comes to advocacy, providing professional resources and other services.
I have come to realize over the years that working in a small and successful historical organization is both a blessing and a curse. If you are a person who prefers to go to work each day knowing exactly what you will do because it was what you did the day before and will likely be what you do the following day, working in a small organization is not for you. If instead, you like having a variety of projects simmering along and managing them so none of them boils over, then you will thrive. The difficulty comes when, like my boss above, you manage to find the time and the funds, to attend a conference. I’ve found these programs, ostensibly meant to expand and enhance professional knowledge, often miss the mark. If focused on the small museum, they often end up being so elementary as to be useless for those of us who have staff with professional training and degrees. However programs presented at conferences which include large institutions usually nets the kind of experience I related above.
So what am I saying with all of this? 1) Professional organizations like AAM need to recognize that according to the Heritage Health Index, 74% of institutions are considered small (by their definition based on budget – go here to see more data and cool charts http://www.heritagepreservation.org/HHI/datasmall.html#1 ) and this is where, if they are interested in doing the most good and not simply serving as a mouthpiece for the largest of their constituents, their support and resources should be spent. 2) Just because an institution is small does not automatically mean it lacks professional staff (I’ll write more on this later), in fact much can be learned from experienced staff from smaller institutions since they are the ones who do more with less every day, in good economic times as well as bad.