Adam Rozan: Let’s start by introducing yourself, explaining how you got involved with museums, and your work at the Speed Museum.  

Stephen Reily: My name is Stephen Reily, and I live in Louisville, KY. I’ve been a lifelong art collector, supporter, and student of museums. Over the years, I served on a few museum boards, ultimately leading me to become the director of the Speed Art Museum—the largest and oldest art museum in Kentucky. I held that role for over four years, beginning in 2017. About two years ago, I transitioned to becoming the founding director of a new project called the Remuseum, housed within the Crystal Bridges Museum of American Art.

AR: Your previous board work included the Speed.

SR: That’s right. I did serve on the Speed’s board for ten years, but when I became director in 2017 I hadn’t been on the board for a dozen years, and I wasn’t involved in the Speed’s extensive renovation, during which they closed for almost four years.

AR: If I’m correct, you were a business entrepreneur by career before your museum life.

SR: I’m a lawyer by training, but my career has largely been as an entrepreneur.

AR: From a lawyer to an entrepreneur to a board member to a museum director. Those all seem like significant shifts—each a great learning opportunity, but all so different.  

SR: When I was first asked to step into the director role, I assumed I was probably far down on their list of candidates. I wasn’t the typical museum director, but I brought a unique perspective as someone observing museums from the outside. For example, I previously served on the New Museum of Contemporary Art board in New York, which is very different from the Speed—a non-collecting, entrepreneurial museum. My background made me think of Speed almost like a startup, especially since the museum had closed for four years and reopened with mixed results. I would often refer to Speed as a “ninety-year-old startup” because we were simultaneously a historic institution and a newly revitalized entity within the community.

AR: You said on the Museum Confidential podcast that “a new building is a tactic, not a goal” and that museums and museum directors, and their boards, can get too focused on new buildings and lose sight of their community responsibilities. Could you elaborate on that, especially in the context of running the museum post-reopening?

SR: This is a common issue in museum leadership: a building can be a tactic, but it’s never the goal unto itself; how could it be? Many directors are encouraged to focus heavily on building projects, thinking that an impressive structure is the goal. However, once the building is done, it’s hard to shift focus to serving the community rather than just maintaining the structure. For instance, at the Speed, we worked with architect Kulapat Yantrasast of Why Architecture, who helped us rethink the space for a better visitor experience. However, even a beautiful building can be a burden if it requires too much upkeep, or demands staffing levels that can’t be supported, or distracts from the museum’s mission to serve the public.

AR: The last exhibition you oversaw at the Speed was Promise, Witness, Remembrance, the 2021 Breonna Taylor exhibition. Can we discuss this project?

SR: The project began in the summer of 2020 when Louisville was dealing with the trauma of Breonna Taylor’s death alongside the challenges of COVID-19. The city was in intense turmoil, filled with grief, anger, and pain. I found myself questioning the role of a museum in such a moment. What could a museum do that was truly meaningful in this context? Art became a source of guidance.

It turned out that Amy Sherald had been commissioned to paint a portrait of Breonna Taylor and had worked closely with Breonna’s mother, Tamika Palmer. One of my colleagues suggested, “What if we could borrow that painting?” We had shown Amy’s work before she became widely recognized, so we reached out, and everything slowly fell into place.

This exhibit raised difficult questions: How do we present something so raw when emotions are still fresh? But I felt strongly that we should try, trusting that art could help the community process its pain. Amy’s portrait isn’t prescriptive—it simply shows Breonna’s life, inviting viewers to reflect and feel however they need to. That’s what artists do best and what museums can offer in times of crisis.

AR: What do you think an exhibition like this one means to its community?

SR: We talked about this internally at the museum, as the exhibition symbolized our commitment to being responsive to community issues. It culminated in our efforts to create a museum that not only preserves art but also plays a role in societal dialogue. Although it was a challenging project born out of tragic circumstances, I’m proud that we were able to engage the community in such a meaningful way.

AR: And what, if anything, is the broader implication of a project like this one on the field?

SR: It proved that museums can respond meaningfully to their communities’ needs. But it also raised a broader question: Why do so many still feel detached from reality if museums have this capacity? How can we keep putting on the same kind of shows when our communities are reeling from crises like gun violence, political division, or natural disasters? I genuinely struggle with this disconnect.

Our field needs to shift towards being responsive to the issues that matter most to the people we serve. Otherwise, we risk becoming irrelevant.

AR: Let’s talk about your decision to leave Speed and your exit process since it seems extremely transparent and would be helpful to know about it from a succession planning perspective.

SR: Of course. I was fortunate at the time, as one of my board chairs had HR background from their time at Humana. I had come in as an interim, so I knew this wouldn’t be a lifelong role. I committed to giving the board at least twelve months’ notice, which allowed us to plan for the future without the surprise exits that some organizations face.

AR: If I understand correctly, you were also as transparent with staff?

SR: I was very open with both the board and my staff. We were also hiring, so it was essential to create an understanding that we were building a strong, sustainable organization that wasn’t dependent on me. I would like to think that this transparency helped create a sense of continuity, ensuring that each new hire was seen as a lasting addition to the institution, regardless of my tenure.

AR: What were some ways you all approached succession planning?

SR: I introduced an idea I called “over-hiring.” Instead of filling a role at the basic level, we hired someone with high potential who might initially seem overqualified. I wanted to create positions that would challenge these hires and help them grow, even if their next role wasn’t as a museum director. For example, they might eventually become a CEO in another organization. This approach reflects the idea that museums should act as training grounds for leaders across the country or within our region.

I wasn’t the first to try this approach—the Toledo Art Museum, for instance, has been a powerful incubator for future leaders despite being in a smaller city. They’ve produced generations of great leaders, which is inspiring. It’s a model of governance that emphasizes cultivating leadership from within, something our field needs more of.

AR: After you stepped down from the Speed, you wrote an essay entitled “The Education of a Museum Director,” which in hindsight was the perfect segue to your work at the Remuseum.

SR: That’s true. I wrote that article to talk about the various challenges in our outdated business model. Ambitions and expenses constantly outpace revenues, and we keep growing assets—like collections and buildings—that often act as liabilities. Museums have more assets than any other cultural institutions in the country, but those assets don’t necessarily support the institution’s mission. For example, it’s odd that we celebrate asset growth rather than examining whether those assets serve our purpose.

At the Speed Art Museum, I often encountered written and unwritten norms that constrained our ability to innovate. An unconventional suggestion might be replied to with a comment like, “That would be irresponsible,” even when the art or the museum wouldn’t have been harmed.

We have to acknowledge that the field can be very defensive and is resistant to change; that’s the truth. It felt ironic because art museums exist to share artists’ work, yet the spirit of artists—open-ended, ambiguous, and constantly reinventing—is often missing from museum operations.

AR: How did the Remuseum come about?

SR: Remuseum is an idea born out of Crystal Bridges, with financial support from Alice Walton, the founder of Crystal Bridges, David Booth, a MoMA board member and entrepreneur, and Rod Bigelow, Executive Director and Chief Diversity & Inclusion Officer of Crystal Bridges. They had the good idea to address some of the challenges we’ve been discussing. Specifically, the ideas of community relevance, innovation, and, most critically, a sustainable business model for our institutions. When I heard about this, I thought, “This is exactly where I need to be.”

AR: You’ve mentioned that the field is resistant to change; if so, how will the Remuseum go about this?

SR: I try not to dictate what people should think, personally and in my work. In art museums, the goal should be to let the art speak for itself. Artists have done their job—they created something that invites people to engage and interpret without prescribing a specific reaction. Museums should aim to do the same. This means that we’re going to put the information out there, share it, and hopefully get those in the field interested in participating in what we’re doing to help their institutions.

AR: We were talking earlier about the actual costs for our institutions, and our visitors when they come to our institutions. Can you share what we were talking about?

SR: It’s a complicated issue, and no single answer works for every museum. However, every museum spends a lot of money on each visitor—on average, about one hundred dollars per person, according to recent data we’ve collected on 153 American museums. This includes the many expenses that go into providing a meaningful experience for each visitor, whether they pay for admission or not.

Somewhere along the line, though, we flipped a switch and started seeing visitors as revenue sources rather than as the core purpose of our mission. There’s nothing inherently wrong with generating revenue—if people want to buy food, books, or souvenirs, or if they’re inspired to support the museum’s mission, that’s great. But we must remember that the visitors are here for the experience, not as a source of income.

Think about a food bank: they use philanthropic dollars to feed people and help them achieve stability. A park system uses funds to let people enjoy nature. Museums should similarly ask, “How can we best use our resources to serve the public?”

AR: As we discussed earlier, directors today are first and foremost fundraisers, and institutions, in general, are now focusing more of their resources on revenue generation. Can you talk about the inherent conflicts that might be caused by the need to generate revenue versus the need to service our visitors?

SR: For the last forty years, nearly every major museum has developed similar revenue-generating ventures: cafes, gift shops, event spaces, etc. But when you fully account for staff time, space, and other overhead, most museums lose money on these businesses. Boards often think these ventures help fund the mission, but they can actually drain resources from it.

I’m not saying museums shouldn’t offer food or souvenirs, but we should be transparent about the actual costs. For example, if a museum’s location makes it necessary to provide an eatery because there are no nearby options, then acknowledge it as a service, not a profit center. Some museums do this thoughtfully—like the Denver Art Museum, which decided not to have a restaurant because great local options surround it. Or the Philbrook in Tulsa, which partners with local chefs to do pop-ups. These are ways to provide services without straining resources.

And, to the other part of your question, the concern is warranted, and museums should always pay attention to this, ensuring a healthy balance.

AR: Where is “purpose” in this, and what’s our role within our communities and society?

SR: I believe museums should aim to excel at a few core things rather than trying to do everything. Our mission is to serve the public by providing access to art, culture, and ideas. We’re here to enrich lives, not to run unprofitable side businesses. If we focus on our primary purpose, we’ll be more effective and better able to make a meaningful impact.

Our industry has become more complex over the years, but I think we need to simplify and zero in on our mission. In my current work, I’m exploring how we can help museums innovate and break free from legacy systems that don’t serve the public. Whether it’s environmental sustainability, workforce equity, or board diversity, there are many people in the field advocating for these changes, but progress is often slow. My goal is to create a framework that empowers museums to accelerate change and align their operations with their mission.

AR: We’ve covered a lot of ground, and these are big topics, each worthy of more conversation. To close, can you share what conversations you think are most needed and how we start making changes?

SR: We don’t discuss financial sustainability or relevance in museums enough. And, if we want to make real change in the field, and if we want our organizations to be the kinds of institutions that make a difference, then we also have to talk about governance. Because the change that’s needed can only happen if our boards are educated, involved, and working to create the necessary changes to support our institutions.

That’s the work we’ve started at Remuseum, and now we have the data to support many of these ideas. We have a lot of work to do, but it’s positive, and we’re ready to make it happen.

Jump to the text version

Sometimes, in these polarized and tumultuous times, it feels like no one can agree on anything. As we found in the Annual Survey of Museum-Goers, even the idea of museums cultivating hope for a better future was seen by some audiences through a political lens.

But maybe we are not as divided as we think. Perhaps there are some shared values we can consider to help rebuild our connections to one another and strengthen our communities.

To find out, we asked frequent museum-goers an open-ended question about hope and the future. This question appeared immediately after our direct, closed-ended questions on hope.

Actually…we had two questions to ask, and the luxury of a large sample. We programmed both questions, and half of the sample randomly received one version, and half the other.

VERSION 1:
Imagine your community in 10 years. What do you hope for your community? What do you hope for museums? And what do museums need to do to be a vital part of that community you imagine?

VERSION 2:
Imagine your family and close friends in 10 years. What do you personally hope for those family members and close friends? And what do museums need to do to be a vital part of your lives, supporting those hopes?

Who responded?

One of the things we consider when analyzing open-ended responses from a survey is who is motivated to answer the question in the first place (versus those who choose to skip it). This helps us understand if different segments of respondents felt more strongly (good or bad) than others about what we are asking.

There were two interesting patterns that emerged:

Community Version:

Liberals were nearly 50% more likely to answer the community version of the question than conservatives: 43% of liberals who saw this question wrote something in, versus 31% of conservatives. This fits in with larger patterns we have seen over the past several years, with liberals consistently more likely to indicate community-oriented answers in our museum surveys than conservatives.

Wrote in answers:

• Liberals: 43%
• Conservatives: 31%

Family/Friends Version:

Adults over the age of 60 were the most likely to write something in, 38%, and young adults (under 40) without children the least likely, only 28%. This result, admittedly, we have less insight on.

Wrote in answers:

• Over 60: 38%
• Under 40 without children: 28%

To find out what people shared, we hand-coded a demographically-balanced, but randomly selected, sample of 8,000 responses. (1) We looked at how the responses differed between the two question versions, what values people don’t quite agree on, and what values most of us seem to share.

The most common themes respondents shared centered around civility, helping communities thrive, and the value of people working together. There was quite a bit of articulation that respondents wanted museums to reduce barriers to access (particularly cost), and they also wanted their communities to value and support museums, libraries, and the cultural sector more.

“I hope we are all invested in our places and working to make our world better through where we live. It is a more practical way to make an impact on a smaller scale (not changing the whole world), but still an impactful way! Our museums are a center point for culture and our communities. I hope to continue seeing them thrive in such an important role.”

Personal Hopes for Family and Close Friends

These responses, compared to the community hopes, were much more inward looking and personal. Many of these responses focused on health, happiness, and security.

“I hope that those I love are healthy in body, mind, and soul. That they are free to live authentically and without limitations on their ideas, expressions, or dreams. That they experience equality, love, peace, and joy. That their lives are meaningful and deeply connected to themselves, others & the Earth. Museums have the potential to show us that this is possible.”

Where We Don’t Quite Agree…

There were a handful of topics that some respondents clearly cared more about than others, most of which were not surprising as we have seen similar patterns in quantitative survey results this year and in the past.

• Planet, nature, and climate. Liberals were far more likely to mention concerns about climate change, and hopes for solutions, than conservatives.
• Inclusion. Similarly, liberals were far more likely to mention DEAI than conservatives…by a factor of 5x.
• Value of community, people working together, and civics. As we saw in the 2023 Annual Survey of Museum-Goers, there were political differences in responses about community and civics. Liberals were much more enthusiastic to share their ideas on these topics (and how museums can help) than conservatives. We also continue to see young adults (under 40) without children much more enthusiastic about these ideas than adults over 60…by a factor of 2.5x.

The good news is that there were a number of things that most people seem to agree on. These areas can provide us with excellent starting points for rooting our work in ways that support individuals and our communities. These include:

• The value of learning and education.
  

  “I hope that they are able to be lifelong learners who are confident, mindful, resourceful, and content. Museums can be a place to learn and a resource for building and maintaining mindfulness, resourcefulness, confidence, and contentment through accessible and relatable programs and resources.”

• A desire for less polarization and more civility.
  

  “Everyone gets along peacefully.”

• Individual happiness.
  

  “I hope that my family and friends are happy, healthy, secure, and feel loved. Museums can play a role through providing enjoyment, mental / emotional outlets, and intellectual discourse.”

• Individual health.
  

  “I hope they are happy and healthy and are learning about the world and its beauty, history, and how to keep it going and civilized.”

Because those shared values are such a vital starting point for museums engaging people effectively with many different worldviews and life experiences, we’ve included this as a line of inquiry in the 2025 Annual Survey of Museum-Goers.

Personally, however, we found coding these responses overall to be rather delightful. Most people want to envision a future where those they love, and their communities, are thriving. And many expressed hopes that we will find creative solutions to the problems we face, both globally and locally. That gives us hope as well, because if museums (and other institutions) can build on those shared values more effectively, those creative solutions will be far more possible.

“In ten years, I hope that museums will lead the way to healing using creativity, beauty, and knowledge.”

Annual Survey of Museum-Goers Data Stories are created by Wilkening Consulting on behalf of the American Alliance of Museums. Sources include:

• 2024 Annual Survey of Museum-Goers, n = 90,178; 202 museums participating
• 2024 Broader Population Sampling, n = 2,154
• 2017–2023 Annual Surveys of Museum-Goers

(1) See 2024 ASMG: Purpose and Methodology (Update) Data Story to learn more about our coding methodologies.

*Data Stories share research about both frequent museum-goers (typically visit multiple museums each year) and the broader population (including casual, sporadic, and non-visitors to museums).

More Data Stories can be found at wilkeningconsulting.com/data-stories.

Jump to the text version

“I was impressed by this survey lifting cultivating hope as a significant role of museums — even while exhibits prominently evoke situations of lament. BRAVO!!!”

“It is not a museum’s job to force emotional responses on visitors. Do not manipulate us.”

“I don’t really see this as a museum’s purpose, but I do feel hopeless often.”

For many of us who work in the museum field, the idea of “hope” feels like a positive outcome of a museum visit, and thus worthy of cultivation.

Fortunately, most museum-goers agree! As we saw in our introductory Data Story on hope, four out of five agreed that the cultivation of hope was important.

But how important?

When we analyzed results more fully, we found that while 40% of frequent museum-goers are very enthusiastic about the cultivation of hope in museums, a similar number are actually more ambivalent. Additionally, a small but vocal minority of museum-goers disagreed with the idea entirely.

• Resistant
  • Frequent Museum-Goers: 18 percent
  • U.S. Adults: 13 percent
• Ambivalent
  • Frequent Museum-Goers: 43 percent
  • U.S. Adults: 42 percent
• Enthusiastic
  • Frequent Museum-Goers: 40 percent
  • U.S. Adults: 45 percent

In this Data Story, we will explore more about these differing attitudes and delve into open-ended responses to understand the “why“ behind the results.

The Enthusiastic

“Since the pandemic and political chaos that floods the TV and social media, we have a society filled with anxiety. A place of solitude and hope for the future on any subject is welcomed.”

“Very important, for the future generations. I personally feel like I don’t have much fuel left.”

If there was a common theme among enthusiastic respondents, it was that hope is needed more than ever in these tumultuous times.

Repeatedly, they mentioned mental health, emotional well-being, and that a feeling of hope was necessary for motivating people to work towards positive solutions.

For the most part, these enthusiastic respondents fall into the more “open” category of respondents we have been tracking: they are significantly more likely to be curious, empathetic individuals who want to be challenged, support climate action, and have inclusive attitudes. Additionally, people of color were much more likely to be enthusiastic about hope in museums: half fell in this segment versus 38% of white people.

There was a cautionary note from some enthusiastic respondents, however: warnings against false hope. They wanted the cultivation of hope to be realistic and backed up with proactive changes…not a “sentimental” hope that assumes others will take responsibility for solutions.

The Ambivalent (and sometimes perplexed)

“To me, it’s an odd word choice. Hope is always important, I guess, but it’s not why I go to museums. I go to be inspired and awed.”

“I haven’t thought about it too much, but in the context of the times, I think this is important to begin considering.”

Respondents in this segment were generally open to the idea of museums cultivating hope, but for many, the idea was a surprise.

It simply had not occurred to them and they had to take a moment to consider it. After that consideration, they indicated either a limited degree of support or outright ambivalence.

Generally, for most in this segment, hope is a perfectly fine outcome of a museum experience. But it isn’t the primary goal and they are also perfectly fine if it doesn’t happen.

For some, however, it was simply perplexing. They used words like “odd,” “vague,” or “strange.” A few also said that they didn’t feel this was the job or responsibility of museums…but not in a way that indicated they opposed the idea.

“I do not put this burden on the museum.”

The Resistant

“I don’t want the museum to manipulate my emotions in any way.”

“YOU’RE A MUSEUM! It’s not your job. NO MORE WOKE!”

For those who were resistant to the idea of museums cultivating hope, that resistance was often framed through lenses of politics and manipulation.

That is, they felt “hope” was coded language for “woke” ideologies (with “woke” being used as a pejorative term) or that museums were trying to tell them how to feel.

These knee-jerk, emotional responses sometimes yielded strong language. Additionally, these “resistant” respondents were over 2x more likely than “ambivalent” respondents, and 4.5x more likely than “enthusiastic” respondents, to hold anti-inclusive attitudes. They were also significantly less likely to hold community-oriented attitudes or think that museums should connect people to humanity.

This indicates that more “resistant” respondents are lumping together a collection of values, including hope, that they consider inappropriate for museums…likely because they fear that the hopes museums might cultivate in visitors would be hopes that these “resistant” individuals do not share. This suggests there is a fundamental trust issue at the heart of their resistance.

Overall, however, most museum-goers do want to emerge from museum experience with a feeling of hope for the future. And given their overall openness to imaginative experiences as well, museums can be fantastic places to help people imagine creative solutions and feel empowered to make a difference in their communities.

Additionally, follow-up questions in the 2024 Annual Survey indicate that, regardless of how individuals feel about hope in museum settings, there are common values that most of us share when we think about the future. We’ll explore those shared values in our final Data Story on hope.

“I am choosing ‘other’ [for this question] because I think it is even MORE important than ‘very important.’ The world is a mess. I believe art and all museums can give us [hope] and will save us all.”

Annual Survey of Museum-Goers Data Stories are created by Wilkening Consulting on behalf of the American Alliance of Museums. Sources include:
• 2024 Annual Survey of Museum-Goers, n = 90,178; 202 museums participating
• 2024 Broader Population Sampling, n = 2,154
• 2017 – 2023 Annual Surveys of Museum-Goers

*Data Stories share research about both frequent museum-goers (typically visit multiple museums each year) and the broader population (including casual, sporadic, and non-visitors to museums).

More Data Stories can be found at wilkeningconsulting.com/data-stories.

And yet, media coverage can be a game-changer for museums in so many ways. It can generate ticket sales to events and exhibitions, build your reputation among supporters (especially funders), and boost your Google ranking.

To help more museums gain these benefits, I presented a session at AAM 2024 in Baltimore called “Scrappy Ways to Get Your Museum in the News.” It was a practical, actionable flash talk full of tips for generating (free!) media coverage of your institution. Attendees learned how to think beyond promoting exhibitions to find the many potential press opportunities that museums naturally contain.

These tips came from my experience as an independent public relations consultant for several Philadelphia-area museums, as well as arts organizations and non-profits. My clients don’t have huge budgets to advertise, pay to play (e.g., sponsored content and influencers), or hire large out-of-market agencies like bigger museums do. They don’t frequently have blockbuster exhibitions coming through or buzzy capital projects. And yet, they are doing great work and have compelling stories to tell. That’s where the scrappy part comes in. We look for unique angles and work together to find ways to get their activities, accomplishments, and stories in the news.

In this blog post, I’m going to share the tips from my presentation so that more museums can take what I’ve learned and apply it to their own institutions. This guidance is ideal for institutions without large marketing and communications departments, but will likely spark inspiration for busy professionals in a variety of roles at any size organization.

Going Beyond the Exhibition: Eight Story Ideas

The bulk of my presentation encouraged attendees to think “outside the exhibition.” Yes, exhibitions will draw press attention, and we should put resources into that work, but here are eight ideas for other ways to generate media coverage.

New = News

If you take nothing else away from this post, remember this: New = News. This seems so simple, and yet, most people forget about it when it comes to getting press. Reporters want to report on what is new at your institution. When there is something new happening, tell the world (starting with the press!). On the flipside, reporters may not consider something newsworthy simply because it is interesting or important—that’s something you may need to remind your bosses and leaders. Find a way to make it new.

Humans Are Interested in Other Humans

It’s a fact of life that we are interested in each other: how we live, the choices we make, our failures, our achievements. The press knows this. Center your pitches around a main character. Maybe it’s a person from history; maybe it’s a volunteer with a special story.

Party Time

Special events, galas, public programming: these are all opportunities to get media attention. Is there a topical speaker? An honoree? A milestone? These events may offer opportunities for feature story pitches, simple event coverage on the evening news, or a chance to invite a reporter to attend to further build your relationship and familiarize them with your work.

Shopping!

Don’t forget about your museum store. These shops often offer some of the best shopping in town. Think about holiday gift guides, business pitches about how the economy or a trend is impacting your store, and items for sale that may relate to a topic in the news.

Localize It, Personalize It

Think about niche media outlets, not only your major daily newspaper and TV stations. Publications geared toward a specific neighborhood/town or community (such as LGBTQ+, Latino, or etc.) will help you reach a specific audience with stories that interest them.

Education

Museum education departments often end up siloed and overlooked for press opportunities, because their work can serve different audiences and even happen outside the museum walls. Look for ways to promote what they do. I recommend setting up a regular call with your education department to find out what they are up to. The media especially love to tell stories about local kids. Using the tips above, keep an eye out in particular for human-interest stories, new programs, etc.

Newsjacking

This is an old-fashioned PR term for “hijacking” the news. Essentially, you are looking for topics already in the news to jump in on, knowing that reporters will be actively looking for stories on them. For example: if vaccines are in the news, you might reach out as a science museum to share your resources on the topic.

Money Money

Don’t talk about money at the dinner table, but do talk about it in the press. People are interested in money and reporters are interested in reporting on it. A few examples: a big grant, a small grant to do crucial work, a fundraising event that raises a lot, a capital campaign, a new scholarship program, or a big increase in revenue.

Doing the Prep Work

Now that you know how to identify a good story, it’s time to prepare to pitch the press.

If there is another thing besides “New = News” you take away from this post, it’s this: Have photos ready before you pitch. A lack of good photos is the biggest reporter complaint today; their outlets don’t have the budget to send photographers, so they depend on us. Photos are crucial in 2025 for telling a story. Decent-quality phone photos are fine for most uses, though professional shots are always great. Video is secondary, but it can come in handy, especially if you’re pitching TV.

You should also prepare talking points and identify your spokesperson. Confirm their availability in advance.

Finally, decide how you’re pitching a story. A press release is a formal document that announces news and is widely distributed. A media advisory is the who/what/when/where and is used to invite broadcast (TV and radio) outlets to attend an event to cover it. A pitch is a tailored and targeted message to a specific reporter inviting them to cover something.

Building a Media List

How to build your media list: read, read, read! Subscribe to every outlet that you want to cover your organization. Read, or at least skim, their work. Reading their daily email newsletter can be a quick way to do this. You’ll see what types of stories are being published and who is writing those stories.

Follow reporters on social media and interact with them; learn about what interests them.

Maximizing Media Coverage

Now that you have a plan, you’ll get media coverage! Then what?

Thank the journalist. Send a genuine email expressing your appreciation. Let them know what you liked about their story and working with them.

Share the story on social media—tag the journalist and their outlet.

You can also boost the reach by posting part of it on your website and sharing it in your newsletter. Internally, I recommend including it in board and staff updates too. Your colleagues will be happy to see their organization in the news.

Happy pitching!

Jump to the text version

“Bombarded”

“Exhausted”

“Frustrated”

Over the past several years, we have noticed that respondents to the Annual Survey of Museum-Goers are increasingly sharing negative feelings. Sometimes these negative feelings are in response to content they disagree with.

But much of this increased negativity is a response to perceived changes in their daily lives, including:

• The constant “bombardment” of the political and news cycle
• Eco-anxiety or despair over climate change
• Struggles with work and family obligations
• Financial challenges
• Increased political polarization

This negativity seems to be an expression of what many researchers have identified as a growing crisis in mental health.

In the 2022 Annual Survey of Museum-Goers, most people expressed that museums support their wellbeing.(1) In the 2024 survey, however, we specifically considered the importance of hope in motivating museum-goers to take a more positive and proactive approach to the future.

To find out what the public thinks about museums and hope, we asked a series of five questions.

Three “indirect” questions:

What makes these “indirect” questions? To the respondent, they don’t read as questions about hope, but other things. That’s important because it means that people who don’t feel that strongly about the cultivation of hope in museums tend to skip over the “hope” answers, instead choosing other answers that are more important to them … and they can do so without feeling judged about their answers.

1. What are the most important ways that museums should share and engage you with their content?

Out of the nine potential answers we provided, we are interested in this one:

Promoting hope by helping me imagine a better future

Frequent Museum-Goers: 16%

U.S. Adults: 19%

2. When you think of an ideal museum visit, what do you want to experience?

Out of eight potential answers we provided, we are interested in this one:

Feeling greater hope by helping me imagine a better future

Frequent Museum-Goers: 14%

U.S. Adults: 17%

3. Thinking about how imagination can support learning in museums, which of the following outcomes would you like visitors to experience?

Out of the seven potential answers we provided, we are interested in this one:

Helping visitors imagine a better future, giving us something positive to work towards

Frequent Museum-Goers: 49%

U.S. Adults: 48%

See anything interesting here?

We did!

Respondents were far less enthusiastic when we explicitly included the word “hope,” and more enthusiastic when we dropped the word.

Which means that those who did choose hopeful answers, well, we can feel pretty confident that they support this work in museums.

A “direct,” non-museum question

This question was intended to ask directly about hope … but not in a museum context. We wanted more general thoughts about hope, from their everyday lives.

• Feeling a greater connection to humanity
  • Frequent Museum-Goers: 41%
  • U.S. Adults: 34%
• Art – seeing beauty in the things humans have created
  • Frequent Museum-Goers: 68%
  • U.S. Adults: 40%
• Nature – seeing beauty or wonder in animals, plants, environments, etc.
  • Frequent Museum-Goers: 78%
  • U.S. Adults: 59%
• History – understanding how people in the past faced challenges and overcame them
  • Frequent Museum-Goers: 60%
  • U.S. Adults: 46%
• Seeing people helping others
  • Frequent Museum-Goers: 62%
  • U.S. Adults: 54%
• Finding respite and escape, allowing me to recharge
  • Frequent Museum-Goers: 48%
  • U.S. Adults: 39%
• Feeling there are things I can do to address challenges or problems
  • Frequent Museum-Goers: 43%
  • U.S. Adults: 34%
• Being part of a community of people working to make things better
  • Frequent Museum-Goers: 54%
  • U.S. Adults: 36%
• My religion or faith
  • Frequent Museum-Goers: 32%
  • U.S. Adults: 37%
• None of these
  • Frequent Museum-Goers: 1%
  • U.S. Adults: 4%

Good news! Virtually everyone said they could find hope in something, and many of the answers we provided are rather museum-y, focusing on the things museums often share.

A “direct” museum question

Finally, we wanted to know what they think about hope in a museum setting, asking respondents “how important it is to you that museums work to cultivate hope among visitors?”

• Very important
  • Frequent Museum-Goers: 37%
  • U.S. Adults: 43%
• Somewhat important
  • Frequent Museum-Goers: 43%
  • U.S. Adults: 43%
• Not very important
  • Frequent Museum-Goers: 13%
  • U.S. Adults: 9%
• Not at all important
  • Frequent Museum-Goers: 5%
  • U.S. Adults: 8%

Overall, there is good news here as well, as at least four out five respondents gave positive answers.

Feeling lost in the numbers? We were too! To help, we sorted respondents into three segments, based on the patterns of their individual responses to all five questions.

• Resistant: answered negatively to all museum-related hope questions.
  • Frequent Museum-Goers: 18%
  • U.S. Adults: 13 %
• Ambivalent: these respondents like the idea of hope being cultivated in museums, but are not necessarily seeking it out. They typically gave lukewarm responses to hope questions, or gave conflicting pro/against responses.
  • Frequent Museum-Goers: 43%
  • U.S. Adults: 42%
• Enthusiastic: these respondents loved the idea of hope being cultivated in museums, and chose positive answers to all hope questions.
  • Frequent Museum-Goers: 40%
  • U.S. Adults: 45%

While about equal numbers are enthusiastic or more ambivalent about the cultivation of hope in museums, there is a minority opinion that pushed back, responding negatively.

In the next Data Story in this series, we’ll explore these different perspectives in more detail, including the somewhat surprising finding that some people view cultivating hope for a better future to be too political for museums.

Stay tuned.

Annual Survey of Museum-Goers Data Stories are created by Wilkening Consulting on behalf of the American Alliance of Museums. Sources include:
• 2024 Annual Survey of Museum-Goers, n = 90,178; 202 museums participating
• 2024 Broader Population Sampling, n = 2,154
• 2017 – 2023 Annual Surveys of Museum-Goers

(1) For two Data Stories on wellbeing, go to: https://wilkeningconsulting.com/?s=wellbeing&post_types=post.

*Data Stories share research about both frequent museum-goers (typically visit multiple museums each year) and the broader population (including casual, sporadic, and non-visitors to museums).

More Data Stories can be found at wilkeningconsulting.com/data-stories.

Fulfilling a Need

When I was hired as AAAM’s Executive Director in 2019, I had more than a decade of experience as a member. I was acquainted with the mission and makeup of the membership and had a clear vision of how to take the organization to the next level. First and foremost, I wanted to sit down with present and past board presidents and leaders of our field to gain a better understanding of why AAAM—with an enormous amount of talent at its disposal—had not launched a certificate program that would help bolster our leaders and allow us to remain a leader in the industry.

Given the lack of executive trainings on the market that specifically supported the needs of African-American-focused museum professionals, I endeavored to build a program that considered the unique needs of AAAM members. After my own experiences with one-size-fits-all programs, I knew our members deserved a training tailored to their specific experiences. They needed a safe space to unpack and confront the trauma and complexity of protecting and preserving African American history and culture. They also needed help navigating the museum field as Black professionals—a space to confidentially acknowledge barriers they have faced and receive support in overcoming them from leaders with shared experiences.

As I began to meet with stakeholders to discuss this vision, time after time I was told the same thing: we needed more funding and more capacity. With all of our efforts tied to AAAM’s annual conference, our ability to implement a new educational program was limited. Still, despite these limitations, I continued to believe in my vision. To help overcome the roadblocks ahead, I made it my mission to find the perfect partner. I needed a collaborator who would help us provide a great service to our members and supporters, teaching both general leadership skills and the nuances of working with African art and African-American-focused museums.

That perfect partner—Howard University, one of the oldest historically Black universities and my alma mater.

Leaning into a Legacy

As we began interviewing various schools and programs, it did not take very long to decide that Howard University’s School of Business Executive Education & Center for Career Excellence was the right home for this particular partnership. Partnering with Howard would not only pay homage to our many founding members with connections to historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs), but would give us access to an already thriving executive leadership program with international reach. I thought of the wise words once spoken by Walgreens Boots Alliance CEO Roz Brewer, who emphasized that leaders should be both founder-inspired and mission-driven. The program was already set up for success, and through a strong budding partnership, AAAM would be able to curate a great opportunity that was specific to our members. With the full support of AAAM’s board, we officially moved forward with the program.

In 2022, the AAAM x Howard University Advanced Executive Training Program was officially born. We were excited to offer a space for AAAM members to feel safe sharing challenges they were facing in their organizations and provide tools that these emerging leaders could immediately apply towards solutions. Partnering with Howard also ensured that the foundational elements of the training would remain consistent as the program continues to evolve.

Funding for Accessibility

There was only one minor issue: we needed to find funding to support access to the program for our members. I knew how often they find their professional development line items struck from their budgets and wanted to ensure they did not have to choose between participating in our annual conference and the training. AAAM members deserve both! From that point on, it was imperative for me to find funding to offset the $2,500 per person cost for the training. AAAM’s development coordinator and I created a plan to do this, moving quickly so we didn’t lose the interest of our members or Howard as a partner.

As we researched funders, we quickly realized that our task was much bigger than what we initially anticipated. Thankfully, we had already been awarded a $500,000 grant from the Lilly Endowment Inc., and I quickly requested a budget modification to move funds from one line item to another to cover a portion of the tuition for members, requiring just a $125 enrollment fee. (The training would cost $2,500 for non-members.) With approved modifications from our funder, we signed a contract with Howard’s School of Business and started our inaugural cohort for the AAAM x HUSB Advanced Executive Training in 2022.

As we rejoiced over providing this new professional development opportunity, I looked ahead to the next round of participants. Again, we would need funding. The Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) Museum Grants for African American History and Culture program seemed a viable option. We applied for funding with amazing proof points, implemented a waitlist for AAAM members, and secured the School of Business as our partner for another year of training. In 2023, we received the great news that we were awarded an IMLS grant for over $130,000 to support the program for two years. Our ability to be focused, yet nimble and flexible, paid off through growing program stability. We quickly got to work with the School of Business to make the program bigger and better.

The Training: Learning from the Best

The program’s comprehensive curriculum includes live virtual sessions in conscientious leadership, strategic design thinking, the emerging nonprofit business case, executive fundraising, strategic community relations, and a team capstone project. Each iteration continues to evolve to match the current needs of our members.

From the beginning, program participants met virtually so we could continue to provide access to members throughout the country. By making certain access was available to our members, we could provide an environment that was similar to our annual conferences, allowing members to connect regardless of where they were located. From the first day of the training, the program was an immediate sensation with our members. They were able to discuss everything that would enable them to create their own successful strategic plans. In addition, participants shared and learned from the experiences of one another—iron sharpening iron. The participants asked industry leaders thought-provoking questions and discussed strategies for elevating their careers. The results were absolutely magical: never in our wildest dreams did we anticipate seeing more than 85 percent of our certificate recipients accepting leadership roles within a year. Not that we doubted the program, but the pace for participants’ return on investment was phenomenal and a welcome surprise. It also gave us the confirmation we needed to demonstrate that this specialized leadership program was needed—and effective!

This crown jewel of AAAM’s educational offerings has drawn accolades from the organization’s founders—which I deem one of the highest forms of praise. At AAAM’s 2022 conference in Miami, Dr. John E. Fleming commended us for this very important work.

“When Vedet told me about the program at Howard, it gave me goosebumps because, for the first time, we have a place we can go for leadership training and it is a place where we know we will be welcomed … If you look back over the history of the association, I think this is going to be the most outstanding accomplishment that we have achieved over the past forty-four years,” he said.

The 2024 Advanced Executive Training took place in April and continued to build on the success of the first two trainings, cultivating a safe space where museum professionals can learn from the best in the business. The training was once again a success, and we are eagerly awaiting to see where our certificate recipients will be in the coming years.

For more information on AAAM and the Advanced Executive Training, visit blackmuseums.org or join the waiting list for the 2025 session.

“How many treasures have been stolen from the British Museum?”

“Grief and Anger Mingle After Devastating Brazil Museum Fire”

“How the Mona Lisa almost came to a watery end at the Metropolitan Museum of Art”

“New York’s Met Museum Director Resigns Amid Financial Troubles”

Reading these, does your heart rate inch up? Do you wonder if you or your museum could be next? Do you question whether you have a strong enough handle on the risks facing your institution?

If so, it may be time to consider engaging an internal auditor. Here’s why.

The Value of Internal Audit to Museums

Much like small cities, museums are complex organizations, with a variety of areas focused on research, protection, conservation, education, digital outreach, design, donor development, administration, and finance—just to name a few. They often have diverse revenue streams from ticket sales, retail shops, restaurant services, special events, donors, and large endowments. As such, the related risks are as vast as the range of staff and skills they employ, and the services they offer. And on top of that, the world around us is in a state of uncertainty and change like we have never experienced before, and yet the pace is only expected to exponentially increase into the future. How do leaders keep up?

In organizations with a robust internal audit function, leaders can sleep more soundly at night. They have dedicated employees inside the organization whose sole purpose is to reduce uncertainty and increase confidence in the achievement of organizational success. Through audits and advisory reviews, internal auditors provide the assurance the board and leadership needs to ensure they are on the right path for success. Internal auditors let leaders know both what is going well and what is cause for concern, suggesting solutions wherever issues are identified, thereby helping convert uncertainty into opportunity.

On the flip side, there is an enormous amount of uncertainty and risk to organizations without internal audit functions, and to their leaders and trustees. These organizations may have others who provide them assurance over specific things like financial reporting (external audit) or compliance with laws and regulations (legal). However, they are missing the internal function that is holistically able to bridge the gap from planning to the successful accomplishment of objectives, while overcoming obstacles that can hinder organizational success.

Reducing Uncertainty and Increasing Confidence

It doesn’t take a major scandal to put an organization’s future at risk. Poor governance and missed opportunities can also make it hard for a museum to stay relevant and sustain operations over the long term. But what if you had a trusted partner on the inside whose sole purpose was to help you govern at your best? A function who would provide you with independent, risk-based, and objective assurance, advice, insight, and foresight? This is the role of internal audit.

• Internal audit enhances decision-making and oversight. Management and staff are often deeply invested in their programs or processes, blurring their ability to see the big picture, identify areas for improvement, assess risks fairly, or report beyond the “good news.” Positioned on the inside, internal auditors have a view into all aspects of an organization but are independent from management and objective in their approach, providing leaders the information they need, without bias, to appropriately weigh risk and reward for informed decision-making. Internal auditors inform leadership when things are going well and when they are not. Knowing they have complete information, leaders can focus clearly on the areas of greatest priority or concern to the organization and develop solutions to the most complex of problems. Leaders know that sound decision-making is informed by sound evidence. Having trusted internal auditors provides a fresh perspective, trusted data, and an independent viewpoint when making consequential decisions.
• Internal audit enhances governance. Effective museum governance requires eyes and ears on the ground to independently verify that the museum is on track for success. Coal miners used to carry canaries into the tunnels as the birds would alert them to the presence of poisonous gases. Internal auditors serve as “canaries” for museum governance, raising red flags to protect the organization, employees, leadership, and the trustees from harm. Early warnings from auditors can help museum leaders avoid missed opportunities, financial liability, brand or reputational damage, and legal penalties. With quick attention and intervention to burgeoning problems, stakeholders can ensure that both they and their organization are protected and thriving. One area where this role can be particularly helpful is workplace culture. A healthy culture is critical to the achievement of organizational goals, improving engagement and productivity, and serving as a deterrent for fraud. However, it can also be difficult to objectively gauge from high up, especially since senior leadership is responsible. An auditor’s independent assessment of workplace culture can help avoid serious consequences for organizations and can assist governance bodies right the ship before it’s too late.
• Internal audit enhances the organization’s successful achievement of objectives. Internal auditors are focused on helping the organization in the achievement of organizational goals, and due to their unique positioning and role, they have deep insights into all areas of the organization. As such, they can provide a balanced perspective in critical strategy discussions, break down silos, improve communication, enhance project management and boost organizational alignment. Internal audit also plans audits and consulting engagements around those areas of greatest priority to the organization, ensuring that senior leadership and the board is aware of any issues that may stand in the way of strategic success.
• Internal audit enhances performance. So often, managers have little bandwidth for anything beyond the day-to-day. Internal auditors can dig deep with meaningful analysis around how things could be better, partner with management to identify inefficiencies, and champion improvements for enhanced performance. Furthermore, an internal auditor’s unique role provides the perfect vantage point for identifying best practices and opportunities for streamlined operations. Internal auditors serve as trusted partners with unique skillsets and abilities to advise on areas across the spectrum, identifying opportunities to optimize and innovate.
• Internal audit enhances risk management and control processes. Internal auditors perform audits of high-risk areas, ensuring that senior leadership and the board is aware of any issues in need of greater attention or better risk mitigation strategies. They may highlight that certain art storage areas are located below ground within a flood zone, and that moving the art to storage above ground will better mitigate the risk of loss or damage to the collection. They can also assist legal and compliance offices by providing assurance over whether certain laws, regulations, or internal policies are being complied with, and identifying areas of noncompliance, further protecting the organization from legal penalties or reputational harm. An additional benefit is that the mere existence of an internal audit function can serve as an important deterrent for fraud, waste, and abuse, as staff know there is a function in place focused on weeding it out.

Criteria for Success

Cooperation between an institution’s management and those responsible for assessing and managing risk is critical for success and relies on several essential conditions:

• Communication: Open, transparent, and structured communication must exist between management and the team assessing risk, ensuring that risk and opportunity discussions are part of everyday conversations.
• Support: Management should foster a culture that values accountability, transparency, and integrity, viewing assessments and findings as opportunities for growth.
• Independence and Objectivity: Those assessing risk should remain free from interference so that they may maintain the necessary independent and objective mental attitude to perform their role for the organization.

Think like an Internal Auditor

The most effective internal auditors have honed their ability to guide process owners, management, and executive leadership to objectively and freely contemplate the following questions on their own:

• What opportunities may we be missing?
• What could go wrong?
• Who else should I be collaborating with on this?
• What’s working and what’s not?
• What is standing in the way of success?

Consideration of these questions allows leaders to stay risk-informed, look to the horizon for signs of trouble or opportunity, and remain fluid at adapting to change. When these questions become part of day-to-day conversations, organizations are more likely to successfully fulfill their organizational mission and objectives. So, if you want to think like an auditor, the best place to begin is to consider these questions, encourage others to do the same, and keep the conversation going!

Jump to the text version

Sometimes data challenges us. Analysis often reveals surprising, and sometimes not so surprising, patterns. As we dig deeper and learn more, the findings start to make sense.

But when the data just doesn’t make sense, like that time a children’s museum survey showed the majority of respondents were men without children, we knew immediately what had happened…

They got botted.

Each year, the Annual Survey of Museum-Goers is distributed by museums mostly via their contact lists, as well as social media. Social media platforms allow museums to reach respondents that their contact lists may lack, but this can open up the potential for “botting.”

What’s a “bot”?

Unfortunately, sometimes malicious web-crawlers comb social media for online surveys, spamming them with fake responses. These fake respondents or “bots” use automated tools to complete surveys many, many times and often very quickly.

Why spam a museum survey?

Honestly, we’re not entirely sure. A few years ago a large percentage of bots appeared to be coming from Russia, In that case, we assumed it was intended to indiscriminately mess with any U.S. based survey they could find.

Now, the raw data says most bots are coming from within the United States. That could be the case, or it could also be evidence of more sophisticated tactics of the people behind the bots.

We have found that the small prize drawing incentive offered for completing the survey attracts bots, just like bees to honey. And this is what web-crawlers are hoping to benefit from when they spam a survey on a large scale. Essentially, they’re trying to stack the odds in their favor!

Either way, bots are more than a nuisance…and they can skew your data!

So how do we know which responses are legit or not?

Here are some of the red flags we look for when we suspect bots have infiltrated a survey:

• A cluster of surveys that were started and/or completed at the same time or within seconds of each other
• A large number of responses from the same IP address
• A larger than normal number of responses from out of state and/or country
• Email addresses that consist of jumbled letters and numbers or have names/numbers in a pattern
• Inconsistent and/or contradictory answers to questions
• Ratio of completed surveys and partially completed surveys is out of normal range (it is normal to have between 15%-20% of your surveys only partially completed)
• Repetitive, patterned, nonsensical, irrelevant, and/or less than genuine responses to open-ended questions
• Results that don’t make sense for some museum types (like our children’s museum example above!)
• Surveys that were taken very quickly, sometimes in seconds

Some of these potential red flags on their own may be normal and not necessarily a bot, which is why we conduct thorough data cleaning.

Because participation in the survey is voluntary and questions are not required, data cleaning becomes a subjective process. Therefore, we use our brains (and not computers!) to pre-sort suspicious responses and to clean data. That’s because our brains are now trained in the nuances of responses to make the final decision on the quality of each response and how many red flags is enough to identify the response as a bot.

While we do implement many automatic strategies (sorry, we’re keeping those confidential because we don’t want botters to know our secrets!) to help stop bots from attacking, our experience suggests that they will still find ways to sneak into a survey.

But rest assured, we’ll continue to diligently comb through the data to spot bots—looking for those red flags and then cleaning up the data—to make sure that collected responses are reliable and accurate!

Annual Survey of Museum-Goers Data Stories are created by Wilkening Consulting on behalf of the American Alliance of Museums. Sources include:
• 2017 – 2024 Annual Survey of Museum-Goers

*Data Stories share research about both frequent museum-goers (typically visit multiple museums each year) and the broader population (including casual, sporadic, and non-visitors to museums).

More Data Stories can be found at wilkeningconsulting.com/data-stories.

The most-read posts on the AAM website this year reflect this focus. Whether discussing innovative approaches to descendant community relationships, accessible exhibition experiences, inclusive volunteer program structures, or excellent label writing, they speak to a will to break from the ways we’ve “always done things” and forge more sincere, committed institutions. Without further ado, here were the ten most-read posts across our digital platforms.

1. A Growing Backlash to DEI

By Elizabeth Merritt

As diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives have accelerated in American institutions, a small group of activists has mounted a backlash movement arguing they discriminate against majority groups, yielding significant legal victories. This post outlines how this movement has exploited minor rifts in public opinion, and how museums can navigate around these rifts while promoting progressive practices.

2. Content Warnings in Museums and Galleries: Taking a Proactive Approach

By Jackie Armstrong

Should museums warn visitors about sensitive content in advance? It’s a matter of frequent debate among staff, according to an advocate for trauma-informed museum practices. This post explains why she believes misconceptions may be getting in the way of action, and her advice on best practices for writing your own content warnings.

3. When the Ancestors Call to You

By Isabel K. Handa & Amy V. Margaris

Through an unexpected set of circumstances, an Oberlin College student and professor teamed up in 2023 to return a skull from the college’s ethnographic collection to the person’s native Hawaiʻi. This post, written as a dialogue between the student and professor, outlines how the emotional repatriation experience reshaped collections protocol at the school.

4. Out of Sight: How Museums Can Harness the Blind Perspective to Enrich Visitor Experiences

By Violet Rose Arma

Blind people enjoy the benefits of a good museum experience as much as anyone else, but they’re often held back from them by the field’s ingrained reliance on visual information. This post explores how museums are harnessing their perspectives to make richer, more multisensory experiences for everyone.

5. Demographics of US Museum-Goers: A 2024 Annual Survey of Museum-Goers Data Story Update

By Jessica Strube

What does the average museum-goer look like? The answer is changing, as new data from this year’s Annual Survey of Museum-Goers shows. This illustrated Data Story shares what the results reveal about trends in educational attainment, race and ethnicity, and age and life stage.

6. How to Transform a Volunteer Program in Six Steps

By Joseph O’Neill

Is your volunteer program suffering from declining participation, stagnant demographics, or confusing reporting structures? If so, it may be time for a major update. This post provides a simple framework for making effective changes, based on the advice of volunteer managers who have navigated transition.

7. Consensual Curation and Our Common Future

By Tamara Serrao-Leiva

As the pendulum has swung on repatriation and restitution, museums have been locked into a binary between holding onto collections and letting them go. But are these really the only options? In this post, one curator shares why she believes the future lies in a middle ground of collaborative agreements, and how she’s worked to develop them with tribal and international governments in recent years.

8. Every Museum Needs a Civic Strategy. Here’s How to Find Yours.

By Sarah Jencks

If you think your museum has nothing to do with civics, you may need to expand your definition of the term. This post shares why you should consider getting into the “democracy business” by connecting the stories you tell to the issues your community cares about.

9. Striving for Excellence in Exhibition Label Writing

By John Russick and Jojo Galvan Mora

Despite all that’s changed in museum work over recent decades, one thing remains the same: We still rely on written labels as our primary method of communicating with visitors. How, then, can we write copy that lives up to this role, instead of being “overly long, unclear, and uninspiring”? In this post, the former organizers of AAM’s label-writing competition share what they’ve learned.

10. Rethinking the Status Quo

By Jenny Woods, Brandi Shawn-Chaparro, and Abbey Earich

Volunteer programs are facing worrying trends, with long-serving volunteers declining to return from COVID closures and few new recruits stepping up to fill their shoes. What’s behind these phenomena, and how can museums adapt? In this Museum magazine article, three seasoned volunteer managers share their strategies.

The most active threads on the platform this year give just a taste of the important, useful, and entertaining conversations to be had:

1. Exploring Best Practices for Accessibility in Museum Exhibits

By Marcos Andrew

“I have been diving deep into the world of museum exhibit design, particularly focusing on accessibility aspects. It’s crucial for us to create inclusive spaces that everyone can enjoy, regardless of their abilities. I wanted to start a discussion here to share insights, best practices, and challenges faced when designing accessible museum exhibits.”

2. The Best Piece of Advice About Museum Work You’ve Gotten

By Rachel Alschuler

“I am wondering what the best piece of advice about museum work you have gotten? I learned that one of the most important things is to leave a job/ museum in better shape than you found it so that the next person it set up well. I think it is something I intend to carry with me always.”

3. What Would You Do If a Visitor Asked a Question You Don’t Know the Answer To?

By Rachel Alschuler

“I am wondering what any museum professional would do if a visitor asked a question you don’t know the answer to. I am interested in the response and that it is ok not to know but to always be open to learning.”

4. AI as a Tool for Creating Exhibitions

By Lars Wohlers

“Currently I am trying to get a better handle on what AI means/can do for exhibit design. If you have any experience or you know any interesting article/book regarding this topic, I would love to hear from you.”

5. Audio Description QR Codes

By Maggie Mills

“I’m about to print a large-scale fabric installation and have QR codes linked to audio descriptions of some of the images. I’m wondering if anyone knows what the standard size of the QR codes should be. They are not separate and will be embedded in the imagery. I’m trying to strike a balance between making them big enough to be accessible but not so big that they detract from the installation and make things visually confusing.”

6. Label Standardization

By Hanna McKellar

“I am looking for some resources on museum label standardization – we are hoping to find some sort of template so we can easily create same-size labels without hand cropping each individual label. I would also love to see any label policies/procedures regarding labels if people are willing to share!”

7. Collections Database to the Cloud: Yes or No

By Sherry Peglow

“Please contact me if your institution is AAM accredited and you’ve moved your collections database to cloud storage…or tell me why you haven’t.”

8. iPad Installation Question

By Robin Owen

“We are working with a history museum in New York on two AR experiences with volumetric video, designed for two small spaces. The original plan was for visitors to view the experiences on their own devices triggered by QR codes […] but the plan has serious drawbacks in terms of presenting volumetric video and the amount and quality of WiFi connectivity that will need to be provisioned. So, we’re exploring other options.

One would be to have the museum provide 3-4 tethered touchscreen devices like an iPad, loaded with the AR application, and possibly mounted on a gimbal, that visitors could use to observe the AR experience in each room. For visitor flow and other reasons this would be a better solution.

I’m looking for examples of this kind of installation that we could tell them about, or even better, show them, so they can see for themselves how this could work.”

9. Abandoned Property & Unwanted Donations

By Gretchen Stromberg

“I’m interested in hearing from other institutions if they have experience with unsolicited ‘donations’ being dropped off at their museum (with no documentation) or sent to the museum by mail. Since such items are then technically in the possession of the museum and they are not wanted by the museum, what rights does the museum have to do with the items? Is this a case where abandoned property laws must be followed?”

10. Books: Any Noteworthy Additions in Your Collection?

By Grace Belizario

“I’m interested in learning about any recent or notable books you’ve encountered, whether within your museum’s collection or through your professional or personal explorations. What have you discovered lately that stands out, and why does it hold significance for you or your institution? Whether it’s a rare find, a groundbreaking research publication, or a book that complements your interests or museum’s mission, please share your insights.”