Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
THE MANAGEMENT OF MUSEUMS: A CONTINGENCY APPROACH
by
VIRGINIA LOU GRIMES, B.A.
A THESIS
IN
MUSEUM SCIENCE
Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Texas Tech University in
Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
the Degree of
MASTER OF ARTS
Approved
Accepted V'
August, 1980
II.
III.
IV.
CONTENTS
OF ILLUSTRATIONS.
. . . . . . . . Purpose and Scope .
Selection of Topic
Methodology . . . . Definition of Terms . .
Plan of the Study •
ORGANIZATIONS &'lD !~AGEMENT
Organization Theory . .
. .
. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . Museums as Organizations . . . .
ENVIRONMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Organization Boundaries and Environments
Museum Environments .
Museum Subsystems and the Environment .
Responses to Environment
GOALS AND VALUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Organizational Goals and Values . . . . The Goals of Museums . . . . . . . The Values of Museums . 0 0 •
V. THE TECHNICAL SUBSYSTEM 0 •
VI.
Technology and Organizations
The Technology of Museums . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . 0 0 0
THE STRUCTURAL SUBSYSTEM . . . . 0 0 . . . . Organizational Structure
Museum Structural Levels
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Museum Structural Characteristics . . . . . .
iv
1
1
2
2
2
4
6
6
9
12
12
13
18
19
21
21
22
25
28
28
31
36
36
37
38
Organization Charts and Job Descriptions . . . . 38
Authority Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . Horizontal Differentiation . . . . . Integration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • 0
Administrative Systems . . . . . Structure, Environment, and the Other Subsystems.
ii
41
42
42
44
44
VII. THE PSYCHOSOCIAL SUBSYSTEM . . . Authority . .
Leadership.
Motivation
Roles . • .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
VIII. THE MANAGERIAL SUBSYSTEM
Decision-making
Planning •...•
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
IX.
Organizing . . . .
Controlling . . . • • .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Contingency Views of Management . . . . . . . . . SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
iii
46
46
50
52
53
58
58
61
64
66
68
71
73
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
ILLUSTRATIONS
The Organization System .
Museum Environments . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The Classification of Technologies. . . . . . . . . Organizational Structure in a Small Museum
Organizational Structure in a Large Museum
Museum Departmentalization.
. . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
Expectancy Theory . . . . . . . . . . . .
iv
8
14
29
39
40
43
53
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Museum management is the subject of perennial interest among museum
professionals. Without good management, it is impossible for museums to
fulfill their purposes or execute their functions. Information about
managing museums is readily available, but it is fragmented and there
is no consensus on an approach. This thesis presents an analysis of
the management of museums using a contingency approach in an effort to
develop a theoretical framework for understanding museum management.
The contingency approach to management is based upon organization
and systems theory. In this view, museums are considered organizational
systems. As such, they exist within a larger environment and can be
divided into subsystems. The contingency approach concentrates upon the
relationships among the subsystems and between museums and their environ
ments. Analyzing these relationships reveals patterns which can be
used to increase the effectiveness of museum management.
Purpose and Scope
This thesis analyzes museum management using the contingency ap
proach as a theoretical framework. The contingency approach offers a
means of organizing the widely scattered information available about
the management of museums. Organizing the material available may lead
to valuable insights into the operation of museums and increase the
effectiveness of museum management.
The analysis is limited to a specific management th.eory, the con
tingency approach; and to museums, not including zoos or botanical
gardens. It is limited by geography to museums and management practices
in the United States and in time to a primary emphasis on the past
fifteen years.
1
2
Selection of Topic
There is little evidence of the application of current management
theories to the management of museums. Books are available with such
titles as Basic Museum Management (MacBeath and Gooding 1969) and The
Management of Small History Museums (Guthe 1969), but they are practi
cal guidebooks, descriptive rather than theoretical. There has been
limited application of management theory to specific aspects of museum
management, most notably Personnel Policies for Museums: A Handbook for
Management (Miller 1979). The analysis of this thesis should be a use
ful addition to the literature of museum management by providing a new
approach to the subject.
Much remains to be done that is beyond the scope of this study.
In particular, a detailed analysis of each museum subsystem in relation
to actual museum operation would be very useful.
Methodology
This thesis is the result of an extensive review of the literatures
of management and of museums and of personal experience with museums.
The theoretical framework was provided by Organization and Management:
A Systems and Contingency Approach by Fremont E. Kast and James E.
Rosenzweig (1979). Information on the management of museums was gather
ed from various books, journals, andpersonal observations of museums, in
general, and The Museum, Texas Tech University, in particular.
Definition of Terms
The following terms are defined in order to clarify their usage in
this thesis. These terms are central to the analysis of museum manage
ment.
Accreditation - certifying as meeting certain standards. Refers to the
accreditation program of the American Association of Museums.
Contingency - some thing or event which depends upon another. Refers
to the contingency approach to management theory, in which the
various components of an organization are viewed as interdependent.
3
Ethics -the system of morals of a particular person, group, orprofes
sion. Refers to the museum profession.
General Systems Theory - a theory that integrates knowledge from many
scientific disciplines. A system can be defined as "an organized,
unitary whole composed of two or more interdependent parts, com
ponents, or subsystems and delineated by identifiable boundaries
from its environmental suprasystem." (Kast and Rosenzweig 1979,
p. 98)
Heirarchy - a group of persons arranged in order of rank or grade. Re
fers to the arrangement of people in an organization.
Management - the act of controlling the movement or behavior of someone.
Refers to the coordination of human and material resources toward
objectives in an organization (Kast and Rosenzweig 1979, p. 7).
Used interchangeably with administration in this paper.
Museum - "an organized and permanent nonprofit institution, essentially
educational or aesthetic in purpose, with professional staff, which
owns and utilizes tangible objects, cares for them, and exhibits
them to the public on some regular schedule." (Fitzgerald 1973,
pp. 8-9)
Nonprofit - not intended to earn a profit. Refers to organizations,
particularly museums, which have a special status in United States
custom and law because of their goal of serving the public good
rather than producing a profit.
Organization - a systemized whole; a group of persons organized for a
specific purpose.
Profession - an occupation requiring advanced education or training and
involving a specific body of knowledge. Also includes special
powers and privileges, such as self-regulation, and a code of
ethics (Kast and Rosenzweig 1979, p. 45).
Values - the social principles or standards held by an individual.
Refers to the principles held by members of an organization.
Plan of the Study
Museums are analyzed as organizational systems which Kast and
Rosenzweig define as:
1. A subsystem of its broader environment consisting of 2. Goal-oriented people with a purpose 3. A technical subsystem - people using knowledge, techniques,
equipment, and facilities 4. A structural subsystem - people working together on inte
grated activities 5. A psychosocial subsystem - people in social relationships 6. A managerial subsystem - which coordinates the subsystems
and plans and controls the overall endeavor (1979, p. 18).
4
The contingency approach to management analyzes the relationships
among organizational components and determines patterns that are appro
priate for a particular organization. This approach can suggest
specific ways of organizing institutions such as museums, by an analysis
of each of their subsystems.
The environment of an organization pervades its operations. Museums
are a part of the general business environment of the United States
and are affected specifically by such environmental factors as the ex
panding numbers of museums, increased corporate interest and support,
changing demographics, public policy and law, and social values.
An organization's goals or purposes determine the shape of all of
its subsystems, while the values held by the members of an organization
play a large part in shaping its goals. Museum goals are based on the
five primary functions of collection, conservation, research, exhibi
tion, and education, but museums set priorities and limits on these
functions according to their needs and circumstances. The values of
museum members tend to reflect the history of museums and the conflict
between classic and democratic traditions.
The technical subsystem of an organization includes the special
knowledge needed for its operations as well as any machines used. The
technologies of museums are used in their five operational functions
and, like those of other organizations, are becoming increasingly
complex.
5
The structure of an organization is based on the patterns of
relationships among its members. It includes such elements as organi
zation charts, job descriptions, authority systems, and differentia
tion and integration techniques. These elements are all present in
museum structures, which are usually classical in form.
The psychosocial subsystem of an organization consists of the
pattern of social relationships among its members. In museums, parti
cular types of authority, leadership, motivation, and roles are found.
The managerial subsystem links all of the other subsystems and
is based upon decision-making. The management functions of planning,
organizing, and controlling are common to museums as well as other
organizations and must be understood by museum managers. The final
result of the contingency approach to management is the spectrum
between mechanistic and organic organizations. Mechanistic systems
tend to have a stable environment, well-defined goals, straight-forward
technology, and a classical managerial system. Organic systems, on
the other hand, tend to have an uncertain environment, dive.rse goals,
complex technology, and a behavioralist managerial system. By
relating their organizations to these two models, the managers of
museums can analyze the components of museum systems. This analysis
enables the various subsystems of museums to be matched to each
other and to the environment, thus establishing an effective organiza
tion system.
CHAPTER II
ORGANIZATIONS AND MANAGEMENT
The United States is a nation of organizations. According to
Peter F. Drucker (1980), 93 percent of the work force is employed by
an organization. In addition to formal employment, there are thou
sands of organizations which people join on a voluntary basis: Girl
Scouts, Lions Clubs, and the League of Women Voters. The effective
and efficient management of these pervasive social groups is impor
tant to many people.
Management as a professional field is a new development, and, as
the amount of research and literature increases, new methods and
theories are changing the management of many organizations, including
museums. Although there has always been interest in how best to
manage museums, the concern has intensified in recent years as museum
work moves toward becoming a true profession. Proper management of
museums is being discussed in many places, from scholarly journals to
popular magazines, from professional meetings to informal gatherings
of museum employees.
Organization Theory
Organization theory is a recent approach to the study of manage
ment. As presented by Fremont E. Kast and James E. Rosenzweig in
Organization and Management: A Systems and Contingency Approach (1979),
organization theory is based on a contingency view of systems theory.
It combines information from many fields including sociology, psychol
ogy, anthropology, political science, economics, philosophy, and
mathematics and also is based upon the experiences of members of
organizations. Therefore, it is a body of knowledge founded upon both
practical experience and scientific research (Kast and Rosenzweig 1979).
6
Organization theory includes the study of management, systems
theory, and the contingency view. The first of these, management, is
an everyday fact of modern life. It involves making and implementing
decisions and is necessary everywhere from the direction of personal
lives to the guidance of huge corporations. According to Kast and
Rosenzweig, "Management involves the coordination of human and mater
ial resources toward objective accomplishment." (1979, p. 7) It is
the basic function of people who administer organizations.
Systems theory integrates knowledge gained from many scientific
disciplines. A system can be defined as "an organized, unitary \vhole
composed of two or more interdependent parts, components, or subaystems
and delineated by identifiable boundaries from its environmental supra
system." (Kast and Rosenzweig 1979, p. 98) Systems are physical, for
example a galaxy; biological, the human body; or social, a corporation.
Systems theory is holistic, an attempt to understand an organization
in its entirety. Therefore, some of the characteristics of a svstem
are understandable only by considering their relation to the whole.
An important concept in systems theory is the distinction between
closed and open systems. Physical systems are closed, that is, they
interact very little with their environment, while biological systems
are open, they interact constantly with their environment. :lost early
scholars treated social systems as closed systems, until 1951 when
sociologist Talcott Parsons identified their open nature (Katz and
Kahn 1966, pp. 8-9).
Using systems theory Kast and Rosenzweig define an organization
(illustrated in Figure 1) as:
1. A subsystem of its broader environment consisting of 2. Goal-oriented people with a purpose 3. A technical subsystem- people using knowledge, techniques,
equipment, and facilities 4. A structural subsystem - people working together on integra
ted activities 5. A psychosocial subsystem - people in social relationships 6. A management subsystem - which coordinates the subsystems
and plans and controls the overall endeavor (1979, p. 18).
Environment
Goals and Values Subsystem
Psychosocial Subsystem
Environment
Figure 1. The Organization System (After Kast and Rosenzweig 1979, p. 19)
8
Kast and Rosenzweig's definition of an organization system is used
as the principle framework for this analysis of museums as organiza
tions.
The contingency view is the practical result of organization and
systems theory. While systems theory provides a way of understanding
all organizations, the contingency view provides a basis for design
ing and managing specific organizations. The contingency approach
focuses on the patterns of relationships among the subsystems and
between the organization and its environment. The intent is to
develop an appropriate structure for a given environment, to match
management style to given goals, etc. Thus, according to Kast and
Rosenzweig, "The essence of this view is that there is no one best
way and that there is a middle ground between 'universal principles'
and 'it all depends.'" (1979, p. 20)
9
The contingency approach to management is an effort to understand
the realities of complex organizations in changing environments. As
Katz and Kahn point out, "Social systems are anchored in the attitudes,
perceptions, beliefs, motivations, habits, and expectations of human
beings." (1966, p. 33) This makes social systems much more variable
than other types of systems. Organization theory attempts to recognize
the variability without reducing it to over-simplified analogies.
Organization theory treats administration as a process applicable
to nonprofit as well as profit-making organizations. This point of
view is expressed in The Administrative Process by Stephen P. Robbins
(1980). If administration, or management, is applicable to both pro
fit and nonprofit organizations, then these two seemingly different
types of organizations must have some common characteristics.
Museums as Organizations
Some authors maintain that museums are indeed similar to profit
making organizations. Alan Peacock and Christine Godfrey conclude
that museums are similar to business firms and have inputs of labor
and objects, production functions of research and conservation, and
outputs of exhibits and programs (1974, pp. 56-57). Carl E. Guthe
agrees with this viewpoint and says, "The administration of a museum
is like that of any organization." (1957, p. 17) However, many
museum people would agree with Sherman Lee's opposing statement that
"Business is business and art is art." (Kadis 1977, p. 46) Lee seems
to feel that the two subjects, business and art, have nothing in
common.
The contingency approach has not yet been applied to museum
management, but parts of other current management theories have been
applied to a limited extent. William M. Sukel considers organization
theory and museums in his article, "Museums as Organizations." (1974)
Other subjects under consideration in recent journal articles are
policies and goals, personnel policies, ethics, the role of the
director, and government regulations. These topics are of concern
in the management of any organization.
Increasing numbers and varieties of museums in the United States
have led to the perception of museum work as a professional field.
One result of increasing professionalism among museums has been a
growing interest in applying knowledge gained from other fields,
including management theory, to museums. The accreditation program
of the American Association of Museums (AAM) has been a practical
means of encouraging the application of professional standards to
museum management. The AAM's accreditation program was begun in
1970. It sets standards for museum operation and performance, so
that the public and those in the museum field may have a basis for
judging the effectiveness and efficiency of their institutions. The
program is meant to provide public confidence, to strengthen museums
on a national level, to increase the self-confidence of museums, and
to provide a qualitative basis for decisions by grant-making agencies
(Fitzgerald 1973). The accreditation procedures of the AA}f require
10
museums to conduct a self-examination related to many areas covered by
management theory. This has created greater awareness of management
theories among museum employees.
The remainder of this thesis analyzes museums' relationships
with their environments and their subsystems. The contingency
approach provides a method of organizing diverse information about
museum administration and linking this to current management theory
while preserving the uniqueness of museums. An analysis of the re
lationships of museums, their environments, and their subsystems,
based on the contingency approach, provides the groundwork for under
standing museum operations and will lead to more effective management
of museums.
11
CHAPTER III
ENVIRONMENT
By definition, an organization exists within the larger system
of its environment. According to Webster's ~ew World Dictionary, an
environment is "all the conditions, circumstances, and influences
surrounding, and affecting the development of, an organism or group
of organisms." (1970) For a social organization, the environment
consists of the society in which it exists. An organization does not
exist, however, as a separate, closed unit of the society; it is an
open system that exchanges information, energy, and materials with
its environment (Kast and Rosenzweig 1979, p. 126). This implies
that an organization is not just a passive adaptation to its environ
ment but actively chooses, reflects, and manipulates its surroundings.
Organization Boundaries and Environments
An organism is set apart from its environment by its boundaries.
For a social organization, boundaries are not physical but must be
inferred from its activities. The limits of its operations define
its boundaries. For example, a company that manufactures nail polish
has created a boundary between itself and male consumers. Because
organizational boundaries are defined by activities, they are flexible,
not fixed, and change to meet changing circumstances. In addition,
boundaries act as filters by controlling inputs and outputs and enable
an organization to maintain its autonomy. This filtering also stand
ardizes inputs and outputs, in order to make operations smoother (Kast
and Rosenzweig 1979, pp. 127-128). For example, training employees
will standardize personnel input and limiting the product to a certain
size will standardize output.
12
An organization is not affected equally by all parts of the en
vironment. The environment can be divided into the general environ
ment, which affects the organization indirectly, and the specific
environment, which affects it directly. All organizations in the
United States share a similar general environment which is made up
primarily of other organizations. Characteristics of this general
environment include general literacy, urbanization, a money economy,
a democratic form of government, and a complex social system. These
factors are favorable to the proliferation of increasingly complex
social organizations. The specific environment of an organization
depends upon the particular organization. The specific environment
of a hardware store, for example, would be its suppliers, customers,
and employees.
Museum Environments
13
Museums share the general organizational environment of the
United States. The general environment for a museum includes state
and national governments, consumer groups, civil rights groups, other
museums, education groups, and the media. In addition, museums have
characteristic specific environments. The specific environment of
a museum may include its visitors, school children, support groups,
school district officials, community members, and local government.
The general and specific environments of museums, as illustrated in
Figure 2, greatly affect all aspects of museums.
Many of the environmental factors of museums are recent intro
ductions. In the early years of museums the environment was much
simpler, and museums paid very little attention to their environments.
Museums began as private collections, in most cases, and retained for
many years an attitude of being "a world apart." (Carey 1978) Museums,
however, no longer can ignore their environments. The environment
has become more demanding, and there are many more factors in the
environment which directly affect museums. Groups such as civil
rights organizations do not wait for voluntary cooperation by other
organizations but demand that the force of law be used to assure
cooperation. Other environmental factors which increasingly influence
GENERAL ENVIRONMENT
and National
Government
SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENT
The Media
Local Government
Officials
Community Members
Education
Visitors
MUSEUMS
School District Officials
Consumer Groups
Children
Support Groups
Civil Rights Groups
Figure 2. Museum Environments
14
15
museums include the expanding number of museums, closer ties to other
businesses, changing demographics, government agencies and regulations,
and changing social values. The increase in the number of museums in
the United States during the past seventy-five years has changed the
environment of all museums. Because of their great increase in num
bers, museums are more visible and seem to be more important, both to
themselves and to others. A sense of this importance has led to grow
ing emphasis on professionalism in museum management and in the conduct
of museum operations, as the AAM's accreditation program illustrates.
Another aspect of the issue of professionalism in museums is concern
with professional training of museum workers. Museumstudies programs
have proliferated in the past ten to fifteen years (Glaser 1978, p.
19). The American Association of Museums began a survey of museum
studies programs in 1976, which resulted in the publications of. policy
statements on "Statement on Preparation for Professional Museum Careers"
and "Minimum Standards for Professional Museum Training Programs" in
the November/December 1978 issue of Museum News. Two other results of
increasing numbers of museums are somewhat contradictory. More museums
have meant more competition for audiences, objects and money. It also
has led, however, to more cooperation among museums, particularly be
tween the community museums of a region and those in the urban centers
(AAM, Museums: Their New Audiences 1972).
Other businesses are increasingly influencing museums. Corporate
sponsorship ofmuseum exhibits, particularly expensive, temporary ex
hibits, has become quite common. "Two Hundred Years of American
Indian Art" sponsored by Philip Morris at the Whitney Museum in 1971-
72 is an example. Reliance on corporate support in turn has been
caused by such environmental factors as inflation and declining indi
vidual support. Corporate sponsorship has raised many questions about
how much influence this new environmental factor will have on museum
planning and programming. Will temporary exhibits be selected for
their "saleability" rather than artistic excellence, for example?
This may lead to exhibits only on "safe" subjects, forestalling ex
perimental shows or exhibits of new talent which may be too controver
sial for corporate sponsors (Metz 1979).
16
Another environmental change which is affecting museums is demo
graphic. Museums were from their start primarily urban institutions.
Thus, the changing demographics of the United States present a chal
lenge. The original audience of museums--basically white, upper and
middle class--has moved to the suburbs, leaving museums with a new
audience in their neighborhoods. Cities are now the homes of people
who cannot afford to move to the suburbs--people who must more often
worry about where their next meal is coming from, than about cultural
institutions (AAM, Museums: Their New Audience 1972). This major
change in the environment has led to different responses from various
museums. Programs aimed specifically at new audiences, "branch" or
"neighborhood" museums, and "mobile" museums are efforts made by some
museums to respond to their new audience. A well known example of
these responses is Anacostia Neighborhood Museum, a branch of the
Smithsonian located in one of the depressed neighborhoods of Washing
ton, D.C. (Alexander 1979). Solutions to the problems of a changing
environment do not come easily. The problems and their solutions raise
serious questions about the definition and role of museums, which can
be answered only by each institution according to its own needs.
All museums are affected by a plethora of government agencies
and regulations. Just a few of the agencies with which museums come
into contact are the United States Postal Service, the Equal Employ
ment Opportunity Council, the Labor Department, the Office of Safety
and Health Administration, United States Customs, and the Copyright
Office ("A Watchful Eye in the Public Interest" 1976). Government
regulations affecting museums increase daily, covering everything
from how animals may be collected, to the importation of archaeolo
gical objects, to working conditions for employees. For example,
natural history museums face many difficulties with regulations cover
ing the collection, reception, possession, and transportation of ani
mal species. If rigidly enforced, the Endangered Species Act, the
Lacey Act, and the Black Bass Act could endanger museum collections
and research programs (Hart 1978). Art museums are affected by the
passage of the new copyright law which took effect January 1, 1978
(Crawford 1977), and the California law giving artists royalties for
the resale of their works (Warshaw 1975). Both of these laws have
altered museums' traditional relationships with artists.
17
Changing social values have had great impact on museums with the
effects of such issues as civil rights, ethnic heritage, public ac
countability, and responsibility to artists. Museums, like most organi
zations, are increasingly sensitive to social pressures. This is partly
a consequence of the pressures brought by various interest groups.
Museums have become more responsive to civil rights issues as a variety
of groups have made their presence felt. Passage of Section 504 of
the Rehabilitation Act has mandated greater efforts toward physical
and programming accessibility for-the handicapped. The issue of
public accountability is of great concern to all museums, particular-
ly since the State Attorney General of New York brought suit against
a museum curator on conflict-of-interest charges. This stems in turn
from growing public concern about the accountability of its public
servants, and a tendency to see museums as public, rather than private,
organizations (Carey 1978). According.to Thomas Albright (1980),
artists also are an increasingly influential group. Art museums, in
particular, have felt pressure to give "equal opportunity" to all
artists. In response to the pressure, art museums have tended to be
come journalistic, reporting on trends rather than attempting scholar
ly judgment~ by putting on large group shows of new artists and one
·person shows only of well-established artists.
Evidence presented by Edward P. Alexander (1979) in Museums in
Motion suggests that the history of museums is a history of environ
mental influences. The wealth available from increasing trade and
commerce made possible the first art collections of the Medici family.
The growing wealth of Europe created the royal art collections of
Charles I, Louis XIV, the Hapsburgs, and Catherine the Great. The
changing ideals of the Enlightenment, which included a belief in the
value of education for the common person, led to agitation to open
galleries and collections to the public. The Louvre was created by
the social pressures of a new political force--the French Revolution-
when the nation's art was seen as the heritage and possession of all
the people. Napoleon used art as a symbol of national glory, and he
sent "requisitioned" masterpieces from the conquered countries to the
Louvre and the provincial museums of France. During the nineteenth
century the newly nationalistic countries of Europe competed to esta
blish public art museums representing the nations' prestige.
At the same time, in the United States, where art was a luxury
to people more concerned with the exploration of a new land, practi
cal interests led to the collecting of natural history objects.
These collections were open to the public, following the nation's
democratic ideals, and were seen as a means of education for the
common person. Explorations in the New World, Africa, and the East
also led to the development of natural history museums in Europe.
The influences of the industrial revolution brought the develop
ment of still another type of museum--that of science and technology.
These museums attempted to explain the many marvels of the modern
world to the public and were supposed to provide examples of fine
workmanship for artists, craftsmen, and technicians. The great
world's fairs of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries
influenced these museums, and their leftover exhibits often were the
founding collections for the new museums.
18
In response to current social pressures, some museums have be
come cultural centers which include the performing as well as the
visual arts. They attempt to reach out to all groups in the community.
Meanwhile, museum exhibits are moving into subject areas not tradition
ally considered suitable for museums, such as the controversial "Harlem
on My Mind" put on by the Metropolitan Museum of Art (Alexander 1979).
Museum Subsystems and the Environment
All of these environmental influences have had their effect on
museum organizations and their subsystems: goals and values, technical,
structural, psychosocial, and managerial. The actual goals and values
of museums have been affected more than the stated or formal goals.
The stated goals of museums in the United States have always been
democratic, primarily education for the common people, but the actual
goals and values have had more to do with the preservation of an elite
group to govern museums and of a middle class atmosphere within the
19
building. However, recent social pressures are changing these un
stated goals. Technical subsystems reflect the growing technical
sophistication of all fields in the United States, particularly in
the development of scientific principles for the conservation of
museum artifacts. The presence of the ubiquitous computer also is
being felt in the museum world. Several major museums, exemplified
by the Smithsonian Institution, have computerized their registration
systems (Alexander 1979). Structural subsystems of museums are
changing in response to the new demands of the environment. Museums
now include new departments, such as public relations and offices of
development, to handle previously ignored areas. Psychosocial subsys
tems have changed the least, although the advent of unionism among
museum workers, most notably at the Museum of Modern Art, has changed
the ways museum people relate to each other and to boards of trustees
(Raskin 1974). Managerial subsystems are gradually being affected
by current management theories, and terms such as "decision-making
systems" and "management by objectives" are being heard around
museums. Environmental influences have affected each of the sub
systems of museums, and responses to these influences are changing
museums in fundamental ways.
Responses to Environment
Social organizations do not react to environmental pressures with
an involuntary reflex. They adapt to new pressures by using a variety
of management techniques: buffering, levelling, dominating, changing
boundaries, and anticipation. Buffering consists of techniques to
standardize inputs and outputs, for example training programs for new
employees standardize personnel inputs. Levelling is attempting to
equalize quantities of inputs or outputs over a period of time, for
example by offering admission discounts during slow hours. Dominating
is attempting actively to influence the organization's environment,
by lobbying, for example. Changing boundaries avoids a problem area
altogether, and anticipation is the use of long-range planning to in
sure a consistent response by the organization to the environment
(Bell 1974). Museums use all of these adaptive techniques.
Museums, like other organizations, are part of a society, an
environment. The relationship between organization and environment
is never stable but is always changing, as the institution attempts
to respond to changes in its environment and also to influence these
changes. A successful organization develops a long-lasting, recipro
cal relationship with its environment. Museums must make use of all
management techniques available to them, in order to deal with their
rapidly changing environment.
20
CHAPTER IV
GOALS AND VALUES
The organizational subsystem most directly influenced by its
environment is that of goals and values. An organization must share
the values of its society and must fulfill goals that meet the
society's expectations. Goals and values are thus closely related,
and both should be considered from the perspectives of the society,
the organization, and the individual.
Organizational Goals and Values
According to Kast and Rosenzweig's definition, organizations are
goal-oriented. That is, they consist of a group of people who are
trying to achieve a specific purpose. The goals of an organization
represent the future conditions that it tries to reach, and the na
ture of these goals shapes the other subsystems and dictates the
organization's relationship to its environment (Kast and Rosenzweig
1979, p. 151). However,·organizations are complex systems, and their
goals usually include unwritten or operational goals as well as
formal, stated goals. One reason for this is that an organization is
made up of individuals, each with individual goals. Individual goals
do not necessarily match those of the organization and may even be
inconsistent, ambiguous, or in conflict with organizational goals.
The priorities individuals place on organizational versus personal
goals and the congruence of the two sets of goals often determine
the success of an organization. Formal goals for an organization
include making a profit for most businesses and serving the public
for nonprofit organizations. A common operational goal is sur
vival, particularly for bureaucratic organizations for which it may
be the only goal.
~1
22
The other component of this subsystem, values, is closely linked
to goals. Values are personal views of what ought to be; behaviors
and conditions that are preferred. Closely related to values are
beliefs, which are the individual expressions of what is perceived to
be true. The collective beliefs and values of a society form its
ideology. The values of an organization are difficult to define pre
cisely, but organizational values are the center of much interest in
the United States at the moment. Of particular concern are the
ethical (or nonethical) standards of businesses, government agencies,
and public organizations. Public examination of questionable goals
and values is exemplified by Watergate and can be found in daily
newspaper headlines.
The Goals of Museums
Like all organizations, museums are goal-oriented systems. Their
goals are not always formally stated but can be inferred from their
actions. The goals of museums, in general, consist of their primary
functions of collecting, conserving, researching, exhibiting, and
interpreting material objects. However, each museum places limits
on these functions according to its choice of subject matter, geo
graphical area, and time period, and different museums place differ
ent priorities on these functions, thereby,establishing a unique set
of goals.
The goals of the first museums in the United States were general
and educational. The purpose of many museums was similar to that
stated by Albert S. Bickmore, a founder and the first superintendent
of the American Museum of Natural History (AMNH). He stated that
the museum met its purpose by "affording amusement and instruction
to the public" and by "teaching our youth to appreciate the wonderful
works of the Creator." (Alexander 1979, p. 53) Morris K. Jessup,
president of the AMNH, stated the same goal in different words. In
his view, museums furnished "education, innocent amusement, and
instruction to the people." (Alexander 1979, p. 54)
However, museums subsequently have placed different priorities
upon the various functions. For history museums, Daniel Traverso,
former director of the Texas Historical Commission's Museum Services
Department, suggested this list of purposes:
1. To preserve the keys to understanding the past by collecting and conserving.
2. To bring pleasure and knowledge to people through interpretation.
3. To reinforce other aspects of community identity (1976, p. 11).
On the other hand, Lawrence Alloway, former curator of the Guggenheim
Museum and contributing editor to Arts Magazine, suggests that the
first priorities of an art museum a~e the exhibition and publication
of works of art, while conservation and research are "basically ser
vicing functions." (Alloway 1967, p. 8)
Even the traditional goal of education has changed since the
23
days of Bickmore. Educational techniques in early museums were pas
sive; they assumed an audience eager for self-education. Some museums
still believe that exposing the public to great works of art or to
the wonders of nature is sufficient instruction. However, in the
past twenty years the emphasis in education gradually has shifted to
active educational programs. Over 90 percent of the museums survey
ed by the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) in 1974 offer some
type of formal educational program, and 51 percent have increased
these activities since 1966 (NEA Museums USA 1974).
The emphasis on active education directly reflects the opinions
of museum directors in the NEA survey, as 92 percent of those survey
ed felt that providing educational experiences for the public was very
important. However, the directors also saw conserving the cultural
and/or scientific heritage (84 percent) and interpreting the past or
present to the public (78 percent) as very important (NEA Museums
USA 1974). The NEA survey of approximately 1,820 museums illustrates
the commonality of goals for museums in the United States but also
shows that different types of museums place different priorities upon
their goals.
In recent years management theorists have become increasingly
interested in the importance of formally stated goals for organizations.
24
Formal goals provide a sense of direction and purpose, help identify
interest.groups, form the basis for all planning and decision-making,
increase motivation, and provide standards for performance evaluation
(Kast and Rosenzweig 1979). As museums have been influenced by
modern management theories, they also have placed greater emphasis on
formal goal-setting. In his monograph Defining the Museumts Purpose,
Wilcomb E. Washburn (1975) discusses the necessity of specific and
concrete goals for museums in order to organize resources and to
evaluate accomplishments. According to him, museums have complacent
ly relied on inertia to survive and therefore have lost their vitali
ty. In addition, museums have devoted themselves to collecting for
its own sake; gloating like misers over their collections, with the
sole goal of accumulating artifacts. Formal goals can prevent
museums from losing sight of their larger purposes.
The American Association of Museums encourages formal goals for
museums through its accreditation program. The standards set for
museum operations include "Purposes, Plans and Future." In order to
meet these standards a museum must have a written purpose, constitu
tion, and by-laws, which are reviewed periodically. In addition,
the standards require long-range planning and continuing re-evalua
tion of programs and museum operations (Fitzgerald 1973).
The standards set by the AAM encourage goal-setting, but some
people feel that the types of goals set under the accreditation pro
gram are too vague. Washburn believes that museums must set measur
able goals in order to provide a basis for evaluation. For instance,
he suggests that a museum might set a goal of teaching a percentage
of a given type of student to be able to describe a certain type of
pottery. On a more general operational level, a museum might set a
goal of increasing a collection until it reaches a certain quantity
or quality in a specified amount of time within a given budget
(Washburn 1975). Measurable goals for museums were first studied in
the 1920s and 1930s by Edward S. Robinson (1928) and Arthur W.
Melton (1936), but there was no followup of their work until the
1970s. Dr. C. G. Screven has been working in this field, and some
of his results and conclusions were published as The Measurement
and Facilitation of Learning in the Museum Environment: An Experiment
al Analysis (1973). The findings of these researchers point toward the
benefits of measurable goals for museums but have yet to be widely
accepted by museums (Washburn 1975).
The Values of Museums
The values held by members of an organization are more difficult
to determine than organizational goals. The values found today among
museum workers are varied and changing, but there is a set of values
common to many United States museums that can be traced to their
history.
Museums were, in the beginning, creations of wealth. The collec
tions of the kings and nobility of Europe were the basis for most
European museums, and they were often housed in leftover palaces. In
the United States museums began with an idea, rather than a collec
tion. Often a group of prominent, wealthy people would decide that
their city needed a museum and would form a board of trustees to
raise money for a building and a collection. The Metropolitan Museum
of Art and the Boston Museum of Fine Arts both began this way. These
museums then followed in the tradition of their European predecessors
by erecting ornate buildings, very much like palaces. Therefore
museums have a tradition of being associated with wealth and grandeur.
The values linked with museums and their presumed wealth have
been elitist, causing museums to be equated with churches (partly
because of their nonprofit status), worthy of awe and respect (Grana
1967). Artist Ad Reinhardt stated this view when he said, "A fine
art museum is a tomb, not an amusement center, and any disturbance
of its soundlessness, timelessness, airlessness, and lifelessness is
a disrespect, and is in many places, punishable." (Alloway and
Seitz 1967, p. 12) This attitude has been encouraged by museums
insisting that their objects are things of reverence, almost sacred,
because of their age or originality. Other attitudes sometimes
associated with museums are those of a patrician proprietor "allowing"
the public entrance, the overriding importance of personal confront
ation with an object, the exhibition of priceless treasures, and the
26
significance of individual creativity. Another facet of elitist values
is based on the fact that many of the people who composed the first
museum staffs were wealthy and worked for very little, or no, salary.
According to A. E. Parr this "amateur spirit" is still present in the
museum world (1959). Museum professionals are thought to work for the
love of their field, which presumably excuses low salaries. There is
also a problem with the expectations of the public, who sometimes seem
most impressed with the glamor of dioramas and flashy exhibits of
gold and ancient treasures, thus reinforcing the view of museums as
storehouses of wealth.
Concurrent with elitist values in American museums, there also
has been a democratic tradition. Some of the first museums expressed
the democratic attitude in their emphasis on education for the people,
all of the people. Democratic values have become stronger through the
years and are reflected in many current museum practices and concerns.
Longer hours, more utilitarian buildings, accessibility, branch or
mobile museums, and cultural centers are efforts by museums to involve
all of the people.
The two sets of museum values, elitist and democratic, may be
illustrated by differences of opinions about labels in art museums.
Some in the museum world feel that art works should be identified by
only the minimum of information--artist, title, and date--so that
the encounter between viewer and work of art is strictly aesthetic
and personal. Others feel that it is necessary to provide more back
ground information about the artist, his style, and the particular
work, in order to make it easier for a visitor to understand and
appreciate the work of art (Grana 1967).
A separate issue concerning values in museums is the debate on
who should manage museums: administrators or scholars. In 1977 the
Metropolitan Museum of Art illustrated the problem when the board
appointed both a president as the top administrative officer and a
director as the top curatorial and educational officer. The choice
between an administrator and a scholar as head of a museum reflects
a division between those in museums who believe that museums must be
run in a business-like manner and those who believe that museums'
first concern must be scholarship. This difference in values will
probably continue to be present in the people who work in museums.
27
Still another issue concerning values is that of the personal and
professional ethics of museum workers. In response to the growing
controversy over appropriate guidelines, the AAM published Museum
Ethics in 1978. This report by the Committee on Ethics is a state
ment of suggested guidelines which may be applied by each individual
museum to its own situation. These guidelines provide a starting
point for organizations and individuals concerned with the ethical
basis of their profession.
The values of the museum world are often those of its elitist
past, but the democratic values which have been present in American
museums since their beginning is becoming more common as a result of
increasing professionalism and public interest. The goals of museums
also have changed from an early emphasis on education to reflect the
current variety of museums and environments. The accreditation pro
gram of the AAM encourages museums to set formal goals and, through
the self-review entailed, to become aware of their own values and
attitudes. With this knowledge, museums can establish goals and
values that are congruent with the expectations of society and their
members. In this way goals and values provide a foundation for the
management of museums.
CHAPTER V
THE TECHNICAL SUBSYSTEM
In an organization, human activities must be organized around
various technologies. In this broad sense, technology is the use of
knowledge to achieve the goals of the organization. The technical
subsystem includes the specialized knowledge and skills used by the
organization, aswell as machinery and equipment (Kast and Rosenzweig
1979). Like the other subsystems, the technical subsystem is deter
mined largely by the organization's environment, and it in turn in
fluences the remaining subsystems. Many people think only of machines
when they consider technology, but specialized knowledge and techniques
are just as important to an organization. For instance, in order to
make use of computers, it is necessary to have an appropriate computer
program.
Technology and Organizations
One common means used by management theorists to analyze an
organization is the technology it employs. Two considerations are
important: 1) whether its technology is simple or complex and
2) whether its technology is· stable or changing. These two factors
can be combined to produce a two-dimensional analysis, illustrated by
Figure 3. Organizations may fall anywhere along the continuum from a
laundromat which has a very simple, stable technology, to International
Business Machines, which uses very complex, dynamic technology.
Organizations may employ more than one level of technology. The de
partments of an organization may fall on different points of the
technology continuum (Kast and Rosenzweig 1979, p. 183). For example,
in a university the building and grounds department deals with simple,
unchanging techniques; while the research conducted by the physics
department involves highly complex, dynamic technology.
28
X <lJ
r-l 0.. e 0 u
/ Advanced Technology:
r---------------------------------------------~C~o~m~p~u~ter Company
/1 Continuous Process:
r-------------------------------------~C~h~e~m~ical Plant
/ Assembly Line:
Automobile Manufacturer ~-------~/
Small Batch Factory: r------------------C_l~o~t~h~in~g Manufacturer
Craft( Weaver
-----/~ Basic Person-Tool: Ditchdigger
<lJ
!V ' Stable Dynamic /
Figure 3. The Classification of Technologies (After Kast and Rosenzweig 1979, p. 184)
29
30
The technologies of an organization interact with its environment
and with the other subsystems of the organization. As a subsystem of
its environment, an organization uses the technical knowledge avail
able, and it develops new technology which in turn is used by the
environment (Kast and Rosenzweig 1979, p. 185). The technical sub
system strongly affects the remaining organizational subsystems. The
goals and values of an organization have a reciprocal relationship with
its technical subsystem. Without appropriate technology, many organi
zational goals would not be possible, but the goals chosen determine
the technologies utilized.
The structure of an organization relates in a complex way to its
technical subsystem. Studies have confirmed that the level of tech
nology has greatest impact on structural variables at the operational
levels of an organization, and its effect at the coordinative and
strategic levels is less certain (~ast and Rosenzweig 1979, p. 187).
For example, the technologies used by the operating level of a fac
tory, the production line, directly influence the way jobs are assign
ed and coordinated and the patterns of authority and communication.
However, at the strategic, or top management, level and at the
coordinative level, which integrates the strategic and operating
levels, the particular technologies used by the factory have little
effect on structure.
The psychosocial subsystem is greatly affected by the technolo
gies used by an organization. In general, people are expected to
adapt to the technology, rather than vice versa. Obviously, the
social aspects of work on an assembly line are quite different from
those of a university professor. The type of technology used may
determine the type of task performed, physical mobility, contacts
with other workers and supervisors, or the amount of independent
judgment allowed. This relationship is dramatically more evident
during times of technological change, when the people directly af
fected often show visible signs of insecurity and anxiety (~ast and
Rosenzweig 1979, p. 188).
The managerial subsystem is the least obviously affected, but,
nonetheless, technology's influence is pervasive. The management
31
techniques developed in the United States that made sending a man to
the moon possible have done more to revolutionize society than have
scientific-engineering changes, according to Kast and Rosenzweig (1979,
P· 191). As a form of management technology, the techniques developed
to manage large scale projects like the moon program have included new
patterns of organizational relationships in such areas as communication
and authority. Examples of specific managerial approaches to complex
projects include program or systems management and planning-programming
budgeting systems. These new techniques are a response to the complexi
ties of the technologies of modern organizations.
Thus, the technical subsystem of an organization, the tools and
techniques used, is an integral part of the organization and has a close
relationship to its environment and the other subsystems. The goals and
values and the psychosocial subsystems are directly related to the tech
nical subsystem, while the relationship to the structural and managerial
subsystems is indirect, but all of the subsystems are affected by
technology.
The Technology of Museums
At first glance it might seem that the operation of museums would
not require much in the way of technology, and no doubt, casual visitors
do not suspect the range of technology used daily in museum operations.
Museums, however, utilize a wide range of technology, both in the sense
of special knowledge and procedures and in the sense of equipment.
The technologies used in museums have developed over time as museum
operations have become more specialized and have been influenced by the
technological advancements of their environment. Techniques have been
borrowed from many fields and applied to museum problems. An example
is X-ray photography, used by museums to determine the condition and
authenticity of paintings (Alexander 1979). The technologies of museums
relate to their functions: collecting, conserving, researching, exhibit
ing, and educating.
Of these functions, the most basic is collecting. Museums by de
finition contain tangible objects, and these must be acquired in some
manner. Collecting theory constitutes a large part of the literature on
32
museums. G. Ellis Burcaw devotes one-fifth of Introduction to Museum
Work (1975) to collecting theory. Museums must have sound knowledge of
collecting theory in order to function effectively. Collecting theory
includes such topics as how objects are acquired, how to evaluate the
appropriateness of objects for the museum, how to transfer ownership
from donor to museum, and how to document museum collections. The
technologies of collecting can be seen most clearly in the processes
of analyzing and documenting objects.
Analyzing possible acquisitions for condition and authenticity is
an area of great interest for museums, and many new techniques are being
used. The suitability of an object for the collection must be determined
by its 1) known individual history, 2) physical condition and character,
and 3) historic associations (Guthe 1969, p. 27). The physical condition
and authenticity of objects can be analyzed with scientific techniques.
Processes such as X-ray photography, ultraviolet and infrared photography,
X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy, and carbon 14 and thermoluminescence
dating are recent additions to methods of determining the physical nature
of an object (Alexander 1979, p. 128).
Another area of importance in the process of museum collecting is
the accurate documentation of all of its objects. Museum Registration
Methods (Dudley and Wilkinson 1980) is a detailed reference on this sub
ject, covering such topics as receiving objects, setting up a complete
documentation system, and suitability of materials for permanently marking
various types of objects. These techniques contribute to the technology
of documenting museum objects. Another technological tool becoming
important to museums is the computer. Four articles in Museum Registra
tion Methods are devoted to the use of computers in documentation. One
of the most pervasive of modern inventions, the computer gradually is
being incorporated into museum operations. Its most common use is the
storage of information about the collection. The Museum of Modern Arts
has put its entire art collection records in computer storage, and the
National Museum of Natural History has computerized the information on
the 500,000 specimens in its crustacean collection (Alexander 1979,
p. 130). Museum Cataloging in the Computer Age (Chenhall 1975) explores
the subject in greater detail.
33
Once an object has been acquired for a museum's collection, the
technologies of conservation become necessary. Museums have always
collected tangible objects, and yet only in this century has progress
been made in the use of scientific techniques for conservation
(Alexander 1979). Conservation includes techniques and tools to provide
proper care for any object and also includes techniques for the repair
or restoration of damaged objects. For instance, it has been found that
many factors in the physical environment of museums may adversely affect
objects. Technology enables temperature, humidity, atmospheric pollu-•
tion, and light to be controlled carefully at optimum levels. Objects
must also be protected from insects, theft, breakage, fire, andwater
(Alexander 1979, pp. 143-144). In addition to basic care, many special
ized techniques for the repair or restoration of aged or damaged articles
have been developed. Conservation techniques are explained in detail in
The Conservation of Antiquities and Works of Art by H. J. Plenderleith
and A. E. A. Werner (1971). The authors divide materials into three
basic types: organic materials in~luding leather, paper, wood, and
bone; metals including gold, silver, tin, copper, and iron; and sili
ceous materials including stone, ceramics, and glass. An example of the
specialized repair techniques described by Plenderleith and Werner is
found in the section on wood (1971, p. 138). A common problem with
wooden objects is extensive damage caused by fungi or insects which
weakens the structure. One type of consolidation of the wood that may
be used is impregnation of the object with an epoxy resin which pene
trates the structure and solidifies. The highly specialized technology
of conservation demands expert knowledge, and the conservator is one of
the most respected of museum professionals.
Research is another function of museums. The technologies of re
search include the types of research done by museums and the techniques
utilized. Research methods used by museum professionals are similar to
those of other researchers, but within museums research concentrates
either upon artifacts in the collection or upon its audience. The most
common type of museum research can be called programmatic or applied
research. This is the basic research performed on each object in the
collection and deals with its physical nature, history, and significance
34
(Alexander 1979, p. 159). The other type of museum research which con
centrates upon the collection might be called general research, which
increases knowledge about a class of artifacts. Most common in natural
history museums where research on large collections results in advances
in systematics or taxonomy, general research also is found in history and
art museums. Audience research is conducted because of museums' interest
in determining the effectiveness of their exhibits and programs. Early
audience research was conducted in the 1920s by the psychologist Edward
S. Robinson, who performed classic time-and-motion studies on museum
visitors. More recently, demographic and attitude surveys of visitors
have become common (Alexander 1979, pp. 165-169). Thus research is a
technology that enables museums to learn more about its artifacts and
audience.
Exhibition design is a complex field, and it utilizes many kinds of
technology. Techniques and tools come from such diverse areas as
graphics, visual design, photography, electronic media, and educational
and communication theory. Herbert Bayer states, "It becomes [the] inte
grated use of graphics with architectural structure, of advertising
psychology with space concepts, of light and color with motion and
sound." (1961, p. 258) Modern exhibit design has been influenced by
displays at world's fairs and department stores, by modern art and
architecture, and by techniques used in trade fairs and amusement parks
(Alexander 1979, p. 175). The purpose of exhibitions is the effective
communication of a message or idea or point-of-view to the visitor.
An exhibit may use a variety of techniques including the graphic arts,
collection objects, audio-visuals, and lighting to communicate with the
visitor. A reference for exhibition technology is Communicating with
the Museum Visitor by the Royal Ontario Museum (1976). This book pre
sents a methodology for developing a comprehensive exhibit program.
Education is a fundamental museum function. Museums collect,
conserve, research, and exhibit so that artifacts may be used to in
crease knowledge and understanding. Educational programs in museums
use technologies from fields including psychology, sociology, communi
cation theory, and education theory. These programs use a variety of
formats: self-guided or conducted tours, "living" exhibits, lectures,
35
conferences, publications, films, and television (Alexander 1979, pp.
196-207). In addition to techniques gathered from many sources, educa
tional programs use many recently invented machines. Technological
innovations are evident in self-guided tours where a person may carry
a tape recorder or radio receiver to hear the tour, may push a button
at an exhibit to hear its "talking label," or may hear a lecture simply
by coming within broadcast range of a particular exhibit (Alexander
1979' p. 197).
From this overview of the technologies of museums, it can be seen •
that museums fall into the top half of the technology continuum. (See
Figure 3, p. 29) The technologies of museums are complex and changing.
Large museums in urban centers which are often in the forefront of
innovative technology will lie higher on the line than smaller, commun
ity museums with simpler, more stable procedures. In addition,
different museum departments will fall at different points. For instance,
the maintenance department uses simple, stable technology, while the
security division's technology is more complex and somewhat dynamic. The
technology used by the exhibits department is still more complex and
may change rapidly. The effective management of museums depends upon
understanding the complex, dynamic technologies utilized. In addition,
each museum's technical subsystem must be understood by its administrator
in order to provide a basis for effective management of the organization.
CHAPTER IV
THE STRUCTURAL SUBSYSTEM
The structure of an organization is analogous to the skeleton of a
human body; it determines shape and supports the organism. Organiza
tional structure, however, is difficult to describe precisely, because
it is not a physical object like a skeleton but must be inferred from
th~ operation and behavior of an organization. Kast and Rosenzweig
define structure as "the established pattern of relationship among the
components or parts of the organization." (1979, p. 198)
Organizational Structure
There are two ways of analyzing the patterns of relationships that
make up an organization's structural subsystem. One is by analyzing
the structural levels of an organization: strategic, coordinative,
and operative. The strategic level of an organization is concerned
with long-range planning and interacts continually with the environ
ment. The coordinative level translates the plans of the strategic
level into specific goals for the operative level and oversees their
implementation. The operative level, where production of goods or
services actually occurs, is concerned with short-term objectives and
has very limited contact with the environment (Kast and Rosenzweig
1979), In large organizations these levels are identifiable with top
management, middle management, and production management.
Another basis of analyzing the structural subsystem of an organi
zation is by its characteristics. The five main components of struc
ture are:
1. An organization chart and job descriptions--the formal
pattern of relationships of positions and duties
36
2. An authority system--the relationships of power, status, and
responsibility
37
3. Horizontal differentiation--the division of tasks and assign
ments to portions of the organization
4. Integration--the coordination of separate components and
activities
5. An administrative system--the formal policies, procedures,
and controls.
Understanding the particular type of each of these characteristics pre-•
sent in an organization enables a manager to function more effectively
(Kast and Rosenzweig 1979).
Although the structure of museums is determined to a great extent
by their varying sizes, museums' structural subsystems consist of the
levels and characteristics explained above. The particular form that
the structure of museums has taken was influenced by the classical
management theory popular in the United States during the nineteenth
century, when many museums were founded: Museums' structure also re
flects the unique characteristics of museums.
Museum Structural Levels
Museums' structures can be divided into three levels: strategic,
coordinating, and operating. The strategic level of museums consists of
the governing board, usually a board of trustees. Carl E. Guthe in The
Management of Small History Museums lists several characteristics of
museum boards that illustrate their strategic functions. They are
"legally responsible for the organization, its activities, and its
commitments;" they "are responsible, as trustees for the people, for
the museum's economic stability, good name, and management policies;"
and, "The museum board is a legislative and policy forming board, not an
administrative one." (1969, pp. 16-17) Some museums are part of a larger
organization such as a university or a state museum system, in which
cases the legal authority rests with the governing authority of the
parent institution. The coordinating level is the director or admin
istrator of the museum. According to G. Ellis Burcaw in Introduction
to Museum Work, "The director is the chief administrative officer of a
38
museum; it is he who hires and fires and is in direct charge of the
operation." (1975, p. 39) The operating level consists of the collec
tions and all tasks directly involved with the acquisition, care, ex
hibition, and interpretation of the objects. The people who compose
this level are the curators, or keepers, and their technical assistants
of whom Douglas A. Allan said, "At rock bottom, the spiritual power and
the active performance of every museum depends upon the curator." (1974,
p. 54) These three components--curators, director, and board--form the
"line" management of a museum, which holds direct authority over opera
tions.
Museum Structural Characteristics
Organization Charts and Job Descriptions
Like the structure of other organizations, museums' structural
subsystems can be analyzed by their characteristics. The primary ele
ment of structural subsystems is an organization chart and the related
job descriptions. These form the basic framework of an organization.
Not all museums have formal, written organization charts and job des
criptions, but, as it is required by AAM accreditation standards, they
are becoming more common. Two organization charts for museums of dif
ferent sizes are shown in Figures 4 and 5. Size is an important factor
in the structure of an organization, and this is clearly shown in the
charts, as small museums have much simpler structure than large ones.
In addition, it is evident that museums are horizontal organizations
rather than vertical ones; the layers of relationships are shallow but
broad. Museums structures as illustrated reflect reliance on the con
cepts of a scalar chain of superior-subordinate relationships and on
the use of span of control. Scalar chain refers to the vertical flow of
authority and responsibility in a direct line from superior to subor
dinate, and span of control is having several subordinates in direct
relationship with a superior (Kast and Rosenzweig 1979). In museums
the span of control tends to be fairly broad, reflecting the relatively
small size of most museums and the desire of museum directors to
retain direct, personal contact with as much of the organization as
possible.
Boa
rd o
f T
rust
ees
Dir
ecto
r/C
ura
tor
of
His
tory
I I
1 S
ecre
tary
/Reg
istr
ar
Cu
rato
r o
f A
rt
Su
per
vis
or
of
Ex
hib
its
~~-
--
~-
---
~
Fig
ure
4
. O
rgan
izati
on
al
Str
uctu
re i
n a
S
mal
l M
useu
m
I H
andy
man
/ Jan
ito
r l
--~-
~--
~ --
~-~-----
---
. ·~~____j
VJ
\0
I A
dm
inis
trati
ve
Ass
ista
nt
~
G)
rcj~
en
c: en
IU
ro 1-
1· 1-
1· .,
t1 ~
en 0.
. en
rt
rt
en o
ro IU
~ ~
~
en IU
rt
~
(") ro
I C
ura
tor
of
Art
~
~
en U
l U
l en
1-1•
1-1•
Ul
Ul
rt
rt
IU
IU
::l
~
rt
rt
[Bo
ard
o
f T
rust
eesl
fDir
ecto
r
:secre
tary
J
;Pu
bli
c R
ela
tio
ns
I I
Su
perv
iso
r o
f S
up
erv
iso
r o
f S
up
erv
iso
r o
f E
du
cati
on
E
xh
ibit
s B
uil
din
g M
ain
ten
ance
(/)
t-3
~
~
t-3
rcj
::r:
(J
ro t-
OO
en
t.:l
ti
ro ::r
' IU
IU
("
) .,
c: en
ro rt
(")
0 ~
., .,
0 t1
t-J
• en
1-1·
::r'
rt
0..
'd
ro OQ
en
Ul
1-1·
Ul
~
0 ~
ro rt
t1
rt
OQ
rt
1-1·
OQ
~
IU
IU
Ill
IU
~
....
....
...
(")
t1
IU
rt
., 1j
::l
::s
ro 1-1
• Ill
~
ro '-<
! en
o..
rt
t1
IU
'd
t1
::l
::r'
ro t1
I I
1 I
Cu
rato
r o
f C
ura
tor
of
Cu
rato
r o
f D
irecto
r o
f H
isto
ry
Cos
tum
es
and
T
ex
tile
s N
atu
ral
Sci
ence
s P
lan
eta
riu
m
~
~
~
p.
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
t;l
~
en U
l U
l en
en U
l en
Ul
en en
en 0
Ul
Ul
en U
l en
Ul
Ul
Ul
Ul
Ul
Ul
Ul
(")
Ul
1-1•
1-1·
1-1•
1-1·
1-1·
1-1•
1-1·
1-1•
t-J•
1-l·
t-J·
ro 1-
l• U
l U
l U
l U
l U
l en
Ul
Ul
Ul
Ul
en ::l
(/
)
rt
rt
rt
rt
rt
rt
rt
rt
rt
rt
rt
rt
rt
IU
lUI
IU
IU
IU
IU
IU
IU
IU
Ill
IU
Ul
IU
::l
::>
~
~
~
~
~
::l
~
~
~
::l
rt
rt
rt
rt
rt
rt
rt
rt
rt
rt
rt
rt
Fig
ure
5
. O
rgan
izati
on
al
Str
uctu
re in
a
Lar
ge
Mus
eum
~
0
41
Directly related to organization charts in the structure are job
descriptions. Museums have traditionally been weak in this area. A
person may be employed to direct a museum with no clear cut listing of
duties and responsibilities; and the same is true for personnel at all
levels. With the influence of modern management and organization theory
on museum administration practices, definitive job descriptions are more
common. This is encouraged by AAM accreditation standards which require
that the staff "have a clear understanding of their respective jobs."
(Fitzgerald 1973, p. 72)
Authority Systems
An authority system is the vertical differentiation of an organiza
tion: the division of power, authority, and responsibility among the
parts of an organization (Kast and Rosenzweig 1979). ~useums have fol
lowed classical management ideas of a scalar, centralized hierarchy. As
can be seen from the organization charts (Figures 4 and 5) , the top
authority is the board of trustees, upon whom falls the final responsi
bility for the museum. Immediately below the board is the director. All
responsibility and authority for day to day operations are delegated to
him by the board. The director in turn delegates limited authority and
responsibility to his subordinates. Although increased emphasis on a
formal structure has reduced the tendency, authority in museums often is
based on personality. Previously, directors controlled their institu
tions as much by prestige and personality as by positional power, and,
while directors rely more on formal authority now, authority among peers,
for instance curators, depends greatly on personal qualities.
Authority also can be divided into line and staff authority. The
line management of an organization has direct authority over its opera
tions. In museums this would include the board of trustees, director,
and curators of collections, education, and interpretation. Staff
authority is held by the specialists connected to an organization who
act in an advisory capacity. In museums staff specialities include
public relations and fund-raising. A unique element in the structure of
museums is the large number of volunteers. These people may appear
42
anywhere in the line or staff but are most often utilized as volunteer
teachers called docents.
Horizontal Differentiation
Horizontal differentiation within an organization is called depart
mentalization and refers to the division of activities among personnel.
This differentiation usually occurs on the basis of function, location,
or product (Kast and Rosenzweig 1979). Museums primarily use differen
tiation by function, although a few that have separate branches or sub
divisions, for example the Smithsonian Institution, operate on geographi
cal or locational differentiation. Departmentalization in two typical
museums is illustrated in Figure 6. The departmentalization shown is
based on function and shows how assignments of the various functions
might be made in museums with a staff of three or ten persons. The ap
plication of traditional management theory can be seen here. However,
in museums specialization and division of labor are rarely carried as
far as they are in industry. In museums division is often based on
subject area, for instance a Department of History, but within that
broad area the personnel may perform a variety of tasks, such as basic
conservation, cataloging, research, and developing proper storage.
Integration
Logical as functional division appears to be, it can lead to prob
lems of coordination, or integration, of the various departments.
Division into departments can lead to each one working toward its own
goals and ignoring the others. It is necessary to develop unity of
purpose among them, and museums turn to classical management theory,
relying on centralized authority and the administrative system to provide
coordination. Because most museums are relatively small organizations,
these methods usually are successful. Some museums also use a voluntary
form of integration which relies on individuals being aware of organi
zational goals and problems and feeling a commonality of purpose. To
encourage this type of voluntary coordination, good communication is
essential. Museums attempting to improve communication are making use
Three Person Museum
Director--------~
Secretary/ -----1
Assistant
•
Ten Person Museum
Director/Curator and Secretary
Curator
Registrar
Education Officer _
Two Technicians------~
Conservator ______________ ~
Guard--------------~~
Figure 6. Museum Departmentalization
Functions
Administration
Finances
Collecting
Research
Exhibit Design
Public Relations
Registration
Photography
Education
Publications
Extension
Guiding
Library
Sales
Information/ Reception
~3
Display Production
Restoration/ Conservation
Security
44
of devices such as staff newsletters. Another form of integration is
facilitated, which is characterized by the use of cross-departmental
committees and work groups. This form is becoming common in museums,
as illustrated by the project terms for exhibit planning and design
suggested in Communicating with the Museum Visitor (Royal Ontario
Museum 1976). These groups greatly increase the members' feelings of
"esprit de corps" and weakens the perennial attitude of "us versus them"
within the organization.
Administrative Systems
One of the traditional methods of coordination is the administrative
system: the procedures, rules, and regulations designed to direct the
flow of work and direct personnel. Although it has always been a part of
the structure of museums, a more explicit concern with formal policies
and regulations has been evident during recent years. There is an in
creased emphasis on the importance of written policies to cover museum
functions. General policies are encouraged by the AAM accreditation
standards, and the regulations covering routine activities are also under
study. There is a growing attempt to develop recommendations for proce
dures applicable to all museums, for example Personnel Policies for
Museums: A Handbook for Management (Miller 1979). This manual is in
tended to help standardize museum personnel practices, one of the main
components of an administrative system.
Structure, Environment, and the Other Subsystems
As stated above, structure does not exist in isolation. It is only
one of the subsystems of a museum and is affected both by the other sub
systems of a museum and by the environment of a museum. The environ
ment in particular has had a greater effect on museums in recent years,
as their purpose increasingly is seen as the production of services
for the public. Issues such as accountability to the public and
accessibility for handicapped visitors have changed the structure of
museums, most often by the formation of new departments to handle
them.
45
Each of the remaining subsystems also affects the structural sub
system. The goals and values of museums vary according to structural
level. The strategic level develops long-term goals and the general
policies of museums. The coordinative level is responsible for develop
ing specific objectives from the policies and strategic goals. The
operating level is concerned with fulfilling short-term objectives. The
values of museums may vary from level to level, also. The board of
trustees may value the prestigious publication program above all other
programs, while the curators may be primarily concerned with the preser-•
vation of the collection. Museum structural subsystems also reflect the
technologies they use. Departments of registration and conservation re
veal new technologies within museum organizations. The psychosocial
subsystem greatly affects the structure. Early staff members were often
wealthy amateurs, and the structure they worked within was a loose, in
formal arrangement. As more professionals have entered the field, how
ever, the structure has become more formalized, although the original
horizontal form has been retained. The managerial subsystem is inter
twined with the structure of a museum, and planning, organizing, and con
trolling are made possible by its characteristics.
The contingency approach recognizes that organizational structures
vary according to their interactions with the environment and other
subsystems of the organization. The patterns of relationships that
constitute the structures of museums are products of the influences of
the other subsystems, the environment, and the history of museums.
Improved understanding of the structural subsystem of museums should
enable museum administrators to manage their organizations more
effectively.
CHAPTER VII
THE PSYCHOSOCIAL SUBSYSTEM
The psychosocial subsystem is an intrinsic part of any organiza
tion, but it is perhaps the most difficult of all of the subsystems
to understand. It consists of the social relationships of the indivi
dual members of the organization and for this reason is difficult to
define precisely. The social relationships include those among members
of work groups, those between a person and his or her supervisor, and
those between supervisors and their subordinates. Social relationships
are based upon individual behavior, and the psychosocial subsystem is
based on the behaviors involved in authority, leadership, motivation,
and roles. Together these components determine the human climate of
the organization (Kast and Rosenzweig 1979). The climate is very dif
ferent in different organizations. Working for a university does not
feel the same as working for Texas Instruments or for a museum. The
contingency approach to management provides an analysis of the psycho
social subsystem in order to mesh its characteristics with those of the
environment and the other subsystems.
Authority
Authority is the basis of many social relationships in an organiza
tion and is one form of social power. Other types of social power also
are utilized in organizational relationships, but authority is the for
mal basis of power accepted by all members. Authority has many aspects,
and theorists such as Max Weber and Chester I. Barnard have produced
analyses of its definitions, sources, and forms. Authority must be
understood in order to manage museums, as well as other organizations.
Authority is defined by Katz and Kahn as
... legitimate power, power which is vested in a particular person or position, which is recognized as so vested, and which is accepted as appropriate not only
46
by the wielder of power, but by those over whom it is wielded and by the other members of the system (1966, p. 203).
47
A more recent definition, given by Stephen P. Robbins, is "authority as
the right to act, or command others to act, toward the attainment of
organizational goals." (1980, p. 223) There are several important
concepts in these definitions. One is legitimacy, or the right to act:
organizational authority accepted by all members of the system. An
other is that organizational authority belongs to the position, not to
the person. Anyone assuming a position assumes the authority that
does with it. Finally, the definitions point out that in an organiza
tion, authority is the means of assuring compliance from all members
(Robbins 1980).
The early theorists of authority, such as Max Weber and Henri
Fayol, visualized authority as developing at the top of an organization
and moving downward (Robbins 1980). For instance, United States Navy
officers derive their authority from the Chief of Naval Operations,
who derives his from the President, who derives his from the Constitu
tion of the United States. A contrasting theory, known as the accept
ance theory, was suggested primarily by Chester I. Barnard and Herbert
A. Simon (Kast and Rosenzweig 1979). They suggest that authority is
granted from below, that is a subordinate has the choice of accepting
or rejecting authority. Acceptance theory views subordinates as having
a "zone of tolerance." A directive that falls within this zone will be
accepted; a directive that falls outside of it will be rejected. The
zone of tolerance depends upon a person's judgment of whether the bene
fits of acceptance outweigh any costs involved. It may be either rela
tively broad or narrow, depending upon the superior. This theory im
plies that authority that is not accepted by subordinates does not
exist, and that Weber's theory of descending authority is not a suffi
cient explanation for effective management of an organization (Robbins
1980).
Authority stems from three sources: personal or charismatic auth
ority, traditional authority, and rational-legal authority (Kast and
Rosenzweig 1979). All are found in organizations, and all three may be
~8
found in one person. A shop foreman may have authority based on per
sonal traits, intelligence or strength; for traditional reasons, the
foreman in that job has "always" had more authority than the others;
and for rational reasons, the rules of the organization assign authori
ty to him. Analyzing the source of authority leads to more effective
use of it.
An organization utilizes many forms of authority. For instance,
line and staff management are associated with different types of
authority. (See Chapter V.) Line authority is related to the direct
achievement of organizational goals, while staff authority is limited
to advising, serving, or evaluating line operations. In addition, some
organizations utilize functional authority: authority over someone not
in the direct area of command (Robbins 1980). An example is the authori
ty which security officers have over other members of the organization
in security matters. Understanding the forms of authority can lead to
more effective management.
Authority and power are closely related concepts. Authority is
defined as legitimate power: power accepted by all members of the
system. Power is defined as the ability to influence the behavior of
someone else. Five types of social power have been identified: legiti
mate, coercive, reward, expert, and referent power (French and Raven,
cited in Robbins 1980, p. 241). All are found in organizations.
Legitimate power, or authority, has been discussed above. Coer
cive power is based on fear of punishments or sanctions: the fear of
being fined, demoted, fired, embarrassed, spanked, or killed is an ex
ample of coercive power. Reward power is the opposite of coercive
power. It is the power to distribute benefits, such as money, pro
motions, friendship, praise, or anything valued by the receiver. Ex
pert power is based upon expertise, special skills, or knowledge;
as the saying has it, "Knowledge is power." Referent power is based on
admiration for another person. If Jackson admires Brown to the point
of modeling his or her behavior upon Brown's, then Brown possesses
referent power over Jackson (Robbins 1980). Referent power is often
demonstrated by the mentor relationship in business, when a young exe
cutive who is anxious to advance selects a senior executive to emulate.
49
These five forms of power are not mutually exclusive; they often
overlap. Legitimate power positions usually include the other types
of power, for example a manager has the power to promote or discipline
subordinates. In addition, people in positions of authority may ac
quire power independently of their legitimate power. For instance,
the manager's option to act in a friendly manner to a subordinate is
reward power that is independent of his or her position (Robbins 1980).
Effective management of museums must include an understanding of
power and authority. The structure of most museums relies upon the
descent of authority from the top, and there has been little considera
tion of the acceptance theory of authority. Grace Glueck supports
this view of museum psychosocial systems and calls the board of trus
tees, "the seat of all authority." (1972, p. 119)
The various sources and forms of authority are utilized in museums.
Museum managers have authority for personal, traditional, and rational
reasons; and line, staff, and functional forms of authority are used.
Line authority is vested in the board of trustees, the director, and
the curators. Fund-raising and public relations specialists have
staff authority. Finally, functional authority may be held by the
personnel manager or the supervisor of security.
The five types of social power also are found in museums. Legi
timate power is, of course, found in the formal authority system. Co
ercive and reward power are part of the authority system and also are
used independently. Expert power is very common in museums, as many
specialists claim power based on their knowledge of furniture or educa
tion theory or on their skills in conservation or exhibit design. Re
ferent power also exists in museums, as illustrated by the apprentice
carpenter who admires and emulates the master carpenter. Any form of
power carries with it the possibility of abuse, and formalized proce
dures for the use of authority in museums are being developed to pre
vent misuse (Miller 1979a).
The use of power and authority must be understood by any manager,
and those who manage museums are no exception. Museums can be managed
more effectively by the proper use of the sources and forms of power
and authority. This is only one aspect of the psychosocial subsystem
that must be matched to the complete organization system.
50
Leadership
Leadership is the human component of authority. Authority is
power associated with an organizational position, whereas leadership
is the individual's ability to influence others, whether in a position
of authority or not. Leadership is an issue of perennial concern in
the United States, witnessed by Presidential campaigns wherein candi
dates endeavor to outdo each other in claims of leadership ability.
From the literature of leadership, three analytical approaches emerge:
the traits, behavior, and contingency theories (Robbins 1980, p. 319).
Some of the first efforts at defining leadership concentrated on
the "great person" theory and attempted to isolate the personal traits
of outstanding leaders such as Alexander, Napoleon, Joan of Arc, and
Churchill. The characteristics that emerged as desirable include in
telligence, strength, courage, morality, sense of purpose, and enthus
iasm. The sum of these traits, however, is not enough to explain the
success of all great leaders, for example traits cannot explain the
leadership of frail Mahatma Gandhi or of immoral Mussolini.
Another approach concentrates on the behavior of leaders, and
three distinct styles are defined. In the authoritarian, or auto
cratic, style the leader makes all decisions, informs subordinates
as needed, assigns tasks, and closely supervises performance. In the
democratic style the leader shares decision-making with subordinates,
keeps them fully informed, allows them to decide on methods and divi
sion of tasks, and supervises as "one of the group." The laissez-faire
style is basically non-leadership, in that the leader presents the prob
lem and will supply materials and information if requested but never
actively participates. Both the authoritarian and the democratic
styles of leadership seem to be effective, but neither is effective in
every situation. The laissez-faire style seems to be rarely, if ever,
effective (Kast and Rosenzweig 1979).
The contingency approach to leadership attempts to recognize both
the trait and behavior theories and to put them into a relationship
with situational variables. In other words, what type of leader using
which style will be successful in what situations? Some of the situa
tional variables to be considered are the values and traditions in the
51
organization, the nature of the problem, and the time limits. The sub
ordinates should also be considered in terms of their interest in the
project, their adherence to organizational goals, their willingness to
share decision-making, their knowledge and experience, and their ex
pectations (Kast and Rosenzweig 1979). In this approach there is no
one best way to lead. Leadership style is seen as a continuum from
authoritarian to democratic, and a leader may use many different styles,
depending upon the situation. It is important for leaders to recognize
the complexities involved, to be aware of their own leadership prefer
ences, and to adjust their style to the situation, if possible.
There has been little consideration of leadership in museums in
the literature, and most of the discussion has centered on the traits
desirable for directors. The director is definitely seen as the leader
of the museum; according to the AAM, "The director provides conceptual
leadership." (AAM, "Museum Positions: Duties and Responsibilities"
1978b, p. 25) Supporting this view is Richard E. Brown, director of
the-Kimbell Art Museum, who states, "The most important aspect of a
director's position is leadership." (Kadis 1977, p. 49) Many museums
have been said to assume the character of a particularly long-lasting
director. There are several lists of desirable traits for museum
directors available. One of the most recent was given by Alan Shestack
in 1978. His list includes scholarly, knowledgeable, well-read, cul
tured, and self-confident (p. 30).
As for leadership behavior, museum directors in general have an
authoritarian style, although a few may be almost laissez-faire. Ronald
Eghermann in "The Museum as Employer" advocates a more democratic ap
proach and suggests that employees should participate more fully in
decision-making (Conger, et. al. 1979, p. 27).
Becoming familiar with the theories of leadership would enable
those in museum leadership positions to manage more effectively. Dif
ferent situations call for different styles of leaderhsip, and museum
managers must fit their leadership styles to the psychosocial sub
systems, to the remaining museum subsystems, and to the environments.
52
Motivation
One of the most challenging problems in dealing with people in an
organization is motivation. How can their willingness to perform their
jobs be assured? Motivation involves needs, goals, and a desire to act.
An individual must perceive a need, relate that need to a goal, and
then desire to act in a manner leading to that goal.
The needs behind motivations have been the subject of much study.
The best known theory was proposed by Abraham Maslow (cited in Robbins
1980, p. 295). He proposed a hierarchy of five needs, generally pic
tured as a pyramid. From the bottom up these needs are physiological-
hunger and thirst; safety needs--security from harm; social--friend
ship and affection from others; esteem--respect from others; and self
actualization--self-development and fulfillment. The lower needs, phy
siological and safety, are dominant over the higher needs, according to
the theory, and must be substantially satisfied before the higher needs
can act as motivators. Logical as Maslow's theory seemst there is
little empirical support for it. Several studies that have tried to
validate the theory found no support for it (Robbins 1980).
A similar theory was presented by Frederick Herzberg (cited in
Kast and Rosenzweig 1979, p. 249) and is known as the Motivation-Hygiene
Theory. Herzberg proposed two distinct sets of factors that relate to
motivation. One set contains demotivators and relates primarily to job
dissatisfaction, while the other set consists of motivators and relates
to job satisfaction. Herzberg called the first set hygiene factors,
which includes company policy and administration, salary, and working
conditions. The second set he called motivators, and they include
achievement, recognition, responsibility, and advancement. The
Motivation-Hygiene Theory seems to have some empirical support from
experiments done by Herzberg (Kast and Rosenzweig 1979).
Another theory has been proposed by David McClelland (cited in
Robbins 1980, p. 297). McClelland suggests that three major needs
exist in an organizational setting: achievement, affiliation, and
power. According to his theory, people tend to be motivated primarily
by one of these needs, and managers can more effectively deal with peo
ple by recognizing which motivational factor is strongest in each
•
53
individual. In addition, it seems possible to teach achievement attri
butes which can improve work performance (Robbins.l980).
Each of these theories offers insight into the motivation of
workers, but none of them seem to completely explain individual moti
vation. The contingency view, known as expectancy theory, integrates
the theories and puts them into a situational context in order to ex
plain motivation. Expectancy theory is based on three variables: ef
fort, performance, and satisfaction. A person is motivated to exert
effort if it is expected that there is a reasonable probability that
the effort will lead to reasonable performance toward reaching a goal,
and on the expectancy that this goal will lead to desired rewards
which will cause satisfaction (Kast and Rosenzweig 1979). Figure 7
presents this theory more clearly.
Effort Performance Satisfaction
Figure 7. Expectancy Theory
Motivation in museums has been considered mainly in relation to
volunteers, for example in The Effective Management of Volunteer Pro
grams (Wilson 1976). In the area of professional staff, it had long
been assumed that they work because of their love of their jobs. Re
cently, ·however, museum staffs have begun demanding adequate material
rewards for museum work, infue form of salary. In a recent article in
Museum News, all three participants in the discussion, John Conger,
Ronald Eghermann, and Gail Mallard, mentioned appropriate compensation
as a major concern for museum personnel (1979).
Motivation is a part of the psychosocial subsystem that all man
agers must understand, and expectancy theory could be a valuable tool
for the managers of museums. By understanding the needs, goals, and
desires of their subordinates, museum managers can provide the proper
incentives for motivation and can insure more effective management of
their institutions.
Roles
Organizations attempt to limit the variety of behavior that they
confront and to direct all actions toward organizational goals. One
54
way that this is done is through the role system. A role is the set
of behavior associated with a particular position in an organization.
The behavior is linked to the position, not the person, and any person
occupying the position is expected by other members of the organization
to display appropriate behavior. In this way, roles limit the range of
expression of individuals (Kast and Rosenzweig 1979). Katz and Kahn
point out that roles create the structure of an organization by their
functional interdependence. "The network of standardized role behav-.
iors constitutes the formal structure of an organization." (1966, •
p. 49) In this light, a manager is someone whose role consists of
overseeing the role behavior of other position occupants.
Roles are much discussed in museum journals these days. There
seems to be a general impression that the roles of museum personnel
are changing, but there is no agreement about how they are changing.
These changes have been caused by many factors, such as the financial
squeeze, growing public demand for accountability, and the professional
ization of the field. Three museum positions which have elicited much
discussion about roles are those of trustee, director, and curator.
The board of trustees is the legal foundation of a museum. The
board is collectively responsible for the legality of a museum and
oversees the operation for the benefit of the public interest. There
is general agreement upon what the role of board members should be.
Guthe says,
They are on the board to contribute their knowledge and wisdom to the discussion and formulation of wise and practical policies controlling the museum's destinies (1969, p. 17).
Helmuth J. Naumer agrees that the responsibility of the board is to
establish policy; however, his book, Of Mutual Respect and Other
Things (1977), was written because of confusion about the proper role
of trustees. Many museums were founded by wealthy and/or civic minded
individuals who then formed the board of trustees. These founders often
have a proprietary attitude toward "their" museum and may use it to
further their own collecting or social interests. Naumer cites cases
of misuse of power including one in which a board president requested
that a life-sized photograph of himself and the President of the United
55
States shaking hands be displayed in the rotunda of the museum (1977,
P· 17). Naumer also points out that the responsibilities of the board
include understanding "the purposes, programs, and priorities of the
museum." (1977, p. 11) This is a legal obligation as well as a moral
one. In the current court case, a state attorney general is suing a
museum board of trustees, because they were not informed about the
activities of their museum and therefore did not prevent the abuse and
misuse of its collections (Failing 1977). The role of the board member
as a contributor of time and knowledge for the benefit of museum policy
seems clearcut, but an effort must be made by all concerned to see
that this role is fulfilled.
The director is the operational head of the museum. To him the
board of trustees delegates all authority and responsibility for the
daily operation of the museum, and his role is largely determined by
the board. Naumer includes among the director's responsibilities:
initiating and overseeing exhibitions and programs, expenditures, ac
quisitions, and hiring and firing all personnel (1977, pp. 14-15).
These are the duties of many managers. However, the role of museum
directors is seen by many people to go far beyond its managerial as
pects. In an article in Museum News, AlanShestack observes that the
director of an art museum must possess many attributes. He must be an
... art historian and connoisseur, business person and fundraiser, diplomat, politician, lobbyist, personnel manager, publisher, architectural consultant, restaurateur, educator, after-dinner speaker and ... resident psychoanalyst (1978, p. 27).
In the midst of the current pressures affecting museums, the director
acts as the mediator between conflicting interests. He or she must
balance the private interests of the trustees against the public's
interest, the emphasis on exhibitions and programs against research and
conservation needs, and relevance against aesthetic standards (Shestack
1978).
One major controversy in the museum field now is whether the
director's role should be that of a scholar or administrator. Shestack
strongly supports scholarship: "Museum decisions are ultimately deci
sions about quality, ... and managerial decisions should always be in
the service of quality programs." (1978, p. 89) Some museum boards
seem to disagree, however, as they have hired business people either
56
to administer museums or to share administration duties with a director
of curatorial affairs (Kadis 1977). To a certain extent there will
always be debate about the precise nature of the director's role. To
be successful, a director must learn as much as possible about the
role expected of him or her in a particular museum.
At the heart of museum operations are the curators. It is the
curators who are directly in charge of the collections of the museum
and of the people who work with collection objects. Curators are ex
pected to be scholars, experts in their field whether it is Early
American furniture or Modern Art. It is the curator's judgment which
forms the basis for the quality of the institution, and their role
as scholar was once their primary role in museums. However, curators'
roles are expanding in response to changes in museums themselves. Ac
cording to Dore Ashton (1967), Contributing Editor to Arts Magazine,
curators of contemporary art museums face a particularly difficult
challenge. Curators of art have traditionally formed judgments based
upon how well the quality of a work endured through time. However,
because art museums now collect contemporary art, the wish to make
history rather than interpret it seems to be triumphing. By attempt
ing to stay "up to the minute" and, indeed, predict trends before
they occur, curators act more like reporters or prophets than scholars
(Ashton 1967).
Edward R. Fry (1972) views curators as having three roles: that
of caretaker, of assembler, and of ideologue. As caretakers, curators
are in charge of the nation's secular relics which must be preserved
and documented. As assemblers, curators attempt to acquire important
works from the cultural heritage represented by the museum. As
ideologues, curators create collections based on an idea, or perhaps
develop an idea to justify a collection. These three roles can be
illustrated by the caretaker as a keeper of a historical house, the
assembler as a curator of European Art, and the ideologue as a curator
of Contemporary Art. However, these roles are not mutually exclusive
and may overlap in many instances (Fry 1972). Like those of directors,
57
the roles of curators are complex and will depend largely on the situa
tion in which they exist. Curators, directors, and trustees have
definite roles within museums, and museum managers should be aware of
the behavior associated with each role, so that he or she may be able
to adjust the roles to the other components of the psychosocial subsystem.
The psychosocial subsystem of any organization contains many
variables. Authority, leadership, motivation, and roles all play a
part in the network of social relationships that form the psychosocial
subsystem. Museum managers must understand how these factors inter
relate, so that the characteristics of the museum psychosocial subsystem
may be matched to those of the other museum subsystems and to its en
vironment.
•
CHAPTER VIII
THE MANAGERIAL SUBSYSTEM
The center of an organization is the managerial subsystem, which
links all other subsystems and relates the organization to its environ
ment. (See Figure 1.) The managerial subsystem provides the tech
niques that a manager uses to control the operations of an organiza
tion. If the managerial subsystem is the center of an organization,
then decision-making is its heart. Decision-making, choosing among
alternatives, is the basic function of managers. So pervasive is
decision-making in organizations, that some authors have used it as
the basis for an analysis of management in general. (See Bell and
Coplans 1976.) The decisions of managers concern accomplishing the
goals of organizations through the people, materials, and technologies
available. These decisions are involved in the management functions
of planning, coordinating, and controlling.
Decision-Making
Decision-making is not so much an accomplishment as it is a pro
cess. That is, choosing among alternatives is an ongoing activity, be
cause problems are seldom completely solved, and the resolution of one
problem will affect the solution of later problems.
The moment of choice is only one step in the decision-making
process. The first step is the realization that there is a problem
that requires resolution. The next step is to gather all available
information about the problem and then to develop alternative solu
tions. These solutions must be evaluated and one selected. The last
steps are implementation of the solution and review of the results.
In an ideal world, all information related to the problem would be con
sidered and every possible alternative solution would be critically
analyzed. The decision-making process would then yield the best solu-
58
tion to the problem. However, in this less than perfect world,
decision-making is not as straightforward as this des.cription sug
gests. It is more likely that only some of the information and part
of the alternative solutions will be considered. The choice may be
based on such human factors as values, and the final solution will
probably be satisfactory rather than the best solution.
59
Basic to the process of making decisions is information. A
manager must have a constant, reliable flow of information so that he
or she may identify problems, develop solutions, and review the effects
of the decisions. A manager must receive not only enough information
but also the right kind. The information received must be relevant
to the goals and problems of the organization.
In order to accomplish this, organizations develop systems which
provide the information necessary for management. These systems must
gather information from the external environment and from the sub-.
systems of the organization. The information needed includes numerical
data, other objective information, and subjective information, such as
opinion. Because some of the necessary information is quantifiable,
designing mechanized systems for processing information has become
popular. However, an over-emphasis on computers and other machines
can lead to the development of the perfect data-processing system,
rather than a better information system. Another temptation in the
use of mechanized systems is to gather every bit of data possible,
"just in case" it might come in useful. However, an information system
must be designed to serve the decision-making needs of organizations.
It should be oriented to organizational problem solving, rather than
techniques of analysis (Kast and Rosenzweig 1979).
An information system operates at the three structural levels
of an organization: strategic, coordinative, and operational. At the
operational level all the information about how the organization is
operating must be gathered for the benefit of the upper levels. Often
this information is gathered by the rule of exceptions: operational
data is reported only when it deviates from the norm. The coordinative
level receives and organizes the data and sends it upward. It also
60
sees that information from the strategic level is conveyed downward
to the operating level. At the strategic level the internal informa
tion received from the other levels is added to information gathered
from external sources, in order to provide a basis for planning (Kast
and Rosenzweig 1979).
Organizations face two general types of problems. Routine, or
programmable, problems have answers contained in the rules and proce
dures of the organization. Non-routine, or non-programmable, problems
require creative problem solving.
Programmable decisions occur most often on the operational level of
an organizationmd are often quantifiable. Examples are decisions
about salaries, charges, and the amount of materials needed. Many
techniques have been developed to solve programmable decisions. Some
of the more common types of these techniques are linear programming,
queuing theory, probability theory, inventory models, and marginal
analysis. Queuing theory is an example of how these techniques ap
proach problem solving. Also known as waiting line theory, queuing
theory produces solutions to such problems as how many cashiers a
grocery store needs at any given time. This is a problem of balance:
balancing customer waiting time and possible displeasure against the
cost of building and staffing cash register stations (Robbins 1980,
p. 82) .
Non-programmable decisions are most commonly made at the strategic
level of an organization and are qualitative decisions, for example,
the decision to begin manufacturing a new product. This type of
decision-making relies on the experience, judgment, and creativity
of the decision maker.
The operational level of an organization deals with both program
mable and non-programmable problems. In fact, it is rare for a prob
lem at any level to be entirely programmable or non-programmable. The
most complex problems may allow the use of quantitative techniques for
portions of the problem, while qualitative methods must be used for
the remainder. In a contingency view of management, the manager
61
should be aware of the various methods of problem solving so that the
appropriate methods may be applied to decision-making.
There has been little discussion or application of decision-making
theory to museums. In fact, the idea of applying quantitative tech
niques to decision-making in museums would probably be resisted. The
experience and good judgment of the director are assumed to be the
basis of all decision-making. As Alan Shestack said, "Museum decisions
are ultimately decisions about quality." (1978, p. 89) The director's
judgment leads to decisions "based on what is defensible in scholarly
and educational terms." (Shestack 1978, p. 89) However, quantitative
techniques are just that--techniques. They are useful tools while
solving a particular problem but do not constitute goals in and of
themselves. Becoming familiar with the theories and techniques of
decision making should improve the problem solving abilities of any
museum manager, thereby improving the management of the museum.
Planning
One of the primary goals of decision-making is to develop plans.
A plan is a statement of what to do, who is to do it, how it is to be
done, where, and with what resources. Plans are the backbone of an
organization and act as guides for all decision-making and evaluation
within an organization. They also allow for coordination among sub
systems and help a manager to identify needs for resources. Planning
can greatly improve motivation because it focuses on the goals of an
organization. People work better if they know where they are expected
to go and how they are going to get there. Planning is essential in
managing any organization. According to Kast and Rosenzweig,
Comprehensive planning is an integrative activity that seeks to maximize the total effectivenessofan organization as a system in accordance with its objectives (1979, pp. 416-417).
Every manager must understand how to plan.
Plans are not born but made, and organizations must develop a
definite process in order to encourage ongoing planning. In fact,
Robbins points out that the process of planning is as important to an
organization as the accuracy of the resulting plan (1980, p. 128).
62
The setting of objectives or goals has been discussed in Chapter III.
Once the objectives have been decided upon, a detailed analysis of the
organization and its opportunities must be produced. This portion of
the process is called forecasting, and it analyzes the present en
vironment of an organization and predicts future changes. The internal
conditions of an organization must also be considered. These internal
factors include organizational expenses and income and human resources
(Robbins 1980, p. 149).
Based upon the organizational goals and the forecast, specific
plans of action are developed and standards of performance for indivi
dual tasks are set. Specific plans for an organization are sometimes
called strategies and apply to the organization as a whole. Strategies
may have sections that apply to different parts of an organization, but
these sections must fit smoothly together. Strategies must also be
flexible and properly timed. An example of a successful strategy was
the development and production of the Mustang by Ford Motor Company.
The strategy had to include all aspects of the company from design to
production to marketing and to make all of these aspects mesh. It had
to be flexible to meet any problems that arose along the way, and it
was obviously well-timed, as evidenced by the overwhelming acceptance
of the new model (Ivancevich, Donnelly, & Gibson 1980).
Strategy sets the standards of performance. Standards must be
clear cut, so that they may be evaluated. Examples are the production
of a given number of cars per day and the setting of a certain number
of bolts per minute. A technique for setting standards of performance,
known as management by objectives (MBO), is popular in current manage
ment literature. MBO is defined as
..• a process whereby the superior and subordinate managers of an organization jointly identify its common goals, define each individual's major areas of responsibility in terms of the results expected of him, and use these measures as guides for operating the unit and assessing the contributions of each of its members (Odiorne 1965, pp. 55-56).
In other words, MBO enables each member of the organization to set per
sonal standards, guided by the goals of the organization, and to develop
63
a plan for meeting these standards with the cooperation of his or her
superior. Management by objectives can be very useful for increasing
motivation and effectiveness of workers. Kast and Rosenzweig sum up
the planning process as the determination of what an organization
1) might do, 2) can do, 3) wants to do, and 4) should do (1979, pp.
424-425).
Plans are classified into different types based upon such varia
bles as time-range, scope, and flexibility. Plans can be relatively
short-, medium-, or long-term, and can be straight-line or adaptive.
The types of planning and plans used vary according to the structural
level of an organization. Managers on the operational level usually
engage in short-term, functional, straight-line planning. On the
coordinative level, managers use medium-range, project or program
planning with some adaptive elements. Managers on the strategic level
engage in long-range, comprehensive, adaptive planning.
The contingency view recognizes that there are many types of
plans suited to many different situations and matches the plan to the
situation. It is useful to a manager to attempt to recognize all the
possible factors of a planning situation, estimate their relevance, and
then develop a possible course of action.
Planning is used by museums for many purposes, but the process of
planning is not always explicit. George MacBeath and S. James Gooding
(1969) discuss the importance of planning for utilizing resources and
meeting rapidly changing conditions. Museum planning is the responsi
bility of the director and should be comprehensive and long-term as
well as specific (1969, pp. 35-37).
The accreditation program of the AAM, discussed in Chapter III,
also encourages museums to set specific goals and engage in long-range
planning. However, the necessary connection between long-range and
short-range plans is not often considered. Museums would be better
served by the utilization of a specific planning process, so that
coordination between comprehensive plans and operational standards
is more explicit. This would also increase the motivation and ef
fectiveness of museum employees.
64
Organizing
After the plans have been made, a manager must organize human and
material resources in order to implement them. Organizing consists of
establishing relationships between the activities to be done, the peo
ple who do them, and the materials needed (Robbins 1980, p. 8). The
components of organizing include dividing and integrating the jobs,
the authority and responsibility, and the people of an organization.
Planning the relationships of these components is known as organi
zational design and is mainly concerned with the structural elements of
an organization. (See Chapter V.) Management theorists have developed
two contrasting types of organizational design: Bureaucratic/Classical
and Behavioralist.
Max Weber, a German sociologist, developed a model for organiza
tional design that he called Bureaucratic. The model is very similar
to the formal organization structure developed by classical theorists
such as Henri Fayol. Weber's design is characterized by a high degree
of 1) division of labor by function, 2) hierarchical authority system,
3) reliance on rules and procedures, 4) impersonality of relationships,
and 5) hiring and promotion based upon qualifications. Bureaucratic/
Classical design focuses on the formal structure of an organization
(Kast and Rosenzweig 1979).
On the other hand, Behavioralist design is based upon the people
who are members of the organization and upon the elements of the psycho
social subsystem. (See Chapter VI.) The design typically includes such
elements as 1) division of labor by project, 2) delegation of authority
and responsibility, 3) flexible rules and procedures, 4) supportive re
lationships, and 5) overall emphasis on worker satisfaction (Kast and
Rosenzweig 1979).
The contingency approach takes the viewpoint that both of these
schools of design have valid points, but that a combination, a design
somewhere in between, will be the most realistic. All of the elements
of an organization, its environment and subsystems, must be taken into
account when designing the organizational structure.
65
Once the organizational structure is designed, then the last task
of organizing is staffing. Capable, knowledgeable people are essential
for the success of any organization. Staffing means finding the right
person for the job, but it also includes helping these people with the
job and retaining or discharging them. According to Ivancevich,
Donnelly, and Gibson the staffing process has eight steps:
1. Human resource planning--estimating the size and makeup of the future work force.
2. Recruitment--acquiring the best qualified applicants to satisfy the organization's human resource plans.
3. Selection--evaluating applicants and choosing the best candidates to fill jobs.
4. Orientation--formally introducing the selected individuals to their unit and the organization.
5. Training and management development--conducting activities that will prepare employees to contribute more to the organization.
6. Performance evaluation--attempting to allocate resources, reward employees, provide feedback, and maintain relationships and communications between managers and subordinates.
7. Compensation--attempting to pay employees in accordance with the contributions they make to the organization.
8. Promotion, demotion, and termination--developing systems that involve shifting employees to higher level positions (promotion) or to lower level positions (demotion) or asking them to leave the organization (discharge) (1980, pp. 172-173).
These are the steps which are involved in organizing the human resources
of the organization.
The formal process of staffing is being recognized as an important
part of museum management. MacBeath and Gooding discuss some of the
steps, such as job descriptions and selection, and point out the value
of an analysis of the human resource needs of the institution (1969, pp.
32-33). Ronald L. Miller has performed a valuable service for museums
with his book, Personnel Policies for Museums: A Handbook for Manage
ment (1979a). As Miller points out in an article in Museum ~ews,
... the experiences of widely diverse organizations-profit, nonprofit, and public--have shown that well thought out and effectively implemented personnel policies are basic managerial tools to improve employee morale and institutional performance (1979b, p. 29).
With Miller's book as a guide, museums may greatly improve their handling
of the staffing process.
66
As for organizational design, it is not considered explicitly in
museum literature. However, as discussed in Chapter V, the structure
of museums tends to be very traditional so that structural design seems
to follow Classical theories. MacBeath and Gooding support this when
they state, "the director must assign particular pieces of work to his
individual assistants and must be responsible for telling them how the
work is to be done." (1969, p. 32) They recommend that the director
consult with staff members during planning but, "he must make his own
decisions," and the "director is responsible for what is done; it is his
job to run the museum." (1969, p. 32) The evidence indicates that
museums for the most part have classically designed organizations.
Controlling
Controlling is the managerial process that determines if planning
and organizing have been successful. It is an integral part of manage
ment and has a reciprocal relationship with planning. Controlling is
the process of assuring that performance and products match standards
and taking corrective action if they do not. Thus, control depends upon
planning, for without goals and standards it is not possible to evaluate
products and performance. However, planning also depends upon control,
because plans are often adjusted according to the information received
from controlling. The control process is part of managerial decision
making and, as such, is dependent on the flow of appropriate informa
tion.
Implicit in this description are four elements common to control
ling. The control process must have 1) something to measure, 2) a
means of evaluation, 3) a standard of comparison, and 4) a means of
corrective change. These elements are linked by the flow of informa
tion into a control system. The control system begins with the goals
and objectives of an organization. From these, standards for perform
ance and products are set, and then the work is done. Performance is
compared with the standards, and adjustments are made either in per
formance or standards. The product also is compared with the stan
dards, and the information is used for reassessing standards.
Finally, the results are compared to organizational goals, which may
67
be supported or changed. This description of the control system is
applicable to any control situation. The means employed at each step
of the process determine what specific type.of control system an organi
zation uses. The types vary from objective, formalized systems to
subjective, informal control systems.
Kast and Rosenzweig describe two types of control systems-
traditional and behavioral (1979, p. 454). Traditional control systems
rely on the formal authority system and structure of an organization.
Assumptions of this type of control system include that: 1) the amount
of possible control is fixed (if subordinates have more control over
their actions, then the supervisor has less); 2) control is unilateral;
and 3) control moves vertically. On the other hand, behavioral control
systems rely upon interpersonal influence, and its assumptions include
that: 1) the amount of control is variable (the concern shown by both
superior and subordinate for achieving objectives increases total con
trol), 2) control is mutual, and 3) control moves vertically, horizon
tally, and diagonally.
Neither of these types of control systems seems applicable in
every situation. The contingency approach takes into account the
environment and the other subsystems in matching a control system with
an organization. It also recognizes that an organization may employ a
variety of control systems to monitor different areas or projects, but
these systems should be coordinated through their relationships to the
goals of the organization.
Museums engage in various forms of control but rarely have planned
control systems. Some attempts have been made to measure the effective
ness of exhibits (see Chapter III), but little has been done to evaluate
the overall effectiveness of the institutions. One form of evaluation
that is used in some museums is the annual report. The report usually I
contains such items as the number of visitors, a discussion of the ob-
jects accessioned, a financial statement, and a description of the
museum's activities and programs (MacBeath and Gooding 1969, P· 31).
The annual report gives an overall picture of the museum's progress,
but the information is too general to be of much use to the management.
68
Museums certainly are not alone in their difficulties with control.
Most nonprofit organizations have difficulties in establishing systems
of evaluation. This stems from the general nature of their objectives
and from their nonprofit orientation. Indeed, Ivancevich, Donnelly,
and Gibson state that "Measuring productivity is perhaps the most
critical problem facing the management of nonprofit organizations."
(1980, p. 481)
The key to successful control systems is to set specific, prefer
ably measurable, objectives and standards and to coordinate all efforts
toward the organizational goals. Museums could benefit from the appli
cation of control theory.
Contingency Views of Management
All of the organizational relationships described seem to form a
pattern--two sets of patterns to be exact. Organizations can be seen
as relatively closed and stable as in the classical viewpoint or as
relatively open and adaptive as in the behavioralist's theories. Char
acteristics of the various subsystems seem to be divided by their rela
tionships to these types of organizations.
As presented here there are two distinct types of organizations.
However, in real life an organization, or even a portion of an organiza
tion, is rarely an absolute fit with one of these patterns. Organiza
tions, and their subsystems, are relatively more like one or the other,
so that these types of organizations should be seen as the end positions
of a spectrum, with most actual organizations falling somewhere in
between.
Table 1 presents an analysis of an organization and its sub
systems in relationship with organizational characteristics. The analy
sis of the relationships of systems and characteristics of organizations
provides the means of analyzing any organization in order to correlate
its subsystems and to manage it more effectively.
•
Tab
le 1
. R
ela
tio
nsh
ips
of
Sy
stem
s an
d C
hara
cte
rist
ics
Org
an
izati
on
al
Ch
ara
cte
rist
ics
of
Org
an
izati
on
s S
ub
syst
ems
Clo
sed
, §t
'!l:
>le
Opel!_~ A~~tive
En
vir
on
men
t:
Gen
eral
n
atu
re
Pre
dic
tab
ilit
y
Bo
un
dar
ies
Go
als
and
Val
ues
: G
oal
str
uctu
re
Go
als
in g
en
era
l
Perv
asi
ve v
alu
es
Go
al set
Go
al-
sett
ing
pro
cess
Tech
nic
al
Su
bsy
stem
: G
ener
al n
atu
re o
f ta
sks
Typ
e o
f in
pu
ts
Typ
e o
f o
utp
uts
M
eth
od
s
Pla
cid
C
ert
ain
R
ela
tiv
ely
clo
sed
F
ixed
an
d w
ell
-defi
ned
Org
an
izati
on
wit
h si
ng
le
go
al
Eff
icie
ncy
, S
tab
ilit
y,
Mai
nte
nan
ce
Eff
icie
ncy
, P
red
icta
bil
ity
, S
ecu
rity
S
ing
le,
Cle
ar-
cu
t M
anag
eria
l h
iera
rch
y
Rep
eti
tiv
e,
Ro
uti
ne
Hom
ogen
ous
Sta
nd
ard
ized
, F
ixed
P
rogr
anun
ed
Tu
rbu
len
t U
ncert
ain
R
ela
tiv
ely
op
en
Var
ied
an
d n
ot
cle
arl
y
defi
ned
Org
an
izati
on
as
learn
ing
, ad
ap
tin
g
syst
em w
ith
m
ult
iple
g
oals
E
ffecti
ven
ess
, In
no
vati
on
, G
row
th
Eff
ecti
ven
ess
, A
dap
tab
ilit
y,
Res
po
nsi
ven
ess
Mu
ltip
le
Wid
esp
read
p
art
icip
ati
on
Vari
ed
, N
on
rou
tin
e H
eter
og
eno
us
No
nst
and
ard
ized
, V
ari
ab
le
Non
prog
ranu
ned
a-.
\.0
Tab
le 1
. R
ela
tio
nsh
ips
of
Sy
stem
s an
d C
hara
cte
rist
ics
(co
nti
nu
ed
)
Org
an
izati
on
al
Ch
ara
cte
rist
ics
of
Org
an
izati
on
s S
ub
sy§
tem
s Closed
1_S~abl~
Ope
n,
Ad
apti
ve
Str
uctu
ral
Su
bsy
stem
: F
orm
ali
zati
on
P
roce
du
res
and
ru
les
Au
tho
rity
sy
stem
Psy
ch
oso
cia
l S
ub
syst
em:
Ro
les
Mo
tiv
ati
on
s
Lead
ers
hip
sty
le
Pow
er
syst
em
Man
ager
ial
Su
bsy
stem
: G
ener
al n
atu
re
Dec
isio
n-m
akin
g
tech
niq
ues
Pla
nn
ing
pro
cess
Co
ntr
ol
syst
em
Hig
h
Man
y an
d sp
ecif
ic.
Usu
all
y
form
al
and
wri
tten
C
on
cen
trate
d,
Hie
rarc
hic
Sp
ecif
ic a
nd
fi
xed
E
mp
has
is o
n ex
trin
sic
re
w
ard
s,
secu
rity
, an
d
low
er-
lev
el
nee
ds
Au
tho
rita
rian
C
on
cen
trat
ed
Hie
rarc
hic
al
stru
ctu
re o
f co
ntr
ol,
au
tho
rity
, an
d
info
rmati
on
. C
om
bin
atio
n
of
ind
ep
en
den
t,
sta
tic,
com
po
nen
ts
Au
tocra
tic,
Pro
gram
med
C
om
pu
tati
on
al
Rep
eti
tiv
e,
Fix
ed
, S
pecif
ic
Hie
rarc
hic
, S
pecif
ic,
Sh
ort
te
rm.
Ex
tern
al
co
ntr
ol
of
part
icip
an
ts
(Aft
er
Kas
t an
d
Ro
sen
zwei
g
19
79
, p
p.
48
8-4
89
.)
Low
Fe
w
and
g
en
era
l.
Usu
ally
in
fo
rmal
an
d
un
wri
tten
. D
isp
ers
ed
, N
etw
ork
Gen
eral
an
d
dy
nam
ic
Em
ph
asis
o
n in
trin
sic
re
war
ds,
es
teem
, an
d self
-actu
ali
zati
on
Dem
ocr
atic
E
qu
aliz
ed
Net
wo
rk s
tru
ctu
re o
f co
ntr
ol,
au
tho
rity
, an
d
info
rmati
on
. C
oo
rdin
ati
on
of
inte
rdep
en
den
4
dyna
mic
co
mp
on
ents
Part
icip
ati
ve,
Non
prog
ram
med
, Ju
dg
men
tal
Ch
ang
ing
, F
lex
ible
, G
ener
al
Recip
rocal,
G
en
era
l,
Lo
ng
-ter
m.
Self
-co
ntr
ol
of
part
icip
an
ts
.........
0
CHAPTER IX
SU~Y
The contingency approach to organization and management theory
offers insight into the process of museum management. Its most valu
able contribution is its view of an organization as a whole, a system.
When involved with the day-to-day operation of any institution, it is
very easy to lose sight of the purposes and goals behind daily details.
The contingency approach emphasizes the interrelationships of all parts
and the dependence of all of the subsystems on the goals and values of
the organization. This reminder of relationships and priorities should
be useful for any museum administrator.
In regard to the specific management problems of museums, the con
tingency approach provides useful guidelines. In general, museums fall
toward the middle of the organizational systems/characteristics spect
rum (see Table 1) with a slight bias toward the open, adaptive pattern.
The bias toward the open, adaptive pattern is supported by the tremen
dous influence environment has on museums, indicating relatively open
boundaries; by the goals and values of museums, which are multiple and
include effectiveness and responsiveness; and particularly by the na
ture of the technical subsystem, where problems and tasks are seen to
be varied, nonroutine, and nonprogrammable.
However, many of the structural, formal components of museums seem
to be those of a relatively closed, stable organization. Examples of
closed, stable characteristics are found in the structural subsystem,
where authority is usually concentrated and hierarchical; in the psycho
social subsystem, in which roles are fixed and leadership is author
itarian; and in the managerial subsystem, which consists of a hier
archical structure of control, authority, and information.
71
72
From this analysis it seems that the management of museums would
be improved if the relationships between the various subsystems and
characteristics were recognized and made more explicit. From a basis
of comprehensive planning, perhaps the decision-making and authority
systems could be decentralized somewhat and correlated with the nature
of the tasks and problems confronting museums. Planning is also the
answer to rapidly changing environments and technologies. In fact,
planning, particularly the formation of goals and objectives, must be
the foundation for the administration of any museum . •
There appears to be almost a fear of management-- "business"-
theory among some in the museum field. Sherman Lee, director of the
Cleveland Museum of Art, has said,
It's the misapplication of corporate thinking into an area that is quite different by philosophy and by purpose from a business enterprise. A museum's purpose is to spend money, not to make it. Efficiency is subservient to esthetic and education priorities. What I'm saying, fundamentally, is that business is business and art is art. The fastest way to destroy art is to make it like everything else, homogenize it, make it part of the profit-making setup (Kaddis 1977, p. 46).
This seems to be a valid criticism of attempts to apply "business"
practices to museums. However, contingency theory, by recognizing dif
ferent types of organizations and by its emphasis on goals and plan
ning, provides a way to improve museum management without jeopardizing
its uniqueness among organizations. Contingency theory certainly has
no disagreement with Alan Shestack's statement that, "The museum will
thrive if decisions are made in harmony with the basic purposes and
long-range goals of the institution and not solely on the basis of
attendance figures." (1978, p. 89)
Museum administrators should become familiar with the contingency
approach to organization and management theory. Familiarity with the
contingency approach can lead to acceptance of management techniques
which will aid the administrator in managing his or her specific museum.
In addition, a greater understanding of the process of management will
improve the management of all museums and lead to higher professional
standards.
LIST OF REFERENCES
American Association of Museums. 1972. Museums: Their New Audience.
Washington, D. C.: American Association of Museums.
1978a. Museum Ethics. Washington, D. C.: American Associa
tion of Museums.
1978b. "Museum Positions: Duties and Responsibilities."
Museum News. 57(Novernber/December): 25-26.
Albright, Thomas. 1980. "The Contemporary Art Museum: 'Irresponsi
bility Has Become Most Widespread."' Art News. 79 (January):
42-47.
Alexander, Edward P. 1979. Museums in Motion: An Introduction to the
History and Functions of Museums. With a foreword by William T.
Alderson. Nashville: American Association for State and Local
History.
Allan, Douglas A. 1974. "The Staff." In The Organization of Museums:
Practical Advice, pp. 52-67. New York: UNESCO Press.
Alloway, Lawrence. 1967. "An Introduction: Museums and Masses." In
The Museum World, pp. 8-10. Arts Yearbook 9. New York: Arts
Magazine.
Alloway, Lawrence and William C. Seitz. 1967. "The Changing Role of
the Modern Museum." A discussion conducted by Bruce Glaser. In
The Museum World, pp. 12-19. Arts Yearbook 9. New York: Arts
Magazine.
Ashton, Dare. 1967. "Curating Instant Art History." In The Museum
World, pp. 20-21. Arts Yearbook 9. New York: Arts Magazine.
Bayer, Herbert. 1961. "Aspects of Design of Exhibitions and Museums."
Curator. 4:257-287.
Bell, Gerald D. 1974. "Organizations and the External Environment."
In Contemporary Management:
Edited by Joseph W. McGuire.
Hall, Inc.
Issues and Viewpoints, pp. 259-282.
Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-
73
74
Bell, Robert and John Coplans. 1976. Decisions, Decisions. New York:
W. W. Norton and Company, Inc.
Burcaw, G. Ellis. 1975. Introduction to Museum Work. Nashville:
American Association of State and Local History.
Carey, Ted. 1978. "The Kan Case: Exploiting Museum Resources or
Faithful to His Duties?" Art News. 77(March): 100-104.
Chenhall, Robert G. 1975. Museum Cataloging in the Computer Age.
Nashville: American Association for State and Local History.
Conger, John; Ronald Egherman; and Gail Mallard. 1979. "The Museum
as Employer." Museum News. 57(July/August): 22-28.
Crawford, Tad. 1977. "The New Copyright Law: Help in Half-Measures."
Art in America. 65(September): 11-12.
Drucker, Peter F. 1980. "The Job as Property Right." Wall Street
Journal. 4 March.
Dudley, Dorothy H. and Irma Bezold Wilkinson. 1980. Museum Registra
tion Methods. Washington, D. C.: American Association of Museums.
Failing, Patricia. 1977. "The Maryhill Museum: A Case History of
Cultural Abuse." Art News. 76(March): 83-90.
Fitzgerald, Marilyn Hicks. 1973. Museum Accreditation: Professional
Standards. Washington, D. C.: American Association of Museums.
Fry, Edward F. 1972. "The Dilemmas of the Curator." In Museums in
Crisis, pp. 103-116. Edited with an introduction by Brian
0 'Doherty. Foreword by Nancy Hanks. New York: George Brazilier.
Glaser, Jane R. 1978. "Museum Studies." Museum News. 57(November/
December): 19-20.
Glueck, Grace. 1972. "Power and Esthetics: The Trustee." In Museums
in Crisis, pp. 117-129. Edited with an introduction by Brian
O'Doherty. Foreword by Nancy Hanks. New York: George Brazilier.
Grana, Cesar, 1967. "The Art Museum and Its Public." In The Museum
World, pp. 70-74. Arts Yearbook 9. New York: Arts Magazine.
Guthe, Carl E. 1957. So You Want A Good Museum: A Guide to the Manage
ment of Small Museums. Publications, New Series, Number 17, 1957.
Reprinted 1967. Washington, D. C.: American Association of
Museums.
75
1969. The Management of Small History Museums. Nashville:
American Association for State and Local History.
Hart, C. W., Jr. 1978. "The Burden of Regulation." Museum News.
56(January/February): 23-25.
Ivancevich, John M.; James H. Donnelly, Jr.; and James L. Gibson. 1980.
Managing for Performance. Dallas, Texas.: Business Publications,
Inc.
Kadis, Phillip M. 1977. "Who Should Manage Museums?" Art News. 76
(October): 46-51.
Kast, Fremont E. and James E. Rosenzweig. 1979. Organization and
Management: A Systems and Contingency Approach. New York: McGraw
Hill Book Co.
Katz, Daniel and Robert L. Kahn. 1966. The Social Psychology of Organi
zations. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
MacBeath, George and S. James Gooding. 1969. Basic Museum Management.
Ottawa, Ontario: Canadian Museums Association.
Melton, Arthur W. 1936. Experimental Studies of the Education of
Children in a Museum of Science. Washington, D. C.: American
Association of Museums.
Metz, Robert. 1979. "The Corporation as Art Patron: A Growth Stock."
Art News. 78(May): 40-46.
Miller, Ronald L. 1979a. Personnel Policies for Museums: A Handbook
for Management. Washington, D. C.: American Association of
Museums.
1979b. "Developing a Personnel Policy Manual." Museum News.
57(July/August): 29-32.
Naumer, Helmuth J. 1977. Of Mutual Respect and Other Things. Wash
ington D. C. : American Associa tio.n of Museums.
National Endowment for the Arts. 1974. Museums USA. Washington, D.C.:
National Endowment for the Arts.
Odiorne, George S. 1965. Management by Objectives. New York: Pitman.
Parr, A. E. 1959. Mostly About Museums. New York: American Museum
of Natural History.
76
Peacock, Alan and Christine Godfrey. 1974. "The Economics of :1useums
and Galleries." Museums Journal. 74(September): 55-58.
Plenderleith, H. J. and A. E. A. Werner. 1971. The Conservation of
Antiquities and Works of Art: Treatment, Repair, and Restoration.
2nd ed. London: Oxford University Press.
Raskin, A. H. 1974. "Behind the MOMA Strike: Activism, 'Schizophrenic
Unionism,' the Scramble for Funds." Art News. 73(January): 36-41.
Robbins, Stephen P. 1980. The Administrative Process. 2nd ed. Engle
wood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Robinson, Edward S. 1928. The Behavior of the Museum Visitor. Wash-
ington, D. C.: American Association of Museums.
Royal Ontario Museum. 1976. Communicating with the Museum Visitor.
Toronto: Royal Ontario Museum.
Screven, C. G. 1973. The Measurement and Facilitation of Learning
in the Museum Environment: An Experimental Analysis. Monograph
publication of the Office of Museum Programs. Washington, D. C.:
Smithsonian Institution.
Shestack, Alan. 1978. "The Director: Scholar and Businessman,
Educator and Lobbyist." Museum News. 57(November/December):
27-3lff.
Sukel, William M. 1974. "Museums as Organizations." Curator. 17
(December): 299-301.
Traverso, Daniel. 1976. "Contributions of a Museum to a Community."
In Thoughts on the Museum and the Community, pp. 11-13. Austin,
Tex.: Museum Services Department, Texas Historical Commission.
Warshaw, Robert S. 1975. "Law in the Art Marketplace." Museum ~ews.
53(May): 18-23.
Washburn, Wilcomb E. 1975. Defining the Museum's Purpose. New York
State Historical Association Monographic Studies No. 1. Edited
by Wendell Tripp. Cooperstown, N.Y.: New York State Historical
Association.
"A Watchful Eye in the Public Interest." Museum News. 54(May/June
1976): 26-31.
•
77
Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language. 2nd college
ed. 1970.
Wilson, Marlene. 1976. The Effective ManagementofVolunteer Programs.
Boulder, Col.: Volunteer Management Associates.
•
