MLA Light Touch Peer Review CCC Museums and Galleries Service Oct 2010

8/8/2019 MLA Light Touch Peer Review CCC Museums and Galleries Service Oct 2010

1/23

Light Touch Peer ReviewCanterbury City Council:

Museums & Galleries Service


2/23

Light Touch Peer Review Canterbury City Council: Museums & Galleries Service

1

Contents

Theme 1: Leadership and Governance 7

Theme 2: Policy and Strategy 9

Theme 3: Community Engagement 11Theme 4: Partnership Working 13Theme 5: Resource Management 15Theme 6: People Management 17

Theme 7: Customer Service 19

Theme 8: Performance, Achievement and Learning 21


3/23


2

Background

The Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA) is a Non-Departmental

Body sponsored by the Department for Culture Media and Sport and is the

lead strategic agency for museums, libraries and archives. We work to improve

peoples lives by building knowledge, supporting learning, inspiring creativity

and celebrating identity.

MLA has been commissioned by Canterbury City Council (CCC) to undertake

a Light Touch Peer Review (LTPR) of its Museums Service. A Light Touch

Peer Review allows a team of people who understand the pressures and

challenges of running museums, libraries or archives to review the practices of

the service in a challenging but supportive way. This process allows a

constructive discussion of its strengths and weaknesses and provides

recommendations of how improvements can be made.

Peer reviews are about MLA helping museums, libraries and archives, and

local councils drive their own improvement. In carrying out this LTPR, MLA will

support Canterbury City Council through a targeted approach providing

practical help and expertise to help them plan their services improvement. In

providing an external perspective we will help them deliver on their potential.

We have agreed the following principles:

The value of the LTPR is as an opportunity to take a fresh look at the

Museum Service with the assistance of a professional peer and other

consultancy support

That LTPR is a partnership between the Review Team and CCC with

the express intention of supporting self-improvement

LTPR will benefit CCC most if there is capacity given to the process

and engagement from senior figures and colleagues

That LTPR is one stage in a longer term supportive/improvement

relationship between CCC and MLA.


4/23


3

Context for this Review

The LTPR was undertaken at a challenging time for Canterburys Museums

Service. A reduction in the budgets for the service for 2010-11 led to

proposals for closures and reductions in service; proposals to which there was

strong local opposition. This opposition, and the consultation exercise that

followed, demonstrated a high level of support for the Museum Service and,

mindful of this, the Council agreed that the cuts should be delayed to 2011/12

to allow some time to develop ideas and implement changes.

The LTPR is just one of the mechanisms through which the council can

develop those ideas and plan for service improvements. However it is

important to stress that the emphasis of the LTPR process is on long-term

strategic improvement planning. It encourages authorities to take a broader

look at the service to ensure that it identifies the outcomes it is or should be

contributing to, and builds the partnerships that are necessary to the

achievement of these outcomes. It is for the authority itself to determine its

budgets and the level of resources allocated to each of its services, within that

context.

The review team

The Review Team comprised:

Wendy Parry - Regional Manager (South East), MLA

Neil White - Local Government Relationship Manager (East Region),

MLA

Sarah Wilkie - independent consultant

Helen Eccles, Programme Manager - Museum and Workforce

Development, Renaissance South East

The team spent one day on site and in that time was able to meet with:

Cllr Darren Ellis, Portfolio Holder for Museums and Galleries

Museums and Galleries Advisory Group

Colin Carmichael, Chief Executive


5/23


4

Velia Coffey, Director

Janice McGuinness, Head of Service

Ken Reedie, Curator of Museums and Galleries

Katie Ginger, Visitor Service Manager

Martin Crowther, Education Development Manager

Craig Bowen, Collections and Research Manager

Manda Gifford, Outreach Officer: Coastal Museums

Staff focus group

Council Officers focus group

Partners and stakeholders focus group

Prior to the on-site day a telephone interview was conducted with Krystyna

Matyjaszkiewicz, Gallery Exhibitions Manager, who could not be available on

the day.

The team was appreciative of the welcome and hospitality provided by the

service and would like to thank everybody that they met during the process for

their time and contributions. The way in which the needs of the team were

taken care of in the build up to the review and whilst on site by Peter Davies

deserves a special mention.


6/23


5

Summary of findings and recommendations

At the end of the on-site day the Review Team presented its initial findings to

Colin Carmichael, Velia Coffey, Janice McGuinness and Ken Reedie. The

headlines from that presentation have been incorporated into this report as part

of a more detailed written account of the findings of the review. The main body

of the report is structured around the eight themes of the IDeA self-assessment

benchmark tool completed by the service prior to the review.

Overall key strengths

The Leader, other Members and senior officers are all very positive

about the role of heritage in supporting the broader work of the council

While budget cuts are seen as a driver of change, those leading the

service acknowledge that they should not become the main driver

The Cross-party Museums and Galleries Advisory Group is very

supportive of the service and open to change

A lot of people want to work with the Museums Service: recent events

have galvanised support, and there is a clear opportunity to turn that

support into strategic partnership working

Staff are committed to the service, in many cases passionate about it

Main issues for consideration

The Review Team did not develop a strong impression of a shared

vision for the service

The service needs to be braver in taking risks

Many staff do not feel empowered and lack the confidence (and support

of managers) to take decisions and implement ideas

Plans developed specifically for the Beaney need to be embedded

across the service

There are differing views (within the service and the council more

generally) about the levels of priority that should be given to diverse

customer groups


7/23


6

Community engagement work is not yet culturally embedded in the

Museum Service: it is too often linked to external funding opportunities

or triggered by others

The use of external funding is on the whole piecemeal and ad hoc

Recommendations

Following the LTPR, a number of recommendations are made below to

address the key issues for consideration summarised above.

Members and senior officers should work together to develop and

articulate a clear vision for the Museum Service that will underpin

improvement and provide much-needed context for the service review.

Senior management should identify and implement systems that would

empower staff, encouraging them not only to think creatively and come

up with ideas but also permitting them to put these into practice, even

at the risk of failure

The service should seize the opportunity presented by recent events to

capitalise on the current willingness of stakeholders, working with them

to create a shared vision and to formalise partnership working

The service should develop a coherent marketing strategy and

audience development plan which would segment and identify target

audiences and their different needs to inform future planning and

prioritisation

The service should adopt a more proactive and strategic approach to

community engagement in order to position the service more strongly in

terms of its contribution to broader council and community objectives.

The service should develop a more coherent funding strategy, using its

experience of successfully raising funding for the Beaney project, and

its emerging partnerships, to enable access to more diverse funding

streams, and exploring more commercial opportunities


8/23


7

Detailed findings

Theme 1: Leadership and Governance

Strengths

There is clarity at most senior level about need to reshape the service

While budget cuts are seen as a driver of change, those leading the

service acknowledge that they should not become the main driver

The Cross-party Museums and Galleries Advisory Group is very

supportive of the service and open to change

Areas for development

The Review Team did not develop a strong impression of a shared

vision for the service

There is a need for greater transparency towards your partners,

towards staff, and towards the general public

Staff need to be empowered and to feel able to think creatively and to

innovate

The service needs to be braver in taking risks

The Chief Executive is strongly supportive of change within the service and

expressed the view that meeting budget reductions should be secondary to a

more strategic review to address different options for service delivery. The

Review Team welcomed the openness and honesty of several senior officers

who articulated similar views.

However there is not yet a strong, shared vision for the service and work to

develop such a vision should be an urgent priority. Members and senior

officers should work together to develop and articulate a clear vision for the

Museum Service that will underpin improvement and provide much-needed

context for the service review, and will support improved partnership working

with external and internal stakeholders. As part of this process it should seek

to find and to articulate its place within the authoritys overall vision, ensuring

coherence between the two.


9/23


8

It is apparent that the Cross-party Museums and Galleries Advisory Group is

very supportive, and its members willing to put politics aside in the effort to

create the best possible service for the city. Relationships between Members

and Officers seem largely positive. However the Review Team felt a need for

a more open and transparent approach to the work of this group, for instance

allowing interested members of the public to attend part at least of the

meetings.

Many members of staff, at different levels within the organisation, were

supportive of their immediate managers, but many also expressed a need for

more autonomy. The team heard several accounts of good ideas that went

unheard, of decisions that had to be referred upwards, of plans that had to be

changed at short notice when over-ridden, and of difficulties in doing their job

due to a feeling of not having full control of all aspects. It will be important in

taking the service forwards that the organisation finds more effective

mechanisms for involving staff and ensuring that the good ideas expressed to

the Review Team find a voice within the service and can be turned into real

opportunities.

With the exception of its recent work on the Beaney development project,

Canterburys Museum Service does not appear to be a risk-taking

organisation. The Review Team felt that the lack of staff empowerment could

be a factor in this, and consider that it has in the past had a negative impact on

relationship-building with partners, and had led to a stasis in terms of service

development. If the service is to respond positively to current and future

challenges it needs to develop a less risk-averse culture and to be braver in

allowing, and in learning from, failure. If it is able to do this, the Review Team

felt that there could be real potential for the service to progress and turn these

challenges into opportunities for growth.


10/23


9

Theme 2: Policy and strategy

Strengths

Culture is at the centre of the Corporate Plan

The Leader is very positive about the role of heritage in supporting the

broader work of the council


A clearer articulation of priorities would support service planning and

partnership working

Plans developed specifically for the Beaney need to be embedded

across the service

The service would benefit from a coherent marketing strategy and

audience development plan to inform future planning

Involving staff in the planning process would improve awareness of

service priorities and strengthen morale

The Review Team welcomed the positioning of culture within Canterbury City

Councils Corporate Plan, and the recent revision of the Cultural Policy to

reflect the new enabling and commissioning roles for local councils. It was

heartening to hear the Leader talk of the importance of heritage to an historic

city such as Canterbury.

Although these and other more specific plans exist for the service, those

working in it and with it were unable to articulate clearly its strategic priorities.

Greater clarity would support service planning and partnership working.

Both Members and Senior Officers talked about the need to learn from good

practice elsewhere, which MLA will be happy to facilitate. However the

organisation does not appear to have yet developed the appropriate systems

to learn from and embed good practice from elsewhere in the City Council or

indeed from within the Museum Service itself. There are several good plans

and strategies in place for the Beaney Project (the development of a new art

museum and library), including a strong community engagement plan and

audience development plan, but the Review Team saw no evidence that the

service had fully developed and implemented systems to widen the scope of

these to encompass the whole service.


11/23


10

Many people from both inside and outside the service talked about the need to

balance different and at times conflicting priorities: preserving the citys

heritage versus opening up access; collecting versus income generation;

balancing international, national and locally important exhibitions. In particular,

the Review Team observed some tensions between the community offer and

the desire to feature more strongly on the tourist agenda. The team concluded

that the service would benefit from a coherent marketing strategy and audience

development plan for all the museums, led by the Museum Service, in order to

segment and identify target audiences and their different needs to inform future

planning and prioritisation. The Councils own Marketing Department should

be able to advise on this and to provide expert support on the marketing

strategy element of this work.

Some staff expressed a desire to be more involved in service planning at an

operational level in order to bring the specific expertise of their role to the

decision-making process. The Review Team recommends that finding ways to

enable this would improve staff awareness of service priorities, ensuring that

potential opportunities are not missed and that plans are deliverable. It would

also have a very beneficial impact on staff morale and commitment to the wider

organisation.

The Review Team observed that clear distinctions were often made between

professional and non-professional staff, i.e. qualified curators and front of

house, and felt that at times this was leading to tensions within the

organisation. Closer working between these groups and a breaking down of

barriers would lead to a more dynamic and creative work environment, in which

ideas were encouraged. This would support the service in moving forwards by

ensuring that it did so as a single team with shared ambitions for success.


12/23


11

Theme 3: Community engagement

Strengths

There is good work on individual projects in partnership with the

councils Community Development team

Some staff and other council officers spoke enthusiastically of the

importance of local museums in building community identity

This is acknowledged to be a developing and improving area for the

service


Community engagement work is not yet strategically embedded in the

organisation: it is too often linked to external funding opportunities or

triggered by others

There would appear to be tensions within service between the

community offer and a more traditional collections/curatorial focus

The excellent Community Engagement Plan developed for the Beaney

has yet to be rolled out across the service

Community engagement work is acknowledged to be an important and

developing area for the service, but is not yet culturally embedded in the

organisation. For example, the Review Team was impressed by the quality of

the Community Engagement plan developed for the Beaney Project, but

disappointed to learn that this has yet to be rolled out across the service. In a

similar way, good individual projects developed and delivered in partnership

with the councils Community Development team appear ad hoc and largely

driven by opportunities identified by that team rather than by those working

within the Museum Service itself. A more proactive and strategic approach to

community engagement would help to position the service more strongly in

terms of its contribution to broader council and community objectives.

The Review Team observed some tensions within the service between its offer

to local communities and a more traditional collections or curatorial focus. For

instance, some staff expressed the view that a recent trend towards more

community led exhibitions had attracted fewer visitors as only local groups

were interested in these. Conversely, bought-in national exhibitions, which

had been staged more frequently in the past, had attracted visitors to the city


13/23


12

from outside the region. These were seen by some as being closer to the

services traditional role of preserving and making available heritage. The

organisation would benefit from a clear statement of purpose in relation to its

community work, and managers should work with staff to help them

understand this aspect of the museums role.

The Review Team made a broad distinction between three obvious audience

groups: local people with a strong interest in and support for culture; local

people as yet not very engaged with the cultural offer in the city; and tourists

and other visitors to the area. This is naturally a very blunt analysis. As

mentioned above, a coherent marketing strategy and audience development

plan could help the service to segment and identify these and many other

potential target groups, understand their different needs and make considered

decisions about these sometimes conflicting priorities.


14/23


13

Theme 4: Partnership working

Strengths

A lot of people want to work with the Museums Service: recent events

have galvanised support

There is a clear opportunity to turn that support into strategic

partnership working


Potential partners (within and outside council) dont have a strong

sense of the Museums Services vision orpriorities

The service needs to capitalise on opportunities, create a shared vision

and formalise partnership working

The service needs to develop trust in its partners and be more open

with them

The Review Team was impressed by the positive attitude of stakeholders

towards the Museum Service and by their keenness to engage with the

organisation. There is an honest acknowledgement from both within and

outside the service that mistakes have been made in the past, and a genuine

willingness to put these to one side and to work together to seek improvements

while responding to current challenges. The service should seize this

opportunity to formalise its relationships with these stakeholders and create

what one potential partner described as a Heritage Working Group. The

intention would be to create a body with genuine responsibilities for influencing

the way the Museum Service develops, which would in turn give the wider

community some control over the cultural offer within the city.

The success of future partnership working will depend on greater clarity of

vision, in order to develop shared priorities with partners. The service would

also benefit from being more open with and trusting of its partners. Some in the

stakeholder group felt that if there were more transparency at an earlier stage

about the challenges facing the Museums Service, then they as partners would

be in a better position to determine how they might be able to help.

Where good partnership work already exists, for instance within the council,

this is often based on good informal networks and relationships between

individuals. Officers from Arts Development and Community Development


15/23


16/23


15

Theme 5: Resource management

Strengths

The service is accessing a lot of external project funding

People within and outside the organisation are aware of real

opportunities to increase income (e.g. through retail and commercial

avenues)


The use of external funding is on the whole piecemeal and ad hoc

need to develop a more coherent funding strategy

Use partnerships to enable access to more diverse funding streams,

and more commercial opportunities

Use technology more effectively to manage resources

The Review Team was struck by the success of the service in accessing

external funding, most notably for the Beaney Project, but also for a number of

other initiatives. The approach taken to putting together the multimillion pound

funding package required for the redevelopment of the Beaney demonstrates

that the service has the potential to work at corporate and departmental level to

translate strategic objectives into a deliverable funded project.

However, as with many organisations, the use of external funding elsewhere in

the service appeared to the Review Team to be on the whole ad hoc and

reactive. The Museum Service would benefit from the development of a clear

funding strategy, using the learning from the Beaney experience, to enable

officers to focus on the most relevant funding streams, match new

opportunities to priorities and anticipate future possibilities. As part of this

strategy, the service should identify how the more formal partnerships

arrangements recommended above might open up access to more diverse

funding streams, and more commercial opportunities.

Both Members and Officers stressed a particular need for the service to

improve its retail offer, looking at and learning from best practice elsewhere in

the sector. For example, one officer suggested that there could be

opportunities to work with local craftspeople to offer high quality products that

would appeal to the tourist market. Several also pinpointed the Roman


17/23


16

Museum as having the potential to become more commercial in its approach

and thus generate more income for the service.

The Review Team also encountered several instances of individuals within the

organisation having interesting ideas about how best to maximise resources,

and it would seem that these are not always finding a voice. One talked of the

potential, especially in the coastal towns, for local f irms to sponsor relevant

exhibitions, but felt that such ideas had been batted back too often, so had

given up on raising them. Senior management should consider how staff with

ideas about income generation might be empowered to pursue them.

In terms of how existing resources are deployed, front of house staff raised a

specific concern about wastage of printed marketing and promotional

materials. They feel that these are often received too late to be of real use,

sometimes several weeks after the exhibition which they are promoting has

started, and that consequently many are thrown away. Similar concerns were

raised about the delays in repairing items, filling empty cases etc.

Another specific concern relates to the efficient use of technology to help

manage resources. The Review Team heard about tasks being carried out on

paper that could be more quickly performed with the help of IT.

Canterbury benefits from having six museums, each with a distinct offer. It is

important though that while making these distinctive offers each is seen as part

of the whole Museum Service. Moving forwards, the service needs to assess

the best way to allow for differing and locally-focused collections, activities and

exhibitions, while also making the most efficient use of resources through

service-wide (or potentially wider) delivery mechanisms. Stakeholders

expressed the view that not all the museums have to be run directly by the

Council, suggesting that there could be different models of delivery and

different ways to use the council's limited resources to maintain a museum

service, for example running them in partnership with the Universities or asvolunteer-run community museums.


18/23


17

Theme 6: People management

Strengths

Staff are committed to the service, in many cases passionate about it


Staff see themselves as working for the Museum Service rather than

the council and in some cases, for an individual museum

Staff do not feel empowered and this is impacting negatively on morale

Staff talked with some enthusiasm about their role in the Museums Service,

and most had clear views about its value to their users. However the Review

Team felt that in many cases their enthusiasm was for their specific part of the

service, rather than for the service as a whole, and that relatively few saw

themselves as working for Canterbury City Council.

Staff reported that on the whole senior management keep them well-informed,

though some spoke of getting mixed messages about the recent closure

proposals, leading to a degree of uncertainty about their own future in the

service. They feel able to feed comments and suggestions upwards but

reported that only rarely do they receive feedback on their comments or

understand what action has been taken (or the reasons for non-action).

The team formed the view that staff at all levels in the service lack a sense of

empowerment. Many spoke of decisions that had to be referred upwards or

that, if made, were later overthrown. The team saw little evidence that initiative

and creative thinking were encouraged and celebrated. People used phrases

such as Its not my job to ... or Ive given up raising ideas. Senior

management needs not only to encourage staff to come up with ideas but also

to permit them to put these into practice, even at the risk of failure. This would

have a very beneficial impact on morale, create a positive learning culture

within the organisation, and could enable it to explore innovative ways of

improving the service at little or no cost.

The Review Team observed some confusion over the line management of front

of house staff. Clarity about this would help to improve internal

communications, especially between front of house staff and senior

management.


19/23


18

The Museum Service would seem to be making good use of volunteers;

however the Review Team formed the view that putting greater trust in these

volunteers would enable the service to reap greater benefits from their

involvement. For example, allowing them more access to IT systems (within

carefully controlled parameters if necessary) would enable them to take on a

wider range of responsibilities. Allowing established volunteers to work

unsupervised would free up staff for other duties.


20/23


19

Theme 7: Customer service

Strengths

The coastal museums in particular have good awareness of their

importance to local people

School teachers are known to value the service

Systems are in place for customers to express their views about the

service


There is a need to think more about the customer rather than the

collection

There are differing views (within the service and the council more

generally) about the levels of priority that should be given to diverse

customer groups

Customer awareness of the service is patchy: there are issues with

signs, posters, leaflets etc

It was clear to the Review Team that many in the organisation recognise the

importance of getting the customer experience right. However there are

differing views (within the service and the council more generally) about the

levels of priority that should be given to diverse customer groups. One person

talked about new and jazzy exhibitions being given too high a priority at the

expense of the historical collections, while another felt that the service should

focus more on what was unique to Canterbury and less on objects that

everyone has. There were conflicting views on the value of locally relevant,

community-led events and exhibitions versus nationally significant touring

exhibitions. A clearer strategy for the identification of priority customer groups,

and better communication of those priorities and the rationale behind them to

staff, would resolve some of these differences of opinion and unite the service

in its efforts to improve its offer to customers.

Staff were able to describe the systems that are in place for customers to

express their views about the service, but were unclear about the level of

influence these had on service planning.


21/23


20

Many at all levels in the organisation (including Members) raised a specific

concern about publicity. It is felt that there are particular issues with signs (out

of date, shabby or non-existent), posters and leaflets which are limiting

customer awareness of the service.

Unfavourable comparisons were made with the commercial heritage

destinations in the city. Stronger partnership working with these would enable

the service to learn from good practice elsewhere.


22/23


21

Theme 8: Performance, achievement and learning

Strengths

The service has evaluation mechanisms in place for projects

There are processes and systems for customers to express their views

about the service


It is not clear how evaluation feeds into service planning

There is a lack of feedback loop (for staff, partners and customers)

The Museum Service needs to become more of a learning organisation

It was clear to the Review Team that the service has evaluation mechanisms in

place for projects, but less clear how evaluation feeds into service planning.

Neither staff nor partners were able to clearly describe the process whereby

they received feedback on performance information. For example, teachers

had been consulted about plans for the Beaney, but were unsure about the

extent to which their views had been taken on board.

There is a theme running through this LTPR of a lack of empowerment and of

risk-taking, which if addressed would enable Canterbury Museum Service to

become much more of a learning organisation supporting staff at all levels to

think creatively, to implement new ideas, to evaluate and learn from the results

(including what doesnt work), and to feed that learning into improvement

planning for the service.


23/23

Museums, Libraries& Archives Council

Grosvenor House14 Bennetts HillBirmingham B2 5RS

T +44 (0)121 345 7300F +44 (0)121 345 7303

[email protected]

Leading strategically, we promote best

practice in museums, libraries and

archives, to inspire innovative, integrated

and sustainable services for all.

Documents

MLA Light Touch Peer Review CCC Museums and Galleries Service Oct 2010