Reflection With Watermark

7/31/2019 Reflection With Watermark

1/25

Oliver Bliss

Institute Cultural Practice: Placement January May 2012

Feasibility Study for an Internship and Collective Capacity Building in

partnership with Contemporary Arts Society

I had an initial idea to construct my own placement study, which I wanted to explore

further. I work full time at Arts Council England and I was note-taking for an annual

review of an organisation, which is regularly funded. The relationship manager was

encouraging the organisation to include paid internships within their programming.

However, this organisation was very small and Arts Council England contributed an

amount of money, which represented a contribution to an overall limited income. I did

not understand how they were expected to fund the internship or provide sufficient

support as the organisation functioned with a small number of part time staff. I

thought that if the organisation collaborated with other organisations they might be

able to afford an intern who would then act as a volunteer co-ordinator for several

partners arts organisations. The volunteer co-ordinator would manage the

recruitment and tasks of volunteers whilst acting as a mentor to their professional

development.

I have a personal passion for the visual arts sector. I wanted to focus on this sector

for my placement to provide me with an opportunity to gain exposure to several

organisations, build relationships with different types of visual arts organisations and

gain an understanding of how they operate and deliver. The placement provided a

reason for me to introduce myself to other organisations and have something useful

to offer them. This would then enable me to demonstrate how I can think strategically


2/25

and provide a useful solution to a broad issue, which could impact on several

organisations. Part the reason why I wanted to create my own placement was to

allow me to meet with several organisations rather than just one.

I approached Mark Doyle, head of collector development in the North West,

Contemporary Arts Society (CAS) to become my mentor for the duration of my

placement. I felt he would be the most appropriate person to help me with this idea

as CAS have funded his position with support from Arts Council England to work with

visual arts organisations in the North West such as collectives, galleries and studios

with an aim to support artists and encourage more people to collect visual art. As a

member of CAS, I had attended a few of the events he had organised and knew he

was well connected to the visual arts sector. I felt his experience with the sector

would be useful as he had already brokered trusted relationships and could advise

which would be the most suitable organisations to target working in partnership.

Initially I was very excited by this idea and wanted to use the placement as an

opportunity to make it happen. I created an outline draft of my idea and sent it to him

for review. Doyle was willing to become my mentor and he helped me adjust my

vision to make my aims more realistic. The time constraints of the placement meant

that there was a limited amount of work that could be achieved. I would have set

myself unrealistic targets without his support, as I wanted to run before I could walk.

It would have been impossible to construct the model and be operating within five

months. He suggested that I use the placement as an opportunity to create a

feasibility study of my proposal to explore whether my idea would be a viable project.

Doyle helped me plan a realistic timetable of what I could achieve between January

to May and we decided on five key aims upon which the study should focus.


3/25

The aims of the study were:

What benefits would the role bring to the intern, the volunteer and the arts

organisation?

Is it needed?

How would it operate and is it sustainable?

Whether any other similar schemes already exist

The current stance of local arts organisations towards volunteering

It was agreed that I could spend January to February researching my idea and

creating a document, which would then be checked by Doyle to ensure it was

appropriate. This would then be shared with organisations between March and April.

Booking meetings was an important part of the planning process as I was aware of

the conflicting demands of each persons diaries. I knew I needed to get the

information to them promptly in order to give them time to digest it and schedule a

date for the interview within the period of March and April. It was hoped that I would

be able to interview everyone by the middle of April in order to type up the interviews

and analyse their responses before my deadline in May. The scale of the feasibility

study also needed to be agreed. Before discussing the idea with Doyle, I was

considering how the partnership could work across greater Manchester and

Liverpool or even link up to Cumbria and Lancashire. Doyle helped me scale down

the project into a more manageable size. It was decided that it would be best to

focus on organisations within Manchester, as there are plenty of visual art

organisations within the city from which to choose. Focusing on Manchester would

also make it easier for me to organise meetings for interviews and test whether there

would be any interest. If organisations in Manchester were not interested in the

model, I could then extend my search to Liverpool as it has an equally rich cluster of


4/25

visual arts organisations. If Liverpool was also unsuccessful, I could then evaluate

why both lacked interest or alternatively approach more organisations further afield.

It was also felt that a limited number of organisations should be approached to make

the project more manageable. A greater number of organisations could potentially

lead to an unmanageable range of expectations making it difficult to accommodate

lots of conflicting needs.

The organisations that I approached to discuss the model were (as illustrated above)

Castlefield, Chinese Arts Centre (CAC), Cornerhouse, Manchester Art Gallery

(MAG), The International 3 (TI3) and Ultimate Holding Company (UHC). As a


5/25

reserve to these companies (if any did not want to be interviewed) I could have

interviewed other local organisations like Centre for the Urban Built Environment,

Islington Mill, Richard Goodall Gallery, Victoria Baths and the Whitworth Art Gallery.

Doyle advised that I first researched whether my idea already existed or if there were

any other similar schemes available. He felt that organisations would take my ideas

seriously if I had an evidence base to show that I had researched existing schemes.

The latter would reveal whether there are any models that could be adapted to fit my

ideas and avoid trying to re-invent an existing model.

I developed the first three sections of the feasibility study in consultation with Doyle.

Section one (appx a: 3-10) provided an introduction to present the initial idea and

some context to the model itself. Information was drawn from my initial research and

Doyle helped me edit the structure in ensure that it was clear and succinct.

I found that there is an increased interest for schemes, which facilitate interns and

volunteering. The current economic climate has led to reductions in public funding for

the arts and redundancies. The lack of opportunities for people to find work in their

preferred professions has meant an increasing reliance on the voluntary sector.

However, volunteers have unpaid roles and organisations rely upon individuals

desire to contribute. This can only occur if a person has spare time and enough

income to take on unpaid labour. Those who are not in this position, miss the

opportunity to develop new skills and meet other professionals in their art industry of

choice.

During my research I found a scheme called New Deal of the Mindthat produced a

programme called the Future Jobs Fund. It was a programme that put over 500

young unemployed people into work in the creative industries across the UK and


6/25

used funding from the Department for Work and Pensions Future Jobs Fund

scheme. Young people on Jobseekers Allowance were given six month work

placements with arts organisations and provided with training, coaching and

networking opportunities. The findings showed the success of giving young people

paid work experience. Over 70% of participants on the programme went straight into

employment, education or training at the end of their placement. The findings also

revealed that many long-term unemployed young people could not afford to do

lengthy unpaid internships, which are often seen as a necessary step to get a foot on

the jobs ladder. 90% of participants would not have been able to take part if the

placement had been unpaid (Creative society, 2011 4).

Founder Martin Bright said:

We know that the paid work experience is the best way of getting young

unemployed people into job. We welcome the coalitions focus on

apprenticeships, but more needs to be done to target these at young people.

Ultimately, we will need to return to some form of job guarantee for the long-

term unemployed. The alternative is to write off a whole generation.

Creative Society, 2011 2

These types of opportunities puts people in a better position when applying for

employment as it demonstrates that they are driven and committed to the arts with

practical hands-on experiences. Internships provide paid work experience, which

enables more people to access the opportunity to build and develop skills. Chief

Executive Alan Davey from the Arts Council England stated:


7/25

In Achieving great art for everyone, Arts Council's 10-year framework for the

arts, we set out our long-term goal of creating a diverse and highly skilled

arts workforce. To achieve this aim we need to make sure that working in the

arts is seen as a sustainable, long-term career for people of all

backgroundsWe're determined to open employment opportunities in the

arts to all, steadfast in our belief that in the arts will benefit in the long term

from the new ideas and perspectives that a more diverse arts workforce will

bring. Well-planned, paid internships have a role to play in bringing about this

change by helping people from all backgrounds gain experience of working in

the arts.

Creative & Cultural Skills, 2011 3

Organisations are making more of an effort to make their business become leaner

whilst maintaining the same outputs. This makes paid internships an expensive

luxury for some. Organisations individually can struggle however; this pilot aims to

alleviate certain pressures through pooling resources and working collaboratively.


8/25

I found a useful illustration from Building Social Marketplaces(Boyd, 2011 25) that

proposes the consortium model, which is very similar to what I was suggesting which

I used to explain the model. A critical difference between the consortium modeland

my own was that the hub is made up of a cluster of organisations delegates with

collective responsibility rather than one individual being in overall charge of the

volunteers as would be the case with my model. The former can create an imbalance

in focus as there is no clear leader. Representatives form MAG and Cornerhouse

stated that they were part of a consortium model called Cultural Volunteers

Consortium Forum (CVCF). (appx a: 7;45;74-79) However, they both stated that

they felt disengaged from the consortium as progress was slow and the consortium

lacked a clear leadership. They added that although they met as a consortium, there

was little collaborative working. Both organisations recognised the potential in the

model (appx a: 29;) I was creating and acknowledged that it would improve working

in partnership and enable volunteers to work across several organisations.

The research in section 1(appx a: 3-10)also broadened the scope of the project and

made me consider the role of the volunteer in more detail. I started to find sources

which demonstrated how volunteers had been previously exploited in their workplace


9/25

(appx a:22;51-52;85). Volunteers are not protected because they are not paid

employees. Up until this point, I had been focusing overtly on the benefits to the

organisations to incentivise them to join the scheme. I became aware however, that I

was drifting away from the needs of the volunteers. Doyle suggested that I

summarised the specific benefits volunteers and organisations (appx a: 10) would

receive. This would highlight the merits of the ideas so that the information could be

useful in encouraging more to join the partnership.

I researched different organisations including an accredited scheme called Arts

Awardwhose mission is to support young people who want to deepen their

engagement with the arts, build creative and leadership skills, and to achieve a

national qualification. I realised this scheme could be incorporated into my model so

that individuals could both volunteer and get a qualification through the process. I did

test this idea during the interview process and all the organisations agreed that

volunteers should receive some form of training. They actually wanted to widen that

opportunity further by creating a training budget that volunteers could access to

support their own personal development. I collated this data that formed the

foundations of my feasibility study.

Section two (appx a: 11-16) was created to provide organisations with the core

requirements that needed to be embedded to make the model possible. This section

was developed last, once I had gathered the information and analysed what the

model should include. For the purpose of making the document easier to read, it felt

more appropriate to place the core requirements in the second section to highlight

the practical issues of the model.


10/25

Section three (appx a: 17-26) was an alphabetical summary of the organisations and

schemes I had researched. I reduced the amount of information I was originally

going to supply because the document was becoming too big. I also attached

hyperlinks within the document to an appendix so that the sources could be referred

to if required in the future. This helped me to separate the essential information that

was needed to understand the model from the more information that could become

more useful in the future (if the project was taken forward).

Doyle suggested that the document should not be more than 3,000 words otherwise

none of the organisations would read it. This proved to be very valuable advice as by

the end of the project, I had written over 25,000 words for the complete study.

However, for the purpose of making organisations understand the model, I only

needed sections 1, 2 and 3. The information was still too dense at around 8,000

words. To solve this, I created an executive summary (appx a:55-58)to explain the

overview of the project so that if individually a person required more information they

could refer to the full study. When I interviewed representatives, they all said that

they had read the executive summary and understood the idea but had not had time

to read all the sections of the study.

As I interviewed different individuals, I elicited more information that both informed

my thinking and also what adaptations I needed to make to improve the document.

These findings were summarised in section 4 (appx a: 27-40)of the feasibility study.

This section discussed my findings from the interviews. (appx a: 28-94) I

summarised the key points raised in the interviews and placed the full narrative in

the appendix section (appx a: 66-86) to reduce the amount of information in this

section. Comments raised in the interviews helped me formulate an action plan

(appx a: 31-35)for a pilot. I deliberately only included headline themes within the


11/25

plan; I wanted to provide a structure that was flexible and easy to understand. I

extracted detail from the planning narrative within section 2 (appx a: 11-17) which

also informed the layout of the structure of the action plan in section 4.

It was also important that the content of the feasibility study should retain its validity

in the future. The purpose of the placement was to assess the viability of the model

and gauge interest in making the model happen and it was found that the model has

the potential to work. In principle the organisations were interested however,

specifically how the model was going to operate needed to be understood.

A budget (appx a: 59-60) for the project was also supplied to the interviewees. I

generated the budget based on guidance from the Arts Council England

Internships in the arts- A guide for arts organisations(2011). (appx a: 5-6) The

document provided guidance regarding payment to interns conforming to the

national minimum wage (appx a: 46-47). This was a challenge, as I did not know

if arts organisations provided any expenses already or how much should be

provided. Research from Volunteer England website (appx a: 24-25) also

outlined good practice. From these sources I was able to compare basic costs

against volunteer expenses such as travel, subsistence (and other resources the

intern would need such as a mobile phone and laptop). I had to calculate the

potential cost implications surrounding the project and build in a contingency

figure to help mitigate the risk. I created several different options for the

interviewee to consider. This gave interviewees an indication of what they could

potentially pay if they became partners in a pilot.

Once I had created the budget, half way through the placement, I discovered I would

have to amend it as the national minimum wage (appx a: 46-47) will increase in


12/25

October 2012. I had to revise all my calculations to reflect this increase in order to

ensure the future validity of the budget. Responding to feedback from the interviews,

I also amended the budget further including training costs for the intern and

volunteer. This was not a cost I had originally anticipated. I had originally considered

a budget based on the intern receiving arts award training however, I was unaware

at the time of the costs required to moderate (appx a: 18-19) people in receipt of an

arts award. Interviewees also expressed that volunteers may wish to receive other

forms of training or alternatively have additional travel costs refunded in order to take

on shadowing opportunities. It was a pleasure to see that organisations had a

genuine interest in supporting the professional development of a volunteer and were

willing to contribute financially to reward the volunteers and give them more

meaningful experiences. I assumed originally that organisations would want the

lowest possible cost with a maximum result which would benefit them more without

much consideration for the volunteer. This was a false assumption on my behalf as

feedback form interviewees strongly suggested that those working in public funded

venues do indeed have the interests of the public as a focus of their remit and are

eager to improve conditions for volunteers and artists even when operating with

limited means.

The additional costs have increased the original budget that the individual

organisations would need to contribute. This has been a difficult financial calibration

a balance of coast per organisation had to be achieved. I asked open-ended

questions of the organisations and as able to gauge a sense of how much they were

willing to contribute. Although Cornerhouse does not have a budget for volunteers, I

was able to identify that from March 2013 to 2015 they were planning on reviewing

their budgets to include the use of volunteers.


13/25

CAS does not have a budget for volunteers and from my research I was able to

determine that it would be difficult to include them into the pilot as their current

budget is a lot smaller than more established galleries but unlike Cornerhouse are

not willing to join at this time. I was able to provide a good argument to Doyle

regarding the use of volunteers. CAS asks members to pay an annual fee of 50 and

I calculated that it would take an increase of 25 members to cover the cost of

contributing to the pilot partnership. It is possible that the volunteers could act as

advocates for CAS and promote membership particularly at events and other

openings. Doyle had considered the potential of the scheme in terms of his available

budget within marketing which he stated was 250-500. Doyle had not considered

that the cost invested in an intern could potentially create a return in the form of

increased membership sales. This would balance the initial expenditure of the

contribution to the partnership. CASs risk would be their involvement with the model

and paying their share up front however, Doyle agreed that if there were enough

evidence demonstrated to reflect this potential, it would be easier to convince his

CAS head office in London to support the model. However CAS North West has not

been in existence for long and would not be able to take on such a risk at this time.

Doyle raised other interesting suggestions as to the direction of the model. He was

more interested in being able to opt into the service as a non-member for one-off

events. He asserted that he would be more interested in paying for a service that

allowed CAS to access volunteers on an ad-hoc basis without CAS having to recruit

them. This does create an interesting dichotomy between paying for services and the

volunteer who is willing to provide services free. The cost is the interns time for co-

ordinating and recruiting volunteers as well as training that the intern provides the

volunteer. However, consideration must be given to the volunteer who would be


14/25

providing the operational service for the one-off event and who would not receive

any money for their time. There could be a negative reaction from other

organisations paying for the service who might not wish to operate in this way or who

would agree if the cost to CAS or other potential one-offs were charged

appropriately. This could be explored as a potential method of diversifying how

income is generated beyond the life of a pilot study.

Ethically I found Doyles suggestion a challenge however, I would suggest that one

off payments are still acceptable because the volunteer would be willing to give their

time for free and receive additional experience in another organisation, gaining

practical experience at an event. A volunteer could encourage membership to an

organisation on a one-off basis like CAS. CAS generates a 50 income when a

person joins. I questioned whether the volunteer should receive commission in the

form of a bonus for securing this additional commission. This would alter the

relationship as the volunteer would earn commission and their legal status would

therefore change to that of a freelance member of staff. This monetary consideration

is the primary reason why I would not recommend that a volunteer receive

commission.

I would argue that volunteers who demonstrate strength in generating sales could

then form their own relationship with an organisation that may result in employment.

Targets could even be created to provide evidence of success and give volunteers

quantifiable objectives, which could be useful when seeking future employment. If

tested and proven, this would evidence another positive in the model as a method of

opening routes to employment.


15/25

TI3 were interested in increasing capacity which could result in income generation. A

volunteer could secure potential contacts that might buy a work of art in the future

through TI3. This is the key reason for their willingness to join the partnership. TI3

are willing to risk that the volunteer does not generate this income in either the short

or long term. They are however, in a position to test the idea whether volunteers

would have a positive impact on income. TI3 also have an interest in developing the

volunteer and supporting the volunteers understanding of the arts market and how

to appropriately interacts with potential clients. This is a specific skill, which requires

a sensitive and responsive approach in order to encourage people to buy art. TI3

see their role as mentors to a limited number of volunteers; this would provide a

more in-depth volunteering experience due to the symbiotic relationship. Comparing

TI3 and CAS demonstrates different models of exchange, which could be beneficial

to the volunteer whilst being profitable to the business in either the short or long

term. I personally feel that the exchange between TI3 and the volunteer would be

fairer as the experience for the volunteer would last longer and they could therefore

gain more exposure to the industry and build more relationships and networks. This

might be an unfair slur to the value CAS can provide a volunteer, as the events that

they run could provide rich experiences for volunteers as well. The experience

however, would be in a shorter concentrated burst.

Julie McCarthy from UHC also made suggestions that made me reconsider changes

to the pilot. She stated that during the planning stages of the pilot and the monitoring

stage, staff within the partnership would have to commit time, which had an in-kind

cost. If UHC were to be involved in the partnership, any member of staff that was

involved in this work would require a fee as each member of staff is paid on a

freelance basis. They receive Pay-as-you-earn (PAYE) meaning that they are paid


16/25

for the number of hours they work rather than receiving a fixed salary. Therefore if

UHC staff was involved in any part of the monitoring or setting up of the pilot, the

time dedicated to this task would directly incur a cost. McCarthy pointed out that

UHC could plan ahead to deliver this work and become a mentor to the intern but

they would need to charge for this service. Alternatively, other organisations (CAC,

MAG and Cornerhouse) had stated that they would volunteer at some point in the

future to plan and mentor. It is more effective for one person to take on full

responsibility to support an intern as a clear point of contact and this in addition,

would not drain other staffs time. If mentoring the organisations staff shared

mentoring duties for free, this would be more cost-effective financially but a less

cost-effective use of the staffs time. McCarthys proposal was unexpected and I had

not accounted for having to revisit my proposed budgets in section 4 to reflect upon

these new suggestions.

I had to inform the partners in advance that the final budget figures I had presented

might be different from my initial suggestions. My figures were dependent upon the

number of organisations (and their scale) who wanted to join the partnership. The

difficulty with this model is the number of people involved in forming an agreement,

which has meant a slow negotiation process that remains incomplete. The interview

process established a firmer idea of the potential costs and made it clear that all the

organisations that I approached wanted to be included. For the purpose of the

feasibility study, this meant that I had found a suitable, viable, budget that could be

agreed if taken forward as a pilot. A budget would still need to be amended slightly

and a contract would need to be created for all members. For the purpose of the

study I had however, developed an operational model.


17/25

Through the interviewing process (appx a: 66-86) I decided that CAC or UHC would

be the most appropriate budget holders as these organisations can accommodate

the additional administration and is not attached to other organisations like MAG and

Cornerhouse who share funds with other bodies.

The matter of the budget holder would have to be finalised between the partners as

well as drawing up a timeline for when payments would be due (either up front

annual or quarterly through project). A separate bank account could be created for

the partners and be controlled by two delegates. This would have the benefit of

making the partners a separate independent group. Organisations with Arts Council

National Portfolio Organisation (NPO) status (CAS, CAC and Cornerhouse) are not

able to apply to apply forGrants for the artsfunding. However, as a consortium is

made up of a mixture of NPOs and organisations that are not National Portfolio

Organisations (TI3, Castlefield, Manchester Art Gallery and UHC), the consortium

can apply to Grants for the arts. The work would be delivered separately with other

organisations that are non-NPOs under a separate new body.

Upon reflection, a potential risk is access to the budget; a budget would need to be

controlled by two separate delegates nominated by the organisations. Other

organisations may need chasing for payments which would greatly impact on the

pilot. A written agreement and contract would need to be created to ensure

payments were made on time. All the organisations involved however, do have a

strong track record of delivering projects with public funds and therefore I felt could

be trusted.

The timing of the pilot was discussed in detail with the interviewees and each person

gave a slightly different perspective of how the pilot should operate. Originally I


18/25

wanted to be able to demonstrate how the internship could work in a cycle. I

originally felt six months would be enough time to train up an intern, therefore two

interns could be recruited within a year. The first six months would be spent with the

first intern. This intern would then train a second intern in the last month; the latter

would then take over for the next five months. It was felt that this model was overly

ambitious as a second intern might not be found in time and trained within the short

period of one month. In consultation with the interviewees, it was deemed more

suitable to extend the duration of the internship and deploy one single intern. This

would test the role without too much additional risk. Two months were also added to

allow a team of delegates (or UHC mentoring) to prepare the internship and make

sure the intern had enough support before the individual started (either by UHC or

volunteer delegates). This period also allowed time for the delegates to meet a few

times (or UHC to plan). Once the role had started contact might be sporadic as they

would be meeting and working voluntarily.

The interviews raised additional themes that I drew out from the conversations I had

individually. These themes (appx a: 36-37) were grouped together as additional

recommendations for a pilot project and additional areas of activity, which could take

place. I did find that most of the visual arts organisations had an assumption that

volunteers would be students or those who had just left education. I believe this

assumption is based on the types of volunteer who have approached the

organisations directly. These individuals are career focused and approached the arts

organisations directly to see if any work were available. This is also why

organisations have not actively advertised for volunteers as they receive ample

requests from those to have the initiative and confidence to ask. However this limits

the range of skills that volunteers can bring. If there was a targeted approach to the


19/25

advertising of volunteers, different sets of skills could be sought. Organisations have

core audiences and could be accused of being too inward focused, missing external

opportunities such as targeting those who are retired or students within different

specialist fields such as finance and marketing. Such individuals can add additional

value to organisations, potentially providing improvements and solutions to how they

operate and deliver.

MAG was different in their approach, has links to several other organisations and a

broad range of volunteers. It has a voluntary policy and is more inclusive in recruiting

volunteers. Through the interviewing process, I identified strengths in what MAG

were doing and made suggestions for improving how their volunteers are recruited.

Apart from MAG, broadening the age of the volunteers had not been considered by

the other organisations and this could change the perception of the volunteer and

how they can be incorporated into an organisation.

It has been frustrating to become aware of these crucial factors and not be able to

pursue the next stage of study due time constraints. I had to be realistic regarding

what could be undertaken without impacting the quality of the feasibility study. It was

important to focus on viability rather than embarking on testing the model.

Separating these two areas has presented me with a dilemma. Part of me would like

to start the pilot immediately however, I have to get all the partners to a point where

they fully understand the model and want to invest in a pilot which is a considerable

challenge and it has taken time to get everyone individually to a place of

understanding.

It was difficult to be able to plan in time to meet individual representatives from the

organisations. Interviewees had very busy and conflicting timetables; finding a time


20/25

to meet them was very difficult. In future it could be onerous to bring everyone

together in one space; meetings would have to be planned far ahead of time. It is

important to ensure that everyone is involved in the discussion in order to make

critical joint decisions. Despite these logistical issues, I was able to gain sufficient

information from each of the organisations to make recommendations for a model to

work towards however, a finalised business plan was not achieved. This is a

personal regret as it would have felt as though I had reached a milestone however;

the reality of getting to a pilot stage requires substantial joint discussion. I believe the

model is feasible, viable and the evidence I have gathered demonstrates particularly

how it could be successful.

Section 5 (appx a: 39-42) was a conclusion to the study. I have summarised how the

model was viable and have based my reflection upon the original aims of the study:

What benefits would the role bring to the intern, the volunteer and the

arts organisation?

There is strong evidence to support that this model will benefit the

organisations whilst also giving the volunteers a more rewarding experience

and exposure than they would receive from organisations running a volunteer

scheme by themselves.

Is it needed?

There is a disparate engagement between organisations working with

volunteers. Organisations that do use volunteers stated that a more consistent

approach with additional time to develop the volunteers skills could be


21/25

achieved through this model. Organisations that currently do not use

volunteers want to incorporate them into their work but in practice do not have

the time to recruit and manage volunteers.

How would it operate and is it sustainable?

I developed a business model which could be used to test a pilot. The long

term sustainability of the model is however, questionable and a pilot would be

needed to test whether there would be a long-term viability in the model. If the

partners agreed to a pilot and it was tested, a full evaluation would be needed.

The pilot period would provide time for other sources of income to be

identified. It is critical that the final evaluation of the pilot reflects the viability of

a long-term, sustainable model which identifies realistic income streams to

support the models future.

Whether any other similar schemes already exist

I explored several similar schemes which did have related aims however, the

way in which the intern is funded through shared sponsorship from

organisations, appeared to be a new way of working.

The current stance of local arts organisations towards volunteering

Through the interview process, I was able to evidence that organisations view

volunteers as positive and useful. They have different perceptions of a

volunteers values and motives. Each organisation interviewed had a different

way of working and faced diverse challenges however; the desire to

incorporate volunteers was universal.


22/25

A risk factor intrinsic to the model is its dependency on the efforts and commitment

of the intern. If the intern had to go on long-term leave due to ill health or another

personal reason the pilot could implode. However, the risk is considered to be

relatively low as there is evidence to show that work can be delivered by one

individual. Doyle is the only employee for CAS to work in the North West and his

counterpart Rebecca Morril who covers the North East. Similarly TI3 only has two

members of staff have managed to survive. I also found additional evidence to show

one individual can be used across several organisations. Kathy McArdle works as a

Cultural Programming Co-ordinator across the Quays Cultural Consortium (appx a:

23) and delivers shared programming with several organisations across the Quays.

These individuals demonstrate that although there is a risk of sickness, it should not

prohibit the pilot being successful. Additionally, this potential risk from sickness could

be mitigated if some volunteers could be trained in elements of the co-ordination role

in case the interns were unavailable for a short period. Long-term sickness could

heavily impact the model if delegate staff attempted to cover the role.

The risk of adapting this model is dependent on budget holders being convinced by

arguments made in the feasibility study. Although organisations have agreed in

principle to the model, Cornerhouse, CAC and MAG will need to gain approval from

their boards to commit to a pilot. Additionally, Cornerhouse and MAG are linked to

other organisations already and may this may create additional constraints when

persuading budget holders to release funds for this particular pilot. Assumptions

have been made by those I have interviewed that the key decision-makers could be

convinced to become partners however; this is currently an assumption on their part

rather than a concrete commitment. It is easier for the smaller organisation to agree


23/25

and commit to a pilot as they do not have to account to a wider body. Smaller

organisations would be more vulnerable as they do not have the additional finances

and were the pilot to fail, would be at greater risk of financial repercussions were the

pilot to be considered unsuccessful.

A successful pilot has different meanings to each organisation. Cornerhouse and

MAG may be more interested in volunteers providing internal support such as

creating a better experience for visitors, being involved front-of-house or increasing

participation through social networks. Conversely, success could be measured by

focusing on an increase in clients, contacts, membership or by the amount of income

generated. The evaluation of the pilot would need to include a range of key

performance indicators to give a holistic view of success and demonstrate where the

strengths, weakness, opportunities and threats (SWOT analysis) within the model

existed. Doyle also questioned whether the internship should become a full-time

post. This is different from the original aims of the study as I wanted to create a

model for an internship programme that paid interns whilst giving them professional

experience. However, if the outcomes of the pilot reveal that it is not a viable project

to repeatedly change and train one individual to become the intern; an alternative

could be the full-time position of a volunteer co-ordinator. This could still result in an

individual entering a professionally paid role through the pilot which would constitute

a positive outcome.

Overall, I found this study very demanding, specifically collating the level of

information required to fully understand how to devise an operational model for my

initial idea. I found the experience deeply rewarding as I have met diverse arts

organisations and have built a rapport with each of them. I also feel I developed a

model which is achievable which makes me very excited about the possibility of a


24/25

pilot. If I was to do this project again, I may have saved this study for a dissertation.

However it has provided me exceptional practice in considering how to effectively

plan out and construct a focused discussion for a dissertation next year.

6,576 words


25/25

Biliography

Boyd Sam, GMCVO (Greater Manchester centre for Volunteer Organisations).

Building Social Marketplaces, providing strength and diversity in public service

provision, May 2011, Web 21 May 2012

http://www.gmcvo.org.uk/sites/gmcvo.org.uk/files/Building%20Social%20Marketplac

es%20(Full%20Report)%20Final.doc

Creative & Cultural Skills, Internships in the arts, a guide for artsorganisations, 28

November 2011. Arts Council England, Web. 21 May 2012

http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/media/uploads/internships_in_the_arts_final.pdf

Creative society, New Deal of the Mind, 2011, no date provided. Web. 21 May 2012.

http://www.thecreativesociety.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/future-jobs-fund-

programme.pdf

For the Appendix and the full model please feel free to contact me

[email protected]
http://www.gmcvo.org.uk/sites/gmcvo.org.uk/files/Building%20Social%20Marketplaces%20(Full%20Report)%20Final.dochttp://www.gmcvo.org.uk/sites/gmcvo.org.uk/files/Building%20Social%20Marketplaces%20(Full%20Report)%20Final.dochttp://www.gmcvo.org.uk/sites/gmcvo.org.uk/files/Building%20Social%20Marketplaces%20(Full%20Report)%20Final.dochttp://www.artscouncil.org.uk/media/uploads/internships_in_the_arts_final.pdfhttp://www.artscouncil.org.uk/media/uploads/internships_in_the_arts_final.pdfhttp://www.thecreativesociety.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/future-jobs-fund-programme.pdfhttp://www.thecreativesociety.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/future-jobs-fund-programme.pdfhttp://www.thecreativesociety.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/future-jobs-fund-programme.pdfhttp://www.thecreativesociety.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/future-jobs-fund-programme.pdfhttp://www.artscouncil.org.uk/media/uploads/internships_in_the_arts_final.pdfhttp://www.gmcvo.org.uk/sites/gmcvo.org.uk/files/Building%20Social%20Marketplaces%20(Full%20Report)%20Final.dochttp://www.gmcvo.org.uk/sites/gmcvo.org.uk/files/Building%20Social%20Marketplaces%20(Full%20Report)%20Final.doc

Date post:	05-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	oly
View:	221 times
Download:	0 times

Reflection With Watermark

Documents