History isn't an outcome; Science isn't an outcome; Art isn't an outcome.
It would be better if everyone would just accept this, even though it's rather reductive. Deepening one's understanding of a topic or discipline like science is an outcome that some people do want to achieve — and those people are usually scientists, science teachers, extremely anxious parents, or science museum professionals. Same with history and art.
What if museums have such a strong tendency to privilege their own interests (learning and engagement outcomes) that the only way they might be able to balance the scales is to just assume no one cares about science or art history or that old boot that fell off a wagon in 1840 and made its long, winding journey to this very special place called a museum?
Because professionals, teachers, and undiagnosed parents are a very small group, and all the other people who visit your museum aren't there to learn about this topic you love.
They are there to take pictures of their kid having fun. They are there to engage in an elaborate mating ritual called "dating". They are there to find a place to relax or connect with an old friend. These are the outcomes most people care about, but museums keep making it about their desired outcomes — learning or "engagement”.
This is such a simple reversal once you see it, but it's remarkable how difficult it is for many museum leaders to see or accept it.
If you read this and take offense — "But people do care about [insert your topic/discipline]!" — you're missing the point.
This doesn't mean you have to stop loving science or history or plants or animals.
It's a challenge: Can you use your interest and expertise to be of service to others?
Can you take all your knowledge of Northern Renaissance painting and work with others in your museum to create a place that helps people in your community feel relaxed and calm in a new city so that they can cultivate new relationships with their neighbors? The art history students aren't going to stop learning!
Can you take everything you know about the how plants sustain life on Earth and help people achieve another well-being outcome like discover something new about themselves (not about plants — about themselves)? Don't worry — your fellow plant plant lovers won't stop coming to your arboretum.
Can you use your knowledge of colonial America to help people spend quality time with others beyond their own group or family? Building social capital will not reduce the number of Revolutionary War re-enactors who visit your institution.
I'll answer my own question: Your interest and expertise can be of service to others. The question is: Do you want to be of service to others? Because if you're not interested or feel threatened by the idea that your skills should be used to advance the goals of others, then maybe your museum really is just yours. It really does belong to you and people like you.
Now the challenge becomes owning that decision. Because if you do decide that you’re going to prioritize what are essentially organizational outcomes, then fewer people who want to feel calm while cultivating new relationships, or discover something new about themselves, or spend quality with others beyond their own group will come to your museum. You’ll still get the students, plant lovers, and Revolutionary War re-enactors, and your goal will be fulfilled, but you’ll have drawn a narrow perimeter about what your museum can accomplish and who it can support.
Your expertise isn't the destination — it's the vehicle.
Museums that make this shift don't lose their identity. They discover their purpose.