Open Forum

Hi Lauren,

At my current museum, we call this committee the Collections Committee (we discuss accessions/deaccessions from the permanent collection and report on incoming/outgoing loans). At one of my previous museums, it was called the Art Committee, as it was solely an art museum, and they discussed similar topics to what I mentioned. 

I'd be curious how your discussion is going and what instigated the discussion!

Every museum that I have worked for has called it the Collections Committee. We have at times in this committee discussed things beyond specific acquisitions, deaccessions, and loans.

Hello all,

My institution is 67 years old. In the beginning that committee was called the Acquisitions Committee and it mostly discussed proposed accessions/deaccessions. Currently, that committee is called the Permanent Collection Committee and its mandate includes oversight of the breadth of Collection management in addition to its previous responsibilities.

Jennifer Bullock

Assistant Curator and Registrar, Kitchener-Waterloo Art Gallery, Kitchener, ON, Canada

Hi Lauren! I would encourage you to call this committee Collections or Collection Development rather than Acquisitions. Presumably the group might also consider surveys, conservation, deaccession, access, security and other contest of your Collection Management Policy.  Acquisitions sometimes lures board members into a false sense of a narrow remit like "we just decide what to add to the collection" and not any of the other hard work like assessment, evaluation, deaccession, disposal, loans, etc. I particularly like Collection Development because it is active - there's a verb in there! Work will be required!

Erin

In reading the excellent responses you have receive so far Lauren, our question is on the mark.  It appears that given the variety of museums there are a variety of committees involved with some aspect of collections, be that acquisition, deaccessioning, care, exhibit and so on.  During my years as a curator and director I fortunately avoided such a designated committees and in fact avoided creating one.  Few people understand the needs, uses, applications purposes of collections other than those in the profession who regularly work directly with them.  These tend to fall into the traditional roles of curators and collection managers/registrars.  This is not to rule out educators, directors, consultants, specific content scholars, visitor service positions, security personnel and conservators, all of whom can and often do have valuable contributions to add to discussions but that may be variable depending on particular circumstances.  I do leave out most trustees as in my experience most know the least about collections but are capable of causing trouble.  There are two collection areas for which I was grateful not to have any sort of collection committee. One was for acquisitions and one was for retention and care.  Collecting is often the most difficult part of a museum's work.  There is a lot of stuff out there.  Deciding what to acquire requires great thought.  When I taught museum studies at the Seton Hall program I had a list of questionable acquisition reasons.  We have seen questions on this site about colleagues stuck with all sorts of messes left by past foolishness, usually innocent I should add.  When I speak of retention I am largely focused on the horrors of deaccessioning.  The current commercial aspect of this practice is eroding the preservation commitment museums by definition embrace. In addition to putting an implied (and sometimes actual)  price tag on everything museums own, it undermines so many museum roles, including the art of collection storage.  This is one of the most misunderstood aspects of our work.  I fear collection focused committees, if made up of non-collection savvy people, will advocate for the loss of proper storage and thus the loss of what it holds.  Finally, as a curator at the Museum of the City of New Your I acquired all sorts of pictures of the city and have no regrets about any.  Everything is still there and accessible for research, exhibit, reproduction, etc.  I can list acquisitions I made at other museums but recommend my latest book: Museum Collecting Lessons: Acquisition Stores from the Inside Routledge, 2022)  The eleven chapters are eleven stories written by colleagues describing things they collected.  I am not in the book selling business but I was lucky to get some great contributors who had/have pertinent things to add to this practice. Thank you, Steven Miller. And if this response is not long enough, I can chat about your question further:  sh.miller2@verizon.net       

Greetings.  I agree with most of Steven Miller's argument, except about committee population.  I think there's an important education component of the collections committee.  Some of my least "educated" collections committee members became the most staunch advocates for my recommendations.  This was partly due to the fact that they were great people who loved the museum and understood their roles.  But it was also due to the fact that they enjoyed sharing what they'd learned with their board peers not on the collections committee.  Because so often collections-related issues consume immense resources, having a non-staff advocate who's been schooled by staff regarding the institution's needs can be invaluable.

I agree that the committee should be named "Collections Committee," or alternatively, "Collections and Exhibitions Committee."

Hi Lauren,

The committees I've chaired have been called the Collections (or Collections Review) Committee. It's specific to the department, but leaves room to not just be about acquisitions or deaccessions. These committees have reviewed and accepted/declined new donation offers and deaccessioning recommendations, and have discussed other issues relating to collections like conservation needs, storage rearrangements, and possible inclusion of artifacts in public programming, as well as being part of the board-approved process of reviewing and updating our Collections Management Policy. For the latter, collections staff have taken the lead on any needed changes, presented them to the collections committee for consideration and approval, and then if approved, those changes go before the full board for final approval. 

As to make-up of these committees, collections staff are included, of course, but at my previous museum the remainder of the committee was also the executive director, curator of exhibits, and one long-term museum volunteer from the community who had worked specifically in collections. That was a national museum and there were no board members on the committee, largely due to their proximity to the museum. At the museum I'm with now, the committee also includes the executive director and three members of the board since it is a county history museum and board members are local. At both places, interns are invited to sit in on the meetings and can participate and share thoughts, but don't officially vote. 

There is real benefit, in my experience, to having multiple perspectives. These meetings always present opportunities to teach those that are not collections professionals and it can actually be a refreshing addition to hear other voices and ideas. 

Hopefully this is helpful!

Best,

Angela Stanford

Advanced Museum Services

www.advancedmuseumservices.com