 Hello everyone and welcome to a joint webinar of the Emerging Conservation Professionals Network or ECPN and the Equity and Inclusion Committee or E&IC, two volunteer groups of the American Institute for Conservation. My name is Jen Munch and I am ECPN's webinar coordinator for the 2017 to 2019 term. Today's webinar is entitled Gender and Leadership in Museums Today, Gender Equity in the Conservation Field. This webinar is the first of a series of educational programs supported by the Department of Art Conservation, University of Delaware, in honor of Bruno Pouliott. ECPN is grateful to the University of Delaware for this opportunity to celebrate Bruno's legacy as a mentor and educator and to commemorate his passion for the conservation profession. For more information, please see the announcement to the ECPN community and AIC's online community. Before we turn to today's program, I'd like to quickly familiarize everyone with the GoToWebinar program. You can use the control panel to make modifications to your audio settings. All attendees are automatically muted by the program, but you can communicate with us throughout the webinar using the question box. If you are watching this webinar with a group of people, please let us know how many using the question box. And if you would like, you can also hide the control panel with the orange arrow at the top of your screen. Now I'd like to take a moment to briefly share information about the Equity and Inclusion Committee. The ENIC, formed in May 2018, works with the AIC board and staff with the principal goal of increasing racial and cultural diversity within the conservation field. The group has launched a discussion board in AIC's online community. Please join us there for discussions following the webinar. For ease of access, links to the discussion board as well as the committee's full statement and roster will be included in the show notes for this webinar when it is posted to YouTube. And one member of the ENIC, Nora Frankel, will be joining us to moderate questions and answers near the end of this webinar. And if you have questions for the speakers, feel free to ask them throughout the presentation and we'll address them at the end. Now I'd like to share some information about ECPN. ECPN is a network within AIC that is dedicated to supporting conservation professionals in the first stages of their career. Please visit our page on the newly redesigned AIC website, our Facebook page, or our wiki of resources for emerging conservation professionals for more details about our activities. ECPN has an ongoing interview series with conservators and specializations that require particular training, plus a series featuring Americans who trained abroad. You can find these interviews on the AIC blog. An upcoming series will feature conservators who work in libraries and archives. ECPN organizes two webinars each year on topics relevant to emerging conservators. Our webinars are all recorded and the full videos are available on the AIC YouTube channel. Without further ado, I'd like to introduce our two speakers for today's webinar. Joan Baldwin is the curator of special collections at the Hodgskis School in Lakeville, Connecticut. She is the principal writer for the Leadership Matters blog. Anne W. Accrescent is an independent consultant to curatorial and educational nonprofits. She is the former director of the Museum Association of New York and former director of the National Council of State Archivists. Both Anne and Joan are former museum directors and they co-teach museum leadership for Johns Hopkins University. They are also co-authors of the 2017 book Women in the Museum, Lessons from the Field, and the 2013 book Leadership Matters. A revised version of this book will be published this year. Joan and Anne are also co-founders of the Gender Equity in Museums Movement, or GEM. And if you'd like to see more extensive biographies for our speakers, please visit the blog post regarding the webinar on AIC's blog. And at this time, I'd like to turn it over to Joan and Anne. Thanks very much and welcome everybody. My name is Anne Accrescent. And excuse me, I'm Joan Baldwin. And we're so very pleased to be with you today to discuss leadership and gender equity, both within the museum field and within conservation. And we'll begin with a little bit of background about how the two of us came to these two topics. We're veterans of cultural heritage museums, Joan and I are, and we believe leadership is the critical ingredient for building and sustaining healthy, responsive museums for the 21st century. The impetus for our book Leadership Matters was watching so many history and cultural heritage museums be buffeted about by social, economic and cultural change, both massive and subtle. This year we completed a revision of leadership matters and change remains an accelerating constant. We know that many of you lead well, but sometimes you lack the tools, the networks, or the preparation to navigate these challenges. Sometimes leading well may also be a matter of empowerment or authority to lead an organization, a department, or even a team. In revising leadership matters, we wanted to alert the entire museum community to the need for more intentional leadership training and development for both staffs and boards of trustees. While writing leadership matters, a number of women came to us and asked us when we were going to write the book about women in the field. And their questions led to our second book, Women in the Museum, which was published in 2017. As part of the research for that book, we conducted focus groups, interviews, and we fielded three surveys to which more than 1200 people responded. And the quotes that you'll hear today throughout our presentation come from those survey respondents. Both books begin with myths that all of us live with. Today we want to share a mash-up of myths from each topic area to try and define how and where leadership and gender intersect. Before we discuss the intersection of leadership and gender, we thought we'd share some numbers about the size of the entire museum workforce. These figures come from the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor. The Bureau updates its totals annually, and the most recent data is from 2018. You'll see that the total museum workforce is 338,000 people, and that is a decrease of 24,000 from the previous year, 2017. You should also note that it is an overwhelmingly white field with 82% people who are white, 14%, to our Latinx, 10%, black, and 3% Asian. This lack of diversity is deeply embedded in both the museum and the conservation field. Fortunately, between the rising voices of many young, diverse museum professionals, and perhaps many in this audience, along with important foundation support for scholarships, internships, and professional development opportunities for minority students and professionals, we may see some movement on this front. So in 2018, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that women comprise 49.5% of the entire museum workforce. Within that number of 49.5% are 13,000 museum technicians and conservators, of whom at least we know from your work, AIC's work, 77% of them are women. Women as a percentage of the entire museum workforce have hovered around or slightly over the 50% mark for the last three years or so. And by way of comparison, women make up 51% of the entire US workforce. So given the overwhelming number of women in museum studies and public history graduate programs and in conservation degree and certificate programs, coupled with the number of part-time and low-paying positions that attract more women than men, this percentage will continue to grow at a healthy rate. We understand that in 2018, that was the first year that the conservation graduate programs had no male applicants. Given what we know about the pipeline, the percentage of women in conservation will continue to climb, and in the museum field as a whole, the number of women could reach 70% in the coming decade. We understand from your colleagues that the conservation field professionalized in the early 1960s. And that the AIC was founded in 1972. And women have dominated this workforce since at least the early 1990s. It's likely that the field, your field, began with more men than women. But more research is needed before we know when that ratio began to change. Let's turn now to Pivot to the myths that we talked about. And the first myth we'd like to share is when you've probably heard it's anyone can run a museum, and it's first cousin. If you've led one museum, you can lead any museum. And we should just note that these myths apply to departments and programs within larger organizations as well. You may have had family or friends tell you your job sounds like a lot of fun that it must be easy breezy, not a lot of pressure and just a lot of really cool things to work with. Or maybe they just have no idea what you do or why you do it. We've also known some museum trustees and even members of the public who casually dismiss museum leadership as something anyone can do. This line of thinking subtly devalues what museums and real leadership are all about. While there are broad similarities among museums, they tend to have collections with oversight provided by a board programming and they're often contained in a physical plant. That's where the similarities end. The rest is variable, wildly or weirdly idiosyncratic and in many cases vulnerable. Museum leadership is vulnerable as well because of its intersection with gender. On the one hand, there are stubborn perceptions intentional or not that men make better leaders. Yet you'll find women directors in the majority of museums with operating budgets less than $3 million. Furthermore, women are more often hired to lead museums in crisis. And maybe that goes for departments as well. But more about that later. So despite this myth about anyone being able to lead a museum or a department or a team, it's hard work and 21st century museum leadership is increasingly complex. And we just, you know, gathered a few, just a few of the issues on this slide of some of the challenges that 21st century museums are dealing with. Leaders need to be agile and adaptable since workplaces often employ four or five generations of workers. And all of them have differing attitudes, approaches and experiences. More museum workers are speaking up about their working conditions and questioning, questioning alignments between institutional values and trustee and donor choices. So there's an activist movement among museum staff that I don't think we've seen for a very long time. Leaders need also to be responsive. Thanks to social media, everyone, and we mean everyone has a say, good or bad. And, you know, people are talking constantly on social media. Collections are the focal point of many of these conversations around the colonization, repatriation and representation of marginalized artists and communities. And while some art museums are selling work to build more representational holdings, we know that history and heritage curators and historians are exploring ways to give voice to those who've traditionally been voiceless. Leaders must also understand how buildings work as many a museum's home staggers under years of deferred maintenance, demanding renovation or even new construction and underpinning everything you do as a relentless quest for audiences, time and money, the three givens in any strategic planning scenario. With this swirling potion of staff, board, audience, community collections and money, is it any wonder leaders struggle to find the time to develop and practice intentional leadership? In researching organizational success across both the nonprofit and for-profit spectrums, four characteristics rose to the surface that we believe are critical to museums, archives and libraries success today and in the future at both the organizational and departmental level. These characteristics are not about collections or buildings or scholarship or even the size of endowment. They're about leadership mindset and commitment to delivering on the promise of mission. And the first is leadership convergence. And by that we mean sort of flattening of the hierarchy and a spreading of authority, saying goodbye to that kind of command and control my way or the highway leadership and diversifying problem solving and decision making. Shared leadership allows everyone and encourages everyone to leave from where they are. The second is multi-dimensionality and that is this idea and we'll talk more about this of connecting an individual with the institution and the community in both space and time. Next, agility. All leaders have to be agile, being comfortable with notions of ambiguity and uncertainty, always having more than one plan of action and being able to communicate with more than one vocabulary and subsequently to evaluate and articulate success in multiple ways. And last, what we call in tune and in touch, and that's the leaders ability to see both internal and external needs to listen to people in the organization and external stakeholders and most importantly to act on what he or she sees and hears. Given what we know about successful 21st century museums, libraries and archives work, you'd think that myth number two hard skills still trump soft skills would have been laid to rest years ago, yet it lingers among many old school leaders. And since 35% of museum board members are males age 65 and older, who often use their corporate experience as the yardstick for evaluating leadership performance. It's no wonder that this myth persists. The truth is, a good leader must master a body of subject matter information, as well as be proficient in basic business practice. Sure, good leaders need to be able to budget to forecast trends to plan evaluate and analyze results. But if leaders aren't able to humanize their knowledge and themselves, no amount of hard skills mastery will inspire enthusiasm and confidence. It's good to remember this quote instead. The soft stuff is the hard stuff. Let's take a closer look. So what does intentional leadership look like? In our leadership matters research, we found that the 36 leaders we interviewed were all intentional about their leadership, meaning they made leadership a personal and professional journey, building self awareness through a cycle of reflection, discovery, reevaluation, recalibration and even reinvention. The way they carried out their practice of leadership emphasized four different but often overlapping qualities, self awareness, authenticity, courage and vision. When we understand that leadership is situational, we can see that intentional leaders draw on these four qualities to varying as needed. However, self awareness is the through line quality for all successful leaders, no matter what job title you hold in your institution. And we're going to assume that you're all intentional leaders otherwise you wouldn't be listening to this webinar. Your participation means that you're willing to engage in learning, turning the spotlight on yourself and acknowledging professional strengths and weaknesses in order to move your career forward. In other words, you're practicing self awareness right this minute. Intentional leaders are what the Center for creative leadership calls learning agile. They model behavior that works organizationally too. As long as leaders and followers engage in an ongoing process of self understanding, then it's natural for museums to engage in the same process of experimentation, reflection and recalibration, thus becoming learning agile institutions. What we learned about leadership is that it can be learned. Anyone can be a successful leader if they want to do the work of learning and practicing intentional leadership. Today, effective leadership is as much about employee engagement as mastery of skills and knowledge. As we stated, intentional leaders are flexible. They possess strong teamwork skills, they manage uncertain and ambiguous uncertainty and ambiguity which is an issue I think in our fields, unique to us perhaps, and they think strategically. These strengths are not the sole province of any demographic, but they do need to be practiced. In 1990, Judith Rosner published an article called Ways Women Lead in the Harvard Business Review. This slide compares some of the leadership styles Rosner discovered in her research. Rosner reported that the majority of men and women said they had an equal mix of feminine and masculine traits, as well as gender neutral traits like adaptiveness, conscientiousness, being systematic. Further, the women who described their leadership traits as predominantly feminine or gender neutral reported, quote, a higher level of followership among their female subordinates than women who describe themselves as masculine, unquote. As far as their effectiveness, Rosner highlights strengths associated with women leaders, including their efforts to encourage participation and share power and information and attempts to enhance other people's sense of self worth and to energize followers. These are important because of the accepted understanding that people perform best when they feel good about themselves and their work, and they try to create situations that contribute to that feeling. Knowing that leadership is about influence and that it can be fluid depending on the situation. We could take exception to Rosner's 30 year old gendered classification of leadership traits in favor of something more gender neutral, like emotionally intelligent traits. Given the fact that gender discrimination continues to be a very real phenomena in the American workplace and the museum workplace, it's good for everyone to understand how leadership traits are perceived and lived. But here's the caveat, as one of our survey respondents noted, just because a woman is in a position of leadership, it doesn't mean that women's issues and concerns are always considered. I'm sorry, it's not it. There it is. In the first minute, we said that women are often tapped to lead museums in crisis. And this phenomenon isn't just about museums, though it's it's widely seen across all job sectors. First, some evidence suggests that the selection of a woman for leadership position signals a change in direction, especially when an organization has a history of all male leaders. For underperforming organizations, selecting a woman shows that it might be undergoing sorely needed change. Second, research indicates that men possess qualities that are better fit overseeing successful organizations, while women's qualities are more suitable in difficult situations. When asked to describe managers in successful organizations, people tended to list stereotypical masculine qualities, decisive, forceful. In this regard, Rosner's gendered leadership traits from the 1990s continue to hold power. These kind of findings lead some to conclude that when we think crisis, we think female. And in times of crisis, more stereotypical feminine qualities like being collaborative or good with people are seen as particularly important. Thus, it may be women are more suitable in crisis situations, since women possess these qualities more so than men. In fact, research shows that feminine traits are considered to be especially important when a leader is expected to manage people or behind the scenes to manage a crisis and sadly to act as a scapegoat. For individual women leaders being put in command when the odds of success are low can set them up to fail. Despite inheriting problems, women in these positions are seen to be fully responsible for the bad state of affairs they inherited and presiding over a failure can undermine career advancement. So here's myth number three, we are the source of our own best ideas. This myth is a breeding ground for bias, both implicit and explicit. Whether backstage and museum workplaces are out in front museums and heritage organizations need to make sure everyone is heard and more importantly than everybody can speak. As much as we might believe museums are objective places unconscious and intentional bias manifests itself everywhere. Gender bias affects how we write our policies from the use of pronouns to the scope of collections to the benefits that employees receive. Similarly, it affects wayfinding and exhibit text, and we only have to read the headlines about who can use restrooms to gain insight about how gender is treated in public spaces. It also impacts how scientific research is presented, how works of art are selected and objects arranged, or how programming is designed. How often do discussions of women inventors and entrepreneurs or the soul sucking drudgery of 19th century housework or women's roles as artists and collectors enter the museum narrative. How often do museum women, I'm sorry, how often do women museum workers question how gender reinforces or challenges history. Yet there is a growing social justice imperative for museums, which asks each of us to acknowledge the polarization and privilege of the institutions where we work, volunteer and play. So let's take a closer look. When we contemplate 21st century leadership at this particularly precarious moment for the museum field, we're convinced it's really about the money and mostly about the mindset. Many of you may be familiar with this notion of the scarcity abundance mindset that's on the screen right now. A scarcity mindset is characterized by the sense that there's never enough to go around. Therefore, we need to hang on to our piece of the pie, no matter what and never ever let it go. It's competition in a miserly way driven by fear, resentment and suspicion. And it makes everything worse. Most of these organizations, organizations survived by a threat. Abundance thinkers embrace the idea that there's enough pie for everyone. And if you add your slice of pie to someone else's, you'll end up with more pie. In order to see the benefits of abundance, an organization needs to feel good about its value and the contributions it makes. Abundance thinking drives collaboration, generosity, trust, ownership and growth. Once you put the excuses and the spreadsheets away, it's clear that a board and a director's ability to lead intelligently and motivate an institution are as important, if not more so, as the quantity of its programming, its collections, or the size of its bank account. So this is quite a long quote. But we think it's an important one. And it comes from Kay Winfeldman, the new director of the National Gallery of Art. The first woman director in the 81 years of the National Gallery of Art. And she wrote this in an article that she penned last year, as long as the staff and trustees of American museums remain predominantly white, it will be difficult for museums to tackle the often painful, but important contemporary issues that we must face. Many museum traditionalists, most of whom grew up in a different America, do not understand why younger and more diverse audiences insist that museums engage in contemporary issues. Museums, however, risk irrelevance unless they step up to address formidable and pressing societal issues. And among those societal issues, I think gender equity in the workplace. So here's myth number four. And with it, we return to this question of gender. The myth is there are so many women in the museum field that gender equity will happen on its own. And certainly many people have told us that in a museum field dominated by women, although we know women are only 49.5% of the workforce. However, women do cluster in certain job titles, departments, types of museums. So it may sometimes seem as though there are more women in the field than there really are. On the face of it, it might seem once a field is dominated by women, all gender issues are solved. But majority women fields can still have issues with pay equity with maternity and paternity leave with access to promotion with sexual harassment or inequitable hiring practices. Why? Well, this may be due in part to the fact that women leaders and managers may not have always had enough workplace power or authority to implement pay and other policy changes for women and minorities. We've seen this play out in well established majority female professions like libraries and nursing. Gender equity issues are not solely women's issues to solve. Leaders need to create equitable workplaces, not just for women, but for everyone. Now's the time to talk about how to keep the gender balance stable in this field. It doesn't matter solely of better salaries or benefits, better working conditions, greater allowance to build a career in a field that's generally constrained by resources. Wouldn't what attracts men into a field attract a more diverse workforce overall? And isn't a diverse workforce what leaders want? I must warn that any field dominated by one gender makes the economy less efficient. Further, the stigma around women's work makes it difficult for organizations to find the best matches when hiring. Let's take a closer look. The museum field is on the verge of becoming a female dominated fields as we've seen. And professions that are majority female have earned the stereotype to nickname pink collar. The term pink collar joined common speech during the Second World War, but it came into prominence in the late 1970s. And it refers to those professions historically considered to be women's work and where women tend to dominate in terms of numbers. So think of the helping and the caring professions like teaching, like nursing, counseling, but also think of service jobs like housekeeping and weight staffing. Think of flight attendants and think of many museum positions. Some of our survey respondents even referred to their departments as pink ghettos. Education and training don't have anything to do with what makes a profession pink. It has everything to do with with longstanding cultural definitions of what is considered appropriate work for women versus men. This means the inherited bias of what constitutes women's work means pink collar work does not have the same value in the economy as the white and blue collar professions. Consequently, society views pink collar workers as less than and pink collar professions as less than less value means less respect for both the profession and the individual worker. And that translates into lower compensation, fewer benefits, and uncertain retirements. We received an email from our webinar organizers with information from a conservator in private practice. And she recalled asking the director of a major conservation program why there were so few men in the program. And the answer, well, the answer was that conservation had a PR problem in terms of men. It was seen as a helping profession, rather than a STEM profession. So this gender bias diminishes a profession significance in the eyes of community and government decision makers, the media, and even donors, leading to what the author Joanne Lippman calls the respect gap. This can be said of museums as well. In many quarters, museums don't get the respect or the public funding they deserve. They're viewed as nice to have amenities, not critical elements of healthy societies. Is that because the public views museums, first and foremost, as pink. There are two more sort of workplace metaphors that go along with the pink collar workplace. And most pink collar workers are aware of at least one of them. They are sticky floors glass ceilings and glass escalators sticky floors is a term describing a discriminatory pattern that keeps people at the bottom of the job scale. It's frequently found in pink collar professions. By comparison, the term glass ceiling describes an artificial discriminatory barrier blocking the advance of women or people of color or both who already hold fairly good standards usually usually in middle management. Although women who run into glass ceilings are more educated and privileged than those who experienced the sticky floor phenomena. Women in both situations have some similarities. Both have low mobility and find themselves unable to better their situations. In addition, research shows that when men enter pink collar professions wages and benefits rise, and they get promoted. While women climb the ladder in a female dominated profession, their male peers glide past them on an invisible glass escalator shooting straight to the top. The bottom line, men in female dominated jobs tend to fare even better than men in male dominated jobs. And they typically earn even higher salaries receive more promotions and achieve higher levels within organizations than their female counterparts. So let's take a look at myth number five compensation is secondary because the work is its own reward. Well, I'm sure most of us find our work very rewarding. And the last but the last time we checked, we still pay the same amount for a gallon of gasoline as Oprah Winfrey does. Believing this allows boards and museum leadership to devalue staff, which affects women more. It holds back museums and heritage organizations from investing in leadership training and development and across the board career development for many employees. And it's a key factor and why this field struggles to attract a diverse workforce and why it's becoming increasingly pink. Pink color professions also pay less. That shouldn't be a surprise and provide provide less benefits. The fact is, there is a gender pay gap in nearly every profession, including museums. The gender pay gap is the result of many factors, including occupational segregation, like pink color professions, bias against working mothers, direct pay discrimination and location. Racial bias, disability, access to education and age also come into play. Consequently, different groups of women experience very different gaps in pay. Women across all races and ethnicities earn less than men. This chart from the American Association of University Women's Economic Security Research illustrates the difference in median annual pay of women working full time year round, compared to the pay of a similar cohort of men. And by the way, white men earn more than all racial groups. The American Alliance of Museums 2017 salary survey reports that most museum jobs pay women less than they pay men. There are exceptions where there seems to be no pay gap, and these include positions like Human Resources Director, CFO, that Chief Financial Officer, Business Manager, and Grants Manager to name a few. So since women currently comprise more than 75% of the workforce and art conservation, it is definitely a pink color profession. You all know that. Women outnumber men by a ratio of four and a half to one in museum and historical society settings, as of 2014, when this report was produced by the AIC. And men's salaries outpaced women's salaries in every percentile reported in museums and historical societies. Notice too that as salaries increase, so does the gender differential. So in the 10% percentile, the difference between male and female salaries was $12,650. But by the time you get to the 90th percentile, the difference was $60,419. In libraries and archive settings, women outnumber men by a ratio of 5.6 to one. And while they earn slightly more than men in the 10th and 90th percentiles, the median salary for women was $8,000 less than for men, and that was the largest differential in that line. Now, the Bureau of Labor Statistics does pull out some statistical information for a category they call Museum Technicians and Conservation. I think that's the exact title. Conservators and Museum Technicians, yeah. Okay, thanks. And in the last chart on that sheet, it shows the median salary. They don't break it out by gender. So this is a compilation of $43,020, which does not track with AIC's findings from 2014. But that, I think, is largely due to the fact that the Bureau is pulling on a much larger labor pool. They're reporting that in this category of Museum Technicians and Conservators, there's a labor pool of 13,000 people. And the AIC salary survey is pulling on a much smaller piece, a much smaller group of respondents, because they're volunteer respondents. So it's likely that that's the difference in the size of the pool is what might be pulling that median number down in the Bureau of Labor Statistics chart. This, by the way, is an important caveat of surveys, and that is that the information that you have to work with is only that which has been submitted. So when you're, you know, comparing things, you've got to really look at more than one data set. So this is also from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and this is how wage data for Museum Technicians and Conservators plays out across the country. I'm not really sure there are any surprises here, except weirdly for Iowa and Illinois being in the top tier of annual mean wages. And so those of you from Illinois and Iowa can take exception to our comment and tell us why they're in the top tier. So here's a quote from one of our surveys. A previous director was notorious for giving raises and higher salaries to men because the women had husbands who could take care of them. He was a little more lenient towards women he didn't think would ever marry. So now it's time for myth number six, which is it's not about gender anymore. When we were writing the Women in Museum book of veteran female leader stated emphatically that it isn't about gender. That what's what is important is race, ethnicity and class, and we don't disagree, but we believe diversity and gender aren't mutually exclusive. If an institution is unwilling to treat its staff equitably pay equitably offer meaningful and equitable benefits work to route toxic work environments. Whether it matter how diverse it is sooner or later its staff will find jobs elsewhere. We know that discrimination of all stripes is alive and well in the American workplace. And in the museum world. We may like to think that our hallowed missions and values exempt us but that is not the case. Last year, Joan and I fielded a survey examining gender discrimination in museums and more than 700 people responded. The overwhelming majority of whom identified as white women. Here's what discrimination look like for our survey respondents. 66% reported being talked over or had their ideas and opinions not recognized 49% experienced or witnessed verbal or sexual harassment. And 41% were the victims of lower salary or salary and equity and 41% excluded were excluded from workforce conversations or information. Also important to note are the intersections between gender discrimination and race, sexual identification and age. All were mentioned numerous times by our respondents. The survey respondents revealed that discrimination often came from older board members, volunteers and contractors, something corroborated by a recent study by the Association of fundraising professionals that said that donors are a big source of discriminatory comments and harassment for development staff. Our results paralleled the work of Niquel Trivedi and Alithia Whitman who published their survey findings on sexual harassment and abuse in an article entitled Facing Sexual Harassment and Abuse in the Feminizing Museum, which was published last year. Now 500 respondents participated in their survey and 90% of those respondents identified as female. Half of them reported that they were victims of sexual harassment or abuse in the museum workplace. And lest you think these things aren't happening right now. Here's a quote from one of our 2018 survey respondents quote made to do stereotypical women's tasks like getting coffee or food, secretary of work like taking minutes or notes, arranging the meetings when men with the same job title or lower in rank would not be asked to do such things. So let's take a look at some commonly recognized ways that women are treated differently at work. And we heard many stories along these lines from our survey respondents and our focus group participants as well as our interviewees. Now there's a lot on this slide. So we'll leave it here for a moment. And we're sure that for many of you, these biases are familiar. And this is, you know, from an article in 2014 and I, you know, I continue to think back to Rosener's work in 1990 that, you know, if women are assertive, they're seen as aggressive that women are less likely to get credit in group group projects. And we heard our eye heard about that from a graduate school professor who's, you know, they deal a lot in group projects. And he said, Oh, yeah, the guys they all sit back and let the women do it. And then at the end they take credit for it. And then another one that really has stuck with me too is women get promoted on performance and men get promoted on potential. Here's another quote from our survey. And it describes the discrimination that this woman has faced. I was asked when I plan to marry and have children barred from promotion because quote young men with families must come first, not allowed to join a project team I qualified for because it's difficult and dangerous and not for young women. And here's another because I'm gay. I've had employees not talk to me or make eye contact with me, treat me differently, and have used hate speech about gay people four feet from me. We can't leave this presentation without saying a few words about boards of trustees because they are complicit in leadership and equity decision making. They set the tone for the entire institution. They hire the chief executive and in some institutions they may have a hand in hiring other key staff as well. Studies show that boards often hire people who are most like themselves, and it's difficult to break stereotypes or outmoded traditions when like hires like. In 2017 board source aam report revealed our things most of us probably know museum boards remain majority male and overwhelmingly white and over age 50. Our survey also revealed that the work of boards tends to fall along gendered lines. For example, men tend to chair finance building and strategy committees, while women chair education collections and fundraising committees. Almost a quarter of our respondents indicated that their boards consider gender equity when recruiting racial diversity is seen as more important, although museum boards aren't doing very well at that since according to the board source report they're still overwhelmingly white. And another quote from our survey. I feel it's important to point out that some of the discrimination I have experienced at the museum has come from not only men but women as well, often members of our board or volunteer community. Our research brought us to a handful of truths for successful leadership and equitable workplaces. Perhaps, you know, you can use them to hone your skills and empower your own leadership. Again, quite a bit here to dig into on this slide but for me, be a trust builder is very important. It's very hard to to have a congenial workplace and a good team atmosphere without trust. And link to that is that notion of a candid culture where people feel safe and free to talk about whatever issue is bothering them, whether it's a content related issue or workplace related issue. And just one other parenthetical thing that tap your entire network that speaks I think also to that notion of not being the source of your own best ideas. There are great ideas everywhere. Not just in the museum field but in the New York review of books in the Harvard Business Review, and you should make you should read and learn broadly. The book ends with action agendas for individuals, institutions, boards of trustees, professional associations, graduate programs and funders. And when it comes to individuals, our advice is to empower yourselves by knowing your value, developing your skill sets, having a written time framed career plan. To speak up for equity when you're when you're comfortable and able to do so for institutions and departments, walking the talk and knowing that institutional cultures are meant to support staff, not the other way around. Be a vocal advocate in your professional associations, and your graduate or certificate programs to address issues of women and leadership and workplace equity so those are just a handful of some of those and no to that. This webinar is going to be available after afterwards so that you don't feel you shouldn't feel as though the information on these slides is going to slip away from you forever, you'll have it. So here's a quote from the wonderful glorious dynam that kind of sums up the importance of collective effort. The story of women struggle for equality belongs to no single feminist or to anyone organization, but to the collective efforts of all care about human rights. Speaking of collective effort, the gender equity in museums movement or gem is a group of people working together to amplify the need to pay attention to equity issues. Joan and I helped to fund German in 2016, because the field was at a gender tipping point. And we felt that there were many issues as we presented to you today. So we carry out our work on a variety of fronts we've have a great website, the address is there there's lots of resources on that website. In fact, two of them that I just took a look at again this morning to remind myself are. We have a section of tip sheets that we call five things you need to know. And we have a couple of tip sheets that are specifically focused on salary negotiation and asking for a raise. We do our best to help to support individuals who are affected by workplace harassment. We advocate for research and policy development addressing equity issues. And we're working to form alliances with organizations and coalitions working on related equity issues as well. So that we really hope that you'll consider joining, joining jam jam it's not a membership association but you can join by following the page which has a wonderful curated set of articles and books and all kinds of resources for you and it's a place to talk about things and and air issues so we hope to see you on the Facebook page. So that's it we'd like to thank you for inviting us today and I think we have a little time to take questions if people have them. So thank you again so much. Hi, this is Nora Frankel I just wanted to thank Ann and Joan for their presentation. I feel like an applause is necessary but so I'm joining from the equity and inclusion committee. I have a few questions submitted previously and during the presentation and I just want to encourage any listeners to continue to go ahead and send those questions through the chat box and we'll try and get them as they come. So the first one that we had was about private practice. So one of the attendees commented that they've noticed institutions offering contracts for conservation that offer lower hourly wages and presumably no benefits than the full time employed conservators at those same institutions. And they also noted that those those contractors in this instance were all women. I'm wondering if you could maybe talk about that and sort of mentioned what are some ways that a conservator maybe in private practice can utilize some of these leader leadership skills to better advocate for themselves. You want to go first, Ann. Yeah, I'll kick that off. I honed in on the leadership skill piece and of course this is something we talk about in our book and we've identified from our research that we have these four, this combination of four sort of overarching attributes, the self awareness, authenticity, courage and vision. And so I got to thinking about that and, and thinking about things like the importance of knowing and being able to articulate your value as an independent conservator to be honest about what you need and want to make. Well, yeah, this is the internal discussion you're going to have, which is about being honest about what you need and want to make annually, and then do the math to determine your daily and project fees, which I assume all of you independence have done and gone through that exercise and do it periodically so that you keep up to date. So that's about, you know, self awareness. It's about authenticity. And, and thinking about whether or not you've, you know, price yourself out of the market, but I think thinking through what do you say when an RFP is unrealistic in scope time and money, and I mean, do you feel honest enough or forthcoming enough to kind of talk truth to power here and question what's being presented to you to bid on. Are you entrepreneurial in making opportunities happen. For example, once on a project, do you see other opportunities for other work and do you advance that with with a client. So those were just, I'm not sure I've really answered that question very well. But those were some thoughts that were kind of swirling around in my head this morning. Joan, do you have any additional thoughts you want to add there. Yeah, I would just say that I think particularly for women, and I could be wrong, but I think particularly for women make the choice to go independent because they are often the primary caregivers, whether that is an elderly family member or for children, because it allows you to control your time. But I think, I think when you do that, just to circle back to what and just said, you have to be self aware and honest with yourself about how much you're going to make how much you need. And it's kind of unfair to say, well, I'm getting lower price work than I would if I were working full time, when I would get that benefit package. But I'm not paying for daycare so you have to have done the numbers, I think, first, and be really sure about why you're doing what you're doing. And as Ann said, keeping up with with what's going on in the field. Well, and I would also add to that too, is having the whatever it takes to call it out to the potential client and to say, you know, you've presented a proposal here, a scope of work, an RFP, whatever you call it, that is not realistic. You know, a guy would do that for heaven's sakes. So, we have to do it. Yeah, that was really interesting. And I think it segues pretty well into some other questions that we've been getting that have to do with salary negotiation, especially for young conservators. So, conservation is a pretty competitive profession. And I wonder if you could talk a little bit about either as a, you know, private contractor or within an institution, deciding between getting the job when there aren't that many jobs and making sure that you are paid what you're worth, especially a lot of emerging professionals who might not have that many, many years of experience, or even, you know, museums don't have that much money. And so dealing with perhaps some internal guilt of asking for more money when you know an institution is already struggling. Lose the guilt. Lose the guilt. I'm telling you, we all are, we're all guilty of that, I think. And I've been guilty of that too. I think we just need to get over that. Again, I don't think men would do this. And, and it's not our, in a way, it's not our problem. They don't have any money, but they need to know they need to be educated to this fact. So, I'll get off my soapbox on that. Joan, do you want to throw in here on this one? Yeah, I mean, I think it, look, I think it's easy for us to say this because we're in the hot spot, needing a job, but being scared, we're not going to make enough. But honestly, it comes back to what we just said in the first question, which is, you absolutely need to know, you need to have done your homework and do your due diligence. You need to know how much you need to live, where you're going to live, whether that's a pricey city or, you know, or not. And, and, and you also need to know what the median salary is for others in your position in that region or area. Because if the offer isn't even the median, you're in trouble. Again, it's easy for us to say, well, you should just walk away because sometimes you can't. But if you can, you should, because what will be worse than not being able to pay your graduate school loans, or, you know, never eat a dinner out because you have to pay your graduate school loans. Or work a second job. Yeah, which we've also heard about so yeah lots. We recommend you use the MIT wage calculator. And that'll give you the living wage for whatever area you're looking at. And then you use that to figure out to, you know, to build your own budget and figure out how much you need. And honestly, if they don't meet that, well then tell them. Well, unfortunately, we're completely out of time we've got one minute left but I do want to mention to all of our listeners that we are going to be moving this conversation over to the higher logic platform so if you're not already a member of the equity and inclusion and conservation board. Please feel free to join up you don't even have to be a member of a IC to do so. So hopefully we can address some of those questions here. And we also are looking to create a blog post in response to this as well so we're going to try and get to some of these really good questions that people have asked. Thank you Nora. Yeah, thank you all. And all of you it's been great to work with you and thank you for reaching out to us we've really appreciated this opportunity to talk with folks more about what we're working on what what we think is really important in the field. And feel free to contact us. Take care.