The History Miami Museum Is Changed by Trans Youth

On the Boundary Stories episode of our podcast, Nina Simon, author of the blog Museum 2.0, gives an example of what it looks like for an organization, in this case the HistoryMiami Museum, to begin to engage stakeholders on a different basis. Listen to how Simon draws parallels between museums and community foundations, and then describes how one museum made a transition towards being what she calls a “participatory institution.”

The museum originally connected with trans youth as stakeholders in an exhibition called “Out Miami.” However, they soon recognized that these young people they met through outreach to an LGBT serving organization could be creative partners, and authorities on inclusion, so they invited them to take part in contributing to the museum in multiple ways. These requests were part of an evolving relationship in which youth were shown respect and offered paid opportunities.

Introduced in Furthering Participation, Archon Fung’s Democracy Cube, can be used to analyse participation patterns or generate possibilities for greater democratic engagement. The Democracy Cube was developed by Archon Fung, the Winthrop Laflin McCormack Professor of Citizenship and Democracy at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government and co-founder of the Transparency Policy Project.

HistoryMiami engaged “Lay Stakeholders” in “advise-consult” roles, often reserved for the professional class. By nurturing a longer term relationship, they were able to involve trans youth in multiple modes of decision-making and influence, while likely gaining the benefit of more honest and informed contributions.

• 
  Participation is a type of democratic engagement

  When community members are invited to participate in the decision-making processes of an institution that benefits form public funding and tax breaks, it is a form of democratic engagement.
  
• 
  Participation is not one thing

  To be discerning about how an institution engages community, we need to ask who is being engaged, how much authority and power they have in the process, as well as how they are being asked to express themselves or in what capacity.
  
• 
  A Season for all types of democratic engagement

  Ideally, an institution should offer a variety of forms and depths of engagement. The Democracy Cube can be used to analyse strengths and weaknesses of a democratic engagement strategy, and brainstorm to improve it.
  
• 
  Building relationships for democratic engagement

  As community members give their time and energy to improve institutions, they develop relationship to that institution which can include a healthy sense of co-ownership.

Experiences & Observations

Which specific communities of stakeholders do you think about or reach out to most, in the context of a foundation you are close to?

Reactions & Impressions

How do you react to the argument that a community foundation must actively design opportunities to be influenced and changed by specific communities, in order not to become obsolete?

Questions & Hunches to test

Over the past year, consider which specific communities have influenced a foundation you are close to, and which stakeholder communities’ influence has been absent. What might need to change in order to engage the meaningful participation of communities whose influence is absent?

Guiding Question

Where does community participation in the foundation, and foundation participation in the community begin and end?