We have often been told that to discover the new, we need to study the old, and to invent the future, we need to understand the past. Thomas Eliot also helped us in understanding the relationship between the contemporary and the past. Thomas Eliot wrote that, "Tradition cannot be possessed, it needs to be reinvented and, mainly, rediscovered." All in all, we need to bring heritage to life. We also need to consider that present cultural heritage is under a constant, urgent state of threat. Because of this situation, new forms of research and mainly management are implemented in order to allow people of contemporaneity to enjoy the heritage of the past. In these days, we are facing examples of politically deliberated and motivated destruction of heritage: what is happening in Syria and Iraq. Heritage is also under the risk of being destroyed by climate change or also by natural disasters. Then there are, after a war, for example, looting and theft. After a war, the invader robs and destroys the cultural heritage, taking, to their own country, the heritage of a specific site, and this is happened during the Second World War, but it is still happening in contemporary life. In a way, we can say that heritage is under the risk of being destroyed and destructed. Therefore, because of this urgency, new tools and new forms of management and, at the same time, research need to be implemented in order to convey and provide a proper experience for the visitors of a museum, heritage site, and/or archaeological site. Technology is helping a lot with this goal. We are now able to print, with a 3D printer, places that have never been seen before. Through scanning, we can arrive to a very detailed way of seeing the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, or a lot of details inside caves, that in the past, were never possible to enjoy and to see in such detail. Technology, on the other side, cannot be the solution of the problem. Technology is a tool. At the same time, we need to implement evidences of storytelling narrative engagement: so, using the tools in order to engage and convey the message that the heritage represents and wants to say. This is leading, in a way, to the big dilemma of heritage management, which is the role played by the curatorship and research and on the other side management and tools. Technology, web, and digital enjoyment can allow the consumer to enter in contact with a work of art, but the same work of art needs to be studied and researched in order to convey the original message that the work of art itself but the same work of art needs to be studied and researched in order to convey the original message that the work of art itself originally represented. The outcome of this dualism is also present in the form of organization and managing the heritage site. We can have, therefore, a dual relationship, so a sort of conflict between what is represented by the curator and what is represented by the manager. Who is the person that needs to lead and be in charge of directing a museum, archaeological site, or heritage site? There are four forms of, in a way, managing and heading a cultural institution. An institution can decide to choose one person that is endowed with a historic and humanistic background, a person that knows, in a deep way, the history of the collection of the museum, the history of art that is represented there; or in the case of museums that are not connected with art, the history and the essence, the core activity of the heritage that is exposed. On the contrary, a director of a museum can be a manager, so a person that has a management background, in this case, he does not know anything or at least he does not have, in his CV (résumé), a proper preparation in the humanities or the topic of the museum itself, but he or she knows the management tools a proper preparation in the humanities or the topic of the museum itself, but he or she knows the management tools needed in order to create a business in a way that is economic, efficient, and effective. Left apart, this form of directorates so management background, humanistic background it is also possible to organize a sort of diarchy, so two people that are playing the same role of directors inside a cultural institution, so people that are working hand-in-hand and divide, in a very precise way, the tools and the activities to be implemented, and together manage the cultural institution. This is a form that, when it works, is the ideal form of managing museums. We have plenty of examples of virtuosos in this field. Here in the Vatican Museums, we have an example of a director with the humanities as a background, and a representative of the management and administration department. In this case, we have a third person in between that puts together the two components of the directorate. This, unfortunately, is not the case spread all over the world, so the dualism between the humanities and management is still present. Then there is a last opportunity in managing a cultural institution that is a sort of clan, so a group of people, not one, not two, but many. This is the case that happened in the past in Chicago for the Museum of Art, where a group of experts of art decided to implement and start the adventure of a new museum all together with a precise division of roles of more than two people. Well, we are not in a situation where we can say this is the best and that is the worst. We cannot say what is the best and most ideal way of managing a cultural institution. For sure, a profound respect of the role played by the other, a profound and deep respect of the importance of management, the importance of research and the curatorship is the solution in order to manage museums and cultural heritage in an effective way. Finally, both the curator and the manager play an important role, what to say is decided by the curator how to say it is decided by the manager. Thanks to a deep and mutual respect on the role played by each one, this is, for sure, the best way to approach heritage and to bring heritage back to life and to also follow the path that Thomas Elliot stated, so not considering tradition and heritage as something that can be possessed, but something that needs to be reinvented and reproached day after day.