As Pieter Couwenbergh and Hilda Bouma noted in their article \u201cVogelvrij\u201d in the *Financieel Dagblad* of 14 May 2026, an increasing number of directors at museums and cultural centres feel unsafe.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Now that the initial dust has settled following the court ruling in the case of Birgit Donker v the National Photography Museum, it is important to turn our attention to the institutional shortcomings in the Governance Code for Culture (GCC). Unfortunately, supervisory boards still too often invoke their role as employers to dismiss the director or chief executive, silence them and thereby absolve themselves of any responsibility for \u201ctrouble\u201d without showing that they have complied with the rules of the GCC.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
To gain some insight into the differing views on the validity of the Code, two recently published documents may be of use; these take very different approaches to the improvements in governance and oversight within the cultural sector, which the Minister and the Council for Culture also consider necessary. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
One view is expressed by Cultuur+Ondernemen (C-O), which has long been the administrator of the Code and, as the primary stakeholder, focuses on the ongoing adaptation of the rules governing good governance and supervision. This organisation has just launched the new GCC, which is an update of previous versions and does not contain any fundamentally new insights. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
This is certainly the case with the white paper by Sjarel Ex, former director of Boijmans van Beuningen, and Jaap van Maanen, a former professor of corporate governance and boardroom consultant, who, as interested stakeholders with practical experience of cultural governance, have listened carefully to colleagues who have experienced \u2013 whether first-hand or otherwise \u2013 the failings of current practice. These experiences rarely come to light, and then only in cases where differences of opinion between the director and the supervisory board lead to the dismissal of the director of the art institution with little or no justification. Ex, in particular, as an experienced artistic and cultural administrator, received an increasing number of messages from concerned colleagues who feel let down by their supervisory boards. As is also evident from the aforementioned article in the FD. These are situations I can confirm from my own experience, and which point to an alarming lack of a sense of responsibility among many individual supervisory board members, funding bodies and local administrators.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We can safely assume that, even if the latest version of the GCC is being read, this is limited to well-meaning management teams and those members of the supervisory board who realise that they lack the knowledge required to supervise an organisation operating in a sector unfamiliar to them. Apart from the omnipotent status of the supervisors \u2013 who believe they need no further information because they already know everything (after all, they would not have been appointed otherwise) \u2013 the ideal-typical supervisor as described in the Code is virtually non-existent. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Members of supervisory boards are usually recruited from among distinguished figures in the business world, the legal profession, accountancy and consultancy. Members with a background in the arts and culture or academia are in the minority. This has led to a situation where it is apparently entirely accepted that, as is the case with the recently criticised Nederlands Fotomuseum, the supervisory board consists of individuals from the upper echelons of the commercial sector. Of the four members (as at 29 June), one is a practising photographer; the rest could easily be sitting at the same table in any boardroom.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There\u2019s something amiss here. Unfortunately, it seems to be becoming the norm for the regulator to act as if it were the owner of the arts organisation it is supposed to supervise. Anyone who regards themselves as the owner behaves like an owner; that\u2019s hardly surprising. In the absence of shareholders, as is the case in the business world, you simply take on that role as the statutory employer of the director\/manager, even without being asked. The statutory director\/manager is therefore, whether they like it or not, closely scrutinised by people who know everything about growth, entrepreneurship and accountability. It is through this that they have built a glittering career in the business world. It is curious that when the director themselves seeks expert advice on running the arts organisation \u2013 for example, by consulting experienced fellow directors or the in-house accountant \u2013 this advice is, as it were, duplicated a priori within the Supervisory Board.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Is this phenomenon new? Not at all. In 2020, a well-researched article appeared in the *Theaterkrant* written by Felix Welsink, a Master\u2019s student in Behavioural Economics at Erasmus University Rotterdam. In his article, Welsink highlights what he sees as the dominant role of the economic approach to cultural expressions. He questions whether the GCC will lead to cultural institutions creating more cultural value and thereby strengthening the sector. The application of the GCC is about making cultural institutions financially and organisationally independent. Welsink concludes: in doing so, the GCC creates a framework, a mould within which the arts institution and its management must operate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It stands to reason that, in practice, this trend towards uniformity, standardisation, planned growth and predictable risk is not at the top of a talented director\u2019s wish list. Unlike successful entrepreneurs, they strive for unique creations where it is only after presentation that it can be determined whether, in the eyes of the board, the project has been a success and why. The average entrepreneur tries to move on to series production as quickly as possible \u2013 and, if possible, to mass production \u2013 in order to keep costs low and returns as high as possible. Moreover, they have a keen eye for marketing, as success is driven by demand. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
A good work of art, concept or idea is, by its very nature, supply-driven; whether and how it is received by society is impossible to predict. After all, an arts organisation is first and foremost a business of mindset, which naturally requires astute management. The drive towards standardisation is understandable, but it is doomed to fail. Should it appear that this is already succeeding in one aspect or another of artistic practice, it soon becomes apparent that there is no consensus amongst the respective participants in the consortium; after all, the creation of unique works cannot be standardised.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I regard C-O\u2019s attempt to foster the belief that, with a new catechism, administration and governance will now finally run smoothly as an illusion. I have attended too many harmonised and standardised exhibitions, festivals, literary events and performing arts productions in the countries of the former Soviet Union to expect any benefit from ever-increasing, finely meshed sets of instructions. Incidentally, closer to home too, the once-effective Dienst Kunstgebouwen (DGK) has ceased to exist due to the increasing emancipation of Rotterdam\u2019s art institutions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Minister would do well to study the white paper by Ex et al. carefully, to do away with the fiction of ownership and employer status within the Supervisory Board, and thereby to safeguard the fundamental artistic (human) rights of the management. Ex and Van Maanen also make sensible points regarding the current lack of oversight over the supervisory body.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It is not without reason that Sjarel Ex stated that, whilst he is pleased with the ruling on Birgit Donker\u2019s unfair dismissal, he also has concerns: \u201cI am pleased with the court\u2019s ruling but concerned about the following: this could happen to any director or board member in the arts sector at the moment; the regulator who helped instigate her dismissal is still in her post \u2026 as a board member; those involved in the smear campaign should be collectively ashamed, and all the funders and so-called supporters \u2013 and yes, the politicians who looked the other way \u2013 should take a long, hard look at themselves.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Dutch Photographic Museum case can be added \u2013 as either a high point or a low point \u2013 to Ex and Van Maanen\u2019s anonymised list. The deafening impact of the judgement of 29 June on faith in written guidelines for good governance could scarcely be greater. It is high time to finally bid farewell to the idea that policy can be formulated, followed and enforced on the basis of a theoretical reality derived from a set of instructions known as the Governance Code for Culture. As is customary with instruction manuals, these are only brought out \u2013 if they can be found at all \u2013 when the machine has broken down; in this case, when there are \u201csigns\u201d that something is amiss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Looking back at my own experience in the arts, I have encountered countless instances of mismanagement and\/or inadequate supervision, in which utterly absurd actions were taken, particularly on the part of the supervisory bodies, or decrees were handed down to the board and\/or staff as if it were the most natural thing in the world. (In such cases, the director or manager can count themselves lucky that no anonymous letter has been sent highlighting all manner of alleged malpractices, which naturally concern the functioning of the management.) All in all, it can do no harm to turn our attention to the \u201cmonstrosity\u201d that is the Governance Code for Culture, which the art world has been dragging along behind it for almost 30 years now (a dead horse is nothing by comparison).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The euphoria surrounding the Tabaksblat Code in the corporate world led some people \u2013 including members of the established art establishment \u2013 to come up with the idea at the time of creating something similar for the art world, in order to \u201cfinally\u201d help that chaotic mishmash of small and large groups, small groups, large and small venues and museums to \u201cfinally\u201d be brought under proper governance, modelled on \u2018Tabaksblat\u2019, which, after all, seemed to promise clarity and uniform oversight of the business world. The fact that the business world and the art world differ considerably from one another in more ways than one did not seem to be an objection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Gl\u00fcck Auf!<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Steve Austen on the Supervisory Board model in the arts sector: \"I have attended too many harmonised and standardised exhibitions, festivals, literary events and performing arts events in the countries of the former Soviet Union to expect any benefit from ever-increasing, detailed sets of instructions.\"<\/p>","protected":false},"author":1294,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_eb_attr":"","_themeisle_gutenberg_block_has_review":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"activitypub_content_warning":"","activitypub_content_visibility":"","activitypub_max_image_attachments":3,"activitypub_interaction_policy_quote":"anyone","activitypub_status":"federated","wpai_meta_description":"","footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"Steve Austen: \"De poging van C-O om het geloof te doen postvatten dat nu eindelijk met een nieuwe catechismus bestuur en governance vlekkeloos gaat verlopen acht ik een illusie..\"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[15614,16518,11687,11688],"tags":[15891,8375,16554,5756],"class_list":["post-125198","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-beleid","category-featured","category-donatie-gevraagd","category-word-lid","tag-code-cultural-governance","tag-cultuurondernemen","tag-nederlands-fotomuseum","tag-raad-van-toezicht"],"views":4052,"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":121836,"url":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/2026\/06\/van-principes-naar-tegenkracht-wat-de-nieuwe-governance-code-cultuur-leert-van-de-praktijk\/","url_meta":{"origin":125198,"position":0},"title":"From principles to counter-force. What the new Culture Governance Code learns from practice","author":"Guido van Nispen","date":"25 June 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"The new Governance Code Culture marks a next step in thinking about management and supervision in the sector. What is changing compared to 2019, what lessons from practice have become visible, and how do the analyses by Sjarel Ex and Jaap van Manen contribute to the discussion\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "beleid"","block_context":{"text":"beleid","link":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/genre\/beleid\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":100492,"url":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/2026\/01\/is-het-toezicht-in-de-culturele-sector-fundamenteel-gebroken\/","url_meta":{"origin":125198,"position":1},"title":"Is supervision in the cultural sector fundamentally broken?","author":"Guido van Nispen","date":"23 January 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"Supervision in the cultural sector is derailed not by lack of rules, but by power imbalances, lack of transparency and lack of corrective countervailing power. Insights from recent reports and opinions and the meeting at the Nieuwe Kerk on 16 January following the Ex and Van Manen report.","rel":"","context":"In "beleid"","block_context":{"text":"beleid","link":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/genre\/beleid\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":123108,"url":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/2026\/07\/na-het-vonnis-over-het-fotomuseum-begint-de-echte-bestuursvraag\/","url_meta":{"origin":125198,"position":2},"title":"After the verdict on the Photomuseum, the real governance question begins","author":"Guido van Nispen","date":"1 July 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"Guido van Nispen: At first glance, the judgement in the case involving former director Birgit Donker appears to mark the conclusion of a long-running labour dispute. But its significance extends much further. The court was exceptionally critical of the actions of the Supervisory Board of the Nederlands Fotomuseum\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "beleid"","block_context":{"text":"beleid","link":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/genre\/beleid\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":127744,"url":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/2026\/07\/open-brief-aan-wethouder-joan-nunnely\/","url_meta":{"origin":125198,"position":3},"title":"Open letter to Councillor Joan Nunnely","author":"Guido van Nispen","date":"19 July 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"Copy: Registry, Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, parties involved in the affairs of the Nederlands Fotomuseum Subject: Nederlands Fotomuseum, council debate 16 July 2026 17 July 2026 Dear Ms Nunnely, Upon taking up your post as Councillor for Culture, you are inheriting a case that now extends far beyond a labour dispute at the Nederlands Fotomuseum. The\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "beleid"","block_context":{"text":"beleid","link":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/genre\/beleid\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":112193,"url":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/2026\/05\/er-zijn-alleen-verliezers-toezicht-zonder-zichtbaar-toezicht\/","url_meta":{"origin":125198,"position":4},"title":"\u201cThere are only losers\u201d Surveillance without visible oversight","author":"Guido van Nispen","date":"25 May 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"A court case over Birgit Donker's dismissal at the Nederlands Fotomuseum grew into an uncomfortable mirror for supervision, legitimacy and public accountability. How visible should supervision actually be in public institutions, and what does it say if it only becomes recognisable when conflict, media and courtroom converge?","rel":"","context":"In "beleid"","block_context":{"text":"beleid","link":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/genre\/beleid\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":121730,"url":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/2026\/06\/nieuwe-governance-code-cultuur-brengt-meer-helderheid\/","url_meta":{"origin":125198,"position":5},"title":"New Governance Code for Culture brings more clarity","author":"Cultuur+Ondernemen","date":"25 June 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"Good governance and oversight require clearly defined roles, careful consideration and an open dialogue about responsibilities. With the updated Governance Code for Culture, Cultuur+Ondernemen offers cultural organisations more guidance on applying the code in day-to-day practice. Titia Haaxma, Director-General of Cultuur+Ondernemen: \u201cOrganisations indicated that they needed\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "beleid"","block_context":{"text":"beleid","link":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/genre\/beleid\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p3yKke-wzk","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/125198","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1294"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=125198"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/125198\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":125212,"href":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/125198\/revisions\/125212"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=125198"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=125198"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=125198"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}