|
 Why Not (For) Profit? Panelists: James K. Ballinger, Dennis Barrie, Anne d'Harnoncourt, and Stacy F. King Moderated by Judith H. Dobrzynski The following white paper is drawn from the remarks of the panelists and moderator for this session, along with the questions and responses from members of the audience. This document is intended to reflect the variety of viewpoints offered during the discussion, and to frame broadly the issues discussed; it should not be taken as a formal statement of opinion by the panelists. Most museums across the country, regardless of subject area, have adopted now-standard models as non-profit institutions, relying on support from a broad range of sources including individual and corporate contributors, government agencies, admissions and concessions revenues, and their invested endowment funds. Despite this—or perhaps because of it—these museums also play an important role as catalysts for economic growth in their communities—a role that often goes unappreciated by local officials, citizens, and sometimes even the institution's leadership. Spurred in part by a recognition of this economic power, a new generation of for-profit institutions are being built, emphasizing financial self-reliance while continuing to focus on an educational mission. Similarly, a few companies have begun organizing exhibitions as for-profit ventures, creating a still-to-be-proven model for touring exhibitions to not-for-profit venues. Both of these strategies raise a number of questions about the impact of profit-making on institutions involved in art, culture, and education—as well as concerns about maintaining the highest educational standards when the prime mover is dollars, not education. Mission: Critical At the forefront of any discussion of this issue rest public perceptions of institutional credibility. For the traditional, non-profit museum, institutional integrity was important, but also difficult to lose: as long as the quality of the programming available to the public appeared beyond reproach, most communities were satisfied. Indeed, many have either tolerated or encouraged their local institutions to strengthen revenue-generation through enlarged stores, restaurants, space rentals, or even catering and event-supply businesses because the income has helped sustain robust exhibitions, educational programming, and other benefits for the museum's audiences. Those entering the field from the for-profit side see such distinctions as illusory. For-profit museums generate their income through the same mechanisms, yet have an incentive to operate more efficiently since they do not receive (tax-deductible) contributions from donors. Their survival depends on earning income by attracting audiences—and the best and the most reliable method is to provide programming that meets the quality standards of "traditional" museums. Although their installations and programs may appear more "populist" than the fine art-driven fare offered elsewhere, advocates claim that this only serves to strengthen their audience base and educate more people—much the way that ever-popular exhibitions of Impressionism serve to draw visitors to art museums, which increases their exposure to other objects and ideas. For the companies seeking to package exhibitions and make them available to any venue able to pay the fees—and to turn a profit in the process—the argument is the same: only exhibitions of the highest quality will be successful, therefore protecting their integrity is a crucial part of their business model. The Politics of Profits Even with the best programming, the introduction of the profit motive in the museum community may raise eyebrows. There are two predominant lines of thought here that set many non-profit museums on edge. First and foremost may be the challenge from local government officials or over-tapped donors, asking why their community's museum cannot be self-sustaining (if not actually profitable). This may lead to the suggestion that, rather than take tax dollars away from other programs, museums should be taxed, and therefore help contribute to their community's welfare rather than live off it. However, these seemingly-simple truths obscure deeper and more complex realities. While a number of for-profit museums have proven successful thus far, not all museums—or subjects—lend themselves to this kind of model. For example, the costs involved in storing, insuring, and conserving fine art can be burdensome for even the wealthiest museum, to say nothing of smaller ones; yet these objects are usually important to a museum's mission, and valuable assets to the community in whose trust they are held. Moreover, even institutions founded around popular themes like pop music have faced economic challenges that a re-orientation to raising profit would not resolve. Likewise, the suggestion that museums are taking funds out of community coffers by not paying taxes can be misleading. While it is true that for-profit museums do pay taxes on their income, they are also more likely to follow a profit-driven need to economize, and to focus their energies only on those activities that are profitable. Educational or other programs that do not attract sufficient audiences may be cut, even if they advance un-measurable or longer-term community goals. By contrast, tax-exempt non-profit museums serve as economic drivers for their communities in other important ways. For example, museums are often large employers, offering jobs in security, maintenance, and administration as well as in education and exhibition development. Unlike their for-profit cousins, while programs or positions that are not necessary are typically cut, institutions that serve the public rather than the profit motive may make more flexible judgments about the "success" of an activity than whether it made money. These institutions also have a greater incentive to invest in their communities—through programming, rather than dollars. Their activities attract visitors who spend money locally. High quality institutions help define communities as attractive, livable places, and their presence contributes to a city's identity. Educational partnerships with schools, organized events for local clubs, and other kinds of services provide invaluable resources and can help make even the smallest town a more dynamic place. Such programs would be more difficult to sustain under a model that removed philanthropic support. Overall, the most important element of any museum, regardless of the non-profit or for-profit status of the institution, may be good management. The characteristics of successful leadership in the for-profit and not-for-profit world may have more in common than either likes to admit. Under the leadership of an engaged and informed director or CEO—and supportive board of trustees—museums can cultivate an environment where significant work and fiscal responsibility are simultaneously achievable. For citation, please reference: http://berkshireconference.org/content/2004-why.cfm
|
