Case Analysis 5 - Central City

Case Analysis 5 – Central City Museum

1. The way that I prefer to see the direction of the museum would be to make it more of a public museum for all ages, not just college kids and adults. The way that the majority of the stakeholders that were interviewed stated that they wanted it to be in the direction of being for college kids and adults. The reason that I don’t like that direction is that donations were asked from the community as a whole, so there forth I would like it to benefit the whole community. If the university and the museum directory would have liked it to be used as more of a university tool, they should have stated that in the fundraiser intentions and maybe have gotten money in other ways, such as bonds. If I were the director I would have to implement the way that the majority of the stakeholders want and the most efficient way money wise. So, as director, I would manage the museum more as a college education tool and museum for adults.

2. If I were in the mangers position and had to try and keep all stakeholders happy I would need to set them all down in a room. I feel as in order to solve conflicts each side needs to look at it from a different angle. Setting them all down in a room allows a discussion to be created and let everyone voice their opinions and view points. Once all of the viewpoints and goals have been shared we look at what plan of action to take. Usually when you get everyone sat down in one room to discuss the differences in futures goals, each side gives way and you meat somewhere in the middle and people wont get upset due to they were part of the deciding decision. So the way I would go about it would be building a coalition. I would talk to customers and mangers to assess that there is difference in goals. Setting them down would be the process of addressing the difference in goals. One may say that making a large group meeting like a political cracker-barrel is a cowardly scapegoat way about it. The reason that...