I'm never too young to change my mind...
Before I began this research, I thought ‘leadership’ was a dirty word, tainted with the misuse of corrupting power, awash with images of Animal Farm dictators and fraudulent politicians...
Theresa Kiyota Rahman de Swiet is a Sync member who is currently on a CLP Leading in London placement with Whitechapel Gallery, and is part of our Sync Intensives programme.
Sync Intensives is a programme running in 2010 over 8 months from April to November, 2010.
As part of this, some of the 15 people on the programme will explore leadership from their perspective as it relates to their work and lives and write articles and case studies. Over to Theresa.....
Setting the scene...
Before I began this research, I thought ‘leadership’ was a dirty word, tainted with the misuse of corrupting power, awash with images of Animal Farm dictators and fraudulent politicians. I had been put off hierarchical structures at medical school where I railed against its patriarchal authority; I had been frustrated by a lack of personal creative input on film sets bent to the whims of the director; and I was confused by disability arts organisations that used hierarchies supposedly to attain equality. Maybe it was just my personality, but I was convinced that there must be better ways of working that involved collaboration and mutual respect, and allowed personal creativity. Furiously convinced that it was the structures themselves that were at fault, at best dismissed as an utopian dreamer, at worst medicalised by one workplace that sent me to a psychologist because of my attitudes towards authority, I searched eagerly for collectives and consensus-making groups – of which more later.
My experience on a Cultural Leadership Placement at the Whitechapel Gallery (WG) however, opened my eyes to the very real possibility of operating within a hierarchical structure that quite brilliantly doesn’t feel like a hierarchy. What is the magical alchemy that allows this? Was I mistaken in my focus on organisational structures? Is it in fact leadership that makes the difference?
During the course of this research, I interviewed the director, five team leaders and five members of staff at the WG, an ex-colleague, two filmmakers, three musicians, a performance poet, and a media producer. I attended two sync days, one NESTA discussion, watched tv, surfed the net and relied on personal observation and reflection.
The exception that confutes the rule: the Whitechapel Gallery (WG)
The Whitechapel Gallery (WG) has about sixty permanent members of staff and about sixty casual staff and freelancers; the vast majority are women, in their late twenties/early thirties from well-educated, artistic backgrounds. Chris Potts, Head of Operations and Estates, describes the WG as ‘six or seven mini-companies within an overall structure although there are some centralised systems’. Senior Management is not formally asked to run their teams in a particular way and they are answerable to Iwona Blazwick, the director, who, interestingly, sees the WG as ‘a flat structure because it is so small.’
Rachel Mapplebeck, Head of Communications, describes Iwona as ‘a visionary leader, with a mix of intelligence and the ability to make complex things easily communicated; she is brilliant at getting everyone on board, inspiring, motivating.’ Iwona, who has the humility of a true intellectual, does not see herself as a ‘leader’ instead describing herself as ‘absolutely passionate about the business of presenting contemporary art’, and as valuing ‘autonomy, responsibility and creativity.’
What was remarkable about all the team leaders that I spoke with, was that they each put forward positive, egalitarian and humane notions of leadership. Caro Howell, Head of Education and Public Events, spoke of ‘protecting the team and shielding them from bureaucratic processes’ and of ‘finding a balance between providing support but encouraging autonomy’. Cookie Rameder, Head of Visitor Services, described leadership as ‘situational’ - making intuitive connections rather than abstract, analytical and academic thinking; her emphasis was on ‘duty and responsibility rather than self-importance’ and on sharing out power – ‘elevating the other person, so that you can become invisible if you are really clued in.’
Chris Potts spoke about being an ‘organic leader’ where crucially the leader's soft skills are paramount: ‘the WG is extremely good at this, partly due to the nature of the sector but partly because the WG recruits brilliantly and chooses creative types sympathetic to what the WG does. With this soft style then hierarchy becomes secondary to organisation: individuals are brought into discussion irrespective of their position, instead there is dependence upon knowledge, skills and creativity'.
This sounded all well and good from above – but what did the rest of the organisation think and feel about all this? Beatrice Banks, Intern, described the organisational structure as ‘marshmallow rather than steel’ and Rachel Cass, Intern, said that the ‘architecture of management is the most positive and fruitful’ of any of the companies that she had ever worked for.
Kirsty Ogg, Curator, spoke of everyone playing ‘an equal and valid role’, and Sarah Auld, Publications Assistant, gave the example of tours of the exhibitions for staff prior to an opening, when everyone is asked their opinion of the work, as contributing to the ‘very democratic feel’ of the WG.
Tara Brown, Education Administrator, was ‘surprised at the amount of autonomy’ she has in her role. In fact, out of the albeit limited sample of interviewees, I couldn’t find any negative comments about the WG with the exception of the geographical layout of the offices, being split into three different areas, and the need to balance the intellectual rigour of the WG’s programming with populism, to make it more accessible and in the long run, sustainable.
I eventually teased out a definition of a good leader from Iwona, and she said ‘to have a perspective on things and be calm about them’ especially in light of funding pressures'.
Her response to suspected low morale over the current funding cuts was to host a staff summer party at her home and serve drinks all evening. How cool is that?
Biomimicry and self-organising groups
During the course of my discussions, I stumbled across several self-organising groups. Kirsty Ogg spoke about Transmission Gallery http://www.transmissiongallery.org an artists’ voluntary collective which rotates its leadership every two years.
This mimics a model proposed by Ken Thompson who describes geese flying in a V, where the birds rotate in and out of the lead position, apparently to conserve energy and because no single bird has memorised the whole route. Ken Thompson claims that collective leadership is the norm in much of the animal world.
For more on biomimicry (copying nature) and leadership, please see: http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/magazine/16-09/st_bugs
Sarah Auld described the national student group, People and Planet, http://peopleandplanet.org as irritating in its use of consensus decision making, as there are ‘huge environmental issues facing us and they are just crawling around the edges.’
In contrast, Tara Brown described the success of the groups, The Riveters, a university women’s rights collective, and The Space Hijackers http://www.spacehijackers.co.uk who interrupt public and personal space, which also use consensus decision making.
Conclusions?
The WG is proving to be the most stimulating and creative environment I have ever worked in outside of my personal practice as an artist. My sense of self has been polished, I have felt warmed by the sensitivity towards my access requirements, I am inspired by Iwona and the sheer loveliness of my colleagues, and above all, I feel honoured at the amount of trust that is given to me that allows me to express my autonomy.
Questions still whirl around my mind. Is it that values and attitudes are more important than structures? Is culture more important than politics? Is it personality that determines whether someone likes to be led or not? Is there a difference between how men and women lead and like to be led? Does respecting diversity mean acknowledging that a variety of structures and leadership models are actually necessary?
About a hundred years ago, the philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein, said that ‘the limits of my language are the limits of my world. Of what we cannot speak, we must remain silent.’
I would concur and say 'of what we cannot speak, we must make art'. The WG and Sync have agreed that for the conclusion of this article, I can make an animation that will be ready to view on this site in mid-September.
With many thanks to:
Sophie Hayles, Sarah Walsh, Nicola Turner, Iwona Blazwick, Caro Howell, Cookie Rameder, Chris Potts, Rachel Mapplebeck, Kirsty Ogg, Beatrice Banks, Rachel Cass, Sarah Auld, Tara Brown, Caglar Kimyoncu, Michael Achtman, Mhairi Leaver, Shlair Teimourian, Jasmine Cooray, Robin Baldock, Elliot Goldstein and Chas de Swiet.
Images are:
Detail from Londonnature Detail from Buddha and lamp Detail from Shamanbuddha Detail from Instead of thinking in terms of either or
all by Theresa Kiyota Rahman de Swiet
I'm never too young to change my mind... [copy]
Before I began this research, I thought ‘leadership’ was a dirty word, tainted with the misuse of corrupting power, awash with images of Animal Farm dictators and fraudulent politicians...
Theresa Kiyota Rahman de Swiet is a Sync member who is currently on a CLP Leading in London placement with Whitechapel Gallery, and is part of our Sync Intensives programme.
Sync Intensives is a programme running in 2010 over 8 months from April to November, 2010.
As part of this, some of the 15 people on the programme will explore leadership from their perspective as it relates to their work and lives and write articles and case studies. Over to Theresa.....
