Hawai’i’s Shangri La Museum of Islamic Art, Culture & Design took a community-focused approach with its “8×8” exhibition.

This article originally appeared in Museum magazine’s November/December 2024 issue, a benefit of AAM membership. 

The Shangri La Museum of Islamic Art, Culture & Design—a center of the Doris Duke Foundation in Honolulu, Hawai´i—is located within the ‘ili (subdivision) of Kapahulu in the ahupua‘a (land division) of Waikīkī in the moku (district) of Kona on the mokupuni (island) of O‘ahu in the pae´āina (archipelago) of Hawai´i. Shangri La was constructed between 1935 and 1937 by American philanthropist Doris Duke (1912–1993), who was inspired by her extensive travels through North Africa and Western, Central, South, and Southeast Asia. As part of her desire to promote the study and understanding of the art and cultures she experienced during her travels, Duke directed in her will that Shangri La be “available to scholars, students, and others interested in the furtherance and preservation of Islamic art and make the premises open to the public.”

Since opening to the public in 2002, Shangri La has faced challenges related to access, and it has sometimes been perceived as an exclusive space, both physically and conceptually. Many Hawai´i residents have only experienced Shangri La from the outside, as it is visible from the ocean below. Due to its location in a residential neighborhood, a conditional use permit limits the number of people who can access Shangri La to approximately 14,000 tour visitors per year. Shangri La’s core ethos of promoting the learning and understanding of Islamic art and culture has also, at times, been a limiting factor for those with generalized views of Islamic art.

Like many museums, Shangri La staff wanted to improve its relevance and service in the local community. Shangri La sought to expand past the center’s original mission, which seemed both needed and inclusive for South West Asian and North African (SWANA) communities, but could also be perceived as exceptionally exclusionary for Hawai´i residents and Kānaka Maoli (Native Hawaiian) communities.

For the past four years, Shangri La has featured a locally centered exhibition series known as “8×8” to address these challenges. The result was a physical and online platform that transformed not only how artists and the Hawai´i community engaged with the museum and its collection but also spotlighted how institutions like Shangri La should prioritize engagement with the communities in which they exist, create space for addressing complex histories, and embrace a change mindset.

A Focus on Visual and Performing Artists

Past Shangri La programming encouraged moments of dialogue with Hawai´i’s history and arts community, often bringing in local creatives to connect with its residency participants who came from outside of Hawai´i. However, Hawai´i’s arts community was not given a dedicated platform at Shangri La until the development of the “8×8” exhibition series in 2020, which has run for the four-year period 2021–2024. The idea for “8×8” (which was a play on Hawai´i’s 808 area code) came from Shangri La staff who wanted to exhibit the works of artists in Hawai´i and offer them experience working with a museum.

For “8×8,” Shangri La’s curatorial team invited eight visual artists and eight performing artists each year from 2021–2024 to create and show their work at the museum. One visual artist and one performing artist were assigned to each one of the Shangri La galleries to create artwork in response to the annual connecting theme, which were Place (2021), Connection (2022), Continuum (2023), and Source (2024). Artists received the same unrestricted stipend to cover the cost of creating their work, while Shangri La covered the cost to document the installed artwork and performances through professional photography and video.

Each year, visual and performing artist cohorts participated in a Zoom call to learn about each other’s work and their assigned spaces at Shangri La. However, collaboration was not a requirement of the exhibition. From painters and glass artists to classically trained musicians and a youth breakdancing collective, Shangri La’s invitations to artists working in Hawai´i yielded a breadth of artistic output and interpretation of Shangri La. Each of the 64 artists that were part of the “8×8” series brought with them their own community, many of whom had never been to Shangri La before. This engagement also furthered awareness of Pacific connections to SWANA cultures, global history, and the arts.

“Getting down as a part of the ‘8×8’ exhibition allowed a unique opportunity for Hawai´i’s breaking [breakdancing] to be understood as an expressive vehicle to connect and interpret the histories of the landscapes we are connected to in the present moment,” said Jeff Wong (Bboy Ark), mentor of Keiki Breaks, a youth breakdancing collective in Honolulu. Their work for “8×8: Continuum” drew connections between breakdancing as a form of freedom, artistic expression, and resistance.

According to Janet Kelly and Noa Dettweiler of Hawai´i Potters Guild (HPG), participation in Shangri La’s “8×8: Continuum” exhibition in 2023 profoundly inspired its membership, fostering artistic growth and collaboration. The exhibition also “served as a vehicle for Shangri La’s Artist-in-Residence and seventh-generation Afghan potter, Ustad Abdul Matin Malikzada, to forge a powerful and lasting cultural connection with the guild’s community,” said Kelly and Dettweiler. After “8×8,” Shangri La and HPG also worked together on a series of floral vases inspired by Shangri La’s collection to be used for convenings and events the center hosts throughout the year.

The inclusion of contemporary artists, especially performing artists, sparked conversations between Shangri La’s collections, curatorial, and programs staff on how to best accommodate creative imagination with open-air collections stewardship. Shangri La’s internal teams needed to transform exhibition spaces for innovation while also continuing cultural heritage stewardship in the galleries. Artists often left concept planning conversations with a deeper understanding of what it means to care for historic art collections.

The Conversations and Critiques

Artists have often been at the forefront of complex and challenging conversations. Artistic works can help audiences sit with discomfort or grief while creating moments of community nourishment and connection.

The architecture and art at Shangri La make it a site of immense artistic beauty and inspiration. But it can also evoke complicated, and at times conflicting, feelings about museums and the colonial legacies attached to them. Shangri La’s open invitation to the artistic community was meant to uplift artists and share space for artistic creativity and celebration, but the center also was prepared to engage with the critiques and questions about Shangri La, and museums in general, that some artists raised in their work. Staff have used these critiques to help Shangri La become a more valuable and contributing member of the community and create dialogue among visitors.

Poet No’u Revilla explored the complex feelings often attached to museums, posing the following question in her poem Nānā i ke kumu: “How can you be something I need, and something I need protection from?” Hip-hop artist Punahele and poet Brandy Nālani McDougall made clear connections in their spoken word pieces to Kānaka Maoli sovereignty, Hawai´i’s history and the histories of Western and Central Asia, and the longing for the return of land.

“Shangri La fostered a beautiful space for me, as a Kanaka ´Ōiwi “8×8” artist (poet), to learn and immerse myself in the wisdom, peace, and beauty of its extensive Islamic art collection and, commendably, to also reflect on the unsettling implications of how these moving artworks came to be in Hawai´i,” shared McDougall, who is also a scholar, activist, and Hawai´i Poet Laureate 2023–2025. “The experience was transformative for me, both personally and creatively, as it led me toward deeper understandings of collective struggle, liberation, and solidarity as well as the ways that Hawai´i remains interconnected with other countries in the world. Much of my poetry now frames Hawai´i in terms of its internationality, and I have Shangri La to mahalo for that.”

Artistic responses centered on land restoration extended to broader sustainability topics. Visual artist Brandon Ng’s Da Wretched of Da Earth explored reassertions of indigeneity through a two-part living installation that challenged the manicured landscapes of introduced and invasive plants at Shangri La. The connections made between Ng; Hui Kū Maoli Ola, a local native plant nursery; and Shangri La’s grounds staff resulted in ongoing efforts to reintroduce native plants across the campus.

After four years of working to institutionalize commitments to Hawai´i’s artistic community, “8×8” as an ethos and exhibition is ready to evolve into something deeper. Islamic art and culture are world heritage, and Hawai´i-based conversations are globally relevant. The “8×8” series not only expanded how Shangri La engaged local artists exploring all facets of Hawai´i but also allowed the institution to receive critiques through artistic expression and deepen communication with our community in the process.

“8×8” reaffirmed the need for Shangri La to deepen its impact in and commitments to the Hawai´i community outside of an annual exhibition. Shangri La seeks to continue these commitments through integrated programming that provides visibility and space for Hawai´i residents and Native Hawaiian voices in larger programs like its residency program and convenings of global communities in dialogue.

Shangri La extends its immense gratitude to the 64 “8×8” artists and their collaborators who have helped the center grow over these past four years and to the creative teams that have helped tell these distinct and innovative stories.

Sidebar: Digital Content

Digital accessibility was at the forefront of the “8×8” exhibition design, which allowed artists and their networks to share their work well past the physical run of their exhibitions. This strategy also helped circumvent the challenges of physically accessing Shangri La’s campus and heightened access limitations related to COVID-19.

Shangri La partnered with NMG Network, working with award-winning filmmaker Gerard Elmore, to create high-quality video recordings of performances in the “8×8” exhibition. Elmore’s team collaborated with Shangri La’s curatorial creative team to produce 32 performance videos, which are available on Shangri La’s YouTube channel.

Most important, the Shangri La and NMG teams collaborated with the performing artists to fully realize their vision in transferring an in-person performance to a video format. These videos capture each performance’s sense of wonder while highlighting new ways to experience Shangri La’s space and historic collections. This was integral to “8×8,” since performing artists would not be able to perform their pieces in front of a live audience in the galleries they were assigned due to various capacity limitations. All performances were experienced as video content.

Also, each year, documentary photographer Elyse Butler documented the performance and visual artwork installed in Shangri La’s galleries. Through her own artistry, Butler provided high-impact visual storytelling, creatively capturing the essence and power of each artist’s work and its dialogue within the Shangri La space.

Digital content is also evergreen, helping both the institution and artists tell their stories far past the exhibition timeline. Filmmaker ´Āina Paikai included his short film for “8×8,” OUTSIDE/IN, as part of the July 2023 HŌ´EA screening for Kānaka Maoli filmmakers during the monthlong celebration of Lā Ho´iho´i Ea (Sovereignty Restoration Day). All of Shangri La’s “8×8” exhibitions remain available on its website and YouTube channel.

If there’s one thing I believe, after my years of working in this field, it’s that there is a museum for everyone. Whether your interests lie in art, animals, automobiles, history, military, nature, science, or sports (to name only a few), there’s a museum that can feed those curiosities with up- close encounters and expert interpretation. In the United States alone, this variety spans more than 22,000 institutions, according to estimates from the Institute of Museum and Library Services—nearly double the number of McDonald’s restaurants in the country.

With this impressive reach, museums impact communities across the country, serving as critical infrastructure not just through traditional visits but also activities like curriculum creation, digital con-tent, adult and youth programs, blood drives, voter registrations, and even—as the Newark Museum of Art is building toward—affordable housing developments. And yet, despite all this hard work to serve our communities, our impact too often seems to fly under the radar. When lack of funding forces a museum to scale back hours, or even close permanently, a big public outcry is rare. If we’re serious about being at the center of our communities, and receiving the funding and support that this merits, that needs to change.

Diversity, equity, accessibility, and inclusion (DEAI) programs are, at their heart, about addressing this problem. They aim to evolve our internal systems, structures, and processes so that our external policies and programs are relevant and impactful for all of us. They embrace the principles of democracy—diverse participation, equitable systems, accessible information, and inclusive processes—to ensure that museums not only affect their communities but reflect them. As you’ll read in this issue of the magazine, these efforts have become increasingly sophisticated over time, building from one-off experiments into an overarching discipline that intersects with every part of our work.

However, as you’ll also read in these pages, the growth of DEAI programs in American institutions has sparked a backlash movement, with public pressure and legislative changes forcing some museums to retreat from or recalibrate their practices. As “DEI” becomes a misappropriated acronym in the public sphere, misguided fears about what the work entails threaten to undermine its true, unifying spirit. Our field will need to be thoughtful about how to dodge the division and act in the interest of results. I believe we can frame our work to help even skeptics see that it is about expanding our field, not shutting anyone out. Ultimately, DEAI is about building a bigger tent, and we must continue to build our momentum toward that purpose.

The guiding principles of diversity, equity, access, and inclusion are integral to museum relevance and community engagement.

This article originally appeared in Museum magazine’s November/December 2024 issue, a benefit of AAM membership. 

In the fall of 2020, the Witte Museum leadership team and trustees gathered in the museum’s conference room and struggled to create a post-pandemic strategic plan infused with diversified financial strategies to get back to normal. We were also focused on the guiding principles of diversity, equity, accessibility, and inclusion (DEAI), welcoming insights from a Facing Change leader via Zoom. Facing Change: Advancing Museum Board Diversity & Inclusion is AAM’s initiative championing the racial and ethnic diversity of museum boards, but we were intent on changing the entire museum.

Our Facing Change consultant challenged what we thought was intentional language in our goal setting. As we listened to her review our work, we acknowledged a significant challenge to our DEAI goals: unconscious bias. What was the bias? The leadership team had initially assumed that financial diversification was separate from DEAI efforts. The consultant helped us realize that using diversity, equity, access, and inclusion as guiding principles means they become integral to every aspect of the museum’s future success: leadership; case-making; and meeting the mission, specifically for the Witte, of shaping the future of Texas.

It was a transformational moment for the Witte, especially for the trustees. For many years, we have been proud of a museum team and visitor demographics that mirror the community. We were also increasing the diversity on the board of trustees, including at the chair and executive levels. But we had much more work to do to foster leadership at every level, including interdisciplinary and empowerment strategies among our colleagues. We recognized the need to move both intentionally and, frankly, swiftly, if we were to truly represent our vast and diverse communities and reap the financial benefits of that successful work. How inspiring to acknowledge that the more diverse, equitable, accessible, and inclusive the museum became, the more worthy of investment we would be.

After a multi-year pandemic that wreaked havoc on budgets and operations, many museums are now emerging from those dark days with an improved sense that what their community needs is how their museum should serve. Communities that experience authentic and measurable impact from museums will respond in kind with investment and involvement. Community-connected museums, including the Witte, are already experiencing this investment. This is the time for museums to return to, or begin, infusing the guiding principles of DEAI into their work with the communities they serve. To help museums with this critical task, AAM is updating its Accreditation process and Code of Ethics for Museums with DEAI guiding principles in mind.

The Changing Context of DEAI Work

In spring 2019, AAM created the Excellence in DEAI Task Force, which included top museum leaders in the field. Soon thereafter, it announced a new initiative, Facing Change: Advancing Museum Board Diversity & Inclusion, with underwriting from the Andrew W. Mellon, Alice L. Walton, and Ford foundations.

The Facing Change initiative was conceived amid a growing movement of anti-racist work in museums, precipitated by the Black Lives Matter movement and an array of shocking gender and racial discrimination cases and crises. But even museums intent on infusing DEAI into their work were often moving at a glacial pace.

Facing Change began by igniting profound community-based conversations at 51 museums across the nation in an effort to help them recognize unconscious bias in their institutions—no easy task—and then make changes accordingly. These conversations included partner museums, entire museum staffs, and board members, touching each person involved.

Then the COVID-19 pandemic erupted, and museums needed to reinvent their operations to survive. Almost immediately, the financial disorder and devastation was apparent, with most museums slashing personnel, some temporarily, some prolonged.

Many museums involved in Facing Change worried about their capacity to continue that work as they struggled to sustain financial stability. Andrew Plumley, AAM’s then Director of Inclusion, sent a series of heart-wrenching memos to the field, urging them to stay the course. “All too often in this country, when a crisis arises, our approaches to equity and inclusion fall by the wayside,” he wrote. He then reminded museum leaders that through the Facing Change initiative, “We’re mitigating inequities at the highest levels of the museum field because we know this work is the right, just thing to do; we must serve our communities better. We know this work is what’s needed to remain relevant and sustainable in the future.”

Museums stepped up. Across the country, they safely opened for vaccination clinics, childcare, and healing experiences. Museums regrouped and retooled to offer solace, programs, and, at the very least, messages to their communities. They pivoted their program delivery, creating virtual programs for schoolchildren and families. The pandemic led many museums to rethink their role in their communities. These steps are emblematic of DEAI guiding principles in action.

As a member of AAM’s Accreditation Commission, I witnessed museums’ extraordinary agility during and after the COVID-19 pandemic emergency. Today we know that museums are resilient. Most not merely survived but are close to a new normal, redefining what museums are and what they will be in the future. Conference titles have moved from a focus on resilience to sustaining a healthy balance.

Infusing DEAI into Accreditation

Unfortunately, this work toward healthy balance in museums comes at a time of increased political polarization that even includes attacks on the progressive nature of museums. Focusing on DEAI has become fraught with tension, with some states annihilating DEAI programs and some museum supporters questioning the use of the acronym, fearing retribution.

Through an IMLS National Leadership Grant, AAM continues to embrace this critical work and has created a committee to help steer the processes of infusing the guiding principles of DEAI into the Accreditation process and expectations. For example, the initial review of the Core Documents through a DEAI lens revealed that the principles are not mentioned, even implicitly, and are not required. All AAM Core Standards need to be adjusted to include DEAI principles as fundamental and also to encourage, if not require, community engagement in developing the guiding principles.

Applying DEAI principles to the Core Standards should be inclusive of the entire museum field, not just accredited museums. How will our museums look to AAM as a guide in this endeavor? How can these changes inspire museums to become accredited? Most important, how can these guiding principles be empowering rather than onerous, inspiring rather than intimidating? How can museums—among the most trusted institutions in America—be a model for America, helping to shape the future using diverse, equitable, accessible, and inclusive guiding principles?

Advice from the Field

I posed the questions above to a group of AAM professionals and members of the Excellence in DEAI Steering Committee. They all have extraordinary passion for this work and believe that museums could be the model of change in their communities.

The progress is real.

The first person I interviewed was Grace Stewart, Director, Equity & Inclusion, at AAM, who noted that the museum field has certainly shifted since the advent of Facing Change. The Facing Change report declared that “hundreds of museums leaders collectively engaged in thousands of hours of DEAI training.” At the outset of the initiative, 20 museum professionals were heading DEAI efforts at their institutions. Today, that number has grown tenfold to 200. That is especially impressive given that many museums decided to embed DEAI throughout the museum rather than establish a separate position, with human resource teams marking their progress toward achieving the guiding principles of DEAI. Stewart notes that museums initially looked outward by creating exhibitions and programs as their DEAI offerings, but they are now looking inward, specifically at their strategic priorities and core values. The American Alliance of Museums is also looking inward. “This has ignited potential DEAI infusion into a continuum of change, including the Core Standards for Accredited museums and for those seeking Accreditation, to ensure that all museums serve their communities,” Stewart says.

DEAI goals must be a part of Accreditation.

Julie Hart, who heads AAM’s standards-based assessment and recognition programs, including the AAM Accreditation Program, says many museums are using the DEAI guiding principles to increase board diversity, which is a good first step. But it is now time for AAM to engage the varied communities within the museum field in creating specific DEAI goals for museums to achieve as part of Accreditation. For example, currently, AAM Peer Reviewers are asked to assess a museum’s public service role but do not yet have more specific ways to define the museum’s community engagement.

Museums need to practice cultural humility.

Mikka Gee Conway, former Chief Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging Officer at the National Gallery of Art in Washington, DC, is a member of the Excellence in DEAI Steering Committee that is working to embed guiding principles into the Accreditation process. Conway wants “cultural humility” to be a part of these principles. “Museum professionals are not authorities in all areas,” Conway notes. “We need to recognize the expertise that resides within our audiences. We need to serve our communities through humble listening.” DEAI principles can be “corrective”—or empowering rather than prescriptive.

Museums can create DEAI entry points for their communities.

Joanne Jones-Rizzi, Vice President of Science, Equity, and Education at the Science Museum of Minnesota, and also on the Steering Committee, agrees with Conway that “DEAI is not a prescribed process, not a check-the-box” endeavor. DEAI work upholds a set of values, educates people on those values, and then asks them to invest in the organization that is doing that work. “We are creating environments whereby someone finds an entry point,” Jones-Rizzi says. “Museums are a microcosm of societies, with everyone coming from a different place.” To that point, she understands that using the acronym DEAI is difficult in these polarizing times and is working on an “Equity Thesaurus” of words that can be used with confidence and with the same impact outcomes.

The language of change matters.

Jorge Zamanillo, Founding Director of the Smithsonian’s National Museum of the American Latino and AAM Board Chair, underscores that the work we are doing must be careful and thorough, especially for the purposes of the Accreditation process. “The guiding principles for Accreditation must be thoroughly vetted” by the Steering Committee, Zamanillo says. Language shapes the experiences of museum professionals as they approach the Accreditation process. He is particularly mindful that young people want to “use their experiences for justice.”

The idea of justice is particularly apropos as we continue the work of infusing DEAI guiding principles into the Accreditation process, with a focus on museums’ visions and core values and, especially, strategic planning and action plans. The words “diversity, equity, accessibility, and inclusion” are powerful pillars for museums. Our communities, from young people to donors, are looking to museums to do this hard, sometimes contentious, work. In the process, we become models of transparency through our community engagement and service. Done well, this work can affirm a sense of justice among all people.

Resources

Facing Change: Advancing Museum Board Diversity & Inclusion

Excellence in DEAI: 2022 Report from the Excellence in DEAI Task Force

Art Bridges is equitably redistributing art across the country through art sharing and community engagement.

This article originally appeared in Museum magazine’s November/December 2024 issue, a benefit of AAM membership. 

When I was in high school, I was a terrible student, but I always showed up for my art class with Mrs. McDaniel. She was a visionary teacher who transformed her classroom into studio spaces, giving each of her students their own space to create art. She engaged us in mature conversations about art and its purposes. I remember her asking, “Does an artist need a viewer?” She believed that artists didn’t just create for themselves; rather, artwork is not fully realized until someone has engaged with it.

Decades later, I find myself inspired by another visionary leader, Alice Walton, who shares this belief. When she built Crystal Bridges Museum of American Art, she did so with minimal arts storage; she did not want the majority of the collection locked away without an audience to engage with it. This idea inspired her to create Art Bridges Foundation, which provides strategic and financial assistance to get American art out of storage and into communities across the country because everyone deserves access to art.

Art sharing may not be the first thing that comes to mind when museum leaders think about advancing diversity, equity, accessibility, and inclusion (DEAI) in their institutions. However, collection loans are essential to diversifying exhibitions in communities across the US. Such loans can increase representation—in both the artists on view and visitorship—and foster conversations that lead to empathy across differences. Too often, however, the costs associated with crating, shipping, and insurance make art sharing inaccessible for many smaller institutions. Art Bridges helps equitably redistribute art across the country through two program pillars: art sharing and community engagement.

Art Sharing

Art Bridges has several programs to share art with partners across the country. Through the Partner Loan Network, Art Bridges collaborates with institutions that have holdings of art in storage to create small groupings of artworks (usually three to eight depending on size) for borrowing institutions to exhibit for two years or more. Art Bridges provides financial support for crating, shipping, insurance, and installation of the artwork.

Recently, the Mildred Lane Kemper Art Museum in St. Louis, Missouri, borrowed a grouping of 19th-century works from Crystal Bridges Museum of American Art to incorporate into its 19th-century galleries, thereby including the perspectives of Native Americans and African Americans on notions of Manifest Destiny. St. Louis is known as the “gateway to the West,” so it’s particularly important that the city’s museums have access to works that explore the history of westward expansion, land expropriation, and the displacement of Indigenous peoples.

Museums that share artworks through the Partner Loan Network include the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts, Museum of Modern Art in New York, Toledo Museum of Art in Ohio, Museo de Arte de Ponce in Puerto Rico, and National Academy of Design in New York, to name a few. As more museums learn about this program through partner calls, staff visits, and conferences, new partners are joining every day, including smaller museums that have wonderful artworks but limited gallery space. Our partners understand that the public is better served if their collections can be enjoyed.

In addition to facilitating loans of artworks in storage, Art Bridges is also actively acquiring artworks to loan. The Art Bridges Collection focuses on ensuring an inclusive American art history and includes seminal works by artists such as Howardena Pindell, Julie Buffalohead, Barkley L. Hendricks, and Kerry James Marshall. These works are available to institutions for up to one year and, as with the Partner Loan Network, Art Bridges provides financial support for crating, shipping, insurance, and installation.

Art Bridges also helps museums without traveling exhibition departments share their temporary exhibitions while also curating our own exhibitions to share for six-month periods. Most recently, Art Bridges supported “Liberating Light,” a selection of works by La Vaughn Belle, Michael D. Linares, and Daniel Lind-Ramos from the Museo de Arte Contemporáneo de Puerto Rico (MAC) collection. The exhibition reflects on the intergenerational, interdisciplinary, and ancestral ties that bind us as seen through contemporary Caribbean art video productions by Afro-descendent artists. Art Bridges provides financial support to MAC, manages the exhibition tour, and provides financial support to museums seeking to bring this exhibition to their community.

Community Engagement

In addition to these loans, Art Bridges provides supplemental Learning and Engagement awards, comprised of financial and technical support, to help museums activate the artworks and further engage their communities. For example, The Hunter Museum of American Art in Chattanooga, Tennessee, borrowed and installed two artworks from the Art Bridges collection in its historic mansion’s portrait gallery: Woman with Flowers by David Clyde Driskell and Brenda P. by Barkley L. Hendricks. In addition, the museum created “The Portrait Project: Shaping a Digital Identity,” a unique, digital application that allows visitors to craft portraits of themselves, a loved one, or preloaded historical figures in the style of the two borrowed artworks. All aspects of the digital interactive are available in English and Spanish. Participants can save their creations for themselves or share them with the museum, which will display them in its central walkway to encourage others to visit the portrait gallery and participate in the activity. With this project, the museum is a site of activation and interaction, particularly for new, young visitors.

Our art sharing and community engagement programs seek to increase access to art and help museums reach diverse communities. But how do we know if these programs are moving the needle on these goals? Most museums collect data on the number of visitors, but many don’t track first-time visitors, motivations for visiting, and basic visitor demographic information. Without these details, museums won’t know if they are reaching new audiences and truly serving their full community.

The Collaboration for Ongoing Visitor Evaluation Studies (COVES) is a visitor intercept survey that, over time, collects a representative data set that helps museums understand their visitorship. Art Bridges provides the financial resources for the staff support needed to administer the survey, as well as the survey instrument and dashboard, so that art museums can participate in COVES and measure progress on their goals.

Barriers to Our Work

While Art Bridges reduces financial and logistical barriers to art sharing, we must still navigate arbitrary industry standards. Institutions have many reasons for denying loans; however, the most common barrier we encounter relates to facility temperature and humidity standards. Many museums across the country don’t have state-of-the-art HVAC systems and struggle to maintain the environmental standard we see most often in loan agreements: temperature at 70 degrees (+/- 4 degrees) Fahrenheit and relative humidity (RH) at 50 percent (+/- 5 percent).

However, while these strict environmental regulations were implemented in the name of preservation, they were not originally intended for collections care or conservation needs. According to Caitlin Southwick, the founder of Ki Culture, a sustainability nonprofit for museums, when HVAC systems were introduced to museums in the mid-20th century, the reason was human comfort. Two scientists, Harold Plenderleith and Garry Thomson of the National Gallery in London, were interested in how these systems might affect the museum’s collections. Taking into account human comfort, they decided that 69.8 degrees Fahrenheit and between 50 and 55 percent RH was reasonable, and given the capabilities of the systems, the temperature and RH should be expected to fluctuate slightly.

These became common temperature standards for artwork in museums, even though they were based on the capabilities of the machines and standards for human comfort for Londoners in the 1970s. These environmental standards were not specifically related to art preservation requirements. The subsequent application of these numbers globally and for all collections was based on a misunderstanding, not best conservation practice.

Nonetheless, these standards have become the norm in loan agreements, thereby eliminating loans to museums that cannot maintain these conditions. While we work with partners to help identify solutions for their environment, Art Bridges is also challenging art museums as a whole to update their standards. Increased flexibility on environmental conditions not only helps alleviate the climate burden of these challenging standards but also brings attention to the ethical concerns of using them as an arbitrary barrier to sharing art with less-resourced museums.

The current vitriol across the political spectrum has put our country at a crossroads. Increasing access to art is more urgent than ever and should be considered a critical component of museum DEAI programs. Through their artworks and exhibitions, museums can foster conversations that bring us together and encourage empathy across differences.

Museum DEAI professionals talk about their accomplishments, challenges, and more.

This article originally appeared in Museum magazine’s November/December 2024 issue, a benefit of AAM membership. 

In recent years, a new function area has emerged in the museum field focused on diversity, equity, accessibility, and inclusion (DEAI). The number of museum professionals with DEAI-related titles has grown into the hundreds, with most having been in their roles for fewer than five years. Titles in this function area range from chief diversity officer (CDO) and director of inclusion to program managers and assistants within DEAI teams. Individual experiences in these roles vary widely. As the Director of Equity & Inclusion for AAM, I reached out to some of my museum counterparts to share their experiences.

The museum DEAI professionals who so generously took the time to share their insights are Monique Davis, Director of the Center for Art and Public Exchange (CAPE) and Chief Equity and Inclusion Officer, Mississippi Museum of Art; Mara-Lynne Payne, Director of Inclusion, Equity & Diversity, Tennessee Aquarium; Rhonda Sewell, Director of Advocacy and External Affairs, Toledo Museum of Art in Ohio; Kajette Solomon, Social Equity & Inclusion Specialist, RISD Museum in Rhode Island; Carla Tinsley-Smith, Director, Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Access (IDEA), Detroit Institute of Arts in Michigan; Lavita McMath Turner, Chief Diversity Officer, The Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York; Alejandro Victoria, Vice President, Head of DEIA & Culture, National September 11 Memorial & Museum in New York; and Beth Ziebarth, Head Diversity Officer, Smithsonian Institution in Washington, DC. Their responses have been lightly edited for brevity and clarity.

What are you most proud of accomplishing or progressing at your institution during your time in the DEAI role?

Kajette Solomon: Instituting regular internal staff dialogues around difficult topics in the museum industry. It has helped provide space for staff to feel seen and heard, fostering increased trust. It has also increased our capacity and the stamina to confront nuanced topics like race, class, ability, and gender inequities, especially in our decision-making.

Rhonda Sewell: I am most proud of several accomplishments in my 3.4 years at the Toledo Museum of Art (TMA). These include overseeing the completion of a 28-page Belonging Plan, which is available on our website and is reviewed annually to ensure adherence to the guiding principles of DEAI; overseeing the four TMA Employee Resource Groups; overseeing governmental affairs and advocacy at TMA to raise needed infrastructure funding to improve museum access; serving as a founding member of the DEAI ALLiance of Northwest Ohio; and serving as the objective lead of a new Community Gallery for Toledo-based, -reared, or -affiliated artists.

Mara-Lynne Payne: I’m very proud of the increased awareness and intentionality of embedding DEIA principles into our daily operations. The development of inclusive policies and the focus on accessibility also make this work worthwhile. While this work can be challenging, its focus helps reinforce our values. The buy-in from staff has been inspiring.

Monique Davis: The institution understands the importance of collecting data and is willing to develop policies and practices that address gaps in terms of inclusion and equity. Over the past three years, we have collected vendor data that now informs staff in making vendor selections. Our goal is to have vendor demographics mirror our community demographics.

Beth Ziebarth: I serve as the inaugural Head Diversity Officer for the Smithsonian and am working with my staff to integrate Access Smithsonian into the newly established Office of Diversity. We substantially met four out of five major activities in the Institution’s DEAI strategic initiative in the first year. Now in year two, we developed a three-year office strategic plan, employee resource group governance, a DEAI Advisory Council, a curated LinkedIn Learning Roadmap for all staff, and accessibility guidance on film- and time-based media programs. It’s a good start, but we recognize that sustaining organizational DEAI requires a long-term commitment to efforts that are staff-owned, informed by our collective lived experiences, and driven by a commitment to equity.

Carla Tinsley-Smith: Reflecting on the past three years, I’m most proud of the opportunities we’ve created to amplify team members’ voices and foster meaningful conversations around inclusion, diversity, equity, and accessibility at the Detroit Institute of Arts. By employing various methods to gather insights and actively involving team members in processes designed to act on feedback, we’ve created spaces for authentic cross-departmental engagement and promoted shared accountability. These inclusive processes sparked a desire among employees to build community, leading to the launch of the Employee Belonging Group (EBG) program in 2023. These museum-chartered, member-driven affinity groups bring together individuals of diverse backgrounds around shared experiences and interests, promoting awareness, resource-sharing, community-building, and the celebration of diversity. The EBGs are designed to cultivate a more inclusive, diverse, and accessible work environment throughout the employee life cycle while aligning with the museum’s strategic direction.

Lavita McMath Turner: I am most proud of the strong partnerships that have developed between the DEAI, Human Resources, and General Counsel’s offices. It is not uncommon for these departments to have challenges, so as a new department head, my number one goal was to build healthy relationships with my colleagues, as we are each critical to transforming workplace culture.

What is currently your greatest challenge or barrier to progressing DEAI work within your institution?

Solomon: Capacity. As a department of one, I rely on my colleagues to accomplish tasks and goals. This means there’s no backup to help move the work forward if I am unavailable. I’d also like to do more but, again, don’t have the capacity.

Davis: I view my greatest challenge as an opportunity for continued growth. Our Equity Team members have varying degrees of familiarity with DEIA issues, and building this capacity is essential for long-term sustainability and success.

Sewell: The greatest challenge to advancing DEAI work at TMA is ensuring that we hold true to being a data-informed (never data-driven) museum and hold ourselves accountable for data collection tied to our Belonging Plan. While we have implemented the Results-Based Accountability methodology to measure our progress, data collection has been a struggle in recent years, as it wasn’t previously collected or processed in the way our current administration envisions.

Payne: It’s such a long journey. We still face challenges, at times, in bringing ideas and actions to fruition. Fatigue and burnout are real. The politically charged environment that we find ourselves in plays a part in creating some of these challenges.

Tinsley-Smith: A key challenge in advancing DEAI work is integrating strategies and actions into the organization’s strategic direction and institutional priorities to ensure the necessary resources and support for meaningful progress. This can affect the pace of change needed for full integration across the organization. Building shared understanding, support, and accountability remains an ongoing effort. To address this, we are implementing annual surveys, hosting listening sessions, and providing learning opportunities that explore various dimensions of diversity. We are also aligning performance competencies to encourage inclusive communication and behavior in daily interactions. This approach supports our long-term goal of embedding DEAI values throughout the organization.

How has the current socio-political backlash against DEAI impacted your work and DEAI progress at your institution?

Davis: The current political climate has heightened awareness about what words we use and how we engage in conversations about equity and inclusion. The work at our institution is moving forward; however, the terrain does raise concerns about potential backlash.

Sewell: TMA is fully aware of the socio-political backlash against DEAI; however, our strategic plan and Belonging Plan remain steadfast in reflecting our leadership, staff, board, stakeholders, and volunteers’ desire to become the model museum in the United States for our quality and our culture of belonging. TMA has put DEAI at the core of all we do, and what’s happening with the backlash has not impeded our commitment.

What do you hope to see happen with DEAI in museums over the next five years?

Solomon: I hope DEAI practitioners become more commonplace, holding positions that report to CEOs/directors and serve as accountability partners. I also hope that DEAI becomes ingrained in everything museums do while still maintaining the ability to report on the specific goals and tasks met.

Davis: I would like to see the development of a community of practice, with an annual convening and a library of resources tailored to a museum’s size and budget.

Sewell: Over the next five years, I hope the museum field will implement best practices in DEAI so that we see more diverse exhibitions; greater representation of more female artists; a place for veterans to enjoy art; and a celebration of our cultural differences reflected in museum programming, activities, and in art collections.
I envision the development of community councils, like what we are launching at TMA, so that visitors have a say in the work we are engaged with; thoughtful reinstallations that tell a global story of our interconnected world through art; regular staff-wide allyship trainings; Employee Resource Groups; community galleries in every art museum; and annual reviews of DEAI strategies. Additionally, I hope to see land and labor acknowledgements; active outreach in nearby neighborhoods, doing business with more disadvantaged business enterprises, minority business enterprises, women business enterprises, and LGBTQIA+ local businesses; living wages for all museum employees; more diverse curators; and so much more!

Alejandro Victoria: I hope to see museums make substantial progress in DEAI by fully supporting the people leading these efforts. This includes providing sustainable funding and resources for DEAI practitioners as they navigate the ever-changing DEAI landscape. In the next five years, I envision museums embracing systemic changes, reevaluating hiring practices, diversifying leadership teams, overhauling curatorial approaches to prioritize underrepresented narratives, revising audience engagement strategies to reach marginalized communities, and embedding equity-focused decision-making in governance and budgeting processes. I also hope to see investments in leadership pipelines through mentorship and career development to cultivate the next generation of diverse museum leaders. By embedding DEAI principles into their core operations, museums can become truly inclusive spaces that reflect and serve diverse communities.

Tinsley-Smith: In the next five years, I hope museums continue evolving into truly inclusive spaces that reflect the diversity of the communities they serve—where both visitors and staff genuinely feel a sense of belonging. This transformation should be evident not only in exhibitions and programming but also in leadership, staffing, and decision-making processes. I envision greater collaboration across museum functions, deeper engagement with underrepresented communities, a firm commitment to accessibility, and the implementation of robust supplier diversity programs. Ultimately, I hope to see DEAI work fully integrated into the core mission of museums—where the focus shifts from asking, “Who does this impact? Whose voice is missing? What more can we do?” to confidently stating, “The impact of DEAI has fostered a sense of belonging for our employees and visitors. DEAI is essential to living our vision, mission, and values; it is an explicit priority, not a peripheral initiative.”

Turner: I hope to see continued institutional focus on DEAI, with dedicated positions and departments leading the work. High turnover in these roles across sectors, including museums, could make it easy to eliminate the person/office and merge the work into HR or Education departments under the assumption that DEAI will continue to be a priority.

What is one thing you wish others knew about being a DEAI officer in a museum?

Davis: The work is ongoing and requires consistent commitment and participation from all parts of the institution. DEIA is everyone’s responsibility and is critical to the ongoing relevance and resonance to the communities we serve.

Victoria: While the role involves driving critical change, success is impossible without strong support from executive leadership and a shared commitment across the institution. DEAI work cannot be effective if siloed or viewed as the responsibility of just one person or department. Real progress requires executive leaders to actively champion these initiatives and integrate them into the museum’s mission, strategy, and resources. Everyone—from top leadership to frontline staff—needs to understand that building a more inclusive and equitable museum is a collective responsibility, not just the work of DEAI officers.

Tinsley-Smith: DEAI officers promote a culture of shared responsibility. Expecting one person to drive change is misguided. Executive leaders model the change, people managers influence the change, and teams support the change. Together, we create change. This collective approach fosters accountability and ensures that everyone understands the core principles of DEAI, creating a culture of awareness and support throughout the journey.

Solomon: We are often under-resourced and doing more than one job. While I have one job, I’m asked to weigh in on a lot and can sometimes feel stretched or in need of more time to thoughtfully respond and give input.

Turner: I wish others understood that being a DEAI officer in museums and other sectors can be lonely. We take on this role as change agents because we believe we can meaningfully contribute to making our institutions more equitable, inclusive, and welcoming for all. And while it is a very public role, we are expected to lead significant change frequently as individual contributors or as small teams. For this reason, I am so grateful for the network of DEAI colleagues from across the country and Canada who provide much-needed support as thought partners, counselors, and cheerleaders.

Resources

Lily Zheng, DEI Deconstructed: Your No-Nonsense Guide to Doing the Work and Doing It Right and Reconstructing DEI: A Practitioner’s Workbook

Shereen Daniels, The Anti-Racist Organization: Dismantling Systemic Racism in the Workplace

Victoria Mattingly, Sertrice Grice, and Allison Goldstein, Inclusalytics: How Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Leaders Use Data to Drive Their Work

Cecile Shellman, Effective Diversity, Equity, Accessibility, Inclusion, and Anti-Racism Practices for Museums: From the Inside Out

Peter Block, Community: The Structure of Belonging

Amber Cabral, Allies and Advocates: Creating an Inclusive and Equitable Culture

Alida Miranda-Wolff, Cultures of Belonging: Building Inclusive Organizations that Last

Robert R. Janes, Museums and Societal Collapse: The Museum as Lifeboat

The Long Island Children’s Museum has focused on accessible programming for people with disabilities—and grown its audience along the way.

This article originally appeared in Museum magazine’s November/December 2024 issue, a benefit of AAM membership. 

In recent years, many in the museum field have sought to shed light on the barriers facing visitors and staff who are marginalized. I, too, have focused on diversity, equity, accessibility, and inclusion (DEAI) at my museum—and specifically on the A, accessibility.

Accessibility focuses on those with disabilities, which is a substantial segment of the US population. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, more than 1 in 4 adults (28.7 percent) has a disability—73.4 million people. Including children (those under 18) with this population adds another 3 million people with disabilities, according to US Census data. Despite representing a significant portion of the population, people with disabilities are sometimes an afterthought in DEAI conversations, or are excluded altogether. For museums to be inclusive environments for all, the disability community must be included in our DEAI work.

In 2015, I helped the Long Island Children’s Museum (LICM) launch a museum-wide access initiative called LICM4all. LICM’s mission is to connect all of our community’s children, and those who care for them, to one another and a life of wonder, imagination, and exploration. LICM4all was a natural next step to expand our audience. I have been involved in this program as not only a museum educator but also a person with disabilities. That said, when you’ve met one person with a disability, you’ve met one person with a disability. Although I have spent the majority of my career as an accessibility specialist, this field is growing, and my experiences and solutions will not always match what others with disabilities need. Listening to the needs of people with disabilities in your own community is crucial when developing programs for them.

The main goal of the LICM4all program is to create a more inclusive and accessible museum by not only making physical changes to the museum that exceed compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) but also by considering access in every aspect of LICM, every day. We have revamped staff training, created a designated access page on the museum website, established programs specifically for visitors with disabilities, and offer tools for families to make their experience at LICM more enjoyable. Although I am the point person for LICM4all, each department has a role in our access program so that it is maximally impactful and consistent across the museum.

Starting Our Accessibility Program

The LICM4all program began after conversations with floor staff following participation in the Cultural Competence Learning Institute (CCLI), which guides museum staff as they catalyze diversity and inclusion efforts in their organizations. LICM was one of the first cohorts to participate in this program and helped pilot it with 10 staff members. Teachings from the CCLI multi-year experience were then brought to all LICM staff, and through conversations about cultivating DEAI, LICM4all was born. LICM4all, an IMLS-funded initiative, seeks to create more accessible and inclusive museum environments for visitors with disabilities.

The first step in creating a successful access program is to take a deep dive into best practices in the field. We researched other museums that had access programs and set up informational phone calls to gain insight. New York’s Museum, Arts and Culture Access Consortium and museum associations, such as the Association of Children’s Museums, the Museum Association of New York, and, of course, AAM, also had helpful tips and ways to find other organizations for collaborations. By far, one of the most impactful resources is the Leadership Exchange in Arts and Disability conference organized by the Kennedy Center. The final stage of this process must be outreach to the disability community in your area; the best way to understand what your community needs is to ask them.

When we first expanded LICM4all, I assumed families would eagerly embrace the new access programming. But this was not the case, largely because they did not yet see us as advocates for their families. It took time and many community meetings to gain their respect and trust, which we did by having open and honest conversations about their families’ needs. When they could see that these conversations led to changes at LICM, they started to see us as advocates. Today, 9 percent of our visitors identify someone in their family as having a disability.

As we started to expand LICM4all, we uncovered another big challenge: staff often felt uncomfortable engaging with visitors with disabilities. They were nervous that they might offend someone with a disability, so they often would not engage with them at all. This changed through vigorous staff training on the basics of disabilities, accommodations, and language sensitivity. Staff also met with parents of children with disabilities and people with disabilities to hear firsthand experiences.

Our Access Programming

In our conversations with our disability community and their families, we learned they were looking for a safe space where they would not feel judged by others. As a result, we created one of the most popular elements of our access program, Friendly Hours, a free monthly evening at the museum when children and adults with disabilities, along with their families, can play in LICM’s 14 interactive exhibits in a more comfortable setting. Other organizations have similar events that have the word “sensory” in the name. We felt that Friendly Hours was a less limiting name since we are seeking to accommodate people with a multitude of disabilities.

With Friendly Hours, we have smaller and calmer versions of some of our large special events like our Countdown to 12! New Years Eve Party and Ghostly Gala Halloween event. And through the LICM4all program, we have been able to adapt each run of our live children’s theater performances into Sensory Friendly Theater Performances, where visitors can attend without fear of being judged or scrutinized.

The goal is for everyone to feel comfortable coming to LICM at any time, but many children and adults with disabilities have found a stronger sense of belonging and community when surrounded by those who understand their daily experiences. This feeling is called access intimacy—when those around you understand what you need because of your disability.

Once the disability community saw LICM’s commitment to serving their families through consistent programming, along with changes in staff engagement and exhibits, members began to share our programming within their own communities. Now, information about our accessible programs spreads organically through word-of-mouth in an incredibly powerful way. Families will often share our dedicated web page about accessibility on their own social media.

Friendly Hours and Sensory Friendly Theater Performances often sell out within a few days, if not hours. We are also engaging new people: generally, at least 25 percent of visitors at each event have never been to LICM before. In the first few years of LICM4all, visitors told us that they wanted more access programs. In response, we increased attendance limits while maintaining a comfortable level of interaction.

Offering Assistive Tools

A successful access program ensures that every visitor encounters minimal barriers and enjoys a positive and inclusive experience. Some of the ways LICM achieves this is by ensuring our space exceeds ADA compliance, which we accomplish through wayfinding signage, accessible bathroom stalls and routes, video captioning, reach range (used to determine the height of components), and more.

Another key component is assistive tools. For example, we have a sensory backpack that includes noise-reducing headphones, weighted lap pads, fidget items, a sensory map that notes places for those who are sensory sensitive or a sensory seeker, and more. Additionally, LICM provides social guides to help visitors prepare for a visit or theater performance, explaining, for example, how visitors will first walk through big yellow doors and go to the Box Office to get tickets, where they might have to wait their turn. Such advance detail can ease some of the anxiety or hesitation that may come with entering a new space.

We also offer a sensory room, which provides respite for visitors who are feeling anxious or overwhelmed and sensory input for those who are sensory seekers. Offering these spaces and tools goes beyond ADA compliance and reduces barriers for visitors with disabilities. We want to create a space that embraces and includes those with disabilities instead of just tolerating them, as often happens to those with disabilities.

Having a disability is a part of being human, and it gives those with disabilities a unique experience of and perspective on the world. By considering these perspectives assets, our museums can bring in new audiences, which ultimately increases revenue. In other words, being an accessible space that welcomes all literally pays.

It is our job as a society, and on a smaller level as members of the museum field, to try to remove the barriers that marginalized populations face. That is one of the most beautiful aspects of cultural organizations: we can bring together communities in an environment that can reduce their sense of “otherness.” As a part of the disability and LGBTQIA+ communities, I have felt a sense of “otherness” many times in my life. Being in a space that lessens this feeling is truly magical. By making our museums as inclusive and accessible as possible, we help our visitors be their most authentic selves.

Sidebar: Tips for Building a Successful Access Program

• Read the ADA Guidelines front to back—these are the bare minimum requirements. Familiarize yourself with all the requirements for web accessibility.
• Meet with members of the disability community in your area to gather their input on how to meet their needs. Compensate them for their time.
• Create an advisory committee of people with disabilities and the experts who serve them to ensure you are using best practices.
• Add an access tab or web page to your website that includes information about service animals, accessible parking spots, assistive listening devices, and any other accessibility tools your museum offers.
• Add more seating areas to your exhibit spaces.
• If your space can feel overwhelming or noisy for some, offer noise-reducing headphones that visitors can check out when needed.
• Conduct staff training on best practices for serving people with disabilities—preferably by an accessibility consultant and/or person with a disability.
• Consider attending the Kennedy Center’s Leadership Exchange in Arts and Disability conference, which covers all aspects of access for cultural organizations.

Resources

Leadership Exchange in Arts and Disability

Web Accessibility Initiative, “Introduction to Web Accessibility”

Museum, Arts and Culture Access Consortium

Emily Ladau, Demystifying Disability: What to Know, What to Say, and How to Be an Ally, 2021

What does effective decision-making look like in the museum environment?

This article originally appeared in Museum magazine’s September/October 2024 issue, a benefit of AAM membership.

Museum leaders are facing unprecedented challenges leading and managing their institutions. They are reexamining their missions, impacting their relationships with visitors and the broader community. This reassessment involves revisiting how museums present themselves to the public, creating empathetic visitor environments, and implementing protocols concerning shared decision-making.

This current dynamic is fueled by a variety of factors, including changing attitudes toward the purpose and value of museums, along with political polarization in the United States and the accompanying “culture wars” that bring a hypercritical focus on the role of educational and cultural organizations. The reassessment also reflects new sensitivities to structural inequities in society, particularly around race and gender, and museums’ roles in perpetuating or addressing these issues. This manifests in tensions over how collections were and are acquired, exhibited, and, in some cases, deaccessioned.

Museum leaders are grappling with the various constituencies, inside and outside the museum, that should be involved in decision-making. Senior leaders are being asked to rethink relationships with their communities and workforces to create both visitor-friendly and employee-friendly environments. Museum employees—and in many cases, their unions—are demanding better compensation, wage equity, more flexible working hours, career development opportunities, and more. A major challenge managing in current environments arises when employees, influenced by union organizing strategies emphasizing social justice and related progressive ideologies, question the traditional role of a museum in modern society and instead view the organization as one built on fortunes amassed by capitalists in corrupt systems, which were then used to expropriate art and artifacts from marginalized or colonized populations.

Many museum leaders find they need more effective management structures and decision-making protocols to develop and implement new organizational policies that did not exist in past years. These policies include institutionalizing new ways of accessing collections as viewing and education moves online; enhancing diversity, equity, and inclusion in museum workforces; identifying new revenue sources; and confronting challenges inherent in the post-pandemic workplace, including unionization efforts, the desire for remote work, less workplace commitment, and “quiet quitting.”

Leaders might find themselves with limited authority and resources to effectively resolve these pressing matters. The following ideas and thoughts are meant to guide those who seek to be effective leaders in this environment.

Effective Leadership Traits

While there are many distinct types of leaders, my experience and research suggest effective leaders engage in the following behaviors, activities, and analyses.

• They have a clear sense of (and are effective in communicating) what they want to accomplish and how these accomplishments align with the organization’s mission.
• They “manage” upward to those to whom they report, laterally to peers, and downward to those reporting to them. Not only do they articulate the reasons they are pursuing particular goals, they provide and insist on metrics to assess progress and demonstrate why meeting the goals will benefit key constituencies.
• They engage in reciprocity, such as making allies of adversaries and trading favors (in the best sense of the word) by identifying incentives for those who can help them succeed. They find ways to work around or neutralize individuals or groups who oppose their ideas.
• They identify defensible decision-making criteria and ensure such criteria are used.
• They are tireless activists who take risks and cultivate or instill loyalty in trusted aides and team members.
• They reward and mentor others, have unstinting energy and time, network continually, and seek to replicate success.
• They prepare, pay attention to detail, delegate to trusted employees, develop personal credibility with those they supervise, and focus tenaciously on final goals, which, they insist, must be measurable.

I would also caution against placing too much emphasis on some of the leadership literature, which can paint a naive and altruistic picture of leaders or the traits needed for success. For example, one genre of leadership literature over-emphasizes the need to inspire, be empathetic, empower, and serve others. While these traits are laudable, and sometimes effective, focusing on them often fails to address the political and behavioral dynamics inherent in real-world settings, such as how leaders deal with passive-aggressive subordinates and oppositional behaviors. Of course, there is also the matter of circumstance: as Machiavelli observed some 500 years ago, good fortune plays a role in who succeeds and who does not.

Infrastructure, Governance, and Consultation Considerations

Four related issues, often overlooked, are necessary for effective leadership and decision-making in mission-driven cultural environments: administrative infrastructure, governance and consultation, options for those opposing leadership decisions, and financial resources.

Administrative infrastructure. Innovative ideas cannot take root without the people assigned to lead tasks; committees to consider budgets, implementation strategies, and alternative options; and people to serve as liaisons to various departments. Museums as organizations are often personality driven, and successful leaders know decision-making processes and behaviors must be institutionalized. This means that ideas, and the processes associated with implementing them, must be formalized and managed, people held accountable, and outcomes measured to gauge success. Absent these processes, particularly the development of criteria for decision-making, the administrative infrastructure needed to support a leader’s ideas, goals, and objectives cannot be sustained.

Governance and consultation. Leaders need a strategy and plan to steer ideas through the “museum bureaucracy.” Dealing with accrediting associations, governance documents (approved by the board), labor relations agreements, and a host of other manuals, handbooks, board guidelines, and legislative dictates will likely require consultation with others inside and outside the organization, which will impact the decision-making process. Navigating these rules, regulations, and guidelines takes patience and determination. Committees must be created or engaged, lead individuals appointed as chairs, and alternative options developed. As museum professionals know, it is often far easier to stop an idea or initiative, particularly a new one, than implement one. The old quip “How you do something is as important as what you do” remains salient. Leaders must determine their organization’s goals and priorities, challenges, and milestones that can be measured so everyone knows progress is being made.

Opposition options. Leaders must know how to effectively shape and implement ideas, reward allies, and win over or neutralize adversaries. Employees, as well as those to whom leaders report, need to see the utility of a new idea before they can support a divergence from the status quo. Successful leaders must convince others to take risks. In my experience, many employees in larger organizations are risk averse and less likely to take actions that benefit others in the organization. Change is difficult unless subordinates and supervisors understand and embrace, in concrete ways, the rewards for change. This requires valid assessment measures and recognized criteria for decisions. Without behavioral change, new ideas, plans, and goals will not succeed.

Resources. Simply put, without a budget and resources to fund new initiatives, they cannot succeed in the long term. Organizations might also need to amend the budgetary process to include support for new initiatives.

One final thought: museum leadership must have the support and trust of the museum board chair. The leadership process will be immeasurably more difficult without such support and trust, which are not guaranteed and must be continuously earned.

It might help to consider a biblical lesson in thinking about these ideas for effective leadership. While God enabled Moses to part the Red Sea and escape from Egypt with his followers, Moses was permitted only to see the Promised Land, not actually reach it. A leader’s work requires sacrifice, with ongoing success the potential reward.

The unexpected closure of the Museum of Art at the University of New Hampshire shocked staff and supporters—and offers important insights for the field.

This article originally appeared in Museum magazine’s September/October 2024 issue, a benefit of AAM membership.

Museum directors are experts at managing risks of all kinds. The American Alliance of Museums (AAM) requires every accredited museum to have a disaster plan. At the Museum of Art at the University of New Hampshire, located in Durham, our disaster plan ran more than 165 pages and was housed in a three-inch-thick, three-ring binder. It detailed responses to fire, theft, environmental damage, biological hazards and chemical spills, power outages, flooding, and hurricanes.

I have been in this field long enough to have lived through financial crises, facility emergencies, accidents, disputes with collectors, and entanglements with artists’ attorneys. However, despite my prior experiences and our diligence in maintaining the disaster plan, we were not prepared for what would happen on January 16, 2024, when the university closed the Museum of Art and laid off all four staff members.

When disaster struck, I and my staff made the best decisions we could at the time. While I hope no one finds themselves in this awful situation, the experience, though unique to academic museums, revealed personal and professional insights into the lead-up and process of closing a museum.

The Immediate Aftermath

In response to declining enrollment, the university undertook a “budget reset,” resulting in a $1.4 million cut to the College of Liberal Arts and the Museum of Art’s closure. As news of the museum spread, my inbox was inundated with messages from bewildered patrons, students, and faculty bemoaning the staff layoffs and urgently asking, “What can I do?” I received copies of letters that people sent to university leadership, thoughtfully arguing in support of the Museum of Art, which was founded in 1941, and its storied history on campus as a place to learn from studying art up close and in person. Many supporters recounted transformative experiences as undergraduates, while others wrote about exhibitions and programs that enriched their lives as members of the local community.

This outpouring of letters, posts on social media, messages, and phone calls encouraged me and my coworkers. The calls for me to be reinstated and staff to be retained indicated the genuine connection we had with faculty and patrons, but the university administration was unwilling to revisit its decision.

That our terminations happened during the winter break when students and faculty were off campus was no accident. Other than a forum for faculty of the College of Liberal Arts, the administrative home for the museum, the University of New Hampshire never publicly announced the Museum of Art’s closure. This left me as the primary contact and spokesperson for inquiries from the media and public, including donors, artists, and alumni, all of whom were wondering what would happen to the museum’s collection. We were left wondering, too. We were completely taken aback by the decision and had no closure plan, despite our meticulously detailed disaster plan, and no experience to guide us on what to do next.

Once we regrouped, my colleagues and I devised an action plan addressing operations/security, safeguarding the collection, preserving historical documents and collection records, and communicating with the public. Thankfully, the university committed to retaining the art collection, which numbered about 2,500 objects. To ensure the collection’s security, we met with the Department of Art and Art History faculty to develop plans for accessing the collection, maintaining the collection database, and managing backups for high-resolution collection images.

Together we assigned responsibilities to the appropriate staff to oversee distinct tasks: continuing insurance coverage; securing our electronic files and collection management database (backing up and printing hard copies); coordinating transfers of files to archives; checking in with campus security, facilities, and housekeeping; canceling pending gifts and proposed acquisitions; responding to inquiries from members of the public and press; and creating inventories of museum equipment and supplies to be turned over to the Department of Art and Art History. We also worked with the university’s procurement office to unwind or cancel outstanding contracts, loan agreements, and subscription obligations.

Lastly, we developed talking points to use with members of the press who began to contact me after the local paper published a faculty member’s opinion piece about the museum’s closure and layoffs. Our talking points conveyed the university’s decision, though we did not justify the rationale. We explained that museum staff were not consulted, that the decision was a surprise, and that the museum was financially healthy with more than $700,000 in endowment funds and more than $230,000 in current-use funds. Important to us, we also reassured people that the collection would be maintained and that its works would be made available through the Department of Art and Art History.

People have asked if, in retrospect, we had any warning. Were there dark clouds circling above the Museum of Art? Truthfully, we did not have any warning, nor could we have done anything differently. The university’s decision was abrupt and devastating. Nonetheless, the Museum of Art staff responded with professionalism, tact, and unwavering dedication in preserving the museum’s collection and history. Molly Bolick, Education and Communications Manager; Stephanie Garafolo, Exhibition and Collections Manager; and Kathy McKenna, Office Manager, deserve this acknowledgement.

What We Learned

As an academic art museum, we were fortunate to count professional archivists among our colleagues. With the University Archives staff, we developed a plan to preserve the museum’s exhibition and loan histories, ensuring that the collection and donor records would be accessible for research, future inquiries, or retrieval if the Museum of Art should reopen under a new administration. Together, we preserved records and documentation of 60 years of artistic production for future use.

To ensure that a museum’s archives and records are preserved in the event of closure, museums, particularly in small communities, should partner with historic organizations. At small museums, donor records are often retained for legal purposes, but the ephemera generated by exhibitions and public programs are discarded. This is especially true for the digital content many museums generate. Municipal archivists can help develop a retention and preservation plan for museum records.

Two weeks after the staff received their 45-day notice, the dean of the College of Liberal Arts asked us to develop a transition plan for the Department of Art and Art History. When we led faculty on a walk-through and reviewed collection management processes with them (including our integrated pest-management plan), it was clear they were unprepared for the amount of work required to maintain a collection to professional standards.

Communication is another critical component of a museum closure. Staff, board, and friends group members will suddenly find themselves without a role at the museum and will need support. Our staff were notified on a Tuesday that our positions were eliminated and were asked to leave campus for a day or two. Museum staff came back together on Friday to discuss the layoffs and develop communication plans and action steps.

Devise an emergency communications plan so that you, your board, and staff are not caught flat-footed if your museum is shuttered. Whom will you need to contact? Imagine a diagram of concentric circles, with the inner circles comprising the people who are the most impacted. Work from the inside out to notify these people.

We had to notify donors, advisory board members, student employees, artists, and businesses with which we worked. The university did not assist us with this, nor did they assume responsibility for working with donors and patrons. The dean of the College of Liberal Arts spoke to the media to clarify the reasoning behind the closure decision, but many patrons were left wondering what would become of the collection.

You will also need to decide who will liaise with the press after closure. Who will compose the public response, and how will you get the word out? Do you need legal advice before speaking publicly, or will the board chair be the primary spokesperson? Independent institutions will need to notify their secretary of state to legally close. Obtain legal advice before you proceed with dissolution.

As president of the Association of Academic Museums & Galleries and a former member of the board of directors of the New England Museum Association, I was fortunate to have colleagues from other museums write letters of support to university administrators, imploring them to reconsider their short-sighted decision. Others spoke to the press about the Museum of Art’s value and its role in the community. Do not hesitate to rely on the support of your regional and national museum leaders.

Losing not only our jobs but also the museum that enriched the campus and broader community was devastating for all of us. A colleague wrote to me months later, “The museum was not closed—it was abandoned. . . . The university’s failure to take professional and ethical responsibility for the collection, the publications, and the permanent records that make up the museum—that is disrespectful to all staff, board members and artists that were involved with the museum.”

Members of the Museum of Art’s dedicated board of advisors independently met with the university administration to discuss how the university could financially support the Museum of Art and fundraising opportunities going forward. The board of advisors are determined to support the arts at the University of New Hampshire and hold out hope that a future administration will be receptive to reopening and restaffing the Museum of Art. Their determination and willingness to engage in conversations about financial stewardship and sustainability, even in the absence of a museum director, is commendable. I truly hope their efforts are successful.

Sidebar

Know Your Rights

Nobody wants to focus on losing their job, but if it occurs, it will be helpful to know what you are due ahead of time.

Read and understand your organization’s employee benefits. What are you owed for unused time off? What are your expenses to maintain health insurance through COBRA? Are other benefits available from your employer if you are laid off?

The Employee Assistance Program offered by the University of New Hampshire provided eight free mental health counseling sessions. Additionally, as part of the separation, laid off employees could meet one-on-one with a career services adviser, which was invaluable during my search for new employment.

You will also want to research your state’s unemployment benefits requirements and application process. Pass on this information to your staff to help them navigate unemployment. Additionally, write letters of recommendation for your staff, which they can use as references in their job searches.

Resources

Susana Smith Bautista, How to Close a Museum: A Practical Guide, 2021

Tips on keeping sane in the insane world of museum leadership.

This article originally appeared in Museum magazine’s September/October 2024 issue, a benefit of AAM membership.

“I’m leaving, because with such a privileged role comes responsibility. . . . I know what this job takes. And I know that I no longer have enough in the tank to do it justice. It’s that simple.”

– Jacinda Ardern,
former Prime Minister of New Zealand

Leading the Museum of Us (formerly the San Diego Museum of Man) as its chief executive officer over the past 14 years has been the great honor of my life. My job is a privilege bursting with rewards beyond measure, and I pinch myself whenever our iconic building comes into view on my way into the office. Even after all this time, I still feel immense gratitude for the opportunity to contribute to this remarkable organization’s transformative work.

If I’m being honest, though, the past many years have also been immeasurably challenging, with more sleepless nights than I care to remember. Reimagining the Museum of Us in anti-racist, decolonial, and other human-centered ways has required leadership that is both highly adaptive and built for the long game. When I first took the position, I possessed some of the skills necessary for success but was woefully lacking in others. Chief among those deficiencies was an understanding of how to create the conditions I needed to regularly—and sustainably—show up as my best self.

Great leaders are both visionaries and servants, right? As the organizational guru Simon Sinek so aptly puts it, they must “eat last” so that others can sustain themselves first. Successfully navigating the challenges of guiding a museum today, however, is dizzyingly complex. Leaders must tend to the wellbeing of so many different types of people with so many different needs that they often neglect to take care of themselves.

Early in my leadership tenure, I often found myself running on fumes. There just weren’t enough hours in the day for me to fill up my tank, let alone pause long enough to change the oil or bring myself in for a tune-up. There were far too many to-dos, all of which I erroneously (and perhaps somewhat arrogantly) thought required my touch. So, rather than carving out time for myself, I just carried on.

In hindsight, I shudder to think of the disservice I did to our work during those moments of depletion. My comments to colleagues were less than helpful, my reactions to complex situations hasty, and my decisions lacked the thoughtfulness they deserved. In short, I was too often approaching my worst when others needed me at my best.

It took time, but eventually I cultivated an ecosystem of care to better support me in my leadership journey. While I still struggle at times, that ecosystem has allowed me to bring a certain equanimity and clear-sightedness to my work far more regularly. I often call on the supports now at my disposal, knowing that building my own capacity is an act of service that benefits the Museum of Us, too.

Self-Care Is Not Selfish

Putting on our own oxygen masks first may seem overly self-serving, but it is the cornerstone of sustainable leadership. After all, how can I effectively help others if I can hardly breathe myself? We all seem to understand this in theory, but regularly incorporating it into our day-to-day is another story. Gasping for air, however, is not a viable strategy in the long term. As leaders, we must build a practice of self-care.

While this looks different for everyone, my own practice centers around physical movement. I tend to be in my head so much that I need to put my body in motion, preferably outdoors, whether that’s hiking, running, romping with my dog Blue, or even stretching. I also try to stay well-hydrated, eat healthy, and engage in activities that center me or bring me joy—meditating, reading great fiction, laughing with a friend, and watching “the beautiful game.”

I’m not always successful, but I try to do these activities as often as possible, and I try not to feel guilty for doing them. My goal is to enjoy them, knowing that when my own cup is full, I’m far better positioned to show up for others in the right way at the right time. This gives me permission to prioritize self-care as an unselfish act. When I let my practice slide, which I often do, I try not to beat myself up too much. After all, mindlessly bingeing on a pint of Ben & Jerry’s ice cream or a new Apple TV+ series after a hard day can—on occasion—be self-care, too.

I also don’t hide my practice from others, knowing that it models good leadership for my team. Practicing what we preach gives others permission to prioritize self-care, too. They, in turn, model it for their teams, sending the message: “We’re in this for the long haul and we’re in it together, so please take care of yourself accordingly.”

Community Care Is Essential

While self-care may be necessary for sustainability, it is insufficient on its own. Showing up as your best self regularly requires a larger ecosystem of support. This is particularly true when leading transformational change, which requires significant moral courage. A recent Stanford Social Innovation Review article, “The Most Critical Ingredient in Leadership,” defined moral courage as the commitment to act in values-consistent ways no matter the challenges. Moral courage is characterized as a mindset focused on the internal conditions needed to deliver on that commitment.

Most important is a board of trustees that will be there for you when the going gets tough—because it will get tough. The path to transformational change is messy, and periodically getting stuck in the mud is a given. Also, this journey is often nonlinear, taking unexpected twists, turns, and time. Your trustees need to understand that these bumps in the road are signs that positive change is afoot, provided you stay the course. If you can get your board to play the long game in this way, you will begin to move mountains together. Start with a board chair who gets it, and then partner with that person to build buy-in with other trustees.

Leaders also need a team that has their back. We all have bad days and—while they may be expert at hiding it—leaders are no exception. We try to regularly show up for others in the right way at the right time, but sometimes we don’t have it in us. And that’s okay. We’re all human. Don’t underestimate the power of letting your team know when you’re not at your best and need short-term cover. It will give your colleagues permission to do the same, and they’ll be happy to lend you the same kind of support you’ve so often lent them. Something magical happens when grace flows in both directions.

Tapping into Outside Supports

As important as a supportive internal team are the people outside your organization who can help guide you on your leadership journey. I’ve long worked with three such partners who have ebbed and flowed in my ecosystem of care, depending on my needs at the time. An executive coach helps me think through my work world, a counselor helps me navigate my inner world relative to my outer world, and a holistic practitioner helps me develop more strength, balance, and flexibility in my embodied world.

While there is significant overlap in how these different partners support me, I cannot imagine sustaining myself in this role over the past 14 years without any one of them. Ask your board if it will build one or more coaches into your organizational budget. If not, find a donor or pay for them yourself, when possible. They are that important.

Also important is a strong peer group with whom you can share your challenges and successes. Early in my leadership tenure, a wise foundation agreed to support my participation in Vistage Worldwide, a peer advisory organization for CEOs, for three years. Fifteen of us—leaders from different industries—met for a full day every month. We heard from world-class speakers, shared personal and professional updates, and—most importantly—processed challenging issues together.

Initially, I couldn’t imagine regularly taking so much time away from the office to participate in this extracurricular activity. Over time, however, these monthly sessions proved so valuable that I came to see them as a key to my leadership success. My board wholeheartedly agreed, footing the not-so-inconsequential bill for another seven years until our group disbanded. Finding peers with whom you can share your struggles, strategies, and triumphs will help you not only feel less alone but also far more supported on your leadership journey.

Taking Time to Pause

An ecosystem of care only serves a leader to the extent that it is regularly activated. It’s easy to get caught up in the pressures of the day and forget to call on our available resources. Pausing is critical. Stopping long enough to honestly reflect on if and how I’m struggling is always the first step in identifying what I may need in any given moment.

While those needs will vary, having an ecosystem of care in place affords me a range of options. When my reserves are dangerously low, I go through my self-care checklist and prioritize the practices I have been neglecting. If I’m feeling overwhelmed or mired in the muck of it all, I ask one or more of my many wise counselors for a fresh perspective. Finding my way often takes time, but with these supports in place, I know that I can successfully navigate any challenge.

Invest your time and energy in cultivating the ecosystem of self/community care you need, and tap into it often. By building your capacity in this way, you’ll be able to show up as your best self far more regularly, and your museum will be far better for it.

You’ve got this.

Resources

Jacqueline Novogratz and Anne Welsh McNulty, “The Most Critical Ingredient in Leadership,” Stanford Social Innovation Review, July 2022
ssir.org/articles/entry/the_most_critical_ingredient_in_leadership

Simon Sinek, Leaders Eat Last: Why Some Teams Pull Together and Others Don’t, 2014

HBR’s 10 Must Reads 2024: The Definitive Management Ideas of the Year from Harvard Business Review

Prentis Hemphill, What It Takes to Heal: How Transforming Ourselves Can Change the World, 2024

How current and emerging museum leaders can shift their mindset from fear to fierce.

This article originally appeared in Museum magazine’s September/October 2024 issue, a benefit of AAM membership.

Many of the cultural and nonprofit executives I coach these days tell me they are worried and even fearful about what the future holds. And not without reason.

These are anxiety-producing times. The terrain is uncertain, from the loss of COVID stimulus monies and private giving that hasn’t rebounded, to the backsliding on the need for and efficacy of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, not to mention a host of other global crises, including climate change. All of this seems to be creating feelings of unease among those charged with leading nonprofit organizations.

It’s not surprising, then, that fewer people in the nonprofit sector are willing to take on leadership positions in these times. What happens to the museum field if leadership is calling, and no one answers?

Leaders operating from a place of fear are not on a sustainable track. But by asking themselves a series of powerful questions, leaders can exchange fear for the fierce, connected, and resilient leadership that museums need today.

What’s Going On?

Rather than being pulled toward leadership roles, my clients frequently are at a crossroads. They are considering stepping down or stepping away, or they simply do not want to shoulder the demands of a top job. They cite a host of reasons, including that museum directorships are too big for a single person, which is why some institutions have adopted shared leadership models. But when I probe deeper, I’ve found that the main reasons people don’t aspire to leadership roles boil down to fear and an understandable yearning for self-care.

When I became CEO of a cultural organization, I was achieving a long-awaited milestone in my career. After working my way up through the ranks in museums, serving as a museum consultant, and co-authoring a book on the leadership traits of highly successful leaders in the museum sector, I had knowledge, skills, and relationships aplenty. But I was not emotionally prepared to handle the breadth and crush of responsibilities, internal and external expectations, and the public exposure and scrutiny that are all part of the job.

And so, hard as it is to admit, I frequently led from a place of fear. My teams and I did well, but we failed to achieve our true potential because of that fear. Overcoming fear starts with naming it and recognizing its telltale signs. The current and could-be leaders I work with have shared with me the following fears.

Fear of failure. Top museum jobs are so big, and the challenges are many. There are numerous opportunities to drop the ball or miss the mark. This prompts overwork, perfectionism, procrastination, and vicious self-judgment.

Fear of exposure or embarrassment. One leader I coached said they were counting down the days until someone or some misstep “comes to take me out.” They wanted to develop an exit strategy before it was “too late.” We all have weaknesses, personal or professional, and in a world of heightened scrutiny, sensitivity, and social media, it’s easy to spend precious energy expecting the brick through the window.

Fear of uncertainty. We live and lead in a very uncertain world, which can feel like the brink of chaos. For many leaders, uncertainty triggers controlling behavior, which robs staff of agency and hampers empathy, curiosity, and creativity.

Fear of rejection. Many people struggle with feeling unworthy, inadequate, or unlovable. Putting ourselves “out there” opens us up to hearing all the reasons we don’t measure up. If we already have a strong internal critic’s voice, leadership roles can turn up the volume.

Fear of loneliness. The US Surgeon General has declared a loneliness epidemic, and Harvard Business Publishing found that 70 percent of new CEOs report feelings of loneliness. Leadership positions require long hours, travel, or relocation, all of which separate leaders from their families, friends, and communities.

Fear of vulnerability. Everything about leadership can leave us feeling vulnerable and exposed.

The Five Foundational Questions

Brené Brown’s groundbreaking research has shown that we cannot lead without overcoming shame about our shortcomings and fear of our vulnerabilities. “Choose the great adventure of being brave and afraid at the exact same time,” Brown advises. Vulnerability begets trust, and trust is the leader’s first currency.

One of the ways I coach people to “be brave and afraid at the exact same time” is to invite them into a practice of asking themselves powerful questions. By doing so, they learn how to coach themselves and others to avoid operating from a fearful place. Here are five foundational questions that can help accomplish that.

1. What values make up my moral compass, and what is my North Star? When leaders are ethical, responsible, and compassionate, there is no risk of embarrassment or shame. Writing a clear statement of one’s life purpose and using it as the arbiter for all decisions and actions takes away fear and second-guessing.
2. How do I nourish myself? When leaders deny their needs for physical and emotional sustenance, they put themselves and their organizations at risk. Nourishment might mean eating right and allowing yourself to sleep six to eight hours a night, or it might mean making time for the things that feed your soul and spirit, like making art, being in nature, or regularly meditating.
3. What do I know that I am pretending not to know? Fear lurks in the shadows, and turning on the light of the innate wisdom, creativity, and resourcefulness that lies within each of us is the best way to banish it. Tune into and trust your intuition. Such insight comes in the moments of silence we create for ourselves.
4. Where am I? The Conscious Leadership Group offers a simple straight line and the question “Where am I?” as a powerful tool for self-management. At all times leaders are either “above the line,” open, curious, and committed to learning, or “below the line,” closed, defensive, and committed to being right. (See above.) People below the line also tend to believe there is not enough money, time, space, energy, or love and that there is a present threat to their self-esteem, authority, or security, which leads to finding fault, blaming, rationalizing, justifying, avoiding, or causing conflict in the interest of winning. When a leader is above the line, they believe that the universe is working in their favor, they question their beliefs, and they are open to multiple perspectives. They believe that the people around them are creative, resourceful, and wise allies. Once we locate ourselves as operating above or below the line, we can take steps to move into or stay in conscious, fearless leadership.
5. Looking back at the end of my life, what will have been important? Is it the task or the relationship? Is it my life’s product or its purpose? This “flash forward” technique allows us to consult with our older, wiser selves and reconnect to our sense of meaning and purpose in the moment, rather than when it is too late to change course.

These fearsome times need courageous museums to offer spaces for learning, dialogue, inspiration, reflection, and healing. Courageous museums need fierce, fearless leaders. Will you answer when leadership calls?

Resources

Brené Brown, Daring Greatly, 2012

Shirzad Chamine, Positive Intelligence: Why Only 20% of Teams and Individuals Achieve their Full Potential, 2012

Robert E. Quinn and Anjan V, Thakor, The Economics of Higher Purpose: Eight Counterintuitive Steps for Creating a Purpose-Driven Organization, 2019

The Conscious Leadership Group, “Locating Yourself – A Key to Conscious Leadership”
youtube.com/watch?v=fLqzYDZAqCI

Jim Dethmer, Diana Chapman, and Kaley Warner Klemp, “The 15 Commitments of Conscious Leadership”
whatgotyouthere.com/15-commitments-of-conscious-leadership-by-jim-dethmer

Building Movement Project, The Push and Pull: Declining Interest in Nonprofit Leadership, Race to Lead Research Series
buildingmovement.org/reports/push-and-pull-report/