Public museums and art galleries depend upon public investment in their activities. Consistent with this, in the 21st Century these institutions have a changing role, and new opportunities, that demands higher levels of accountability while being more focused upon being understood as a community cultural enterprise.There is an alternate understanding of this kind of institution and that it is that they may operate as a public charity. If that is so the benefits that flow to charities need to be realised. Likewise, the benefits that might flow to contributors/donors need to be secured.
2010 is shaping up to be a milestone year for the QVMAG in that it will expend at least 10 million dollars of ratepayers’ and taxpayer money on recurrent and capital expenditure. Given that investment it is timely that a review of the institution’s governance and policy priorities be undertaken. Alongside this, its mode of operation in the context of the dividends it is delivering to Community of Ownership & Interest will need reviewed in context with the institution’s governance.Issues worthy of consideration and review are:1. Recurrent Expenditure: The level of the QVMAG’s recurrent expenditure provided by Council, ratepayers, is approximately
3% of Council’s annual budget. Given this:
• What is the museum’s purpose for being in the context of both the Council’s annual expenditure and its long-term investment in the institution?
• What social dividend is being delivered?
• What cultural dividend is being delivered?
• What supplementary and/or complementary cash income does the museum generate for either Council to offset its impost on the rate-base, OR the wider community to offset its indirect contributions via rates?
2. Strategic Planning: Without a strategic plan that sets out the institution’s purpose for being; a set of objectives/goals that fit the circumstance and are consistent with the purpose; matching rationales for the objectives; and strategies for achieving the stated goals/objectives the museum there is a case to be put that the institution is either rudderless, purposeless or self-determining
– or a mixture of all three. Ideally there needs to be:
• An overarching plan for the institution that looks towards the long term future of the operation that would be formally reviewed every 10 years;
• Consistent with the above, a medium term plan that looks forward 3 to 5 years and is reviewed within that timeframe; and
• Consistent with the above, short term plans for various components of the institution, ideally all of them, that are informally reviewed within a 12 month reporting period and used as benchmarks for reporting and quality assurance purposes;
and arguably without a strategic plan that has these elements management is unable to demonstrate its accountability to governance and/or other funding agencies
– State Government, Research funding agencies, Art funding agencies etc.
NOTE: “Our mission is to be a leader in the intellectual and creative development of Launceston and the State by increasing our enjoyment and understanding of our natural and cultural heritage.” What might this actually mean in practical terms? Does it mean anything that would adequately describe the QVMAG’s purpose for being or say anything that might justify Council’s/communities commitment of scarce resources to the institution in a 21st Century context?
3. Accountability: Given that Council is accountable to its constituency because it is committing ratepayers’ and taxpayers’ funds to the operation of the museum Council needs to:
• Be able demonstrate that the funding Council provides to the museum is delivering the outcomes expected;
• Be able demonstrate that the museum is meeting goals Council sets within the budget it provides and within the policy framework
(acquisition, research publication, etc.) Council/governance/ trustees determines;
• Be able demonstrate that funds provided by other funding agencies
(government, private & corporate) have been applied to the purposes for which they were intended; thus
management must be accountable, and demonstrably accountable, to governance/Council. For that to be so Council/governance needs to
determine policy and management needs to
deliver on the policy – and be held accountable for doing so.
4. Fundability: To win funding the museum needs to be able to demonstrate that:
• It has the capacity to deliver a program that meets perceived community needs; and
• Is able to dependably acquit its obligations to funding agencies – Council itself, State Govt., Federal Govt., Research Foundations, the corporate sector, private trusts and benefactors, et al. To do so the museum needs to be able to demonstrate its credibility in the field in competition with like organisations against benchmarks set by funding agencies and the field. This is also true for Council, which needs to be assessing the institution’s performance against policy driven benchmarks relative to the institution’s budget allocation.
5. Research: By nature museums are research institutions that initiate research in-house and facilitate independent, cooperative and collaborative outside the institution. Given this, the museum must be best placed to win the funding that matches its research agenda. In a contemporary context the museum needs to be able demonstrate that it has:
• Established a research profile within its Community of Interest & Ownership;
• Targeted its research agenda to fit Community of Interest & Ownership imperatives;
• Clear research priorities and matching resources
– human resources, infrastructure, collections, etc.; and
• A research culture that interfaces with the institution’s public program, community outreach endeavours and ancillary activities.
6. Publication: Given their funding sources museums arguably have an obligation to publish the outcomes of the research it has been engage in and with. These publications will take many forms including touring and static exhibitions; books, catalogues and journals; Internet publications and website; conferences and symposiums. In addition, publications can be a means of income generation. Against this background, and within funding constraints, museums need to be:
• Proactive in publishing the museum’s peer reviewed research outcomes;
• Facilitating the publication of research outcomes origination within the museum’s Community of Interest & Ownership.
