CCI Newsletter, No. 28, December 2001

"Managing Change: The Museum Facing Economic and Social Changes"

by David Grattan,¹ Manager, Conservation Processes and Materials Research Division

The most recent General Conference of the International Council of Museums (ICOM) was held in Barcelona, Spain, from June 28 to July 6, 2001. This major event included many parallel sessions under the umbrella topic "Managing Change: The Museum Facing Economic and Social Changes." Of the many items up for discussion, one issue of obvious concern is the progress of ICOM reform.

ICOM is adapting to the challenges presented by rapid growth and a fundamentally changing environment. Among the many aspects of this reform process are revisions to the Code of Ethics and Statutes, which provide the ground rules for the operation of ICOM itself and of its member museums. These revisions were presented at the Barcelona conference, and can be seen on ICOM's Web site. The implications of these changes are of great concern to those interested in the preservation of cultural heritage — especially professional conservators.

The issue of conservation figures prominently in the revised documents, and the stringency of the conservation requirements placed on museums by the Code of Ethics is impressive. In a nutshell, museums are required not only to regard conservation as an integral part of their function, they are also obliged to employ professionally trained staff. These statements inspire confidence that museums will recognize the importance of conservation within their organizations. But even as ICOM's requirements are becoming increasingly rigorous, the position of conservation within museums is weakening.

This paradox was brought forward during the conference at the Conservation Committee's roundtable discussion "Reinventing the Conservation Department" where the topic of change was addressed by representatives from a number of leading conservation institutions: Jean-Pierre Mohen of the Centre de recherche et de restauration des musées de France, Rik Vos of the Instituut Collectie Nederland, Gaël de Guichen of the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and the Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM), Tim Whalen of the Getty Conservation Institute, and Bill Peters of CCI.

Nancy Hushion, a museum consultant from Canada, started the discussion with a presentation from the perspective of museum managers — who must regularly deal with reduced financial support for their institutions. Faced with difficult choices about where and how to allocate limited resources, one of the most common solutions has been to eliminate conservation and conservators from organizational structures. As a result, many institutions no longer have conservation departments. Conservation has become a service to be acquired on an 'as needed' basis, rather than an integral museum discipline. Sometimes the actual Conservation Laboratory has even been used for something else entirely (e.g. a gift shop). These solutions, while answering the dilemma of reduced funding, are in sharp contrast to the requirements of ICOM's Code of Ethics.

The root of this tendency to disregard conservation activities is often the requirement for public accountability which means that museums must be seen to be economically stringent and efficient. This has led to an emphasis on exhibition rather than the traditional more hidden activities of research, study, and conservation. This can be compounded by the fact that museum directors may be 'media stars' without museum training (a situation that had been discussed by Luis Monreal in his plenary speech earlier in the conference) and may not have the same regard for conservation activities as would a museum professional with a research or an academic background.

How then can institutions and individual conservators ensure the maintenance of professional conservation standards within museums? The speakers in the session stressed the need to communicate the importance of conservation work more effectively, not only to colleagues but also to the public. They also emphasized the need to be aligned with the needs of clients — and in the context of a museum this means alignment with the goals and objectives of the museum. Another aspect that came up repeatedly was the necessity of developing partnerships among museum organizations and operating more within team structures.

By the end of the session, the following conclusions were reached:

1. Conservators must take a higher level of responsibility for the preservation of cultural heritage.
2. Conservation should become an important aspect of training for museum managers.
3. Conservation must clearly be seen to respond to client needs (and the client is the museum or the museum visitor, not the object).
4. Conservators must recognize that museums have changed radically, and to remain part of the museum they will also have to change.
5. Conservators will have to convince the public that 'real objects' and 'authenticity' are important.

In short, conservators will have to communicate clearly the importance of conservation to everyone concerned, especially the public. In addition, the importance of forming partnerships with museum organizations and working in team structures with other professionals is increasingly evident.

To respond to these challenges, the following resolution was put forward to and passed by the General Assembly:

 

If this resolution can be successfully implemented, perhaps Gaël de Guichen will be right in saying "We should never again see the sign 'closed for conservation' - the sign should read - open for conservation."

1. David Grattan is also the Chair of the ICOM Committee for Conservation.