Come Together: Could Sharing Resources make us Stronger?

We all work in partnership with other sites—it's best practice. But could formalising these relationships bring greater efficiency savings and resilience? As many sites face financial strain or even closure, there’s increasing pressure to find innovative ways to pool resources, cut costs and boost sustainability. Yet few are exploring alternative operational models in a structured, strategic way.

This is Heritage Thinking Differently—looking at how formal partnership agreements between heritage sites might help us weather the storm while retaining our values.

Lessons from Local Authorities

Large local authorities have already embraced shared resource models. Where done well, teams are treated as a single workforce, deployed where they’re needed most. Retail staff might be allocated to support a site hosting a major event; marketing teams might focus on the combined public offer across multiple venues; and maintenance efforts are prioritised where demand is highest.

From my experience, this approach can reduce costs and even increase impact. But there are often one or two sites that become the poor relation—perhaps because they’re smaller, harder to access, or more specialist. Centralised teams, understandably, tend to focus on high-footfall sites or those with stronger income potential. For many venues the model works, but some struggle to get the attention they deserve.

This imbalance often stems from how the partnerships were formed—typically not as equal collaborations, but as top-down cost-saving measures. What if, instead, a group of similarly sized, equally valued museums came together voluntarily with a shared goal of resource efficiency?

Shared Fundraising and Marketing

Fundraising could be a clear area of mutual benefit. Many smaller museums and heritage sites can’t afford to employ a full-time fundraiser with a strong track record. A time-share agreement could make it possible for each partner to benefit from specialist expertise. While complications could arise—such as competing for the same funding pot or tight deadlines requiring focused input—these risks can be managed through clear agreements and planning.

Marketing offers another opportunity. Pooling budgets could enable recruitment of a more experienced professional, although the role would demand flexibility. Unlike fundraising, where criteria are usually externally set, marketing approaches must often reflect a site’s distinct identity. Not every professional is comfortable adapting their style to different brands—but for the right person, this kind of diversity could be energising.

Back-Office Efficiencies

Some efficiencies are more straightforward. Sharing HR, finance, events management or maintenance services could reduce costs and maintain sector expertise. Many museums already buy in this support, so why not formalise the arrangement with another site?

Sites with large outdoor spaces could also collaborate on estate management—sharing equipment and tools that are rarely used, but costly to own. While transporting heavy machinery isn’t always viable, it makes little sense for neighbouring sites to each purchase specialist tools they seldom need.

Sharing Specialist Roles

If survival is at stake, even core roles could be shared. It may be possible to combine curatorial, learning, or senior management posts—or even governance structures. In fact, shared leadership could make it easier to address contractual and logistical challenges.

Of course, the logistics are complex. Who is the employer? Would one partner hold the contract and offer services for a fee? What about tax, place of work, travel costs, or employee rights? Remote working might help, but not for every role. And what happens if an employee issue arises—or one site wants to exit the agreement? Differences in culture or management style could also create tension.

There are many challenges—some I may not have considered—but they might be worth tackling if the reward is long-term resilience. Imagine an arrangement where you and your partners pool your expertise together.

Making It Work

Success depends on strong leadership, sound systems, and a shared understanding of the sector. Relationships are key. Each partner must understand the others’ pressures and priorities, and be open about their values and approach.

Some partnerships may result in better recruitment prospects and improved efficiency. Others may not be cost-effective. But where long term survival, resilience or growth depends on bold decisions, we should not rule out new models simply because they are complex. Strategic thinking is essential.

If you’ve identified potential partners, a cross-organisational strategic review could help you explore these options. I can support you with this—please see the link below.

Paul Baker

Link:

Heritage Thinking Differently - Strategic Review