Supervision of cultural organisations can and must improve

The supervision of organisations in the cultural sector can and must improve. So writes the Culture Council in its advice presented today: "Supervision in the cultural sector: an art in itself". The advisory contains an integrated approach with recommendations to the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, grant providers, industry associations, cultural organisations and regulators themselves.

Many Supervisory Boards in the sector perform their role carefully and adequately. But tougher demands from society and politics mean that their work has become more challenging. " It is good that more attention has now been paid to issues such as social safety, fair pay and hiring self-employed people. But it is up to supervisor and management to stay sharp on this together, each from awareness of their own role." , says Kristel Baele, president of the Council for Culture about the opinion.

Professionalisation drive

Smaller organisations in the sector in particular face a shortage of suitable supervisors. Training, remuneration and recruitment could be more professional, especially compared to other semi-public sectors. If you pay supervisors, you can also expect more quality and it is also more attractive for self-employed people to become supervisors. Concentration of supervision, where several organisations have one supervisory body together, is also an option. Furthermore, incentive subsidies for training supervisors should be continued, the council advises.

Culture Governance Code

This authoritative code of conduct is in need of an update. The council recommends that the code be adopted in future by an independent code committee, fed by the field. To prevent supervisors from belatedly becoming aware of abuses in the organisation, careful rules around whistleblowers and confidants are important.

Behaviour and culture

Good supervision does not exist only by the grace of laws, rules and codes. Behaviour and culture are also important. If these can be discussed, they can also be influenced and steered, the council writes. A good starting point for that discussion is arriving together at a shared supervisory vision for one's own organisation with respect for everyone's role.

External monitoring

When is it up to a grantmaker to intervene, and how can this be done effectively? There is still too much ambiguity about this. A guideline on this could help here. The lead in drawing it up should be given to the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science and the state cultural funds in their role as grantmakers. The need has been expressed from the field for a central information point, where managements and supervisors can go in an accessible and early stage with questions and tricky issues. For now, this is better than setting up a disputes committee or an inspection, the council concludes.

The advice, drafted partly at the request of the former OCW minister, has now been sent to the current outgoing minister Gouke Moes. It was prepared by an advisory committee comprising of Wilma Gillis-Burleson (chair), Nancy Jouwe (also council member), Cees Langeveld, Jan Stolker, Jacqueline Stolmeijer-Arends and Hedwig Verhoeven.