The topic is the structure of the museum, the organizational structure of the museum. Space-planning structure of museums Structural divisions of the museum

One of the tasks of management in the field of culture is the development of an effective organizational management structure. Since the early 1990s. The organizational structure of management of Russian cultural organizations has undergone significant changes. Let's look at these changes using the example of museums.
Most Russian museums in the early 1990s. had a linear-functional management structure.
Built on the principle of unity of command, the organizational structure united several functional areas. Thus, in the State Hermitage at the top level of management of the linear-functional structure

there was a director supervising five functional areas assigned to deputy directors (scientific, personnel, financial planning and administrative and economic, capital construction and reconstruction, storage and control over the safety of valuables (Fig. 10). At the State Tretyakov Gallery, subordinate to the general director there were six deputies (for scientific work, economic issues, construction, storage, technical and administrative issues) (Fig. 11).
The linear-functional management structure of the museums under study was fully consistent with the peculiarities of their functioning at that time. Museums, which were fully supported by the state, focused exclusively on the implementation of ministerial programs and events that provided additional government funding. However, since 1992, museums have faced significant changes: their budget funding has been reduced by 30-50%, and the number of government programs has decreased significantly. As a result, museums faced acute financial and organizational problems. Thus, the size of the financial deficit of museums in some cases reached half of the annual budget, museums had difficulty covering their operating expenses, the number of temporary and traveling exhibitions decreased significantly, etc.
The crisis situation of museums, in turn, required significant changes in the strategy of their functioning. Museums began to focus on attracting extra-budgetary sources of funding, developing new areas of activity, such as marketing, entrepreneurship, etc. However, the implementation of the new strategy began to lead to more complex coordination of activities, which required changes in the existing organizational management structure. As a result, since 1994 there has been a clear trend in museums to transform the linear-functional management structure.
Transformations of the linear-functional management structure in Russian museums can be grouped in two directions.
First. In connection with the emergence of new areas of activity,

additional posts of deputy directors and departments subordinate to them. In 1994, the State Hermitage created a separate area for museum development activities, supervised by a new deputy director for development. This area specializes in the development and attraction of extra-budgetary sources of funding, public relations, work with visitors, etc. In accordance with this, new structures were introduced under the subordination of the deputy director, such as the press service, development department, hospitality service, etc. (see Fig. 12).
Second. Small project substructures responsible for the implementation of specific programs and coordinated by the museum’s senior management are becoming widespread within the management structure. The temporary project team consists of ten to twenty specialists from various departments, who simultaneously report to the project manager and their immediate department head. The principle of double subordination, a characteristic feature of the project structure, is clearly visible in the new organizational structure. One example of project groups is the project group of the Tretyakov Gallery, organized in 1997 to create a branch of the museum on Krymsky Val. It included twenty-eight employees from different departments - planning, technical, capital construction, development, scientific, etc. (see Fig. 13).
The increase in the number of project groups in the museum required the coordination of their work, which led to the creation of a project headquarters. The project headquarters represents a specially created management unit under the director of the museum, which is responsible for project management. The project staff includes project managers, the number of which is not constant, but depends on the number of projects being implemented in the museum. Project managers are fully responsible for the implementation of a particular project and coordinate general organizational issues with the museum director. Thus, at present, the Hermitage project headquarters, created in 1997, consists of three specialists - consultant of the British Memorial Foundation K. Philippe, leading specialist of the Danish engineering consulting company Niras S. Fox and Russian manager V. Zuev. Philippe is leading projects to modernize the main entrance to the museum and reconstruct the left wing of the General Staff building, Fox is leading the Russian-Danish project to reconstruct the museum's heating systems, and Zuev is responsible for implementing the project for the construction of the Hermitage Repository in the Staraya Derevnya area. The project teams reporting to the project headquarters include specialists from the museum’s internal services, such as the capital construction department, the chief engineer’s service, the chief mechanic’s department, the development department, etc. (see Fig. 12).
The considered transformations of the linear-functional management structure of museums lead to the creation of a certain new structure. As can be seen from Fig. 5.1.3 and 5.1.4, this structure is distinguished by the presence of project groups that report to the project headquarters. The new structure allowed Russian museums to quite successfully solve the problems of coordinating work processes.
Firstly, the new structure has increased the speed of completion of capital works through the creation of project teams. If in the early 1990s. In the museums studied, no more than one capital project was implemented per year, then in the second half of the 1990s. the number of capital projects implemented per year increased to three to five projects. For example, in the Hermitage, before the introduction of the new structure, the project of creating a Museum Repository was gradually implemented over several years, and currently, as mentioned above, three large-scale capital projects are being carried out simultaneously.
Secondly, due to the introduction of departments responsible for the development of new areas of activity, the specialization of museum work has increased. This was manifested in the growth of a number of museum performance indicators: income from commercial operations of museums and the volume of attracted funding sources increased significantly. If in the early 1990s. the share of raised funds and income from business activities in the budget of the analyzed museums was close to zero, then in the second half of the 1990s. in total it accounted for up to 50% of all funding sources. For example, in the Tretyakov Gallery in 1991, attracted and commercial income was practically absent from the museum’s revenue structure. In 2002, these incomes amounted to 39% of the Gallery's budget.
However, gradually, as museums grew, they were faced with the task of strengthening organizational control. In addition, the diversification of museum activities and the increase in the number of functions in the organizational structure have confronted museums with the task of balanced development of commercial and non-commercial areas of work. The new structure was unable to solve the problems that arose, which led to the emergence of organizational conflicts in museums.
Firstly, the functioning of the project headquarters began to introduce greater uncertainty into the work of the museum and complicate management processes. The introduction of the project headquarters was not accompanied by a clear development of its job responsibilities, which led to ambiguities in matters of subordination and control. In particular, the relationship between the director and project managers, project managers and project teams, as well as the relationship between project managers among themselves were not defined. Informally, the project headquarters was vested with great power, which began to lead to organizational conflicts. Middle management employees were extremely skeptical about diverting their subordinates to work on project teams.
Secondly, the active development of commercial and non-commercial activities has led to a weakening of the coordination of management in the museum. Various departments, to the detriment of the general policy of the museum, began to pursue their own goals and objectives, which began to reduce the advantages of the current management structure.
The organizational problems that arose required museums to make further changes in their organizational structure. To determine trends in the development of the organizational structure of museums, foreign experience, in particular, the experience of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, is of great interest.
Since the late 1970s. The Metropolitan, as well as Russian museums, faced extremely pressing issues of transforming the existing organizational structure, due to a change in the museum’s strategy. The Metropolitan was forced to move from attracting government funding to searching for new sources of income, as well as strengthening the control system in the museum. The change in the Metropolitan's strategy was due to financial and organizational problems. The financial shortfall, according to American correspondent M. Bailey, was caused by cuts in local government subsidies and the museum's unsuccessful attempts to obtain grants from charitable foundations. Organizational problems were associated with poor coordination of major museum work - in the 1970s. The Metro has launched five large and seven medium capital programs.
At that time, the museum management structure was of the linear-functional type (see Fig. 14). The organization was headed by a director, subordinate to whom were three deputies for exhibition, educational, financial and administrative work. As a result of the changes that took place, the linear-functional management structure of the Metropolitan became ineffective in implementing the new tasks of the museum. This, first of all, manifested itself in the excessive workload of the museum director. The director's responsibilities included collections management, management of research and educational programs, domestic and international relations, as well as financial, marketing and administrative issues.
In this case, the problem was not only in finding a specialist who would combine such diverse interests, but also in the fact that the full implementation of all these duties is physically beyond the strength of one person.

Rice. 15. Modern organizational structure of management of the Metropolitan Museum of Art

The ineffectiveness of the linear-functional structure in the new conditions forced the Metropolitan to switch to a different management structure, developed with the help of the consulting firm McKinsey. The main feature of the new structure is that, along with the director of the museum, the position of president appears. The president, an additional management level at the highest level of the organizational structure, is given responsibility for a number of areas of activity (Fig. 15).
The powers of the president include financial planning, project management, public relations, etc., while the director is responsible for the main activities such as exhibition, educational and administrative work. With the introduction of the position of president, certain areas of activity are highlighted, which were previously part of the financial, administrative and economic functions and were controlled by one of the deputy directors. There are five structural units subordinate to the president: the vice president for finance, development, public relations, commerce and economic activities.
These innovations indicate the emergence of a new type of organizational structure of the museum, which can be called parallel. It is based on the division of power at the highest level of management on a functional basis. The director and president bear full responsibility for strictly defined areas of activity and have equal powers in resolving general management issues. They jointly determine the development strategy of the organization, carry out various types of planning, etc. The appointment and removal of the director and president, as well as the functions of resolving disputes between them, are performed by the Board of Trustees of the museum. As a result, the parallel structure is characterized by increased not only specialization, but also overall control in the management system. The advantages of a parallel structure are clearly visible in the example of the Metropolitan. The new management structure has allowed the museum to achieve a number of positive results.
Firstly, the financial management of the museum rose to a higher level, which, according to Metropolitan President R. L. Hitch, “allowed the museum to increase its income for 1978-1983.” with 132 million Americans. dollars up to 178 million US dollars Doll."
Secondly, according to Hitch, the share of attracted and commercial income in the museum's funding structure increased over the period 1978-1983. from 26% to 43%. This became possible due to the development of such areas of activity as marketing, fundraising, entrepreneurship, which are subordinate to individual vice-presidents for development and commerce.
The Metropolitan Museum of Art is not the only example. The parallel organizational management structure has become widespread not only in the United States, but also in other countries. Thus, in Great Britain, the experience of another largest museum in the world, the British Museum, deserves attention. In terms of the volume and significance of the collections, as well as the number of visitors and employed staff, the British Museum is on a par with the Metropolitan Museum and the State Hermitage (see Appendix 3).
The British Museum, classified as a national museum, is funded directly by Parliament. In 1998, direct government subsidies to the British Museum alone accounted for 81% of its total income, excluding additional indirect support from local and national budgets (9%). Like the Metropolitan, the British Museum was searching for an effective organizational management structure in connection with the change in the museum's strategy in 1998. In addition to developing scientific, educational, and exhibition activities, the museum began to introduce new areas of work, such as marketing, project management, etc. In addition, the British Museum moved from a policy of attracting exclusively public funds to diversifying sources of funding. The change in the museum's strategy, in turn, was caused by the following factors. Major capital projects commemorating the new millennium and the museum's 250th anniversary in 2003 (construction of a new main entrance, public library and learning center) came to a virtual standstill in 1998 due to lack of resources. The current situation caused serious complaints from the Ministry of Culture regarding the policies of museum director A. G. Anderson and the existing organizational structure of museum management.

In the British Museum at that time, just as in the Metropolitan in the 1970s, the organization was headed by a director, subordinate to whom were deputies for scientific and exhibition activities, educational work, finance and administrative activities (see Fig. . 16). This allows us to classify this structure as a linear-functional type.
The Ministry of Culture saw the ineffectiveness of the linear-functional management structure of the British Museum in the low level of control, poor coordination of work processes, etc., which led to the decision to transform the existing organizational structure of the museum. The main innovation was the appearance in 2000 of the position of chief manager along with the director (see Fig. 17). As at the Met, the director and general manager have overall responsibility for certain areas of activity and jointly make decisions on general organizational issues. According to the “Document on Cooperation” adopted by the museum’s board of trustees, “the director and general manager build their activities on the basis of a common understanding of the tasks and forms of the museum’s activities. There is a division of higher powers between them: the director is responsible for the management of the museum’s collections, the responsibilities of the chief manager include accounting, project management, organization of the museum’s commercial activities, etc. Moreover, if the director develops a “general style” of the museum’s work, its public

Rice. 17. Modern organizational structure of management of the British Museum

Rice. 18. Parallel organizational structure for managing a large museum in Russia

image, then the chief manager takes care of the development of public relations.”
Subordinate to the director are deputies for collections, educational programs, and administrative issues, and the chief manager supervises the work of managers for finance and business activities, public relations and development. The new organizational structure of the British Museum can also be considered parallel.
A parallel management structure is not the only option for improving the organizational structure of museums. In 1996, a special study was carried out in the UK in the field of museum management under the leadership of Treasury employee A. Edward. The study revealed such shortcomings in the management of British museums as “conservatism”, “lack of sufficient clarity in goals and objectives”, “intricacy of management processes”, etc. Edward saw the solution to problems in the transformation of the organizational structure of museums. According to his recommendations, the position of the director as the head of the executive branch should be retained at the highest level of museum management. But subordinate to the director, according to Edward, four new organizational units should be introduced: the financial director, the director of corporate relations and personnel, the director of construction and development, and the director of public relations (see Figure 18).
Thus, in the new organizational structure its functional specialization was strengthened, but the principle of unity of command was preserved.
The recommendations developed by Edward found a positive response and were used by a number of English museums. Thus, the British Museum at one time carried out the following changes to the linear-functional structure. In November 1997, a new position was introduced under the director’s command—deputy director for administrative and economic work (see Fig. 16). However, with the introduction of a new parallel structure in 2000, the position of deputy. Director for financial and economic activities was transformed into the position of manager for finance and economic activities (see Fig. 17).

The experience of using Edward's linear-functional structure has shown that it is quite effective for medium- and small-sized museums. This structure fully ensures clear coordination of management processes and the necessary level of control. In large museums, Edward's linear-functional structure appears complex, inert, with a low level of control (for example, the British Museum). The identified shortcomings are solved by a parallel organizational management structure.
As V. D. Alexander, an American specialist in the field of museum management, notes, a parallel management structure is typical only for very large museums. Most museums “still prefer to maintain the principle of unity of command, based on the fact that a growing number of directors successfully combine art history and management qualities.”
Using foreign experience in the development of organizational structures of museums, it is possible to propose directions for further improvement of the modern management structure of large museums in Russia. The shortcomings of the existing organizational structure of domestic museums can be solved, in particular, by a parallel structure. It allows the museum to develop in an equal volume various areas of activity, both basic and additional, and also to eliminate the problems of subordination of the project headquarters, project groups, etc. Instead of the project headquarters at the highest level of management, the manager’s apparatus, responsible for capital, seems more effective construction, financial activities and development issues of the museum. In turn, increasing the director’s work efficiency is possible due to his concentration on such individual functions as scientific, educational, exhibition activities, etc. (see Fig. 19).
The parallel structure is of particular importance in the Russian economy. It fully meets the tasks of managing large museums, such as developing new areas of activity, attracting foreign sources of funding, etc. The parallel structure makes it possible to actively develop such areas of activity as marketing, fundraising, entrepreneurship, while ensuring a balanced development of non-profit and commercial types activities in the museum. The high level of organizational control in the new management structure allows the museum to maintain the necessary level of coordination both of its own activities and the work of subordinate charitable organizations at home and abroad. The parallel structure in this case appears as one of the effective management structures for large museums in the Russian economy.

Slavnitsky N. R. The structure of the City Museum in the 1920s // Proceedings of the State Museum of the History of St. Petersburg. Vol. 21. St. Petersburg, 2011, pp. 84-100.

In essence, this is a continuation of the story outlined in the work about (http://site/2519.html)

In October 1918, the City Museum was created in Petrograd. As its director noted, L.A. Ilyin, “the emergence of the City Museum was not the result of a long process, but, like many significant undertakings of the present time, occurred quickly and from the outside it may even seem accidental.” The fact is that in the spring of 1918 V.R. Menzhinskaya raised the question of using the Anichkov Palace. She involved V.Ya. in solving this problem. Kurbatov, and he, in turn, is L.A. Ilyina. After a short discussion, they came to the conclusion that the palace complex is not suitable for housing an educational institution, and the most rational way to use it is to create a new museum, and both spoke in favor of creating a City (municipal) museum, where “everything would be illuminated.” aspects of the life and activity of the city in general and not in relation to Petrograd only, but broadly to the idea of ​​the city in general in its global understanding, and only then to give a picture of the characteristics of Russian cities and Petrograd in particular.”

The Regulations on the Museum emphasized that “it was provided with a range of works of the maximum radius,” that is, it was assumed that it would not at all be a museum of the city of Petrograd, nor would it be a museum only of Russian cities, but a museum “should give an idea of ​​the city in general.” The word “city” in the title of the museum was given in a collective sense. The main task of the City Museum was to collect, store and exhibit materials and objects that reveal a picture of the life of the city, mainly the state and development of the urban economy, the role and importance of sanitation and hygiene for cities.

The structure of the City Museum took several years to develop, and its formation in 1918 was mainly influenced by two circumstances. First of all, the composition of the collections - as you know, the main core was the exhibits of the Museum of the Petrograd City Government. But no less important role in this was played by those representatives of the intelligentsia who stood at the origins of the Museum. The preliminary commission, created in the summer of 1918 under the chairmanship of V. R. Menzhinskaya, included L. A. Ilyin, V. Ya. Kurbatov, S. S. Zhikharev, V. S. Librovich, A. P. Bryzgalova, V. S. Anderson and L. I. Zheverzheev. In August 1918, the commission was transformed into the Working Board of the Museum (later the Museum Council), which also included new members - Z. G. Frenkel, M. N. Petrov, E. K. Zamyslovskaya, G. D. Dubelir. It was these people who became the organizers of the Museum and headed the departments.

In June 1918, the Working Commission came to the conclusion that the museum should consist of 10 departments: 1) Cultural and educational, 2) Medical, 3) Technical, 4) Architectural, 5) Art, 6) Theater, 7) Library, 8 ) Statistical, 9) Charity, 10) Social life. However, according to the regulations, only seven departments were formed: 1) Social (statistics, charity, social assistance and public life), 2) Health, 3) Architectural and Construction, 4) Technical, 5) Cultural and Educational, 6) Library, 7 ) Arts in city life. A little later, the Bureau of Cities was formed, as well as the Art Department. In addition, the department of health protection in cities, compiled on the basis of the already mentioned hygienic exhibitions, later received the name “Department of Communal and Social Hygiene”. In addition, for some time there was a Theater, entertainment and music department of the museum.

On September 18, 1919, the following structure was approved:
1) Architectural Department (L.A. Ilyin)
2) Department of Health Protection (Z.G. Frenkel)
3) Technical department (G.D. Dubelir)
4) Cultural and Educational Department (E.K. Zamyslovskaya)
5) Art department (V.Ya. Kurbatov)
6) Museum of Old Petersburg (P.P. Weiner)
7) Socio-Economic Department (M.P. Kapitsa)
8) Administrative with the addition of a financial subdepartment and its necessary part of the Bureau of Cities (M.N. Petrov).
The departments included, in addition to the heads, their assistants, guardians and emissaries.

Let us now take a closer look at each of the divisions.

The Bureau of Cities, created on the initiative of Z. G. Frenkel and L. A. Ilyin, was entrusted with the following functions: notifying Soviet institutions about the work of the City Museum and collecting information about their activities, communicating with various public and government institutions and organizations in Russia and abroad, organizing a library of municipal magazines and newspapers (as well as processing press and providing Museum departments with information that might be of interest to them). However, it did not last long and already in September 1919 it was included in the Administrative Department, and later disbanded.

The task of the Administrative and Organizational Subdepartment was to collect and present materials characterizing the principles of city management. To do this, the subdepartment used materials collected by the Bureau of Cities, as well as literature on urban management transferred to it from the library. A little later, it began to receive materials of the “current moment” from local Soviets (both documents and photographs). In addition, the archive of the former Kolomna District Duma was transferred to the Museum.

The fate of the Art Department is interesting. This unit, headed by V.Ya. Kurbatov (who also became deputy director of the museum), was supposed to be organized in the form of temporary exhibitions (due to the existence of the Museum of Old Petersburg). The department launched a vigorous activity, and by the end of January 1919 it prepared the exhibition “Views of Petrograd and its environs” - the first exhibition opened by the City Museum. In 1919, this department also included the exhibition “Interior decoration of housing”, created in the mansion of Countess Karlova (Fontanka embankment, 46), which was transferred to the City Museum on November 16, 1918. In July 1919, the director noted , that “that the Art Department is now not only a consultant, but also a filter, passing material before transferring it to other departments and the custodian of material of a special artistic nature.”

But gradually this department was transformed - part of the exhibits was transferred to the Museum of Old Petersburg (as originally intended), and on the basis of the rest of the collection, the Department of Art in City Life and the Garden and Park Section, which was part of the Department of City Architecture, were created.

In addition, when the museum was formed in the Anichkov Palace, the premises of Alexander III and Maria Feodorovna in the Anichkov Palace were included in its composition and were called the “Historical Rooms”. The Art Department was also involved in their arrangement, and in 1920 they were “transferred” to the subordination of the “Art in City Life” department.

From the very beginning of its existence, the Department of Communal and Social Hygiene had the largest collection (along with the Museum of Old Petersburg) among all other departments of the Museum, since it already received materials from hygienic exhibitions in the summer of 1918. Initially, these materials were placed in 6 rooms of one of the rear wings on the estate of the Anichkov Palace next to the arena. The subject of study of this department, called the Department of Urban Health Protection in 1918, was the city and its population as a socio-economic and communal economic organization.

The collection of this department included materials on sewerage, sanitary requirements for housing and living conditions in cities, water supply, street improvement, and cemetery work; as well as “materials characterizing the influence of large manufacturing enterprises on the sanitary condition of urban areas” and “materials on the development of special diseases in cities and on covering the general principles of sanitary services for the population in cities and in non-urban areas.”

The theater, entertainment and music department did not last long. As already noted, its creation was envisaged in the original version of the Regulations on the Museum, but such a division was not listed in the approved Regulations. Nevertheless, the department functioned for some time under the leadership of L. I. Zheverzheev. The main objectives of the unit were formulated as follows: 1) comprehensive coverage of the role of theater and spectacle in the cultural life of the city; 2) collecting illustrated publications, engravings, prints, photographs, etc. theatrical and entertainment life of the city; 3) compilation of a reference library; 4) collecting plans, designs of theatrical structures and their theatrical and technical equipment. In February 1919, the department organized a series of lectures “Theater in the life of the city” (these lectures were given by P. O. Morozov), but this activity was soon suspended due to the small number of students (15 - 25 people came to the lectures). It was also planned to open an exhibition of the “People's Theater”, but it was not possible to prepare it, and soon the department ceased to exist.

The architectural department was created in 1919 and was originally called the Architectural and Construction Department. The head of this department from the very beginning was L. A. Ilyin. Through his efforts, one of the most significant exhibitions of the museum was created here. The basis for the department’s collection was the “Archive of Construction Assumptions” from the reign of Nicholas I (7 atlases, 23 volumes, 598 sheets of drawings), discovered in the Anichkov Palace, as well as various drawings, plans, photographs. The official opening of the Department took place on October 6, 1922, and it was fully opened to visitors on July 2, 1923.

The exhibits of the Technical Department were initially supposed to cover “technical issues within the jurisdiction of city government”: 1) communications (land, including streets, bridges, transport, water), 2) water supply, 3) city cleaning, 4) lighting, 5) communications in the city (mail, telegraph, telephone), 6) fire fighting. The exhibition premises were ready by February 1919, but the employees of the department were unable to expand their activities in this way, and it was soon disbanded (the exact date is not known, most likely this happened during the reassignment of the museum, but in May 1920 the department was still functioning, and they planned to transfer materials about the appearance of trams in St. Petersburg to its collection). Most of the materials (primarily on the planning and development of cities) were transferred to the Architectural Department.

The socio-economic department was the last of the divisions of the City Museum to emerge and for some time did not even have its own premises. First of all, the department’s employees began collecting statistical material on work and housing issues, as well as drawing up charts characterizing “working budgets in connection with rising prices for basic necessities.”

The cultural and educational department of the City Museum did not last long - when the question of staff reduction arose (and this happened already in January 1919), the head of the department, E. K. Zamyslovskaya, stated that all employees of the department had received an invitation to accept university departments in the province, so to carry out the reduction in this department you can do it very easily. However, this proposal was not accepted at that time, and the department continued its activities, preparing two exhibitions in 1919 - “A Toy and Its Meaning in a Child’s Life” and “A Primer and a Children’s Book.”

The structure of the Library Department changed periodically. The need to create a library at the museum was recognized from the very beginning, and at the same time, already in April 1918 (that is, when discussing the structure and functions of the future museum), L. A. Ilyin spoke about the possibility of having a library for each department. Therefore, each department had its own libraries. To create a general library, its head, V. M. Anderson, attempted to achieve the transfer to the museum of the book collections of the library of the Ministry of Internal Affairs (70,000 books), the library of the Labor Assistance Committee (600 books), and the library of the former Main Directorate for Local Economic Affairs. This was not possible, and the library was replenished by individual receipts of books that were not needed by other departments, and most of the books were transferred from the “evacuated” libraries of Warsaw, Vilna, Riga, Yuryev, etc. (these cities ended up outside Russia as a result of the Civil War). In June 1920, at the suggestion of Ya. D. Shchupak, all materials (reference books, periodicals) of the Bureau of Cities, which had been liquidated shortly before, were transferred to the library. At that time, it was located in the mansion of Countess Karlova on the embankment of the Fontanka River.

In addition, at the end of January 1919, P. Yu. Suzor approached the director of the Museum with a proposal to create a department of War-affected cities and measures and means or methods for their restoration, dedicated to the destruction of cities during the First World War. According to the author of the note, the department’s materials should have reflected:

1) A picture of the current situation in cities affected by the war. General plans of cities with the designation of the affected parts. Photographs, drawings, descriptions of the main buildings mutilated by enemy actions or fires caused by them (photos, drawings and descriptions of destruction and the current situation of damaged monuments and buildings of artistic or historical significance);

2) projects and assumptions of governments and local city administrations for the restoration of cities and villages to their original or modified form;

3) a collection of samples of building materials, both natural and artificial, used in different cities with data on their fire resistance and strength;

4) legal provisions stipulating the location of buildings, free spaces, improvements, city decorations and other literature;

5) ways and measures and means for the practical implementation of urban restoration - the financial side - and the results achieved.

This proposal was submitted to the Architectural and Technical departments for conclusion on February 14, 1919, but the department proposed by him was never created (perhaps the death of P. Yu. Syuzor prevented it; the conclusions of the departments could not be found).

However, over time, the People's Commissariat of Education began to pay less and less attention to the City Museum, and problems with financing immediately arose. Already in January 1919, when members of the Museum Employees Committee, on the advice of Comrade People's Commissar of Education Greenberg, decided to turn to the Chairman of the Museum Board G. Yatmanov for assistance in finding funds, it turned out that “Comrade. Yatmanov reacted extremely negatively to the very existence of the City Museum, which he even considers an illegal institution.”

At the same time, the Petrograd municipal management authorities did not abandon the idea of ​​​​creating a museum. The City Duma formally continued to exist for some time after the October Revolution, but in September 1918, the Council of Commissioners of the Union of Communes of the Northern Region did not issue a resolution on its final abolition. By this time, management of the local economy had already been completely concentrated in the Soviet authorities.

On June 28, 1919, at a meeting of the Council for regulating the plan of the city of Petrograd and its environs, a decision was made: “to organize the City Museum as a demonstration school for enterprises, which would house everything from the appearance of the city to the interior decoration of the rooms.” On August 14, V.V. Stepanov made a detailed report on the museum at a meeting of the Council. As a result of the debate, during which the question of the possibility of “linking” the City Museum, located in another department, with the Council of Communal Services was also raised, the issue of the need was fundamentally resolved creation of the Museum of the City of Petrograd.

After this meeting, Stepanov carefully familiarized himself with the state of affairs at the City Museum and in mid-September spoke at one of the next meetings of the Council for the Settlement of Petrograd, where he emphasized that the City Museum was ceasing to be a “viable institution” and was “tending towards decay.” Chairman of the Council of Communal Services L. M. Mikhailov, who was present at that meeting, agreed with the need to establish a museum of the city of Petrograd and proposed to raise the question “of accelerating the decomposition of the City Museum in the sense of transferring to the Museum of City Construction those departments and their equipment that are related to Petrograd and should be in the New Museum." V. S. Krivenko also drew attention to the need for premises for the museum. Since the municipal management bodies did not have free space, he proposed using part of the premises of the Anichkov Palace for this purpose. That is, in September 1919, the Council of Communal Services formed a plan for the creation of the Museum of the City of Petrograd on the basis of part of the collections of the City Museum (those that were directly related to Petrograd), as well as the use for this of part of the premises of the Anichkov Palace, which was occupied in the same City Museum.

It must be said that the City Museum was in a very difficult situation at that time. In October 1919, it became clear that the financial situation of the Museum was very uncertain (the estimate for the second half of 1919 was not met). The Workers' Collegium was going to send one of its members to Moscow to find out the current situation of the Museum. However, the business trip did not bring any results - it became clear that the People's Commissariat of Education was not able to maintain the City Museum, located in Petrograd.

That same fall, another misfortune struck: during the offensive against Petrograd, N.N. Yudenich’s troops in October 1919 were used to defend the fortified area. In view of this urgent event, all exhibits of the departments, library funds, as well as the records of the Museum were hastily removed from their places and stored in a very limited room, in that randomly disordered state to which the haste of wartime obliges. The administration began restoring the previous order in the departments only on April 1 of the following year (in the winter, as is known, the fuel crisis also broke out, which did not allow normal work to be carried out in unheated premises).

In this situation (and in 1920 the funding situation did not improve), the management of the City Museum decided to transfer it to the department of the Council of Communal Services.

The first official meeting between the museum's management and representatives of the Petrograd municipal administration took place on May 5, 1920, at one of the meetings of the Working Board of the City Museum. Then the opinions of the parties were clearly outlined - the leaders of the Council of Public Utilities insisted on the creation of the Museum of the City of Petrograd and the disbandment of departments not related to the history of St. Petersburg - Petrograd, and the leaders of the City Museum defended the need to preserve the City Museum. As a result of the meeting, it was decided to form a Conciliation Commission consisting of three members from the Working Board of the City Museum and three from the Council of Public Utilities to directly consider and agree on the existing program of the City Museum and the program of the Museum of the City of Petrograd available in the Council of Public Utilities.

The conciliation commission, chaired by L.A. Ilyin, met for the first time on May 11, 1920. When discussing the name, most members agreed that it should not be narrowed, and the nature of the museum’s work should remain the same. At the same time, it was allowed to “take a practical point of view and add the word “Petrograd” to the current name (for budgetary reasons).” Stepanov spoke out against this formulation of the issue, emphasizing that “the transition of the City Museum should be carried out in such a way that the goals of the City Museum and Sovkomkhoz could be combined and, if possible, without damage to both sides... It’s not the details here, but the entire structure and if Petrograd life had not been sufficiently reflected in the City Museum, it would not have been of particular interest to the Council of Communal Services.”

A few days later, he announced the program he had developed, according to which the museum was supposed to be divided into two departments: a) Historical (history of the city, city government); b) Museum of Urban Improvement and Urban Economy. He wanted to divide the historical department into several subsections on a chronological basis, and the second department was to consist of 19 subsections: 1) Natural history, 2) City planning and development, 3) Communication routes, 4) Water supply, 5) Lighting, 6 ) Cleaning the city, 7) Construction and housing, 8) Firefighting, 9) Population, 10) Food, 11) Public health, 12) public education, 13) Communications, 14) Commercial and industrial, 15) Labor, 16) Social security, 17) Theater and entertainment, 18) Sports, 19) General department (mainly statistical), giving an idea of ​​the development of the activities of city government bodies in various sectors of the city economy, its financial situation, as well as the development of municipalization in the region production, trade and meeting the needs of the population. During the discussion, it became clear that there were no fundamental differences in the programs (no one objected to Stepanov’s desire to single out Petrograd), some discrepancy was only in the view of how and what kind of material should be presented in the departments.

A representative of the department of Scientific Institutions and Higher Educational Institutions of the People's Commissariat of Education, M.D. Orekhov, was invited to one of the next meetings (June 1), who stated that the department had nothing against the transfer of the City Museum from its jurisdiction to Sovkomkhoz, but expressed the wish that In its scientific activities, the museum continued to be in close contact with the College of Scientific Museums of the People's Commissariat for Education.

After this, the matter was transferred to the central authorities in Moscow, where the issue was resolved very quickly, and from July 1, the city museum became subordinate to the Council of Communal Services. The act noted that the Museum of the City remained in Petrograd and received the name of the Museum of the City of Petrograd. The same document stipulated that the Museum was directly under the jurisdiction of the Council of Communal Services and its Chairman. The Museum is in constant communication with the Museum Board of the Scientific Department of the Compros (Education Committee) regarding its scientific activities. At the same time, the museum retained all the previous premises, and all the collections were preserved in it.

A little later, the Urban Planning Department developed principles for the further activities of the museum, which stipulated that the responsibilities of the Museum include:

A) Collecting objects that reflect the structure and development of cities and settlements and their sectors of economy in the past and present, in positive and negative terms.

B) systematization of these items and the formation of a permanent exhibition exhibition in all branches of urban planning and public utilities.

C) organizing inspections of these exhibitions by the public and explaining to them the significance of the exhibited objects and the progress of development of urban planning and public utilities.

In the new Regulations, attention is drawn to the first point, according to which the Museum was charged with collecting collections reflecting the development of cities, and not just the city of Petrograd. This meant that the ideas of V.V. Stepanov (he, by the way, no longer took part in the work of the museum) were not accepted, and the museum retained its previous name - the City Museum. In general, the old structure of the museum was preserved - it consisted of 12 departments: 1) Old Petersburg; 2) Socio-economic; 3) Health Protection; 4) Water supply and sewerage; 5) Lighting; 6) Communications and relations (this department was never developed - N.S.); 7) Ways and means of communication; 8) Firefighter; 9) Architectural and construction; 10) Garden; 11) Arts in city life; 12) Cultural and Educational. A historical section was created in each of these departments.

At the same time, the collections located in the “Historical Rooms” of Emperor Alexander III and Empress Maria Feodorovna, which were still under the jurisdiction of the City Museum, legally remained under the jurisdiction of the Museum Department of the Commissariat of Public Education (and the employees who ensured the safety of the collection were subordinate to the Department for the Protection , accounting and registration of monuments of art and antiquities). However, two years later, in 1924, the “Historical Rooms” were again subordinate to the City Museum and were part of the Architectural Department.

In February 1921, the Museum consisted of the following departments:
1. Socio-economic - head. Mikhail Petrovich Kapitsa.
2. Health protection - head. Zakhar Grigorievich Frenkel.
3. Technical - head. Grigory Dmitrievich Dubelir.
4. Architectural and construction - head. Lev Alexandrovich Ilyin.
5. Arts in city life - head. Vladimir Yakovlevich Kurbatov.
6. Cultural and educational - head. Ekaterina Konstantinovna Zamyslovskaya.
7. Museum of Old Petersburg - head. Petr Petrovich Weiner.
8. Information desk - head. Yakov Davydovich Shchupak.

When comparing the Regulations of 1920 and the structure of the museum in February 1921, one can pay attention to the emergence of the Technical Department. In fact, this was a new department whose task was to cover issues of providing cities with: 1) energy for production and transport for transporting raw materials and products, and 2) special devices for providing public services to the city population and transport for transporting the population throughout the city. However, this department began to function only at the end of 1927.

Serious changes have occurred in the structure of the library. The fact is that the Museum included the Fundamental Library of the Urban Planning Department, which it was decided to merge with the museum library (all citizens were allowed there, but books were issued to the museum employees only). In 1921-1923 it was called the Fundamental Library, and in 1924 it became part of the created Library and Information Department. This department, in addition to the library, included a Section for the Organization of Public Utilities and a Research and Reference Bureau, which collected reference material on issues of public utilities in the USSR, Western Europe and America and advised on both theoretical and practical issues related to the organization of local public utilities.

In addition, an independent division was the Department of Interior Decoration of Housing, located in the former mansion of Countess Karlova (Fontanka embankment, 46), which was included in the City Museum in March 1919. This section was organizationally included in the Architectural Department, but in At the same time, it was self-supporting, and its budget was made up of the amount of entrance fees received from visitors to the Department, as well as from amounts received from the rent of 5 apartments for rent. This exhibition was opened to visitors in 1924.

However, by 1923 the structure had changed somewhat:
1) Public utility organizations (with a help desk);
2) Socio-Economic;
3) Communal and Social Hygiene;
4) Technical;
5) City Architecture;
6) Arts in city life;
7) Communal education (department of education in the life of the City);
8) Museum “Old Petersburg”.
9) Fundamental library.

In addition, in the summer of 1923, the Meat Museum was transferred from the territory of the city slaughterhouses to the Department of Communal and Social Hygiene.

TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 3. L. 49.
Shpiller R.I. State Museum of the History of Leningrad // Museum and Power. M., 1991. Part 2. P. 152.
TsGALI SPb. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 3. L. 49.
Shpiller R.I. State Museum of the History of Leningrad // Museum and Power. M., 1991. Part 2. P. 151.
TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 2. L. 1.
Right there. L. 12.
The idea of ​​creating such a unit was first expressed in mid-October after a report by Z.G. Frenkel about the Finnish Bureau of Cities. (TSGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 6. L. 31; D. 7. L. 44 vol. - 45.). And in the City Museum, the Bureau of Cities was created on November 18, 1918 - TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 6. L. 36; D. 7. L. 65 vol. - 66.
Museum of the City by October 1927. L., 1928. P. 36-37.
TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 8.
Scientific archive of the State Educational Institution GMI St. Petersburg. Op. 1. D. 2. L. 175.
At the meeting of the Working Commission on October 10, the application of Z.G. was considered. Frenkel about the Finnish Bureau of Cities, after which L. A. Ilyin proposed creating a similar Bureau in the Museum of the City - TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 6. L. 31; D. 7. L. 44 vol. - 45.
TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 12. L. 8.
The exhibition was opened on January 26, 1919, and in the first two months it was visited by 6,118 people - TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 5. L. 2.
Scientific archive of the State Educational Institution GMI St. Petersburg. Op. 1. D. 2. L. 100-101.
Right there. L. 157.
TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 27. L. 66.
Museum of the City for October 1927. L., 1928. P. 35.
Right there.
TsGALI SPb. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 5. L. 4 OB.
Right there. L. 5 vol.
Scientific archive of the State Educational Institution GMI St. Petersburg. Op. 1. D. 17. L. 9.
TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 1. L. 17.
TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 15. L. 20.
City Museum for October 1917. L., 1928. P. 54.
TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 2. L. 63.
Journal of the meeting of the Working Board of the City Museum on January 13, 1919 // TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 28. L. 4.
TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 2. L. 67.
Scientific archive of the State Educational Institution GMI St. Petersburg. Op. 1. D. 1. L. 4.
Scientific archive of the State Educational Institution GMI St. Petersburg. Op. 1. D. 1. L. 29; D. 9. L. 1.
Scientific archive of the State Educational Institution GMI St. Petersburg. Op. 1. D. 17. L. 13.
Scientific archive of the State Educational Institution GMI St. Petersburg. Op. 1. D. 2. L. 212.
Right there. D. 23. L 27 rev.
TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 12. L. 2.
Scientific archive of the State Educational Institution GMI St. Petersburg. Op. 1. D. 1. L. 89.
Journal of the meeting of the Working Board of the City Museum on January 13, 1919 // TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 28. L. 3. It is interesting that in April 1929 G. Yatmanov was appointed director of the City Museum, although he did not hold this post for long. - Scientific archive of the State University of Culture and Culture of St. Petersburg. Op. 1. D. 40. L. 50.
Petrograd at the turn of the era. The city and its inhabitants during the years of revolution and civil war. St. Petersburg, 2000. P. 14.
TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 38. L. 6 vol.
Right there. L. 23.
In this regard, one interesting fact can be noted - in January 1919, Viktor Vladimirovich read lectures on statistics at the City Museum and even then had some idea of ​​​​the state of affairs in this institution - the Scientific Archive of the State University of Culture of St. Petersburg. Op. 1. D. 7. L. 5.
TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 38. L. 25.
Right there. D. 9. L. 53.
Right there. D. 3. L. 25.
Right there. D. 32. L. 8-9.
The commission included M.P. Kapitsa, V.Ya. Kurbatov, Z.G. Frenkel; M.P. Roslavlev, V.V. Stepanov, A.D. Schmidt.
TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 32. L. 12-13.
Right there. L. 16 rev.
Right there. L. 17-19.
Right there. L. 21.
Right there. D. 69. L. 3.
Right there. D. 34. L. 1.
Right there. D. 4. L. 1-2.
Right there. D. 3. L. 6.
Journal of the meeting of the Council of the Department for the Protection, Accounting and Registration of Monuments of Art and Antiquities. February 2, 1922 // TsGALI. F. 36. Op. 1. D. 123. L. 1.
TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 3. L. 24.
Museum of the City for October... P. 54.
TsGA St. Petersburg. F. 3199. Op. 2. D. 200. L. 109.
Museum. T. 1. 1923, p. 71.
TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 3. L. 42.
TsGA St. Petersburg. F. 3199. Op. 2. D. 201. L. 1.
TsGALI. F. 36. Op. 1. D. 341. L. 1.
Scientific archive of the State Educational Institution GMI St. Petersburg. Op. 1. D. 37. L. 5.
TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 156. L. 39.
TsGALI. F. 72. Op. 1. D. 3. L. 42; Leningradskaya Pravda. 1924. No. 239. October 18. P. 6.
Scientific archive of the State Educational Institution GMI St. Petersburg. Op. 1. D. 32. L. 6; Museum. 1923. T. 1. P. 71.
Scientific archive of the State Educational Institution GMI St. Petersburg. Op. 1. D. 32. L. 7.
Issues of public utilities. 1928. No. 10. P. 105.
Konrad-Yavorsky A. The City Museum is approaching production // Issues of Communal Services. 1930. No. 5. P. 65.
Shpiller R.I. State Museum of the History of Leningrad // Museum and Power. M., 1991. Part 2. P. 156.

When designing museums, the principle of maximum separation of two main technological flows should be consistently implemented: the route of visitors and the paths of movement of exhibits.

The main activities of museums are: the formation and storage of collections, research work, organization of permanent exhibitions, organization of exhibitions, cultural and educational activities.

Table 6

Table 7

Visitor serviceFunctionPlaceReceptionVestibule, cinema lecture hall, clubsDisplayExhibition and exhibition hallsInformationInformation services, library

Formation and storage of collections. The museum carries out its functional program using specific means. A physical monument is the basis of various types of museums.

Identification, registration and acquisition of funds are carried out according to the profile of the museum. Depending on the significance of the exhibits, the museum’s funds are divided into basic and scientific-auxiliary.

The architectural aspect of the problem includes the need to have special premises for storing funds by type of exhibit, work premises for fund employees, storage of scientific archives, reserve areas for regular replenishment of collections, the ability to update permanent exhibitions and exhibitions.

The increase in museum collections per year averages 3 - 4%. Thus, the holdings of most museums double every 25 - 30 years. The development of the museum mainly falls on the share of storage facilities.

Research activities consist of several successive phases: identification and classification of material, scientific processing for cultural and educational purposes, placement of receipts in collections and exhibitions. The scientific classification of the museum's collections is reflected in the compilation of catalogs and other scientific and supporting documentation. The final phase of scientific processing of museum material is the organization of exhibitions and the preparation of scientific publications.

Conducting scientific work by museum staff and fund specialists is ensured by access to all materials in the fund collections.

The research work plan includes the development of a scientific concept for the development of the museum, a thematic structure, thematic and exhibition plans and architectural and artistic measures for the design of exhibitions. Head museums provide scientific and methodological assistance to branches.

Special rooms located near the library are intended for scientific work. The library completes its collections in accordance with the specifics of the museum and serves museum employees and visitors.

The area of ​​premises for scientific work is provided for heads of departments (sectors) - 9 m2, for scientific employees - 4.5 m2. The area of ​​​​rooms for the library is given in table. 8.

Table 8

Premises (zones) Unit of measurement Area, m Premises (zones) for serving readers Places for reading at single tables 1 place 3 The same, at double tables the same 2.4 Open access fund 1000 storage units 4.5 Department of issuing and receiving literature 1 department 5 Premises (zones) for storage and official work Fund without open access 1000 storage units 2 ,5 Places for library and industrial work 1 place 6

Permanent exhibition- the main link in the museum’s activities. It is formed mainly on authentic exhibits that have undergone scientific processing. Basic requirements for the exhibition: integrity of the architectural and planning structure and scientific concept, creation of comfortable conditions for visitors (thoughtful traffic schedules, lighting, information, the possibility of individual inspection and as part of excursion groups, taking into account the interests of different categories of visitors); expressive artistic form of presenting the entire collection and individual materials in accordance with the structure and thematic and exhibition plan; measures for the safety of exhibits (lighting, temperature and humidity conditions, security measures).

The organization of architectural space includes both the exhibition halls themselves and the open exhibition.

It is advisable to include an introductory hall into the premises as an organizing spatial element, where visitors receive the first information about the museum and ceremonial events are held.

Exhibition activities is an operational form of museum participation in modern life. Exhibitions are organized from the funds of both the museum itself and other museums. They expand the exhibition capabilities of museums and attract new categories of visitors. There are two main forms of exhibitions: inside the museum and traveling, which determines the need for special exhibition halls and vehicles.

Basic requirements for exhibition halls:

proximity to the lobby, the possibility of unhindered isolated access (without passing through other rooms):

neutrality of spatial and artistic solutions;

possibility of easy and quick transformation.

It is advisable to provide rooms for storing exhibition equipment and inventory in the halls.

Approximate ratios of exhibition and exposition areas are given in table. 9.

Table 9

Exhibition area, m150025005000Exhibition area, m200250600

Cultural and educational work includes the organization of exhibitions, excursions, lectures, conferences, meetings, evenings, conversations, film screenings, work of clubs, which determines the inclusion of a film lecture hall and study groups in the structure of the building. Depending on the size of the museum, the dimensional characteristics of the premises vary as follows:

in museums with an exhibition area of ​​up to 200 m, a universal use zone is identified in this area;

in museums with an exhibition area of ​​up to 1,500 m2, a cinema lecture hall with 100 seats and a circle room will be designed;

in museums with an exhibition area of ​​up to 2500 m2, a cinema lecture hall with 200 seats and a circle room will be designed;

in museums with an exhibition area of ​​up to 5000 m2, two halls are designed - a film lecture hall with 200 seats and a small meeting hall with an area of ​​45 - 60 m2, as well as circle rooms.

The nature of the activities of individual museums requires adjustments to these indicators.

In the practice of memorial, historical and local history museums, the presentation of government awards, admission to pioneers and the Komsomol is practiced, in art museums - copying works of art.

A feature of ethnographic museums is the performance of ethnographic ensembles, and literary ones - the systematic holding of lectures, concerts, performances by artists and researchers.

The cinema hall is designed in close proximity to the lobby. It is advisable to provide for its autonomous use.

Collection storage includes carrying out measures for the preservation of exhibits in exhibition halls, but mainly in funds.

The museum fund is characterized by a quantitative and qualitative variety of exhibits. Storage is organized by type of exhibit.

The main part of the work is the conservation and restoration of exhibits. Depending on the size of the museum and its significance, the system includes from one general restoration workshop to a complex of workshops and laboratories. A progressive form of servicing several museums in conditions of centralization of their funds is the organization of basic storage facilities, workshops and laboratories.

Along with traditional forms of activity in the work of the museum with visitors, such as displaying the work of restorers, open access to funds, etc. should be introduced.

The organizational and legal form of the museum is: Municipal budgetary cultural institution (Table 1.)

Table 1. Characteristics of the organizational and legal form

The municipal budgetary cultural institution "Zlatoust City Museum of Local Lore" operates in accordance with the basic legislation of the Russian Federation on culture, the Labor Code and other legislative acts of the Russian Federation, regional and local significance, and on the basis of the Charter.

Every year the museum staff puts a personal signature in the internal regulations.

The employee’s job description (Appendix 1) must also be strictly observed.

The museum is a legal entity, has a seal with its name and the name of the parent organization of the Committee on Culture and Art of the Western Civil Society, letterheads, and corporate symbols. All accounting matters are carried out by the centralized accounting department of the Committee for Culture and Art of the WGS.

The municipal budgetary cultural institution "Zlatoust City Museum of Local Lore" is a scientific, educational and research cultural institution, the main repository of monuments of national history, material and spiritual culture related to the history and nature of the region.

In the field of research work:

Studies the nature, processes of economic, political and cultural development of the region from ancient times to the present day;

Studies the museum's funds, which are one of the primary sources of knowledge about the region, establishes their scientific and artistic value;

In order to comprehensively study the region and create an exposition, it carries out scientific acquisition of funds.

The results of research work are used primarily to improve the scientific quality of the exhibition, which is one of the forms of publication of museum materials and scientific achievements of the museum, as well as to improve the content of scientific and educational work.

In the field of scientific and educational work: the local history museum, on the basis of its collections, displays, and exhibitions, conducts mass scientific and educational work, the content and forms of which are determined by the profile of the museum.

The museum holds lectures, excursions, folklore festivals, quizzes, classes, festive evenings, and auctions.

In order to popularize its activities, the museum distributes posters, leaflets, posters, lecture topics and excursions.

The activities of the museum are financed by the Committee for Culture and Art from the budget in accordance with established standards.

In addition, the museum has the right to provide paid services:

Organize fairs and sales exhibitions;

Organize the work of the art salon;

Take photographs of visitors against the background of exhibitions and with exhibits;

Provide services for copying exhibits and other materials;

Organize traveling exhibitions;

Carry out publishing activities;

Organize commercial exhibitions in areas owned by the museum.

The activities of the Zlatoust City Local Lore Museum include three main areas. Fund work consists of collecting, describing, and storing exhibits. Research involves the scientific study of various materials. Educational work, in contrast to the above, has a pronounced extroverted character.

The Zlatoust City Local History Museum currently has five departments:

Funds Department;

Scientific and educational department;

Department of History;

Nature department.

Art department.

The collections department is engaged in collecting, storing, and replenishing the collection of museum exhibits. The history department is developing excursions, lectures, and thematic and exhibition work on the history of the region. The nature department is engaged in the development of excursions, lectures, thematic and exhibition work in the following areas: geography, ecology, zoology, geology, etc. Employees of the art department develop lectures, excursions of artistic and aesthetic orientation.

The tasks of the scientific and educational department are to organize and conduct events, conduct lectures, and excursions. And also, writing articles for WGO newspapers and preparing materials for television reports. In addition, employees of the scientific and educational department carry out advertising and PR campaigns to attract visitors to the museum, hold events for educational institutions of the district, organize meetings, conferences, round tables, etc.

The total number of museum employees at the time of internship is 54 people. Of these, 21 are scientific workers, 23 are technical staff, 10 are caretakers.

Figure 2 shows the enterprise management structure

Rice. 2.

1. 2.2 Museum management system

financial statements local history museum

Technical equipment of the museum

Equipment

Planning