CONFIDENCE & COMPETENCE IN GOVERNANCE

Please click on highlighted text to make a link

Confidence and interest in a museum can all too easily be damaged – especially so when things go wrong. An organisation’s ability to respond quickly, and appropriately, to difficult situations is an important demonstration of its accountability. A governing body should:

• Make it clear that the organisation as a whole seeks and welcomes feedback, and aims to ensure that it responds quickly and responsibly to comment. Critiques and complaints are a vital and necessary part of feedback. There needs to be clear leadership within the organisation on handling and resolving complaints, and ensuring the lessons learnt are used across the organisation to improve operational arrangements.

• Have a clear policy on when and how it consults and involves staff and their representatives in decision making. The governing body should make sure that effective systems are in place to protect the rights of staff. It should make sure that policies for whistle blowing, and support for whistle blowers, are in place.

• Take the lead in forming and maintaining relationships with the leaders of other organisations, as a foundation for effective working relationships at an operational level.

The competence of a Board of Governance/Trustees (BoT) is entirely dependent on the skill sets and experience its membership brings to the task of governing a museum and art gallery. A museum's BoT is charged with the tasks of:

• Setting policy;

• Developing and making strategic plans and related decisions;

• Allocates resources; 

• Setting goals;

• Raising funds and winning sponsorship; 

• Evaluating performance;

• Rewarding and motivating management;

• Carrying out top personnel decisions; 

• Making themselves available to assist in their areas of individual expertise; 

• Representing and being an advocate for the museum;

and is ultimately accountable to the institution's COI – and especially funding agencies, sponsors and donors. Consequently, the membership of a BoT is typically appointed rather than elected as the election process does not by necessity deliver a BoT membership with the requisite skill sets – scholars, researchers, lawyers, financial managers, independent practitioners, administrators, marketers, cultural representatives, etc.  

Ideally there needs to be a 'prescribed person'  who can independently adjudicate on complaints and operate in an appropriate and confidential way. This person needs to be there for the benefit of employees where they are unable, or unwilling, to report internally. Also, this person needs to be there for anyone else, principally members of the COI, who may wish to report on the proper conduct of public business, value for money issues, fraud and corruption in governance or management. Also, staff may have occupational health and safety issues and may wish to use this means of addressing concerns that may come to their attention. Within the traditions of United Kingdom law and history, typically universities have such a person, known as "The Visitor", who can be the office of last resort for the resolution of complaints and disputes. In Tasmania, the University of Tasmania's 'Visitor' is Tasmania's Governor but a BoT might well nominate someone such as a retired judge to fulfil this role.

While things can unexpectedly 'go wrong' despite there being such a BoT being in place, should it do so, then generally there will mechanisms in place to deal with the situation more expediently than if the body didn't exist.

INDEX  

Please click on a heading to make a link

• MUSEUM GOVERNANCE: The Fundamentals 

• QVMAG: The Status Quo 

• GOVERNANCE MODELS COMPARED & CONTRASTED 

• THE ART GALLERY OF BALLARAT: Its Constitution Discussed