Planning for Disaster is not just Disaster Planning

The Need for Museum Business Continuity Planning and Resilience Development as Highlighted by the SARS-CoV2 Pandemic

Christine A. McKinnon

A Capstone in the Field of Museum Studies for the Degree of Master of Liberal Arts in Extension Studies

Harvard University Extension School

March 2021

Author’s Statement:

I enrolled in the Museum Studies program in the fall of 2018 as a neophyte, thinking a museum job would make a rewarding second career. But what could I bring to a museum? I don’t have the expertise to be a curator, the personality to do development, or the public speaking skills to be an educator. During the “Introduction to Museums” class, I paid close attention to the different aspects of operating a museum, waiting for one that would speak to me, complementing my experience and giving me a path forward as I progressed through the program. It finally came during a lecture on museum disaster planning. This I could do! With a military background and experience coordinating with first responders, I understood the concepts and importance of this work. It was my intention going into this capstone project to write a series of case studies of museum disasters to serve as teaching tools for museum professionals.

That didn’t happen. Instead, when the pandemic came to Boston and everything ground to a halt, I found myself watching institutions I have enjoyed visiting my entire adult life struggle to adapt to the new reality. While doing the initial research for this project, I came across an article by Amanda Benson, “Recovering From Natural Disasters: Helping Museum Employees Return To Workplace Normalcy,” in which business continuity planning figured prominently. It occurred to me that while the museum world has recognized the importance of disaster planning, the pandemic brought into sharp relief the importance of business continuity planning and the fact that museums have not yet recognized the value of developing such plans as widely as they have disaster planning. There was an opportunity to explore an issue of importance to the museum world developing in real time and with real consequence.

Both this capstone and the program in general have been remarkably rewarding experiences for me. I am grateful to have studied under so many passionate and engaging instructors and to have met so many interesting classmates. I would like to thank Museum Studies Program Director Katherine Burton Jones for her flexibility in accepting my last-minute course-correction as well as her guidance and good humor throughout this process, as well as Dr. Christopher Tuckley of Jorvik Viking Centre for his generosity with his time and for sharing Jorvik’s experience. I would like to dedicate this capstone to my husband, Bob, whose support and encouragement have meant everything to me, and to our blind, formerly feral cat, Lewis, who has mastered the art of Zoom-bombing classes, making some fans in the process.

Table of Contents:

i

Introduction 1

Museum Disaster Planning 13

From Museum Disaster Planning to Business Continuity Planning 16

Business Continuity Planning History 17

Comparison of Museum Disaster and Business Continuity Plans 22

Resilience in Museums 22

Case Study: Jorvik Viking Centre 29

Discussion 32

Conclusion 34

Appendix A 35

Appendix B 38

List of Figures

Figure 1. The Relationship between Business Continuity Planning, Disaster Planning, and Intangibles, Contributing to Resilience 34

Figure 2. “Business Impact Analysis Worksheet.” Business Impact Anaysis Worksheet, Ready.gov, 2020, www.ready.gov/sites/default/files/2020-07/business-impact-analysis-worksheet.pdf 37

ii

Introduction

Business continuity planning should be considered a best practice in addition to museum

disaster planning, enabling museums to manage the sudden, devastating impact a crisis can have

on its fiscal health and ability to carry out its mission and operations. Museum disaster planning

has been considered a best practice for at least the last decade (National Standards 44), however;

the 2020 pandemic has highlighted that business continuity planning is a natural and necessary

complement to museum disaster planning. Emma Dadson defines business continuity as “…the

ability of an organization to respond to incidents so that any disruption caused is minimized to a

predetermined acceptable level” (193). This is in contrast to disaster planning, in which the

primary focus is on mitigating and responding to risks to the collection (“3.3 Emergency

Planning”). While the SARS-CoV2 virus does not pose a threat to collections, the disruptions it

has caused in the economy and society have impacted museums’ abilities to operate and fulfill

their mission. Business continuity planning, like disaster planning, is a tool that will help

museums build the resiliency to face future crises.

When news of the outbreak of a novel virus in China was first reported in late 2019,

nobody could foresee the way in which it would completely alter life and society. Museums were

confronted with a myriad of challenges. The forced closure of museum buildings to prevent the

spread of SARS-CoV2 and widespread stay-at-home orders meant museum managers had to

figure out on the fly how museum staff would work from home, how they would meet their

mission without access to the collection and educational facilities, and how they would manage

the loss of revenue from ticket sales and other events. These logistical and fiscal shocks will

likely continue long after the virus is contained as a result of probable changes in visitor

1

preferences and pandemic-caused economic challenges that will test museums’ efforts to

generate revenue and use their facilities to the fullest. Though the pandemic is a disaster,

mitigating its effects will come not from a traditional disaster plan, but rather from a business

continuity plan. These challenges and others will require museums to think carefully about their

operations during the pandemic, finding the balance between remaining fiscally viable and

operating safely.

Effects of the Pandemic on Museums

The pandemic’s impact was immediate and severe. For example, the New England Aquarium

closed for 18 weeks when the virus reached Boston, significantly reducing Aquarium ticket sales

and event revenue that represented 80% of its budget (Spruill). Though its budget was critically

reduced, the Aquarium still had to feed and care for over 20,000 animals (Spruill). Other

museums were similarly stricken. Laura Lott, President and CEO of the American Alliance of

Museums (AAM), estimated that as of March 2020, American museums were collectively losing

U.S. $33 million per day (“Museums Included”).

An AAM survey of 760 museums conducted in June 2020 found this dire situation was

widespread within the museum world. According to the AAM:

The survey results document extreme financial distress in the museum field. One-third

(33%) of respondents were not confident they would be able to survive 16 months

without additional financial relief, and 16 percent felt their organization was at significant

risk of permanent closure. The vast majority (87%) of museums have only 12 months or

less of financial operating reserves remaining, with 56% having less than six months left

2

to cover operations. Forty-four percent had furloughed or laid off some portion of their

staff, and 41 percent anticipated reopening with reduced staff (“Snapshot”).

It is important to remember these responses represent the landscape as of June 2020—

still in the earliest stages of the pandemic. While museums have since been able to reopen with

limited capacity and strict protocols, these modest gains could be lost as winter approaches and

infection rates likely spike, as pandemic fatigue coupled with increased indoor activity create an

environment conducive to the spread of the virus. Such losses could push the most vulnerable

museums past the point of recovery and push other museums into a more precarious position.

Government Relief The serious picture the AAM survey paints comes despite an infusion of government funds

intended to keep small businesses and cultural institutions and their employees afloat. After two

rounds of relief funding from the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act,

the first to support the health care system and the second for individuals, Congress passed the

third round of the CARES Act on 27 March 2020 (“Covid-19 Advocacy”). The CARES Act

provided $2.2 trillion in aid for small businesses, non-profits, families, and state and local

governments (“The CARES Act Works for All Americans”). Of this amount, $50 million was

designated for museums and libraries to be distributed by the Institute of Museum and Library

Services (IMLS). An additional $75 million was designated for the National Endowment for the

Humanities (NEH) (Library Recovery Funding Summary) of which $30 million would be

distributed to state humanities councils and the remaining $45 million would be distributed via

competitive grants to “at-risk humanities positions and projects” (“CARES Act Arts and Cultural

Provisions” 2). Additionally, another $75 million was designated for the National Endowment

3

for the Arts (NEA), with $30 million to be distributed to state and regional arts agencies and

organizations and the remaining $45 million to be distributed via competitive grants to eligible

non-profit organizations (“CARES Act Arts and Cultural Provisions” 2).

Under the CARES Act, two loan programs were available to museums and other non-

profits through early August 2020: the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) and the Expanded

Economic Disaster Injury Loan (EIDL) (“Advocate for Museums”). The PPP enabled museums,

other non-profits, and small businesses to borrow up to $10 million to cover payroll, operations,

and debt service, with the possibility of loan forgiveness (“Finding Financial Relief ”). These

loans allowed museums to keep staff on the payroll or recall furloughed employees at least for a

period of time (Kinsella).

While museums benefited from these government programs, the programs were not

managed effectively, PPP in particular causing controversy when it was discovered that

businesses with more than 500 employees received loans (Capps). Following the initial outcry,

applicants found it increasingly difficult to get a PPP loan due to long processing times (Capps).

The program ended in early August 2020 and another round of stimulus has yet to be passed as

of December 2020. Despite the short-term benefit the CARES Act and PPP may have had for

museums, the aid was ad hoc and finite. Future government aid cannot be assumed during the

course of the current pandemic, and importantly, it cannot be assumed for future pandemics or

other large-scale disasters.

Business Interruption Insurance

Museums will likely not be able to count on insurance covering their losses during future

pandemics and will also likely find their premiums increased as a result of the current pandemic.

4

Many museums and other arts, cultural, and entertainment groups, such as movie theatres and

restaurants, are engaged as of this writing in a struggle with their insurers for business

interruption coverage (Elehalde-Ruiz “Lawsuit”, Brady, Jacobs). Business interruption insurance

covers lost income and other expenses if a “business is forced to close due to ‘physical loss or

damage’ from a covered peril” and is often bundled with commercial property insurance

(Ramnath 1). Normally this assumes physical damage to the property, such as a fire or flood that

prevents the business from operating (Ramnath 2). However, the pandemic has called into

question the definition of physical damage and when to invoke the “civil authority clause”

contained in most business interruption policies, which covers income lost as a result of

government-mandated closure (Ramnath 2). An example of the civil authority clause is the April

2015 curfew the city of Baltimore imposed in anticipation of unrest following the funeral of

Freddie Gray, which forced restaurants and bars to close early and thus lose income (Ramnath 2).

Whether the courts will extend this logic to the government-mandated closures the pandemic

caused remains to be seen.

As early as April 2020, restaurants in Chicago, Illinois were challenging their insurers to

settle business interruption claims (Elejalde-Ruiz “Business Owners”) and by early August 2020,

42 plaintiffs, mostly restaurants, filed a class-action lawsuit in Chicago against 18 insurance

companies (Elejalde-Ruiz “Lawsuit”). The lawsuit “…alleges the businesses had their claims

denied even though they ‘incurred direct physical loss and damage’ and have been ‘rendered

physically nonfunctional’ as a result of the mandated closures and restrictions” (Elejalde-Ruiz

“Lawsuit”). Celebrity chefs such as Thomas Keller and Wolfgang Puck have also called upon the

federal government to compel insurance companies to pay out, and Keller has filed a high-profile

5

claim (Lalley). In June 2020, arts organizations in the United Kingdom, including museums and

major art galleries, filed a class-action lawsuit on the same grounds (Brady) and in the late

summer of 2020 the Historical Society of Western Pennsylvania, which operates the Senator

John Heinz History Center in Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, sued its insurer after its insurer rejected its

claim for business interruption insurance (Ove). The insurer rejected the claim on the grounds the

center was not physically damaged as a result of the pandemic, but the center countered that it

suffered losses of over U.S. $150,000 as a result of its closure, canceled weddings, and other

events directly caused by the impact of the virus on the property (Ove).

For their part, insurance companies argue that pandemics are not covered because losses

due to viruses are specifically excluded from most policies, the result of the 2002 - 2003 severe

acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreak (Ramnath 2). Following this outbreak, the

Mandarin Oriental Hotel sued its insurer for pandemic-related business interruption losses and

received a payout of $16 million (Ramnath 2). As a result of this case, insurance companies

generally include language excluding virus-related closures from their business interruption

policies (Ramnath 2). Additionally, insurers argue that the scope of the claims could render them

insolvent; in mid-April small businesses were claiming losses of between $255 - $431 billion per

month while insurers took in monthly premiums of approximately $6 billion per month

(Elejalde-Ruiz “Business Owners”). Put another way, the insurance industry has approximately

$800 billion in equity, so even several months of payments could lead to insolvency (Ramnath

3). David Sampson, president and CEO of the American Property Casualty Insurance

Association, argued simply that “pandemic outbreaks are uninsured because they are

uninsurable” (Elejalde-Ruiz “Business Owners”).

6

These cases remain to be decided, but regardless of outcome, their impact will be felt for

years to come. If the plaintiffs prevail, insurance companies could find themselves struggling to

remain solvent. At a minimum, if these suits find in favor of the plaintiffs, the issue of whether a

virus can cause physical damage will still likely need to be determined by the precedent set in the

jurisdiction in which a claim is made, adding an element of unpredictability to what should be a

stabilizing asset; in some jurisdictions, courts have already ruled that the presence of toxic gases

is not physical damage, while others have found the opposite (Ramnath 3). In any event, future

premiums for business interruption insurance will likely rise, perhaps beyond what museums and

other non-profits can afford. If the insurers prevail, the claimants, including museums, may find

themselves unable to weather the economic upheaval the pandemic has caused.

Challenges of the Post-Pandemic World

Those museums that survive the pandemic will likely find themselves in a very different world

post-pandemic. Museum-goers may be reticent to return to crowded blockbuster exhibits,

bustling cafes, or crowded after-hours events—all traditionally important revenue generators for

museums. Visitors may expect fewer people in the galleries, and access to intimate installations

such as Yayoi Kusama’s popular mirror rooms could be limited both as a result of state and local

regulations regarding visitor capacity and lingering visitor wariness about congregating in

confined spaces. Such changes will constrain museums’ abilities to rely on ticket sales and event

revenue as a major source of funding operating costs. Additionally, the pandemic has thrown into

sharp relief the precarious state of some museum employees as many workers have been

furloughed or laid off, even as the directors and senior staff at major institutions receive six- or

seven-figure salaries (McCambridge). These disparities have led to growing support for

7

unionization and calls for reform, building upon a trend that predates the pandemic and has

culminated with the unionization of staff at museums such as the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston

and the Philadelphia Museum of Art (Gay). Museums may find themselves having to provide

employees with higher salary and benefits packages to keep and retain talent, during a time when

they will be at a financial disadvantage, as illustrated by the Baltimore Museum of Art’s

controversial and ultimately canceled plan to auction works from its collection in part to work

toward pay equity for its staff (Jackson).

Business Continuity Planning and Disasters

A business continuity plan (BCP) would help museums proactively address the financial,

logistical, and personnel issues they could face in an emergency in real time, rather than

undertake an improvised response as museums have during the current pandemic. Though the

pandemic has highlighted the importance of a BCP for museums, having one in place is

important during any disaster a museum traditionally faces, such as fire, flooding, or

earthquakes, to name only a few. Just as the pandemic has done on a global scale, such localized

disasters can result in a sudden and prolonged loss of public access to the collections, work

space, and revenue, among other challenges, necessitating a plan to continue operations within

the limits of the disaster.

During hurricane Katrina numerous museums and historic homes in Mississippi and

Louisiana were damaged or destroyed. The Maritime and Seafood Industry Museum in Biloxi,

Mississippi was destroyed and only reopened almost nine years later after building a new

museum on the site (Jones 1). Also in Biloxi, the George Ohr Arts and Cultural Center, then

home to the Ohr Museum was destroyed and the Ohr-O’Keefe Museum under construction was

8

badly damaged, delaying its planned opening to 2010 (“O’Keefe Museum History,” “Museums

Blasted”). The Audobon Aquarium of the Americas in New Orleans, Louisiana lost all its fish,

and other New Orleans museums and historical sites including the Presbytere, the Cabildo and

the Old U.S. Mint received “moderate to severe” wind damage (Pyle). Similarly, during

hurricane Maria museums in Puerto Rico (and other islands in the Caribbean), including the

Museum of Contemporary Art of Puerto Rico, the Institute of Puerto Rican Culture, and the

Museum of Puerto Rican Art suffered damage and threats to the collection not just from the

storm, but also from the resultant, months-long power outages (Cuniffe). The Jorvik Viking

Centre in York, England also was forced to close for over a year following a disastrous flood in

December 2015. These examples illustrate how a BCP can complement the disaster plan, the

latter providing a strategy for dealing with the disaster and its immediate aftermath, and the

former providing a strategy for continuing operations during the crisis and recovery periods. This

two-pronged approach, addressing both disaster and recovery can help museums develop

resiliency in normal times to be drawn upon in times of crisis and recovery.

Business Continuity Plan Usage beyond Disaster Response

A BCP’s utility is not limited to disaster response. Other business-related crises, such as the loss

of information technology (IT) infrastructure through a virus or ransomware could require

implementation of a BCP. A disaster happening outside the museum that requires it to shut down

even though it does not threaten the building or collection, for example, localized protests, civil

unrest, or a water main break, could also require a BCP. Similarly, a BCP might be necessary

during public relations or brand controversies that result in a loss of revenue through boycott or

donor rescission. The growing popular criticism of accepting donations from controversial

9

donors such as the Sackler family or global energy companies are examples of issues that could

affect the perception of a museum’s brand and if mishandled, could result in a business crisis

requiring implementation of a BCP (Harris).

Disaster Planning vs. Business Continuity Planning

As important as a BCP could be for a museum, it is not yet considered a best practice as museum

disaster planning is. In 2008 the AAM included risk management for collections in its National

Standards and Best Practices (44). Despite this, the Heritage Health Information Survey found

as of 2019 that fewer than half of museums had disaster plans (“Heritage Health Information

Survey”). This is a relatively low figure, especially considering how the field has for decades

recognized its importance and much has been written on the topic. Museums may go without a

disaster plan because they believe they do not have the resources or personnel to design and

implement one, they believe the plan has to be overly complex and are intimidated by the

process, feel that relying on insurance is sufficient, or simply hope one is never needed.

Even fewer museums have business continuity plans. Amanda Benson, of the University

of Washington, found that as of 2017, less than 14% of mid-sized, California museums had BCPs

(179). This could be in part for the same reasons museums do not have disaster plans: a belief

that planning for low-probability/high impact events is a waste of time; discomfort with or lack

of understanding of the business aspect of museum management; or a belief that government,

donors, or other benefactors will come to the rescue during times of crisis. It could also be in part

because until recently, the business aspect of managing a museum has not been given the same

consideration within the museum world as the curatorial aspect. Jennifer Donnelly notes that:

10

In any museum, a dichotomy exists between responsibilities directly relating to the

objects in the collection and those dealing with the business of managing an institution.

“Art” activities include curating exhibitions, education and outreach, research, and

conservation. “Business” tasks include overseeing contract management, policy

development, budget planning, financial control, fundraising and grant development, and

income-producing activities such as concessions, fees, and retail (2).

She goes on to note that as of 2010, “amongst current directors of major United States museums,

educational backgrounds are almost unanimously in art history” (2). This suggests that disaster

planning, concerned in large part with collection care, comes naturally to museum leaders,

whereas recognition of the importance of the business aspects of museum management are a

more recent development.

Resilience

Developing a business continuity plan in addition to a disaster plan will strengthen the resilience

of the museum, an unstated, but central tenet to both museum disaster and business continuity

planning. Ohio State University’s Joseph Fiksel et al. define resilience as “the capacity of an

enterprise to survive, adapt and grow in the face of turbulent change” further noting “resilience

goes beyond mitigating risk; it enables a business to gain competitive advantage by learning how

to deal with disruptions more effectively than its competitors and possibly shifting to a new

equilibrium” (82). Though written in the context of for-profit business with its supply chain

concerns, the definition holds true in the context of museum-as-business. By having a business

continuity plan in place as well as a disaster plan, museum leaders can take the next step of

11

developing resilience in their organization during times of stability, recovering faster and maybe

even stronger in times of crisis.

Areas of Discussion

To understand the importance of business continuity planning for museums, an understanding of

current best practices in museum disaster planning and how they came to be is helpful. To that

end, this paper will begin with an overview of museum disaster planning—the history of its

development, as well as a discussion of the elements that go into it. The paper will then discuss

business continuity planning, the history of its development as well as a discussion of the

elements that go into it, followed by short case studies describing how Nissan navigated a

disaster through business continuity planning and providing an example of a reputational crisis

The Home Depot experienced. As elements of museum disaster planning and business continuity

planning overlap, these case studies will be followed by a comparison of the two types of

planning. The concept of resilience—though trendy—is important, and a discussion of resilience

and the utility of fostering resilience will be discussed. The paper will then provide a case study

of the Jorvik Viking Centre in York, England, as an example of a museum whose resilience

enabled it to survive a 16-month closure following a catastrophic flood, an experience which has

helped it to weather the current pandemic. Finally, the paper will offer a template of a business

continuity plan tailored for museums and suggest areas for future study. Not all museums will

survive this pandemic; a goal of this paper is to provide insights that will help museums be better

positioned to survive the next disaster.

12

Museum Disaster Planning

To understand why business continuity planning makes sense as a best practice in

addition to disaster planning, this paper discusses each in turn, starting with disaster planning.

Despite increasing awareness of disaster planning as a separate discipline from conservation

throughout the latter third of the twentieth century and beginning of the twenty-first, museums

were slow to develop and implement disaster plans. In December 2005 Heritage Preservation, in

partnership with the Institute of Museum and Library Services, published “A Public Trust at

Risk: The Heritage Health Index Report on the State of America’s Collections.” This was the

first survey to examine the state of collections in the United States and its findings were

concerning. According to the report:

One of the most alarming Heritage Health Index statistics is that 80% of collecting

institutions do not have an emergency or disaster plan that includes collections, with staff

trained to carry it out. Because of this, more than 2.6 billion items are at risk. Only 26%

of institutions have copies of vital collections records stored off-site in case of

emergency. It is essential that a collecting institution experiencing a disaster have a

record of its holdings (“About the Heritage Health Index”).

This report garnered significant attention, both in the museum/library/archives world,

where 25,000 reports were distributed, and in the press (Overbeck Laise). When the Heritage

Health Index Survey’s report was published in 2005, the experiences of Hurricane Katrina were

still fresh in people’s minds and by at least 2008 the AAM had designated museum disaster

planning a best practice (44). Even as the importance of museum disaster planning has been

13

recognized and codified as a prerequisite for AAM accreditation, the 2014 “Heritage Health

Information Survey” found that 58% of institutions still did not have a disaster plan.

Development of Museum Disaster Planning

Museum disasters are as old as museums, but through the late twentieth century most have been

dealt with in an ad hoc basis. According to Thomas Kelleher, historian and curator of mechanical

arts at Old Sturbridge Village, in 1955 Hurricane Diane caused extensive damage to the museum,

located in Sturbridge, Massachusetts. The hurricane destroyed several buildings and threatened

others, including a covered bridge that was knocked off its abutments. During Hurricane Gloria

in 1985, museum staff hurriedly made ad hoc preparations before the storm and reacted to the

damage after the storm. Despite these experiences (and in keeping with the standards of the day),

Old Sturbridge Village did not develop a disaster plan until the 1990s.

In 1958, the Museum of Modern Art in New York suffered a devastating electrical fire,

when a drop cloth caught fire during repairs to the museum’s air conditioning. The museum

quickly filled with smoke and several people were trapped on the upper floors. Staff managed to

save most of the works, evacuating some by passing them from person to person, but while the

fire was put out after less than an hour, it killed one worker, injured at least 25, and and

destroyed three works - two panels of Monet’s “Waterlilies” and Jackson Pollack’s Number 1.

The fire led to the creation of MoMA’s conservation lab, but did not result in standardizing

disaster response (“MOMA on Fire”). Similarly, the catastrophic 1966 flood in Florence was

addressed in an ad hoc manner by the institutions affected and resulted in advances in

conservation, but not disaster planning (Holmes 3).

14

A review of a bibliography on disasters, compiled by Walter Henry of the Stanford

University Libraries in 1988, and covering a period from the mid-1960s to the late 1980s,

showed that approximately forty percent of the citations discussed conservation techniques and

twenty-five percent discussed disaster planning. This bibliography demonstrates the growing

awareness of the importance of risk assessment and mitigation as complementary to salvage and

restoration. In 1978, M.S. Upton, an Australian entomologist, published Disaster Planning and

Emergency Treatments in Museums, Art Galleries, Libraries, Archives, and Allied Institutions. As

Henry’s bibliography illustrates, interest in museum disaster planning as a separate function from

conservation grew during the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s.

Elements of a Museum Disaster Plan

According to the AAM, a museum disaster plan should include the following:

preparedness and response plans for all relevant emergencies and threats (natural,

mechanical, biological, and human); addresses the needs of staff, visitors, structures, and

collections; Specifies how to protect, evacuate, and recover collections in the event of a

disaster; includes evacuation routes and assembly areas for people; assigns individual

responsibilities for implementation during emergencies; lists contact information for

relevant emergency and recovery services; includes floor-plans; bears date of last

revision (“Disaster Preparedness”).

These elements are necessary to protect life and the collection, but do not address how the

museum will continue to operate in the face of disasters or disruption; this is the purpose of the

business continuity plan.

15

From Museum Disaster Planning to Business Continuity Planning

In the “Facilities Managers Desk Reference,” Jane Wiggins defines business continuity

planning as:

…a holistic management process that identifies potential impacts that threaten an

organisation and provides a framework for building resilience and the capability for an

effective response that safeguards the interests of its key stake- holders, reputation, brand

and value creating activities (313).

The effort is worthwhile; according to Wiggins, a business will experience a major disruption

once every four years and many will fail within two years of a major disruption because they did

not have a business continuity plan (313). Despite this, Wiggins found that as of 2014, forty

percent of businesses did not have a business continuity plan (313). Wiggins further notes the

length of time typical emergencies will disrupt business operations, as seen in table 1.

Table 1 Average Length of Business Interruptions and Their Cause

Wiggins, Jane M. “Chapter 24: Business Continuity.” Facilities Manager’s Desk Reference,

Second Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2014. p. 314.

Fire 28 days

IT failure 10 days

Lightning 22 days

Flood 10 days

Theft 26 days

Power failure 1 day

16

In an industrial context, business continuity planning include threats to IT infrastructure,

production lines, supply chains, personnel through workplace violence or pandemics, among

other disruptions (Wiggins 313). In a museum context there is some overlap; museums are as

reliant on IT infrastructure as any industry, and a sudden loss of workers due to workplace

violence of pandemic illness would similarly make it difficult for a museum to carry on its

operations. However, there are elements of museum operations that are unique and these must

be considered as well. Revenue generating elements such as ticket sales, gift shops, cafes, and

memberships and revenue generating activities such as private functions, concerts, and other

ticketed public events can be brought to a halt by a myriad of things, of which the pandemic was

only one. A museum can also be subject to risks to its reputation and brand, as illustrated by

recent controversies over corporate sponsorship (Harris) and the controversial decision of the

National Gallery of Art, Boston Museum of Fine Arts, Houston Museum of Fine Arts, and Tate

Modern to postpone a Philip Guston retrospective (Smee). Museums such as the Newseum in

Washington, DC and the International Museum of World War II in Newton, Massachusetts have

fallen victim to overly ambitious development plans, in both instances leading to their closure

(Hansen, Maas). While these were not the result of poor business continuity planning, they are

illustrative of the importance of understanding the business aspect of managing a museum.

Business Continuity Planning History

According to Brahim Herbane, business continuity planning emerged in the 1970s as the

widespread use of mainframe computers led companies to consider the inherent vulnerability of

relying on a single system that while powerful, was complex and new even to its operators (982).

This initial focus on keeping the mainframes operating evolved through the 1980s and 1990s, but

17

remained technologically focused, given the advent of the personal computer, increasing

interconnectedness of systems and data, and the increased speed at which business took place

(Herbane 982). However, in the early 1990s, events such as the 1990 attack against the London

Stock Exchange, 1993 bombing of the Word Trade Center in New York, and the 1990 blackout in

Manhattan underscored the importance of business continuity planning expanding beyond IT

(Herbane 983). Industry began looking at the hazards other systems within the business faced,

such as facilities, personnel, and supply chain. Herbane notes:

Business continuity planning emerged as a response to the need to protect and restore the

critical value-generating activities of an organisation. Since these activities comprise of

(sic) combinations of facilities, human resources, equipment, intellectual property and

supply chain linkages, a trans-functional process (e.g. manufacturing) and facilities (e.g.

headquarters) driven approach lay at the heart of BCP (984).

Events in the 21st century such as the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the 2008 financial

crisis, and the SARS, MERS, and H1N1 pandemics further expanded the range of hazards to be

considered when developing business continuity plans and introduced the concept of developing

and expanding resilience within organizations (Herbane, 984).

Elements of a business continuity plan

The main elements of business continuity planning are similar to those of museum disaster

planning. The first step is to assess the hazards that threaten business operations through

conducting a business impact analysis. This requires a detailed understanding of the business and

18

identification of those activities and process that, if disrupted, will affect the organization’s

ability to operate. Scenarios could include:

physical damage to a building buildings, damage to or breakdown of machinery, systems

or equipment; restricted access to a site or building; interruption of the supply chain

including failure of a supplier or disruption of transportation of goods from the supplier;

utility outage (e.g., electrical power outage); damage to, loss or corruption of information

technology including voice and data communications, servers, computers, operating

systems, applications, and data; absenteeism of essential employees (“Business Impact

Analysis”).

The analysis predicts the effects of the disruption: loss of sales or income; delays in sales

or income; increased expenses; and customer dissatisfaction or defections are some of the

possible results of a disruption (“Business Impact Analysis”). The timing of the disruption also

needs to be considered; a flood that causes a store to close in March will have a different effect

on business than a flood that causes a store to close in early December, during the prime holiday

shopping season (“Business Impact Analysis”). Similarly, a power outage that affects IT

infrastructure and lasts for an hour will have a different effect than one that lasts for a day

(“Business Impact Analysis”).

After the hazards and their effects are identified, the next step is to take steps to mitigate

the risks these hazards pose, for example, by ensuring data is backed up regularly and steps are

taken to prevent computer virus or ransomware attacks (Kopp 41). Not all risks can be mitigated,

either because of cost or because the hazard is such that mitigation is impossible and addressing

its potential impact must be covered in the BCP (Kopp 41). After addressing mitigation, the BCP

19

should articulate what skills and resources are needed to address the identified risks should they

come to pass, assess what the gaps are in resources and capabilities, and develop strategies and

procedures to close those gaps (“Business Continuity Plan”). These strategies and procedures are

documented in the business continuity plan, along with the assignment of roles and

responsibilities for relevant staff, and a communications plan. The plan should be tested through

table-top exercises or simulated crises and revised as needed (“Business Continuity Plan”).

Case Studies: Nissan and The Home Depot

Nissan during the March 2011 Fukushima Disaster

On March 11, 2011 an earthquake struck Japan, causing a tsunami which then caused a partial

meltdown at the Fukushima Dacha nuclear power plant in Fukushima, Japan (“Fukushima

Accident”). This triple-disaster had a severe impact on industry in Japan, affecting

manufacturing and supply chains. Auto manufacturer Nissan was well prepared to respond to the

disaster. The company had been planning for an earthquake since 2003, identifying evacuation

routes and centers and retrofitting its plants to withstand seismic activity (Aggarwarl and

Srivastava 3). The company also had annual drills and simulations to practice executing its

business continuity plan (Aggarwarl and Srivastava 3). Within 15 minutes, the company had set

up a “Global Disaster Control Office” at its headquarters in Yokohama, Japan, where it

confirmed the safety of its employees, suppliers, and customers, and then began executing its

recovery plan (Aggarwarl and Srivastava 3). Despite the fact that two of Nissan’s plants suffered

severe damage and each lost day of production cost the company $25 million in profits, by April,

2011 the plants were online and producing at pre-disaster levels by mid-May (Aggarwarl and

Srivastava 3).

20

The Home Depot’s Reputational Crisis

The Home Depot, because of its concentration of stores in Florida, had developed a robust and

nimble business continuity plan addressing hurricanes, but in late winter of 2007, the company

experienced a crisis for which it had not prepared (Leonard, et al. 7). On 7 March 2007, online

news site MSN.com published an article critical of The Home Depot’s customer service. The

article set off a firestorm when over 7000 people posted their complaints about and negative

experiences at The Home Depot on MSN.com's comment board. Though the mainstream media

had not picked up the story, The Home Depot executives followed the message board with

concern:

…an official response from the company would likely create a mainstream media news

story where one didn’t currently exist, yet ignoring the discussion would create a

perception among the online community that Home Depot was monolithic and out of

touch. And if the company did respond, who should do it and what would the tone be? If

the company injected itself into the debate, how would it address the legitimate customer

issues that had been raised? (Leonard, et al. 8).

New CEO Frank Blake posted a statement on the MSN.com message board, introducing

himself, acknowledging the complaints, and providing an email address where disgruntled

customers could communicate their complaints directly to the company (Leonard, et al. 8). The

speed and severity of the reputational crisis was a wake-up call to The Home Depot, which

realized that damage to its reputation was as significant a hazard as a hurricane and should be

incorporated into its business continuity planning (Leonard, et. al. 8).

21

Comparison of Museum Disaster and Business Continuity Plans

When comparing museum disaster and business continuity plans, some things stand out.

Museum disaster plans are concerned primarily with protecting life, the collection, and facilities,

whereas business continuity plans are focused on preserving an organization’s ability to conduct

its business. Museum disaster planning typically concentrates on physical and environmental

threats, whereas ephemeral threats to IT infrastructure and branding are addressed in business

continuity plans. In developing and implementing both plans, museum managers should work

closely with the physical plant staff, as breakdowns in the physical plant can place both

collections and business functions at risk. Each plan can be implemented alone or in concert with

the other, as the situation dictates.

Though current experience underscores the importance for museums to develop business

continuity plans as part of the disaster planning process, such planning touches upon a

fundamental tension between the curatorial and business aspects of the museum. The current

crisis will force museums to reconcile this tension, to their long-term benefit. Adding a BCP to

the disaster planning process will help museums not just deal with any future pandemics, but also

other traditional museum disasters that result in a sudden, prolonged stop in revenue or loss of

access to its facilities.

Resilience in Museums

The current crisis has illustrated museums’ need for resilience. The June 2020 AAM

survey illustrates examples of resilience in museums, both expected and unexpected.

22

Table 2

American Alliance of Museums. “A Snapshot of US Museums' Response to the

COVID-19 Pandemic (June 2020).” American Alliance of Museums, 17 Nov.

2020, www.aam-us.org/2020/07/22/a-snapshot-of-us-museums-response-to-the-

covid-19-pandemic/.

The first five bars show that museums have responded to the sudden loss of visitors as

one might expect - by pushing content online and developing ways to reach the audience where it

was. Seventy-four percent of respondents provided educational resources for children, parents,

and teachers; fifty-four percent provided educational resources for college students and adults;

sixty percent provided live or recorded video lectures; forty-three percent provided enhanced

access to digital collection resources; sixty-four percent provided access to digital entertainment

23

or activities. These were intuitive and important steps to keep the public engaged with these

institutions and likely helped to some extent to ease the fiscal shock museums experienced

through increased memberships and donations. Such engagement likely also maintained a core

audience of future visitors when conditions are safe to reopen.

But it is the last five bars that are especially interesting: five percent provided financial

assistance to the community or other non-profits; twenty-three percent donated personal

protective equipment or other material to health-care workers; fourteen percent opened their

grounds or buildings for Covid-19 relief uses; seven percent made their wifi available to the

community, and ten percent responded in some other way. These represent ways that museums

not only demonstrate resilience in continuing to execute their core mission in light of the

pandemic, but ways in which museums can contribute to society’s resilience, through sharing

their resources with the community in ways that do not necessarily relate to their mission, but

highlight their role as community assets in the widest sense.

Resilience has become a popular buzzword, but the concept is valid and should have a

prominent place in both business continuity and disaster planning. Originally conceived in the

field of psychology as “descriptive label [...] [for] individuals who appear to function

surprisingly well under environmental conditions judged to be adverse and stressful” (Darkow

145). Aaron Wildavsky expanded the concept beyond the psychological to the social sciences

(Darkow 145). In the context of business continuity planning, resilience is “the ability of an

organization to resist, absorb, recover, and adapt to the altered environment following a disaster”

(Tracey et al. 1), though it could be argued that resilience expands beyond that to encompass

24

“the capacity of an enterprise to survive, adapt and grow in the face of turbulent change” (Fiksel,

et al. 82).

Developing and exercising resilience is an important complement to business continuity

planning because not all risks can be anticipated and/or mitigated, therefore, “a meaningful

conceptualization of resilience cannot be blind to uncertainty, but rather needs to integrate

uncertainty into its understanding” (Darkow 147). Studies of “High reliability organizations” in

which the margins of deviance from normal operations are narrow and the stakes of

mismanaging these deviances are high, such as airlines or nuclear power plants (Williams, et al.

746), have shown that these organizations recognize not all deviances can be predicted and

understand that “resilience involves improvising and using generic resources…(e.g., knowledge,

communication, financial resources, emotional, relational, structural capacities) to avoid a

catastrophe or to mitigate its evolution” (Williams, et al. 746). Even when risks can be

anticipated, risk assessments in business continuity planning are only as good as the assumptions

underlying them and can represent a “simplified, ‘reductionist’ view of the world” in which

“each risk is identified and addressed independently, and hidden interactions are seldom

recognized. This procedural approach can lull organizations into a false sense of complacency

that could be shattered by an unexpected event” (Fiksel, et al. 81).

There are three elements of resilience that are important to understand. The first is that

resilience should not necessarily be defined as “bouncing back,” but rather, achieving a “new

normal” (Darkow 146). The second is that developing resilience takes place across time; by

looking at the past, present, and future (Howitt and Leonard). The third is that social capital is

central to the most effective forms of resilience (Darkow 146). These are concepts that the

25

museum world should easily absorb, as museums are organizations that are constantly evolving

to address the pressing issues of the day as well as changing audience tastes, often include the

interpretation of the past, for the present, and in anticipation of the future as part of their mission,

and strive to be integral members of their communities.

The current pandemic calls into sharp relief the significance of recognizing that resilience

goes beyond merely returning to the status quo. While a museum could pick up the pieces and

resume normal operations after a discrete disaster such as a flood or fire, societal crises such as

the pandemic “can fundamentally reshape our beliefs and behaviors” (Reeves, et al. 1) creating

“new attitudes, needs, and behaviors which need to be managed” (Reeves and Fuller). While

“traditional risk management is predicated on the goal of returning to a stable operating

condition…a more realistic view is to recognize that every disruption represents a learning

opportunity that may suggest shifting to a different state of operations” (Sloan 81). Anecdotally,

a handful of museum professionals have mentioned in private conversations that they had been

considering expanding their educational outreach and online presence prior to the pandemic and

current conditions accelerated the process. It is safe to assume that when the pandemic has

passed, many of the museums that survive will have a much more robust online presence and

digital education capability than they had prior to the pandemic, enabling them to reach

audiences and interpret their collections in ways that would not have existed but for their need to

rapidly respond to the crisis.

Indeed, the most resilient institutions will not only survive the current crisis, but could

come out improved; fourteen percent of businesses grew during recent economic downturns

(Reeves, et al. 5). While these businesses reduced costs to remain viable, they also innovated

26

around the opportunities the downturn presented and in so doing shaped the post-crisis future

(Reeves, et al. 5). Museums were already grappling with the challenges of modern society before

the pandemic, addressing issues of racial justice, indigenous rights, and employee equity. In

addition to the funding challenges the pandemic poses for museums, it has also highlighted the

effects of economic inequality and systemic racism in both the museum and society-at-large.

Such challenges present opportunities for creative and forward-leaning museums to shape the

post-Covid world and become leaders in their communities and beyond in addressing these

issues.

In order to be positioned to shape the post-crisis world, museums need to develop their

resilience across time, taking steps before, during, and after a crisis to successfully manage it

(Darkow 146). Herman “Dutch” Leonard and Arnold Howitt have noted that while:

…less attention is typically paid to prevention and mitigation efforts, which work on

reducing the likelihood that a disaster will occur or on reducing the consequences of an

event if it does take place. And almost entirely neglected are steps that could be taken in

advance that would make recovery quicker, less expensive, or more complete (1).

They argue there is a:

…need to extend the time frame of our examination of disasters in both directions. We

need to look farther into the future, after the end of the immediate response and into the

longer process of recovery. And we need to look farther into the past—into things that

can be done to avert events…to shape them so that their consequences are not so severe if

they do occur…or to permit more rapid recovery from disaster consequences that still

occur in spite of these efforts (2).

27

One way of doing this is by ensuring that a business continuity plan is a living document,

subject to exercises, testing, and revision as needed. Exercising the plan forces personnel to think

through actions needed in times of emergency, highlights weaknesses in the plan, and ensures

that personnel are familiar with the plan if and when it is activated (Duncan, et al. 141).

Beyond using the business continuity plan as a tool for developing resilience over time,

museum leaders also need imagination. Reeves and Fuller champion the virtues of imagination in

times of crisis:

with imagination we can do better than merely adapting to a new environment—we can

thrive by shaping it. To do this, we need to strategize across multiple time scales, each

requiring a different style of thinking. In the current Covid-19 crisis, for example…

renewal and adaptive strategies give way to classical planning-based strategies and then

to visionary and shaping strategies, which require imagination (149).

The final requirement for resilience is social capital. Leonard and Howitt note studies

indicating the pace of recovery after major disasters is determined by the quality of

neighborhood-based leadership and that “efforts to build local leadership groups and provide

them with experience in organizing their neighborhoods may significantly increase the rate of

recovery” (8). Additionally, community social networks and organizations can provide resources

for physical, material, and emotional support in a disaster (Williams, et al. 749). In arguing for a

new business model for museums that reflect changes in modern societal and consumer behavior,

John Falk and Beverly Sheppard describe a museum business model that recognizes the

importance of social capital in developing resilience, “…figuring prominently in this new model

is that it is situated within the ecosystem of the larger society” (22). Museums are central to the

28

fabric of their neighborhoods and the broader society and can play a role as both benefactor and

beneficiary in managing the current crisis as well as future crises.

The Institute of Contemporary Art in Boston is an example of a museum that has

expanded its role in helping the community through, among other things, offering its Watershed

facility in East Boston as a food distribution site, serving 400 households (Garza and Wagner

17). Similarly, Old Salem in Salem, North Carolina is using its display gardens to grow food for

local food pantries (“Old Salem”). Museums should consider the ways in which they can be

resilient both through creative approaches for fulfilling their core mission during museum

specific and widespread disasters, and ways in which they can contribute to the community’s

resilience during widespread disasters.

Resilience is not a replacement for business continuity planning, but rather an important

complement to it. Darkow writes:

Organizations need both sophisticated risk assessment and planning capabilities to avoid

potential threats or reduce the impact of those threats. They also need the ability to

respond and adapt to sudden shocks in order to contain hazardous effects. Prioritizing

one approach over the other neglects the potential interdependencies between the

different phases and the capabilities to manage them (150).

Case Study: Jorvik Viking Centre

Jorvik Viking Center, in York, England, opened as a museum and tourist attraction in

1984, following the 1976 discovery of the Viking site during construction of a shopping center

(“Coppergate Dig”). The museum is “…the first and only permanent venue in the UK wholly

dedicated to the investigation and representation of the Viking period in Britain and the wider

29

Viking world” (Tuckley “Digging” 76). The museum is composed of a “time travel” attraction in

which visitors travel through an imagined streetscape based upon the archaeological site, as well

as galleries exhibiting items recovered from the area (“2017”). It is one of the top attractions in

York, with over 19 million visitors between 1984 and 2019 and contributes significantly to the

city’s economy (Tuckley “Digging” 76). Jorvik Viking Centre falls under the York

Archaeological Trust which provides funding for archaeological fieldwork, but which expects

other elements under its umbrella to be self-funding (Tuckley). Given the museum’s success, the

York Archaeological Trusts strategy document takes into account the implications of losing the

Jorvik Viking Centre (Tuckley).

Over the course of Jorvik Viking Centre’s 36 years of operation, it has undergone several

major refurbishments and reimagining in response to changing scholarship and visitor tastes, the

2008 international financial crisis, a catastrophic flood, and now the pandemic. In 2000, the

museum closed for its first major refurbishment, reopening in April 2001; the refurbishment

incorporated both up-to-date archeological research and state-of-the-art exhibition design

(Tuckley “Digging" 84). During its closure, the museum held a temporary exhibit “The Jorvik

Story” at a nearby venue, elements of which were also exhibited in Iceland from 2000 to 2003

(Tuckley “Digging" 84). These exhibits enabled the museum to continue to serve its local

community, while also expanding its brand overseas.

Between 2009 - 2010 the museum undertook a second, partial refurbishment, both as a

means to increase revenue following the 2008 financial crisis and to further incorporate the latest

archaeological research (Tuckley “Digging” 90). The motivation to increase revenue was in part

driven by a city-wide effort to increase tourist spending following the financial crisis (Tuckley

30

“Digging” 90). This demonstrates how Jorvik Viking Centre is an integral part of York’s cultural

fabric, part of Falk and Sheppard’s “ecosystem of the larger society” (22). The social capital the

museum has with the city and the city has with the museum is one of the elements of resilience

that is no doubt being called upon during the pandemic.

In late 2015 Jorvik Viking Centre undertook its most challenging refurbishment,

responding to a catastrophic flood that closed the museum for sixteen months. The closure

enabled the museum to update its visitor center, change the timeline to reflect the most recent

research, and incorporate live actors into the time travel attraction (Tuckley “Digging” 94). It

also allowed the museum to focus on digitizing its photographic and video archive from the

excavations and use them in a history of the dig (Tuckley “Re-Imagining” 1). As with previous

closures, the museum sponsored special exhibits from its collection at several sites in York,

allowing residents and visitors an opportunity to engage with the museum while its main site was

not operational (“2017”).

In addition to making major changes to the exhibit and attraction, and digitizing its

archives, the museum incorporated a “series of flood mitigation measures designed and installed

to increase…future resilience against flooding” as well as improvements to the building,

included the installation of emergency lighting, fire and intruder alarm systems, and other

improvements to the physical plant (Tuckley “Re-imagining” 14). Such mitigation measures are

consistent with steps that can be taken as part of business continuity planning and will contribute

to the museum’s resilience against flooding in the face of global climate change. Insurance

covered most of the reconstruction, with donations covering approximately one-quarter of the

£4.5 million total cost. While European museums in general enjoy more government funding

31

than those in the United States, Jorvik Viking Centre, like its American counterparts, is self-

funding and subject to the same challenges during the pandemic (or other disaster/crisis).

Though challenged by the pandemic, these experiences have made Jorvik Viking Centre

resilient and positioned them well to manage the current crisis. The museum has a learning

culture, illustrated by their having “…looked back to earlier iterations of Jorvik to make sense of

the steps to be taken toward its future” (Tuckley 76). The museum has looked to its past to adapt

to the current reality, increasing its online presence and developing live virtual programming that

has attracted participants from Europe, the United States, Mexico, and India. The museum has

also participated in an international virtual summer camp. Just as during their first closure in

2001- 2001, when it sponsored a traveling exhibition to Iceland, the museum has expanded its

international brand through its pandemic response. The Jorvik Viking Centre has proven nimble

in creating online content and providing content off-site that allowed for social distancing until

the museum was able to reopen at a reduced capacity in the summer of 2020.

Discussion

Museums and museum accrediting bodies have long recognized the importance of

disaster planning as central to the ethics of holding a collection in the public trust (“Disaster

Preparedness”). The SARS-CoV2 pandemic has illustrated the need for ethical considerations to

expand beyond protection of the collection to protection of the museum’s ability to operate,

maintain fiscal viability, and develop resilience, as well as the ability to contribute to the

resilience of the community. Any one of the myriad challenges the pandemic has posed to

museums would be sufficient to implement a BCP: the loss of staff through illness or stay-at-

home orders; the loss of revenue as a result of mandated closures; the loss of facilities and the

32

impact that has on fulfilling an educational mission; interruptions of supply chain as a result of

increased demand on suppliers and shippers (possibly impacting cafes and gift shops, for

example); reputational crises as issues of employee equity are brought to the fore; the list goes

on.

While help in managing these challenges exists in the form of commercial property/

business interruption insurance and government aid, the pandemic has highlighted the limitations

of both the government’s and insurers’ responses, underscoring the fact that museums must take

a proactive role in protecting their ability to fulfill their mission during times of disruption. The

case study of Nissan’s response to the Fukushima disaster provides a compelling example of how

the development and implementation of a BCP can enable an organization to overcome the most

severe crises. It is also a compelling example of resilience, demonstrating Nissan’s ability to

adapt to a situation (an earthquake causes a tsunami that causes a nuclear meltdown) that could

not have been imagined in its business continuity planning.

The development of a BCP in concert with a disaster plan will contribute to a museum’s

resilience, however; to be effective, they must be living documents that are embraced by

leadership and staff alike, subject to regular exercises and review, and revised as needed (see

figure 1). Such engagement with these documents not only ensures staff are trained in them when

they are implemented, but contributes to the intangibles that are also necessary to develop

resilience. Intangibles such as the leadership Frank Blake demonstrated during The Home

Depot’s reputational crisis in 2007, and the imagination that Reeves and Fuller champion,

enabling an organization to not only adapt, but thrive in the face of change. Additionally, these

exercises need not be in-house only, as developing relationships with suppliers, community

33

organizations, and first responders will contribute to the social capital that is so important for

managing and recovering from crises.

Figure 1

Conclusion

Business continuity planning is a logical complement to museum disaster planning and

should be considered a best practice in the museum field. The development of a BCP will help to

ensure that a museum can operate and fulfill its mission despite disruptions, both those that fall

under and outside a traditional disaster plan. In addition, the development and exercising of a

BCP will contribute to the museum’s resilience, providing museum managers and staff

opportunities to demonstrate leadership and engagement both within the museum and the

community. The SARS-CoV2 pandemic has highlighted the need for business continuity

planning and resilience for museums as they adapt to the new reality and prepare for the post-

pandemic world.

34

Appendix A

Basic Business Continuity Planning Template for Museums

I. Conduct Business Impact Analysis identifying all possible hazards that could disrupt

museum operations, such as: loss of IT systems/data/records; loss of personnel due to

pandemic illness, labor disputes, etc.; loss of donors/revenue; terrorism or workplace

violence; power outage; etc. Some identified hazards may overlap with hazards included in

the museum disaster plan. Identify areas where the risks posed by identified hazards can be

mitigated and do so to the extent possible. (See figure 2 for a sample business impact

analysis worksheet.)

II. Maintain contact information for museum leadership (including board members), staff,

volunteers, key vendors, banks and creditors, and donors. Ensure all museum staff and

volunteers have the contact information for relevant museum leadership and management.

Develop an emergency communication plan to ensure museum staff and volunteers are able

to communicate up and down the management/employee chain. Other contact information

may be considered sensitive (donors, banks) and should be maintained only by those who

normally work with these contacts and their designee as appropriate.

III. Identify primary worksites and alternative worksites should access to the primary sites be

lost (e.g., main museum building, storages warehouse, off-site office space, etc.). Consider

what equipment or capabilities will be required at these sites and how it could be acquired

when needed or ahead of time.

35

IV. Identify where and how important records and data are stored and what steps can be taken to

preserve this information in the case of IT systems failure, malware, power outage, etc. This

could include backing up data and maintaining it in servers off site or on removable storage

media.

V. Consider how to engage with the museum members, community members, scholars, etc. and

fulfill the museum’s mission during periods of disruption. Cultivate relationships with

community leaders, educators, first responders, etc. Consider how the museum can

contribute to community resilience and how the community can contribute to the museum’s

resilience.

VI. Consider how to engage with donors, creditors, commercial sponsors, bankers, and other

financial contacts during periods of disruption. Consider priorities for funding during times

of disruption. Consider alternative sources of funding or appeals that can be made during

times of disruption. Assess the museum’s state of fiscal health and identify areas of

vulnerability should there be a major disruption. Consider steps to mitigate financial

vulnerabilities.

VII. Consider how to engage with the media. What contacts have already been developed?

Designate a media coordinator to manage media coverage of the disruption.

36

37

Business Impact Analysis Worksheet

ready.gov/business

Ready Business®

Department / Function / Process

Operational & Financial Impacts

Timing / Duration Operation Impacts Financial Impact

Timing: Identify point in time when interruption would have greater impact (e.g., season, end of month/quarter, etc.)

Duration: Identify the duration of the interruption or point in time when the operational and or financial impact(s) will occur. • < 1 hour • >1 hr. < 8 hours • > 8 hrs. <24 hours • > 24 hrs. < 72 hrs. • > 72 hrs. • > 1 week • > 1 month

Considerations (customize for your business) Operational Impacts Financial Impact • Lost sales and income Quantify operational impacts in financial terms. • Negative cash flow resulting from delayed sales

or income • Increased expenses (e.g., overtime labor,

outsourcing, expediting costs, etc.) • Regulatory fines • Contractual penalties or loss of contractual

bonuses • Customer dissatisfaction or defection • Delay executing business plan or strategic initiative

Figure 2 “Business Impact Analysis Worksheet.” Business Impact Anaysis Worksheet, Ready.gov, 2020,

www.ready.gov/sites/default/files/2020-07/business-impact-analysis-worksheet.pdf.

Appendix B

Areas for Future Research

This capstone project was undertaken in response to the events of the 2020 pandemic as it

was happening. In the course of researching it, questions were raised that went beyond the scope

of the paper but are worth further examination. Following are research questions for possible

future exploration to better understand how to incorporate business continuity planning into

museum management best practices and better understand the impact the 2020 pandemic had on

museums—their operations, their resilience, and their roles in contributing to community

resilience.

1. What is the current state of business continuity planning in museums? Amanda

Benson’s article addressed a localized subset of museums in California. How many museums

nationwide (or internationally) currently have business continuity plans? How were they

implemented during the pandemic and what were the results? What best practices have these

museums developed in designing, training, and implementing their business continuity plans?

2. How did the SARS-CoV2 pandemic affect museums? How many museums closed or

were otherwise suffered significant negative impacts as a result of the pandemic? What were

those impacts? What factors led to these museums closing or otherwise reducing their service to

the community?

3. Conversely, for museums that effectively weathered the pandemic, what steps did they

take to do so? How did they manage the challenges of remote work, mission fulfillment,

community engagement, community resilience, revenue generation, among other challenges?

38

What have they learned from this experience and how will they change their operations going

forward?

39

Works Cited

“2017.” JORVIK Viking Centre, 2017, www.jorvikvikingcentre.co.uk/about/jorvik-story/return-

of-the-vikings/. Accessed 13 December 2020.

“3.3 Emergency Planning.” Northeast Document Conservation Center, 2017, www.nedcc.org/

free-resources/preservation-leaflets/3.-emergency-management/3.3-emergency-planning.

Accessed 13 December 2020.

“A Public Trust at Risk” The Heritage Health Index Report on the State of America’s Collections,

https://www.culturalheritage.org/docs/default-source/hhi/hhisummary.pdf. December

2005. Accessed 14 September 2020.

“About the Heritage Health Index.” HHI, Heritage Preservation, December 2005,

resources.culturalheritage.org/hhi/home/about-the-heritage-health-index/. Accessed 14

September 2020.

“Advocate for Museums.” Association of Children's Museums, 19 June 2020,

www.childrensmuseums.org/about/covid-19/covid-19-advocacy.

Aggarwal, Shikha, and Manoj Kumar Srivastava. “Nissan: Recovering Supply Chain Opera

tions.” Management Development Institute Gurgaon and Richard Ivey School of Busi

ness Foundation. 2016.

40

American Alliance of Museums. “A Snapshot of US Museums' Response to the COVID-19

Pandemic (June 2020).” American Alliance of Museums, 17 Nov. 2020, www.aam-

us.org/2020/07/22/a-snapshot-of-us-museums-response-to-the-covid-19-pandemic/.

Accessed 15 December 2020.

American Alliance of Museums. “Museums Included in Economic Relief Legislation.” American

Alliance of Museums, 27 Apr. 2020, www.aam-us.org/2020/03/27/museums-included-in-

economic-relief-legislation/, Accessed 3 October 2020.

American Alliance of Museums. “National Standards and Best Practices.” The AAM Press,

Washington, DC. 2008

American Library Association, Library Recovery Funding Summary, March 2020.

Benson, Amanda. “Recovering From Natural Disasters: Helping Museum Employees Return To

Workplace Normalcy.” Disaster Management and Human Health Risk V, 2017,

doi:10.2495/dman170171.

Brady, Anna. “Insurers Hit by Art-World Class Action Lawsuit as Coronavirus Crisis Bites.” The

Art Newspaper, The Art Newspaper, 5 June 2020, www.theartnewspaper.com/news/

insurers-hit-by-art-world-class-action. Accessed 1 November 2020

“Business Continuity Plan.” Business Continuity Plan/Ready.gov, 2020, www.ready.gov/

business-continuity-plan. Accessed 14 September 2020.

41

“Business Impact Analysis.” Business Impact Analysis | Ready.gov, 28 July 2020,

www.ready.gov/business-impact-analysis. Accessed 18 October 2020.

Capps, Kriston. “How D.C. Museums Fared in the Paycheck Protection Program Lottery.”

Washington City Paper, 14 May 2020, washingtoncitypaper.com/article/174462/how-dc-

museums-fared-in-the-paycheck-protection-program-lottery/. Accessed 7 December

2020.

“CARES Act Arts and Cultural Provisions.” Insight, Congressional Research Service, 27 May

2020, crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN11409. Accessed 7 December 2020.

“Developing a Disaster Plan,” https://www.aam-us.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/developing-

a-disaster-plan-final.pdf. 2018. Accessed 3 October 2020.

“Coppergate Dig.” JORVIK Viking Centre, 2020, www.jorvikvikingcentre.co.uk/about/jorvik-

story/coppergate-dig/. Accessed 20 October 2020.

Cunniffe, Eileen. “For Puerto Rico's Art Museums, Hurricane Maria Wreaked Havoc and

Revealed Vulnerabilities.” Non Profit News | Nonprofit Quarterly, 14 Mar. 2018,

nonprofitquarterly.org/puerto-rico-art-museums-hurricane-havoc/. Accessed 15

December 2020.

Dadson, Emma. Emergency Planning and Response for Libraries, Archives, and Museums.

Facet, 2012, pp. 193–206.

42

“Disaster Preparedness and Emergency Response Plan.” American Alliance of Museums.

https://www.aam-us.org/programs/ethics-standards-and-professional-practices/disaster-

preparedness-and-emergency-response-plan/ Accessed 8 May 2020.

Donnelly, Jennifer A. “The CEO Art Museum Director: Business as Usual?” Transatlantica, no.

2, 2010, doi:10.4000/transatlantica.5044.

Elejalde-Ruiz, Alexia. “Business Owners Bleeding Money during the Coronavirus Shutdown

May Expect Insurance to Cover Their Losses. But Often They're in for a Shock.”

Chicagotribune.com, 16 Apr. 2020, www.chicagotribune.com/coronavirus/ct-

coronavirus-business-interruption-insurance-lawsuits-20200416-

b5kl3xaweja7refbqfr4cpkp3u-story.html. Accessed 1 November 2020.

Elejalde-Ruiz, Alexia. “In a Sweeping Lawsuit, 42 Chicago Businesses Seek Insurance Coverage

for COVID-Related Business Losses.” Chicagotribune.com, Chicago Tribune, 3 Aug.

2020, www.chicagotribune.com/coronavirus/ct-coronavirus-chicago-lawsuit-business-

interruption-insurance-gibsons-20200803-gu6anbsmqzfxxh6h6hgivwxbfq-story.html.

Accessed 1 November 2020.

“Emergency Preparedness and Response.” ICOM, icom.museum/en/our-actions/heritage-

protection/emergency-preparedness-and-response/. Accessed 12 October 2020.

Falk, John H., and Beverly Sheppard. Thriving in the Knowledge Age: New Business Models for

Museums and Other Cultural Institutions. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2006.

43

Fiksel, Joseph, Mikaella Poliviou, Keely L. Croxton, and Timothy J. Petit. “From Risk to Re

silience: Learning to Deal with Disruption.” MIT Sloan Management Review. Vol. 56 No.

2, pp. 79-86. Winter 2015.

“Finding Financial Relief and Support (for Individuals and Institutions).” American Alliance of

Museums, 29 Sept. 2020, www.aam-us.org/programs/about-museums/financial-relief-

and-resources/.

“Fukushima Accident.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 27 May 2020,

www.britannica.com/event/Fukushima-accident. Accessed 18 October 2020.

Garza, Monica, and Charlotte Wagner. “Supporting Community Well-Being Creatively.” ICA

Magazine, Winter 2020, pp. 16–17.

Gay, Malcolm. “In a Landslide Vote, MFA Workers Opt to Unionize - The Boston Globe.”

BostonGlobe.com, The Boston Globe, 20 Nov. 2020, www.bostonglobe.com/2020/11/20/

arts/landslide-vote-mfa-workers-opt-unionize/. Accessed 24 November 2020.

Hansen, Drew. “The Newseum Is Closing. Here's What's next for the Building and the Freedom

Forum.” Bizjournals.com, 2020, www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2019/12/31/the-

newseum-is-closing-heres-whats-next-for-the.html. Accessed 15 December 2020.

Harris, Elizabeth A. “The Louvre Took Down the Sackler Name. Here's Why Other Museums

Probably Won't.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 18 July 2019,

www.nytimes.com/2019/07/18/arts/sackler-family-museums.html. Accessed 15

December 2020.

44

Henry, Walter. “A Brief Bibliography On Disasters.” Stanford University Libraries. https://

cool.culturalheritage.org/byauth/henry/southnet.html. May 1988. Accessed 13 September 2020.

Herbane, Brahim. “The Evolution of Business Continuity Management: A Historical Review of

Practices and Drivers.” Business History, vol. 52, no. 6, 2010, pp. 978–1002.

“Heritage Health Information Survey (HHIS).” Institute of Museum and Library Services, 25

Feb. 2019, www.imls.gov/data/surveys-data/heritage-health-information-survey-hhis.

Accessed 18 September 2020.

Holmes, Megan. “The Florence Flood: An Art Historical Perspective.” Flood in Florence, 1966:

A Fifty-Year Retrospective, Paul Conway, Martha O’Hara Conway. Maize Publishing,

2018

Jackson, Christine. “The BMA Deaccessioning Scandal, Explained.” Baltimore Magazine, 28

Oct. 2020, www.baltimoremagazine.com/section/uncategorized/the-bma-deaccessioning-

scandal-explained/. Accessed 24 November 2020.

Jacobs, Julia. “Arts Groups Fight Their Insurers Over Coverage on Virus Losses.” The New York

Times, The New York Times, 5 May 2020, www.nytimes.com/2020/05/05/arts/insurance-

claims-coronavirus-arts.html. Accessed 1 November 2020.

Jones, Jenny. “New Museum Replaces One Leveled by Hurricane Katrina.” American Society of

Civil Engineers (ASCE), 1 July 2014, www.asce.org/magazine/20140701-new-museum-

replaces-one-leveled-by-hurricane-katrina/. Accessed 15 December 2020.

45

Kinsella, Eileen. “'Success Seems Based on Sheer Luck': Galleries and Museums Scramble for

Government Relief Funds-Before They Dry Up Again.” Artnet News, ArtNet News, 1

May 2020, news.artnet.com/art-world/art-paycheck-protection-program-1848351.

Lalley, Heather. “Well-Known Chefs Band Together to Demand Government Action on Business

Interruption Coverage.” Restaurant Business, Restaurant Business, 1 Apr. 2020,

www.restaurantbusinessonline.com/operations/well-known-chefs-band-together-demand-

government-action-business-interruption. Accessed 11 December 2020.

Leonard, Herman B., Marc J. Epstein, and Melissa Tritter. "The Home Depot: Leadership in Cri

sis Management." Harvard Business School Case 309-055, March 2009.

Maas, Steve. “In Natick, World War II Museum Abruptly Shuts down - The Boston Globe.”

BostonGlobe.com, The Boston Globe, 3 Sept. 2019, www.bostonglobe.com/metro/

2019/09/02/natick-world-war-museum-abruptly-shuts-down/

kidNpWeGOjVKa07sJp0MYJ/story.html. Accessed 15 December 2020.

McCambridge, Ruth. “New Round of Museum Layoffs Coincides with Expiration of PPP

Money.” Non Profit News | Nonprofit Quarterly, 10 July 2020, nonprofitquarterly.org/

new-round-of-museum-layoffs-coincides-with-expiration-of-ppp-money/. Accessed 1

November 2020.

“Mississippi Museums Blasted By Hurricane Katrina.” Antiques And The Arts Weekly, 2005,

www.antiquesandthearts.com/mississippi-museums-blasted-by-hurricane-katrina/.

Accessed 15 December 2020.

46

“MOMA on Fire.” https://www.moma.org/interactivesmoma_through_time/1950/moma-on-fire/,

Accessed 14 September 2020

“National Survey of COVID-19 Impact on United States Museums.” American Alliance of

Museums , 2020, www.aam-us.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/2020_National-Survey-

of-COVID19-Impact-on-US-Museums.pdf.

“O'Keefe Museum History - Ohr-O'Keefe Museum of Art.” Ohr, 22 July 2020, georgeohr.org/

museum-history/. Accessed 15 December 2020.

“Old Salem Plants Victory Gardens for Local Food Banks.” Greater Winston-Salem, Inc., 21 Apr.

2020, www.winstonsalem.com/2020/04/old-salem-plants-victory-gardens-for-local-food-

banks/. Accessed 15 December 2020.

Overbeck Laise, Kristen. “Topics in Preservation Series (TOPS).” A Public Trust at Risk:

Findings of the Heritage Health Index - Topics in Preservation Series - Training

(Preservation, Library of Congress), 14 Apr. 2011, www.loc.gov/preservation/outreach/

tops/laise/index.html. Accessed 24 September 2020.

“Paycheck Protection Program.” Small Business Association, 2020, www.sba.gov/funding-

programs/loans/paycheck-protection-program. Accessed 29 September 2020.

“Public Trust and Accountability Standards.” American Alliance of Museums, 15 June 2020,

www.aam-us.org/programs/ethics-standards-and-professional-practices/public-trust-and-

accountability-standards/. Accessed 14 September 2020.

47

Pyle, Richard. “Katrina Ruined Some Cultural Sites.” CBS News, CBS Interactive, 8 Sept. 2005,

www.cbsnews.com/news/katrina-ruined-some-cultural-sites/.

Reeves, Martin, and Jack Fuller. “We Need Imagination Now More Than Ever.” Harvard

Business Review, 14 Aug. 2020, hbr.org/2020/04/we-need-imagination-now-more-than-

ever. Accessed 11 December 2020.

Reeves, Martin, Philipp Carlsson-Szlezak, Kevin Whitaker, and Mark Abraham. “Sensing and

Shaping the Post-COVID Era.” BCG Global, BCG Global, 22 Sept. 2020,

www.bcg.com/publications/2020/8-ways-companies-can-shape-reality-post-covid-19.

Accessed 18 October 2020.

Smee, Sebastian. “Perspective | The Philip Guston Controversy Is Turning Artists against the

National Gallery.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 16 Oct. 2020,

www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/museums/philip-guston-exhibition-

postponement/2020/10/16/930d74a4-0ef5-11eb-8a35-237ef1eb2ef7_story.html.

Accessed 20 October 2020.

Spruill, Vicki. “Thank you for helping us make progress.” New England Aquarium,

15 September 2020.

Tracey, Shannon, et al. “Promoting Resilience Using an Asset-Based Approach to Business

Continuity Planning.” SAGE Open, vol. 7, no. 2, 2017, p. 215824401770671.,

doi:10.1177/2158244017706712.

Tuckley, Christopher. “Re-Imagining Jorvik: End of Project Report.” April 2017.

48

Tuckley, Christopher. “The Vikings of Jorvik” Digging into the Dark Ages: Early Medieval

Public Archaologies. Williams, Howard and Pauline ClarkArchaopress 2020.

The CARES Act Works for All Americans U.S. Department of the Treasury, 14 Oct. 2020,

home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/cares. Accessed 15 December.

Wiggins, Jane M. “Chapter 24: Business Continuity.” Facilities Manager’s Desk Reference,

Second Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2014.

49

50

51

1

1