Pros
Meaningful curatorial and educational work when leadership isn't interfering, free public access mission is a strong one when it's actually being served
Cons
Leadership at the top is the core problem, and it has been for years. The museum operates at a chronic deficit that is never clearly explained to employees. Leadership has told staff directly that the museum "might have to close," while simultaneously pursuing high-cost vanity projects (expensive gift shop items, expensive seating areas, curated aesthetics with no clear ROI) and asking partner institutions to subsidize budget shortfalls. Where the money actually goes is not transparent to the people doing the work. The workplace culture is built on favoritism and fear. Hiring and advancement depend more on personal loyalty than qualifications. Staff who ask for raises commensurate with their education or experience are told, explicitly, to look for another job. Employees are pitted against each other, and leadership has been heard on multiple occasions describing a strategy of making someone's role "untenable" as a way to force them out rather than managing them directly or having honest conversations. Retaliation is real. Employees who have raised concerns, including sharing internal financial information that suggested mismanagement, have faced professional consequences rather than a good faith response. Former staff who spoke up about mistreatment have experienced continued targeting even after leaving. HR has told staff directly that they have spoken with the significant majority of current employees about this senior leader's conduct, and nothing changes. This isn't a personality clash or a "management style" difference — it's a well-documented, years-long pattern that HR is aware of and unwilling or unable to act on.