Could greater use of co-leadership models offer a tool to diversify who leads our cultural organisation?

Could greater use of co-leadership models offer a tool to diversify who leads our cultural organisation?

Why is this research needed?

Those in leadership positions in the publicly funded arts and cultural sector do not fully reflect the demographic diversity of the UK. The report on Social Mobility in the Cultural Economy from the Creative Industries Policy and Evidence Centre (September 2021) cites evidence of inequality and exclusion in the creative industries in the UK, which has been created through class, gender, race, disabilities, skills and place. It recommends accelerating progression of diverse talent and promoting inclusive leadership, to ensure that the creative leaders of the future are much more diverse. The reasons for under-representation at a leadership level are many and complex. This research proposes to focus on the role that adapting leadership models could play in changing who takes up and is appointed to senior roles in the cultural sector. 

What is already known about co-leadership in the cultural sector?

Ten years ago I undertook a research project as part of my Clore Fellowship to explore joint leadership by Artistic and Executive Directors. In this report I concluded a co-leadership model can work very well for organisations where a wide range of skills are needed at a senior level. In a volatile and complex world, having a ‘sounding board’ with whom to develop ideas and share challenges was another advantage. And when it was time for one of the co-leaders to move on, having a joint leadership model offered stability. I concluded ‘two heads are better than one’; so long as leaders have the competencies needed to collaborate, and accountability and values are shared. In the intervening decade there have been a few examples of new co-leadership models and appointments in the cultural sector, such as Sara Wajid and Zak Mensah at Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery, but as yet this model is still not widely understood or practiced.

When I undertook my original research, the range of competencies expected in a CEO and the complexity of cultural organisations’ financial, political and operational context was already becoming unrealistic. Since then leadership roles have only become more demanding and we have seen an increase in leaders stepping down from roles which come at too high a cost to their health and personal life. These intense working conditions impact leaders with caring responsibilities, health issues or disabilities most keenly. As a leadership development professional I regularly meet leaders who chose not to apply for these roles in the first place, because of the demands of the roles and others who, due to structural racism, ableism or sexism in the cultural sector, have been unable to develop the experience Boards expect of those applying for senior roles today.

Moreover, I work with Boards that, whilst recognising the need to broaden the profile of who they recruit into senior roles, see job-sharing or co-leadership roles as inherently more risky or costly. Some hold heroic and unrealistic assumptions about ‘what it takes’ to successfully lead an organisation in terms of working patterns or personal resilience that prevent real workforce change happening. There is a long way to go before more Boards are see co-leadership as an opportunity.

How can you get involved?

Building on my initial research, and the wider leadership literature around co-leadership, I wish to examine whether co-leadership, including the AD/ED model but more widely other forms of shared senior roles, offers a practical solution to increasing the diversity of who applies for, and is appointed to, senior leadership positions in the cultural sector. 

I will be working on this research during Autumn/ Winter and publishing my findings in February. There will also be an event to share the discuss the findings around February/ March, hosted by the Office for Leadership Transition – and I’ll share details of this nearer the time.

At this stage I am looking for suggestions of people to speak with as part of my research, particularly 

  • those involved in recruitment of senior leadership roles in a Board capacity, and, 
  • women, people with disabilities and people of colour who aspire to or have experience of senior leadership positions. 

If this is you, or have suggestions of who I might talk to please do get in touch – thank you!

This research has been funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC), in conjunction with the Clore Leadership Programme. I am being supervised by Dr Jonathan Price, School of Performance and Creative Industries, University of Leeds.

Co-leadership: a research report

Co-leadership: a research report

Ten years ago I undertook a research project as part of my Clore Fellowship, to explore how the model of joint leadership by joint Artistic and Executive Directors worked. I conducted many interviews with experienced ADs and EDs to understand how these roles worked together, what competencies were needed to make the model work well; the benefits and risks of having co-leaders and how Boards could recruit into these roles. It was a fascinating project and I was fortunate to speak to many inspiring senior figures who generously shared their experiences of making co-leadership work.

Recently I was contacted by an academic who is publishing a far more extensive survey of the topic, and this prompted me to re-read that report and reflect on how much has changed in the past decade.

At the time my interest was both professional and personal. I had been struggling for years the find the right role for myself in galleries and museums, having stepped out of curatorship earlier in my career. In those days curating was the only route into leadership roles in galleries. I also had a young family and was finding the prospect of a solo leadership role intimidating.  

Via the research I concluded the co-leadership model works well for complex organisations where a wide range of skills are needed at a senior level: like theatres or art galleries. In those organisations where leaders might, at times, need to work closely with artists on projects or in the rehearsal room or travel extensively for work, having a joint leadership model enabled the capacity for this to happen. Also in a volatile world, having a ‘sounding board’ with whom to develop ideas and share challenges was another advantage. And when it was time for one of the co-leaders to transition to another post, having a joint leadership model offered stability. So I concluded ‘two heads are better than one’; so long as people appointed had the competencies needed to collaborate well, and accountability and values were shared.

When I first published this report I suggested that art galleries and museums might do well to consider a co-leadership model, and indeed quite a few did. Tate had already pioneered the joint leadership mode in Liverpool (from 2006) and St Ives (from 2007). Other galleries and museums began to adopt an AD/ED model during the years that followed my report.

Looking back at this report now, with the benefit of another decade of experience of organisational and leadership development behind me I’d frame my recommendations slightly differently. But I would not change the core thesis: that collaborative leadership has many benefits and that to work well joint leadership needs careful design and leaders with collaborative values and skillsets. 

There are two things I would change however:

Firstly, I no longer think that the AD/ED model is necessarily the optimum model for art galleries/museums. I still very much believe in collaborative leadership styles and shared responsibility, but that could be achieved via a CEO-led organisation with a senior management team, or a co-directorship with 2-3 leaders. Personally I like collaborating with people as equals, but other models can work. This was very much the view of one of my interviewees at the time – Caroline Collier – who advised me that a collaborative style was more important than a structure where two leaders were equals. 

Wider studies of this form of pluralist leadership find the co-leadership structure is often introduced in sectors or organisations where multiple interests, which may be in tension, need to be afforded equal importance in strategy. Initially some of the rationale for having more ED-types in the galleries sector was to counter-balance an overly artistic centred model of leadership which overlooked these wider concerns. 10-15 years ago we needed the structural reinforcement for an audience champion at the ‘top’ of galleries and art museums, today I feel this is less necessary. We are seeing a new generation of artistic leaders in the visual arts sector moving into key roles who have a broader civic, educational or social vision for their organisations.

Secondly, I would make a far stronger case for co-leadership as a practical solution to CEO roles becoming impractical and overwhelming far. Co-leadership offers a more inclusive model for those with caring responsibilities or health issues/ disabilities. I felt this strongly at the time but hesitated to articulate that view for fear it would be perceived as my personal agenda.

Re-reading the report what strikes me as still very relevant is the question of what systems, structures, skills and values enable collaborative leadership to work. This is the ‘work’ that I continue to grapple with when supporting leaders as a coach, or teams and organisations as an organisational development consultant. How do we work together is a way that makes the best of all our talents and energy, and which – through collaboration – enables us to create things which go far beyond a sum of their parts. 

But it also strikes me that in embracing collaborative leadership we have the opportunity to re-shape leadership roles that will contribute to ensuring our senior staff better represent our wider society in terms of gender, disability and caring responsibilities.

Looking for a supportive peer-learning space to develop your thinking and confidence?

Looking for a supportive peer-learning space to develop your thinking and confidence?

What is Action Learning?

Virtual Action Learning offers a supportive, structured peer-learning environment. Using simple group coaching techniques, Action Learning enables fresh thinking and builds confidence. It involves a small group of peers coming together regularly, for a finite period of time initially, to support one another to work through their work challenges and reflect on their learning: typically around 6 people, for 6 months every 4-6 weeks. 

What’s on offer?

Starting in September I’ll be offering an opportunity to join a new virtual set. Sessions are facilitated by me – Claire Antrobus. I’ve been involved with Action Learning as a trained facilitator and participant for over a decade. No previous experience is necessary – in our first session we’ll cover what Action Learning is, how it works and you’ll have an opportunity to try it out and meet the rest of the group. 

If, after the first session, you decide Action Learning is not for you then you are under no obligation to continue.

Participants will be asked to sign up to the principles of action learning, which include working in a non-judgmental, supportive and confidential learning space, and to attend a minimum of five of the six sessions. In return we offer you:

  • Access to a regular safe and creative space to think through your own challenges in a reflective and solutions-focussed way
  • Opportunity to practice and develop your reflective learning techniques and coaching skills to improve your own and others’ performance
  • A supportive community of practice working together over a six-month period
  • Support from a highly experienced Action Learning facilitator/ trainer, including advice and resources about how to set up your own set after this series.
  • Pay What You Can rate for anyone earning less than UK average wage (or self-employed equivalent).

I’m interested – what’s involved?

  • A three-hour introductory training session covering the foundations of Action Learning and opportunity to practice the core skills of active listening and open questions.
  • Four x 2hr follow-on monthly Action Learning sessions via Zoom.
  • A final 3hr review session, covering self-facilitation to enable to group to continue self-supporting after this initial period.
  • A PDF Action Learning handbook to support you during and beyond the sessions.

By the end of the sixth session the group can decide to complete its work together – or may choose to carry on independently, self-facilitating using the skills and experience you will have developed.

Previous sets have included people with a wide range of experience from across the cultural and wider non-profit sector including self-employed coaches, artists, CEO/ senior leaders from arts organisations, creative consultants and producers and those working inside organisations in a variety of roles.

What have previous participants said about it?

Feedback from recent AL participants includes:

‘It’s a great way of creating space for your own reflection with a group of supportive peers. But there are also huge benefits in developing your active listening skills and the ability to ask questions that help unlock insights for others in the group.’

‘I simply can’t recommend it enough. It was a rare opportunity to step off the treadmill to reflect, learn, listen and share challenges and ideas with a fantastic group of people. The structure of the Action Learning Set creates a space for exploration, idea generation and action. The facilitation of the group ensured that there was a really, warm, caring and human touch – where people felt able to share challenges with authenticity, vulnerability and generosity. It has really developed my active listening skills and given my working practices a reboot. Brilliantly organised, robustly managed and a great take away handbook that I’m referring to regularly.’

‘It’s a brilliant chance to connect with peers you might not otherwise meet, to practice the skills of group action learning, to have your challenges heard and to help others, with a concrete accountability framework that’s also easy to stick to and access.’

‘I joined the action learning set at a point of transition in my career and immediately found a supportive group of individuals willing to share their wealth of experience. During busy times attending the session felt like coming up for air.’

Action Learning is also very cost effective and I include training as part of the sessions so you’ll be equipped to run your own sets after this initial period, should you wish to continue. In 2021 I hosted two new sets, both of which have continued to self-facilitate and now function independently.

When recent studies have shown reflective practice – at the heart of Action Learning – can improve performance by 23%, the real question is how can you afford not to do it?

How do I find out more and what are the dates and costs?

To book your place or discuss whether this is for you just get in touch claire@claireantrobus.com

Intro session: 2-5pm Thursday 8 Sep

Set meeting dates: 3-5pm on Thursdays 13 Oct, 17 Nov, 15 Dec and 19 Jan 

Final: session 2-5pm, 9 Feb

Cost: £175 (or PWYC for those on less than UK average wage or self-employed equivalent)

Co-leadership: a research report

Setting ourselves up for success

When working as a coach or facilitator I always ‘contract’ with people before we start work together: we agree boundaries, expectations and ways of working.

‘Contracting’ is the technical term for these conversations, but I prefer to think of it as ‘setting things up for success’ and it typically involves: 

  • agreeing honestly and as clearly as possible what is expected from one another
  • the purpose and boundaries for the work
  • identifying what behaviours will enable you both to perform at your best and anything that would be unhelpful, and,
  • how you’ll review how it’s going so you can adjust accordingly. 

We contract before we start work together, but also check-in how things are going periodically.

Before we start…

The kinds of questions we might use at the start of a project or assignment include:

  • What do we want to achieve? 
  • How will we know we have been successful?
  • What are our respective roles? What can we offer and for what do we accept responsibility?
  • What requests do we have of one another in terms of how we work? 
  • How will we know whether things are on track?
  • How do we want to handle things if it’s not working well for either of us?
  • What obstacles might get in the way of us working together? How can we avoid this happening? 

Are we still on track?

Review questions can be as simple as:

  • What do we notice about how we are working together? 
  • What is working and what is not working?
  • Is there anything you want more or less of from me?
  • What do we want to change to make this relationship have more impact?

Taking 5-10 minutes to include some of these questions in our meetings with others can help ensure we get off to the most productive start with new projects, or review and realign those already underway.

Pin It on Pinterest