Arts Boards fit for purpose?
Lyn Gardner has, admirably, started
a new hare running in her online column in the Guardian.
Taking the Bristol Old Vic as a recent example she asks about the role
of boards and artistic directors. Now, on this we have views. Here's what
Peter wrote, but do read the whole thread - and contribute, either there,
or here.
It's inappropriate for me to comment on the particularity of BOV's case - TMPL was one of the "commercial advisers" Philip Hedley refers to, but I would like to answer some of Lyn Gardner's most pertinent points.
A major, perhaps the most important, issue for arts organisations - particularly for their long-term sustainability - is governance. It sounds boring, but it encompasses all the issues here: what is the role of the board (usually charity trustees), particularly in artistic policy; is charitable status now - in the 21st century, the best/most appropriate legal form for managing multi-million pound businesses that have customers who are as volatile as any of those in the high street; does the business of running a charity need to be shrouded in secrecy; who decides who is the most appropriate artistic leader for a venue?
Put in this way I doubt if any board member or CEO of an arts organisation would deny the importance of governance. The problem is agreeing the answers when personal, organisational and political vested interests are involved.
As long as we have unpaid, spare time, often meeting just a few times a year, trustee boards there will be issues. They, not the staff team - and that includes prima-dona, do it my way or not at all, artistic directors - are responsible for the business, its strategy both business and artistic, its customer needs and all its employees.
The board needs to set clear - and measurable - artistic goals that are in line with the organisation's vision, and it needs the courage as well as the skill to be able to measure them. Art is allowed - just like the high street - honourable failure. But it cannot be out of touch with what the organisation is striving for, or its market place: see Marks and Spencer.
The board is responsible for having in place the right senior people - business and artistic - to drive the vision. That changes, so the people must change, and they must be up to the current job that needs doing, not following some personal notion of their own. And if it's not working (eg M&S) the board needs the courage - and the skill - to manage changes until it does.
As for secrecy of operation: I personally see no reason why - like almost every public body these days - organisations like charities (most arts venues) should not be completely transparent, publishing their business plans, accounts and board minutes on their web sites. Of course this process may change what people record, but it's a start. Bear in mind too that if they receive public funds and, for example correspond with a funding body, it's quite likely that Freedom of Information Act rules applies: it's easy enough to ask for all the papers held by way of correspondence, staff emails etc on a particular organisation.
Finally, the experience of board members: as in any business - and be very clear, arts organisations are businesses - they should be recruited not because they have cheap business consultancy skills available like the token accountant/solicitor, but because they can manage a charity that delivers art. Importantly, it may be a particular art, in a particular context and community.
Suggesting that board members who have no direct involvement in the production of that art form cannot act in the best interest of the organisation is plain wrong. And a trustee board of a theatre, for example, comprised solely of other theatre directors, producers etc would likely be a very poor one.
Within the current constraints - not being able to pay trustees, especially chairs, is just one of them - recruiting able, dedicated, skilled, enthusiastic, visionary, successful people to become board members and chair is hard. (Any one who wants a job, call me: I know of a dozen organisations who could use you if you fit the description and are prepared to dedicate up to two days a month doing it!).
We professionally spend a lot of time helping to develop boards and organisations in the arts sector, and others. The demand is high, and usually only limited by money - oh, and the lack of understanding that they need to do it ... There's a thought
