Museums, Equality and Social Justice

Richard Sandell, Eithne Nightingale, Richard Sandell, Eithne Nightingale

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• Print ISBN: 9780415504683
• eBook ISBN: 9781136318696
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Archaeology
• Index: Social Sciences

The last two decades have seen concerns for equality, diversity, social justice and human rights move from the margins of museum thinking and practice, to the core. The arguments – both moral and pragmatic – for engaging diverse audiences, creating the conditions for more equitable access to museum resources, and opening up opportunities for participation, now enjoy considerable consensus in many parts of the world. A growing number of institutions are concerned to construct new narratives that represent a plurality of lived experiences, histories and identities which aim to nurture support for more progressive, ethically-informed ways of seeing and to actively inform contemporary public debates on often contested rights-related issues. At the same time it would be misleading to suggest an even and uncontested transition from the museum as an organisation that has been widely understood to marginalise, exclude and oppress to one which is wholly inclusive. Moreover, there are signs that momentum towards making museums more inclusive and equitable is slowing down or, in some contexts, reversing.

Museums, Equality and Social Justice aims to reflect on and, crucially, to inform debates in museum research, policy and practice at this critical time. It brings together new research from academics and practitioners and insights from artists, activists, and commentators to explore the ways in which museums, galleries and heritage organisations are engaging with the fast-changing equalities terrain and the shifting politics of identity at global, national and local levels and to investigate their potential to contribute to more equitable, fair and just societies.

Part I
Margins to the core?

1
The Heart of the Matter

Integrating equality and diversity into the policy and practice of museums and galleries

Eithne Nightingale and Chandan Mahal

For too long equality and diversity considerations have been relegated to the margins of the business of museums and galleries (Sandell 2002) with many institutions interpreting their responsibilities in this area as being limited to one area of activity (for example, collections or staffing) or restricted to specific equality issues (such as race, gender or disability) with a corresponding disregard for the interconnections or tensions between them. Ignoring the changing nature of our society and the multi-faceted and shifting nature of people’s identities they have often been limited (or at worst, insensitive or inappropriate) in their response to diversity and equality issues.

At the same time, there have been examples of outstanding work at institutional, departmental or individual levels. Some organisations have genuinely tried to embed diversity and equality across their organisation; to engage staff at all levels; to draw on the expertise of stakeholders outside the institution in order to respond to changes within society (Janes 2009; Silverman 2010); and to adopt approaches which advance opportunity across a range of equalities or foster relations between groups of people (Bruce and Hollows 2007).

This chapter draws on good practice to explore the challenges inherent in this work as experienced in a range of museums in both the United Kingdom and United States. It explores how far museums and galleries have integrated diversity and equality into mainstream policy; the importance and nature of leadership; the role of staff across the organisation and the significance of internal and external networks, consultation and partnerships. It assesses whether some institutions have focussed on particular equality strands more than others (and for what reasons) and considers whether sufficient attention has been given to exploring the interconnections and tensions between equality issues. It attempts to identify both barriers to, and effective drivers for, change in order to inform future practice in both developing and sustaining this work, recognising the different political, social and economic contexts in which people work. Lastly, drawing on this evidence, it endeavours to envision what a truly equitable, diverse and inclusive museum might look like.

We have based much of the discussion on an analysis of museum policies and on interviews conducted with staff occupying different roles in a range of national, local and regional museums in the UK and the United States.¹ We have also drawn on our own experience of holding roles with a specific brief on developing equality and diversity policies and practices in museums based in London. Eithne Nightingale is Head of Equality and Diversity at the Victoria & Albert Museum (V&A) in London, a national museum that holds world-class collections in art and design. Chandan Mahal, formerly Diversity Manager at the Museum of London, is Head of Audience Development at the Women’s Library, also based in London.

Strategic planning and policy formulation

During the interviews we were concerned to establish the role of strategic planning and policy formulation in advancing equality. Are such processes a prerequisite for the mainstreaming of diversity and equality issues or are they viewed simply as time-consuming, ineffective and overly bureaucratic? Do policies and plans instigate genuine change and nurture consensus and commitment amongst staff or do they encourage complacency and remain largely ignored?

The Museum of London was one of the early pioneers in approaching issues of equality and diversity strategically. In 2003 a Cultural Diversity Audit was carried out which covered four areas: leadership; communication; service delivery; and employment. This led to the appointment of a Diversity Manager, Chandan Mahal, who drove forward the recommendations of the audit and oversaw the development of the Museum’s Race Equality Scheme partly in response to the requirements of the UK Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000.² This was followed by the setting up of an Equality and Diversity Strategy Group in 2005, composed of members of senior management, heads of department and staff from across the Museum. Within the Directorate, individual members of senior management took a lead on different aspects of diversity – race, disability, LGBT and so on. There was also a Disability Working Group. In response to equality legislation, equality impact assessments were introduced to identify both positive and negative impacts on all new major policies and functions in relation to specific equality strands. The two Diversity Managers³ worked with colleagues in Human Resources and, with the active support of senior management, organised professional development training delivered by external consultants. During this period the main focus was on policy and developing diversity action plans for different departments, which the Diversity Managers had a role in monitoring and reviewing. The Diversity Managers subsequently went on to work on gallery projects as part of the Community and Audiences department, which has since become the Public Programmes department. There are no longer dedicated Diversity Managers, the Equality and Diversity Steering Group no longer exists nor does the practice of each director championing some aspect of diversity. This is not to suggest, however, that issues of equality and diversity are deemed less important. Indeed Cathy Ross, Director of Collections and Learning at the Museum of London asserts that:

It has got translated incredibly well in terms of the broader understanding within the organisation. Everybody knows that it is terribly important and it’s something that’s been internalised in terms of people’s thinking particularly in terms of exhibitions. It’s no longer something just on the outside so that has been good.

Yet she expresses reservations as to whether the museum is ‘actually knuckling down and getting some proper planned documents and strategies to move us forward on this’.

Annette Day, Head of Programmes, points to the need to review progress: ‘It would be good to have a way of measuring change. What does not happen is the review and measuring of diversity … the Diversity Manager role did more of that’.

Rita McLean, Director of Birmingham Museums and Art Gallery in the Midlands, UK, reinforces the importance of monitoring impact: ‘Consistency is quite hard … it is really useful to check what you’re doing regularly to make sure it does not slip off the agenda’.

Of all the museums interviewed, it was Birmingham Museums and Art Gallery that showed the most consistent approach to integrating equality and diversity into their annual strategic planning. This included carrying out equality impact assessments on all new major policies and functions such as the collecting policy, lifelong learning and audience development strategies. Such a practice forces the organisation to consider both negative and positive impacts in relation to the multiple equality strands that have now been subsumed into the Equality Act 2010 (race, disability, gender, LGBT, marital status, age and religion and belief).⁴ For example the equality impact assessment of the museum’s Collecting Policy 2009–2013 outlines specific positive impacts such as strengthening the representation of work by black, Asian and disabled artists; increasing the representation of Muslim cultures and other faith groups. Overall impacts include improving the quality of life through celebrating diversity and contributing to community cohesion, thus directly linking the core activity of the museum to equality and social issues (Plate 1.1). The equality impact assessment identifies no potential negative impacts of the collecting policy.

The Horniman Museum in south London, a ‘free, family-friendly museum with exhibits from around the world’, takes a rather different approach. Assistant Director, Finbarr Whooley, states that the Museum is ‘policy light’, adding that ‘we don’t even have an audience development policy’. However the Museum does follow the general line of direction from the Trustees who set out an aspiration that the visitor profile, which is measured through an annual survey, matches that of the local community. Indeed the Horniman has been very successful in diversifying its audience with the percentage of black, Asian and minority ethnic audiences (BAME) increasing from 8–9 per cent in 2000 to 34 per cent in 2010.

Rebecca McGinnis, Access Coordinator and Museum Educator at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, who previously worked in London, remarked on the difference between the two environments in which she has worked: ‘Coming here [to the United States] I was all ready to have a policy but it doesn’t quite pan out that way although I think we’re moving more in that direction’.

Lonnie Bunch, Director of the National Museum of African and American History and Culture (NMAAHC), believes that there is more of an emphasis on policy in the UK largely because of the role of the Government’s Department of Culture, Media and Sport, there being no equivalent body in the United States. The fact that most of the funding for US museums, apart from the Smithsonian, is from private rather than public sources may also be a contributing factor although certain businesses (both in the UK and United States) have been very active in the areas of diversity and equality incorporating this into their mission and strategic plans.

The V&A has had an Access, Inclusion and Diversity Strategy, approved by the Museum’s Trustees, since 2003. In addition there have been related action plans and, as required by law, both Disability and Gender Equality Schemes. All of these have now been integrated into one policy in line with the Equality Act 2010. In addition, the V&A’s annual strategic plan makes clear reference to issues of access and equality and has as one of its four objectives: ‘To provide optimum access to collections and services for diverse audiences, now and in the future’. All staff members have equality and diversity included as one of their corporate objectives in their annual performance management plans.

However, whilst the V&A has pioneered many equality and diversity initiatives, the Museum has been resistant to introducing equality impact assessments except in the area of employment, despite the benefits of having an audit trail in the event of a discrimination case. There is concern that such assessments are overly bureaucratic and indeed the present UK Equality Act 2010 is unclear as to the requirement of such assessments. It was the former gender, race and disability legislation, now subsumed under the UK Equality Act 2010, that led to the introduction of equality impact assessments in the UK and, whilst many local authorities and health services complied, the arts and cultural sector has been more reticent. The fact that Birmingham Museums and Art Gallery is funded by the local council undoubtedly contributed to their more consistent compliance.

The V&A’s Equality and Diversity Strategy Group (formerly the Access, Inclusion and Diversity Strategy Group), chaired by an Equality and Diversity Champion who is a senior manager, is a formally constituted sub-committee of the Museum’s Management Board. There are, or have been, other short- or long-term working parties around specific issues such as socio-economic class; religion and belief; LGBTQ and a Staff Disability Forum. Some of these, initiated by staff around common interests, have undoubtedly contributed to significant change within the V&A.

However a recent evaluation of a major project in the Museum – Capacity Building and Cultural Ownership – Working with Culturally Diverse Communities – funded by the Heritage Lottery Fund, questioned the effectiveness of the former Access, Inclusion and Diversity Strategy Group. A Social Network Analysis – that examined the relationships that existed between individuals in the organisation – showed that few of the Group’s members were on other committees in the Museum and concluded that the Group therefore had limited influence. Steps have since been taken to recruit more members who are in a better position to influence change but the effect of this has yet to be seen.

The potential for inertia and limited influence of committees is well expressed by Magdalena Mieri, Director of the Smithsonian’s Latino History and Culture Program at the National Museum of American History: ‘I don’t think committees work. They suggest things are changing and let people feel good about themselves … but often committee members aren’t empowered or willing to make real changes’.

So where does the future lie? Does the fact that Horniman Museum has significantly diversified its visitor profile, despite its lack of detailed policy, support the view that this is not a prerequisite for change? Is the V&A right to resist implementing a more rigorous equality assessment in relation to all its policies and plans, preferring a less bureaucratic response? Does the case of the Museum of London, where there is no longer an emphasis on policies or meetings, mean that such an approach is now outdated given that diversity and equality have become more central to people’s thinking? Does the size, location, funding or remit of a museum determine the need for a more or less formal approach?

It seems clear that policies that are not consulted upon or consistently applied in practice are unhelpful as are procedures that are so bureaucratic that either they are not implemented or they alienate people. The existence of strategy groups or committees – unless focussed and with an influential, well-networked membership – may encourage complacency. If policy-making is to affect change there needs to be a set of specific objectives that can be measured, based on the particular context of the museum, and integrated into strategic planning. Some equality impact assessments may have become too onerous and therefore counter-productive but we would argue that there needs to be some mechanism, however basic, where staff are prompted to consider the potential impact on equality concerns, both positive and negative, at the initial conception of any major policy or plan and for this to be recorded. This could be in relation to audience development, employment or collecting policies or the development of a gallery, public programme or exhibition. The role of dedicated posts (see also Chapter 4, this volume) is further explored in the next section but it is clear that there needs to be someone with a clear responsibility for coordinating policy across the institution, ensuring consistency and, importantly, reviewing and reporting progress against set objectives.

Interestingly discussions around the implementation of the Equality Act in the UK also point to the need to undertake an Equality Analysis and set specific, measurable and realistic objectives and for these to be transparent, monitored and made public.

Ownership and leadership

Leadership is often cited as a critical factor in driving forward change, and was frequently referred to in our interviews, but such a claim poses interesting questions. How far is...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title Page
• Museum Meanings
• Dedication
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• List of illustrations
• Notes on contributors
• Foreword by Mark O'Neill and Lois H. Silverman
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• Part I Margins to the core?
• Part II Connecting/competing equalities
• Part III Museums and the good society
• Index