Smithsonian: Not (just) a Small problem

The two reports on Smithsonian governance that were released this week (one by the institution's own regents, one by an independent commission) were astonishingly clear on two points: Secretary Lawrence Small (and his deputy Sheila Burke) abused their positions, the trust of the public, their board and Congress, and were rife with professional conflicts of interest that wouldn't have been tolerated at a small non-profit, let alone a $1 billion non-profit. Small's irresponsibility and ineptitude were thoroughly chronicled in both reports. (I'll post some 'best of' moments later today. In the meantime the reports are far more entertaining lunchtime reading than you'd believe a wonky DC report could possibly be. Here's the regents' report; here's the independent report.)

The second point on which the two reports were clear has been little discussed -- so far. Both reports made clear that the Smithsonian's regents have been derelict in their duties. The release of the two reports was sad comedy: First, the regents released a report acknowledging incompetence while simultaneously refusing to be held accountable for it. Its 55 pages can be summarized as: "We goofed. We failed to do our jobs. Oops. Our bad. Mulligan!" Then the independent commission's report revealed the scope of that incompetence.

Small's errors are his own (and many of them were Barry Munitz's, too). But Small was enabled by a disinterested, irresponsible, nearly negligent board. There should be mass resignations.

Later today: Will there be mass resignations?