YouTube Transcript:
The Heart of Culture: Measuring Value Beyond Statistics | Cultural Philanthropy in Action

Skip watching entire videos - get the full transcript, search for keywords, and copy with one click.

AutoDub

Understand YouTube Foreign Videos

Immersive YouTube Voice Translation

Break language barriers, embrace global quality content

Solve Foreign Video Barriers Instantly

Video Transcript

Thank you for joining us today. Um,

we're going to start the webinar now.

Uh, my name is Lady Tanzone. I am here

today as a representative of Filea to

welcome you all to this webinar. Today

is also World Art Day. uh and it is the

second year that the Arts and Culture

Founders Forum organizes a meeting to

celebrate the work that philanthropy

does to support artists and

practitioners. Um for those of you who

don't know, the Arts and Culture Funders

Forum is a network that aims to help

shape the future of cultural philanthropy.

philanthropy.

uh it provides an environment for arts

and culture funders in Europe to come

together and to work together to

reinforce the sector. Um today we have a

very exciting session. So we're going to

talk about the value of arts and culture

and how philanthropy is tackling the

challenge of recognizing the value of

arts and culture beyond quantitative

data. Uh we're going to also discuss how

funders are contributing to expressing

arts impact in numbers and what

practices they are uh putting into place

uh in terms of monitoring, evaluation

and learning to avoid the

instrumentalization in the field. Um

this is actually the second webinar of a

series uh that started back in March

that is titled cultural philanthropy in

action. Uh and it's uh uh basically a

series of conversations among uh arts

and cultural

funders. Uh we have researchers,

artists, cultural practitioners and

funders um that share their views and um

frame a conversation among foundations

that are willing to uh find

collaboration opportunities to support

artistic freedom against instrumentalization.

instrumentalization.

Um the

um the series will actually end in a

month. So on the 15 of May uh we will

have the last uh webinar of the series

and uh the the last appointment will be

uh titled remote engagement arts and

culture for youth and community. So we

also hope to see you there in a month.

Um so before we start and then I'll hand

over to uh Andrea uh from the European

Cultural Foundation for the moderation

of the session. I just wanted to ask uh

to remind you a few housekeeping rules.

Um so if you can please rename

yourselves uh with your full name and

the organization you are representing.

Uh if you can mute yourself just to

avoid any background noise. Um and as

for the session, we will hear from the

speakers first and then we'll also have

some time in the breakout rooms in two

separate breakout rooms um to just uh

ask questions to the speakers. So the

speakers will be also joining the

breakout rooms and have um deeper

discussions on the topics that were uh

that will be presented.

I think that's all from my side. So

Zveeta I will hand over uh to you to to

start the session and thank you everyone

for participating.

Hello. Hello everyone. Uh I'm Andrea

from the European Culture Foundation and

European Culture Foundation is u

currently the chair of the arts and

culture founders forum capitalist board.

So on behalf of the chair of the

capitalist board, I want to welcome you

as well and I'm also going to moderate

that webinar and today uh with our

excellent speakers that we have invited

and u we'll be very happy also to hear

your experiences, your feedbacks later

on in the breakout rooms. Um actually we

are um the chair but the co-chair um is

of this network is um Danielle and Nina

Caraso Foundation and um I also want to

welcome you on their behalf.

Unfortunately Claus RN the vice chair he

couldn't join today but u we want to

also make this very useful for all of

you. Um since I've been working a lot

also in the past in this topic of uh

valuing the arts and culture and the

work of artists and of culture

organizations. I'm very keen to

introduce you the topic of today and

also our speakers. Why did we choose

that topic? Um as philanthropic

organizations we work in the area arts

and culture for many years. We often

stumble upon the question how to value

how to value best the work of our

partners of the individuals as well as

with all the organizations on the ground

that we support in various ways not only

financially but also in kind and in

various different um uh we we uh do this

in different ways. But FELA members have

um often raised over the years the topic

that we need to exchange knowledge and

learning about the ways we evaluate,

monitor, capture the essence of um our

achievements, the achievements of the

organizations we work with. So um there

used to be in the past also training

labs, peer exchanges um also among

foundations that work in different um

areas. But um it's for the first time

that the arts and culture foundations of

those that work in this field um raised

that topic and the need to exchange

knowledge and to learn something more

from each other about how we um how we

do this in our practice and actually

what are those methods and tools that

suit our work best and of course the

work of the artists. Um the nature of

arts and culture work requires different

lenses than the standard measurements

that are quantitative that we monitor,

evaluate, collect different types of

data. Those different lenses that arts

and culture need combine the standard

measurement knowledge with the subtal

art of dialogue and communication with

the artists, with the culture workers,

sometimes with audiences as well as

multiple stakeholders we work with. And

this help us to best understand the uh

their unique and intangible contribution

to the society. Those of you who have

done measurements of different kinds.

They know how challenging these

processes of evaluations can be both for

the funders but also for the

beneficiaries. They sometimes can be

compared to flossing. They are very

healthy but um quite uncomfortable for

uh for many of of the people involved.

But we are all pressured by external

requirements for transparency for

accountability for visibility. Sometimes

um expectations that we have to

demonstrate our success uh or the

success of the organizations that uh

work in the field and sometimes we miss

really important things and values like

trust like um cherishing collaborative

experiences and we sometimes meet miss

important learnings. What is also very

uh important in this uh topic uh is to

mention is that it is a bilateral

learning process. So it's not a

unilateral process and u today uh to

address some of these challenges and to

learn something new. I hope we um have

invited uh three excellent uh experts in

the field. Laura Alexander who is an

independent researcher and she's going

to uh present uh their experience

together with Iwen Yin. Laura is uh used

to be a coordinator of monitoring

evaluation and learning at prince gloss

fund until very recently. She was in

charge also for collecting and analyzing

data. Uh I when I in is a designer and

theorist and she works also in

relationship center design and um yeah

she also um can share some of her

practice in conversation with Laura so

that they will start the first

presentation. Our third speaker who will

start after them is Dr. Ludmila Petrovo.

uh she's director of the CRA center for

research in arts and economics and she

will introduce us later the value based

approach. So um I would like first to um

uh invite Laura and Iwen to start their

presentation and um yeah the floor is

yours. Thank you.

>> Thank you so much for that lovely

introduction. Uh thank you so much to

everyone for joining us on this Tuesday

at least where I am. It's a very

beautiful day. So I'm glad that you have

made time to join for this webinar.

Yeah, just to introduce myself briefly,

as Feta mentioned, I was until the end

of 2024 the coordinator of monitoring,

evaluation, and learning at the Prince

Claus Fund, which is an organization, as

many of you will know, based in the

Netherlands, which supports artists and

cultural practitioners around the world,

predominantly in the so-called global

south. And my focus over the four years

that I was in that role was on

researching the impact of trustbased

funding. I had the privileged position

of being able to work on this from the

very beginning of the Prince Class funds

experiment with giving unearmarked

grants through which these grants

different scales of grant at different

uh moments in an artist's career were

handed over completely free of any kind

of earmarking or budgets but just as a

trustbased investment in an artist's

career and the development of their

practice. And that meant that we were

able to start relatively free of

preconceptions uh and work in a way that

was driven by genuine curiosity about

what actually happened if you give say

100 young artists a year many of them

working in incredibly difficult

circumstances 5,000 euros and a platform

to talk to each other but otherwise

leave them more or less alone.

And we'll get on to I think later some

of the methodologies that we used for

that. And in the years since then, we've

been able to come up with some answers

to that question. But I don't

necessarily want to get into the answers

now, but instead I would like to for

this talk stay with this idea of curiosity.

curiosity.

In general, I think I've come to

understand my work as an evaluator as

essentially being the child in a lot of

rooms. I think anyone who's been in a

room with a 5-year-old knows what it's

like to be constantly hit by these

questions of why and what happens if you

do this? what happens if I press this

button or break this or change this? To

me, I think that's fundamentally what

research and evaluation is about. Uh,

and that means that when you're

motivated by curiosity and by ideas of

value, it's less about measuring and

more about coming to understand and

describe the networks and mechanisms of

change that artists, but also

philanthropists as well as publics are

inshed in globally. So I'm going to

present together with my co-presenter

Iwin Yin some of ways that we've been

experimenting with structuring this

curiosity and Iwin is especially going

to share her perspective as often a

recipient of funding and somebody who

works with a lot of practitioners around

many of these questions. So before we

start I'd like to hand over to Iwin to

introduce herself in a little more detail.

detail.

>> Thank you Laura. Uh I'm a artist,

designer and a researcher. In recent

year I focus a lot on like how exactly

we should fund we can fund sustainable

activism and collective pra p p p p p p

p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p

p p p p p p p p p p p p p practice in

the arts and uh for that and I work very

closely with a lot of communities. I do

extensive inography and uh constructed a

kind of almost like a diagram about what

exactly is a community for such a vague

term to capture a kind of a collective

practice and I also work with

institution practitioners who cares a

lot about this kind of question how they

can actually support uh communities in a

better and and suitable term instead of

just fun treating them like artists with

multiple bodies and also work with a lot

of funders also uh including uh Lara to

really like explore this kind of

question with a more critical but also

forwardlooking ends. So um today I'm

going to serve with serve as a kind of

person that kind of give you the flesh

um about like what's actually happening

on the ground and then sort of um and

then engaging with the question that

Lara going to put out. So yeah,

>> back to you Lara.

>> Thanks so much. Uh so yeah, the first

question or the first perhaps big

concept I'd like to put out and sort of

throw into the middle of the room is

this idea of situatedness. Uh this draws

from feminist epistemologists most

notably of course Donna Harowway. And

this is an idea that both the sensing

and the sense making that go into

monitoring, evaluation and learning can

be understood as situated practices of

knowledge building. What does that mean?

That is essentially a way of getting out

of this dichotomy that we're often

thrust into when it comes to thinking

about knowledge between so-called

objective knowledge, this view from

nowhere that is supposed to produce a

single true explanation of what is going

on, but that as a lot of people have

begun to see more and more, especially

in this area of Mel, has a tendency to

prioritize the viewpoint of the most

powerful, whether that's funders or

people in the global north or anybody

else who happens to be the most powerful

viewpoint in the room and on the other

end of that spectrum a kind of extreme

relativist position in which every view

is as important as every other view and

it becomes very difficult to produce

fixed conclusions.

So understanding perspectives as

situated means understanding them as

objective but partial shaped by the

viewpoints that are available to

differently positioned actors. And the

metaphor here is one of seeing uh where

you stand influences what you are able

to see and how you are able to see. uh

but doesn't affect the truth of what you

see. It just show says that what you are

able to see is only part of a bigger hole.

hole.

So thinking of what funders but also

artists, grantees, audiences, what they

are able to see as situated means taking

into account the place that they are

looking from as well as the time, the

period of time in which they're able to

observe and the moment in which those

observations are listened to and also

the power dynamics under which

information is shared between different

actors. Whenever an observation is made

and shared that can't necessarily be

separated from the person who is doing

the observing the position in the power

hierarchies and the place and the time

that it's made. These contingencies

don't limit the objectivity of

observation but they are part of a

bigger picture and the role of the

researcher or the evaluator perhaps is

to weave together these different

perspectives and by doing this try to

puzzle out how under what circumstances

superficially different statements are

actually just different ways of seeing

the same phenomenon. I'm sure many of

you will have seen the famous

illustration that often gets shown of

blind men feeling different parts of an

elephant and one person says that it's

the trunk of it's a tree and one person

says it's a gate or a wall. So often uh

situated knowledges can work like that

but in other situations there can be

genuine conflict to be explored and

genuine disagreements that need to be uh

where decisions need to be made between

different perspectives.

I'm going to pass over to Iwin now to

give some examples of the receiving end

of this situatedness and how she has

experienced this sense of funders and

grantees especially being often in

different situations different

situatedness from each other when it

comes to knowledge.

Yeah, I so I did a lot of field research

and I work with a lot of communities and

quite interestingly

not only I understand the funders

language from a design perspective or or

whatever you call it but also uh what I

find interesting is in when it's on the

field when it's um when it's happening

on the ground where community

practitioner usually when I'm able to

make them say the truth in their mind

it's like they actually don't know what they're

they're

Right. And that is kind of like only a

pass partial truth is that they don't

know what they're doing in terms of the

funers's eyes. And there's always this

kind of uh anxiety about um for

community practitioners collectives they

kind of felt like there's certain kind

of expectation fall under uh with that

kind of gaze or evaluation or

understanding about what they're doing

and they because they want to get the

money they sometimes will trying to hit

by hit the key words etc. But at the

same time when we coming going back to

the field most of the situated the

practitioner not necessarily having an

immediate clue about what they're doing

unless they were given time and

opportunity to reflect and actually

ironically that from my point of view

that is usually the better practitioner

because they because they really get in

touch with the ground. They focus on

what is happening in front of them.

Although they also will have a kind of

vision but that kind of vision leaves

space for um what is actually happening

on the ground and therefore allowing

them to connect with the field and

connect with their audience or the

people that they want to connect to better.

better.

On the other end then you will have the

kind of very uh practitioner that coming

from the art field that know all the

jargon about what all the expectation

and the hot uh topics that in the uh

funding and the kind of broader art

discourse uh is about and then they know

how to uh speak on that conceptual ends

but they will also get uh really really

um their practice get hinged by that

kind the conceptual performance instead

of really dealing with the actual people

in front of them and I find that is

quite a contradiction in terms of what

we talk about situatedness is that how

does the funders gaze looking at the

communities would actually create a kind

of distance and how do we look at them

in a more proper uh supportive end that

is not driven themsel away from the

actual practice from the actual

connection but actually coming with them

and then sit with them and feel with

them. So um that would be a very brief

not necessary example but um an

>> Thanks for that. And I think what that

really starts to touch on is the need

for translation that translation goes

deeper than something that is just

literal. the fact that often the

languages that are spoken within these

spaces differ wildly and the language

that is typically given the most

prominence often English is not

necessarily the first language of many

of the people in these conversations.

Certainly it relates to the fact that

funders tend to be allowed to dictate

the language that these conversations

take place in. And there is a very

interesting conversation to be had about

the way that technology is starting to

change that relationship through the use

of automated uh translation software.

Generative AIS like chat GPT is very

quickly changing what it means to talk

about translation in these kinds of

spaces. But there's a deeper level of

translation as well which is a movement

not just between different spoken

languages but between different ways of

using the same language and ways of

using language that are shaped by

specific world views. In particular, I

find that languages of evaluation can

often form a kind of jargon. Even the

word evaluation itself is a kind of

jargon. I don't know about other

evaluators here in the room, but

typically when I'm in any kind of a

gathering with people from outside the

funding world and I say that I'm an

evaluator, I'm met with completely

baffled looks. No, nobody really knows

what that means. And there tends to be

an assumption that it is about making judgments.

judgments.

So moving away from this jargon and

creating a form of translation means I

think not just providing a glossery

where we explain particular jargony

words like evaluation into a supposedly

neutral form of language but actually

listening and trying to find how the

same underlying concept might be

articulated by somebody with a

completely different worldview. say a

worldview shaped by experience working

in the arts, working with communities,

working with grassroots organizations.

And often in that sense, we find that

the same concepts are present. They are

shared, but they are articulated through

language completely differently. And the

borders of these concepts are identified

as being in completely different places.

Now, of course, when you're an evaluator

working within a funer, this can often

go both ways. The translation takes

place not just between the funer and the

grantees but between the funer and

whatever bodies or actors the funer

itself is answerable to whether that's

within the organization itself. Uh

within large organizations there might

be bigger teams where translation needs

to take place between teams or bigger

and smaller donors or even ministerial bodies.

bodies.

This of course touches on the assumption

that these different ways of seeing the

world that you are mediating between are

fundamentally compatible and that kind

of compatibility between worldviews is

necessary to make translation possible.

I think this is an assumption that we

tend to make. We tend to assume good

faith. But of course with the rise of

the far right across Europe and the US

in many parts of the world, I'm not so

sure that this assumption is always

true. So there is this caveat of are we

looking at a space where the same

concept can be articulated differently

in translation mediation is possible or

are we in a space of fundamentally

conflicting world views. I'd like to

pass over to Iron again to respond to

this question of translation.

Yeah, I think in uh in my observation

with communities the the most obvious

thing when we when you talk about

English speaking is when you uh there

will immediately create a kind of divide

who get to immediately be approached and

have a direct connection with the funer

with the curators and evaluators and etc

and who doesn't right and uh that kind I

think that would be a very interesting

um entry to look at like how translation

itself is a some sort of like privilege

but that privilege should come with the

kind of responsibility

and and I find that the kind of

responsibility comes into one is

connecting back to situatedness is I

find personally I find the good a kind

of um ethical evaluator or the kind of

translator will be first and foremost

prioritize orient towards the interests

of this the collective the situated

group that is doing the practice and at

the same time I think ironically like so

that we can with that kind of

situatedness then we can actually learn

from like what we haven't been known yet

uh in the kind of value framework that

we are evaluating and on the other hand

we are also looking at like trans the

translator at the same time also serve

as some kind of gatekeeping what is

valuable and what is not valuable and

then you transfer that into a kind of uh

discourse framework or value framework

for the funer for different kind of

local and different kind of culture and

how do you make that kind of navigation

a fair and and and kind of mutually

reciprocal kind of relationship. I find

that a very important kind of uh

translation or even curatorial work if

we might say. And um and in in some of

my research that I wrote about like the

the very essence about community and

collective practice in the art is not

for a lot of people who assume to uh

produce a kind of possible scenario from

the outlook but rather how how these

kind of practice will allow people to

live through the possible alternative

and that will really relying on a lot

supports to really uh giving them the

space to reflect and sit in what their

everyday reality is instead of pushing

to a kind of acceptable glorified kind

of performance. And I find like how does

the translator will be able to tell

funders to say that to just fund people

to live differently to explore

differently to tell us there's different

way to organize is already a very

important value to for you to fund and

how do we structure the kind of uh this

course that allow people with money the

big the the the big tech would actually

subscribe to that idea. I think that's

the bigger bigger role of the

translator. How do you how do we push

forward a new value framework that allow

that coming from the ground coming from

the situation and then allowing us to

fund things differently. So yeah, that's

that's will be my response. Yeah.

>> So this brings us on quite neatly to the

question of value itself, which is I

think the core of what we're here to

discuss today. And as the title of the

event and the introduction that we've

heard suggests, we're constantly being

asked to demonstrate the value of arts

and culture. And implicit in this

request is typically a binary between

so-called intrinsic value, whatever that

might mean, and value in terms of

contribution to certain social or

political goals, which is often

articulated as instrumental value. And

there is within this binary often a

presupposed value proposition in itself

where intrinsic value is perhaps more

valuable than instrumental value unless

you are in a certain other context in

which case maybe it's not. But in any

sense they are seen as things that can

be pulled apart from one another, things

that can be viewed separately.

In my experience, differences in how

people understand value, depending on

where they're situated, where they're

looking from, actually go much deeper

than instrumental versus intrinsic

value. What we value, how we understand

what it is to be valuable is core to who

we are. And what one person what to one

person might be the intrinsic value of a

work might be for somebody else a nice

side effect that goes alongside the real

value. I think we see this especially

often in funding the arts where the

value that a funer perceives in a

project and the value that the artist

who has implemented that project are

often completely different values and

because those values are compatible with

one another. This situation is sort of

allowed to continue. I think this forms

a lovely equilibrium where in many cases

people just sort of tacitly pretend that

they see the value that the other person

is talking about and that we're both

talking about the same value. As long as

they don't come into conflict with one

another, this is a perfectly stable equilibrium.

equilibrium.

I think that if we understand monitoring

and evaluation as a form of translation

between situated world views, then

treating these perspectives as equally

valid within their specific situatedness

helps us to mediate these different

conceptions of value and to move beyond

the divide between an instrumentalized

and perhaps objective datadriven mindset

that official viewpoints might have and

a subjective, nuanced, more organic

understanding that artists can embody.

While certain bodies, particularly

official ones, may see their work as

grounded in fact and objectivity,

artists can often approach their role as

more relative and essential to the

social fabric and resisting rigid

quantification. And by mediating between

these different perspectives and

understandings of value, I think it's

possible to acknowledge both without

reinforcing a divide in which they are

necessarily opposed to each other and

find a way to synthesize diverse

narratives and translate between these

values into a language that can be

accessible to different people, create

space for understanding between

And maybe I can give like sort of more

like a small like internal not exactly

an example but really when I look at uh

community the moment when they receive

uh fundings

things immediately get very spicy let's

say that like it it triggers question

about like the past experience in the

collective in like it it question how do

we understand labor how how is our

relationship how is our space is holding

up to support each other. All this kind

of question what what I call as like the

kind of like solidarity experience in

the collective uh experience is always

subject to question when at the moment

that they receive money because um when

everyone has no money and all the

problem somehow becomes endurable,

right? Because like we are all just

sticking here together trying to give

support to each other. But when money is

received what uh in my research is like

then people will really like the kind of

value framework starting to kicks in and

people get to ask like what do we value

all together as a collective. Do we

value sweeping the floor every days to

make the make the space clean or do we

actually value more in people who is

able to connect with outsider and and uh

getting a lot more audience in the

house? That kind of question immediately

become very very uh visible a candidate

in the in the moment of distributing the

funding and and also then further on it

will also trigger a further question

about what is the ethic what is the

ideology about this collective and then

what what what is the whole point for us

to spend all this time uh and effort in

making this collective all together. So

money really becomes this kind of

turning point in a collective moment.

And so what I'm currently working on is

trying to promote this idea that that

every time that you send out money come

with a some kind of onboarding program

to or even just like a workshop for

helping this kind of collective to

reflecting on what are they doing when

like what are we actually talking about

when we talking about money. Sometimes

the money is only a medium for people to

talk about the things that they they

realize that they're not in the same

value framework with each other even

from the same collective. Right? Because

sometimes we what we understand what is

important is so much part of our uh our

environment, our growing trajectory, our

family education and all that kind of

thing. And the the usually the

confrontation moment goes with uh a

collector will always assume that we are

all the same people and we believe in

the same thing only when money comes in

we realize oh actually we have quite

some discrepancy. So I think like this

is not supposed to be a problem um when

it's uh facilitated and what I find now

with a lot of funding is that there's a

lot of expectation that the money get

like throw into the pot and then it will

be it will figure out themselves right

so I think there's a lot of reflection

in understanding money as a medium of

value how it kind of provoke different

kind of discussion within the collective

And if we were giving the space and

support for them to reflect on that

there will be a lot more nuance outcome

that can come out other than just a show

of solidarity. So yeah that would be my

>> thank you very much both of you. Um I

think uh the time is up for this

presentation but um that was extremely

interesting I think to hear both uh

perspectives. I'm actually have a lot of

questions, but I'm not going to ask them

now uh because I'll leave some space to

Lucy uh to uh continue on that. But what

I found specifically very very exciting

uh in your um uh from your input so far

is like the this idea of that money

actually or the funding I would say um

for a certain purpose actually changes

something in the beneficiaries minds or

it has a potential to change something

that's at least what I gathered from Iwan's

Iwan's

um intervention. So it's not in vain. Uh

that that's a good news. We are not

funding for in vain just to make someone

else happy. There is a certain change or

mindset change that can occur and your

last point was like that we need to

facilitate that or at least there should

be some sort of facilitation. The other

question mark that came to my mind was

more to Laura's intervention um um like

seeing ourselves the funding bodies uh

funding organizations as mediators of

different values different interests

because we are constantly trying to be

we are in some sort of intermediary

function. Um I find this extremely I

think it I find this extremely

challenging uh role uh to actually have

to uh needing to um uh to to serve too

many purposes but also to be mediator

between too many interests. I think

that's a that's that's a major challenge

that we need to reflect upon. But

thirdly, uh I think it's perfect what um

transition it would make perfect

transition between what you have been

discussing and Ludm Miller's

presentation um the different types of

values that the funders can you know

come with to the market or to the floor

with um and the different values um of

the beneficiaries or or of their core

work or the different languages that

sometimes are used about the same thing.

Um I think that's a very good uh

question to start with because going

exactly to talk about the value based

approach uh and how does it work for and

with together with the organizations in

the field of arts and culture. So I

would like to give the floor now to Lud Miller.

You can unmute yourself. Yeah. No. Uh

first of all, thank you very much for

the invitation uh and to file network

and also to European Cultural Foundation

and for this possibility to share my

experience as a researcher and educator

and evaluator uh for more than 20 years.

And um uh we work together with

colleagues from Arasmos University and

develop so-called valuebased approach

which now we implement or not now since

many years uh we implement across Europe

for cultural social related

organizations and um I appreciate very

much uh the previous uh uh speakers

presentations because indeed they touch

upon the principles of evaluation

practices and uh I will try to

illustrate this uh with some of our

examples of work uh recently. I mean now

we are working on very big horizon

Europe project where we trying to

evaluate the multiplicities of values of

the bottom up cultural organizations in

the glam sector. This is uh galleries,

libraries, archives, museums uh and also

share other experiences. I have a a

small presentation to assist to

illustrate some of the points I would

like to do.

So uh it will be a little bit different

mode of uh expert

of experience. Uh first first of all of

course the questions here that we are

trying to answer it's how to support the

cultural organization and at the same

time to allow them to remain

artistically free authentic truthful

honest and at the same time asking them

to contribute to social uh

transformation and of course it's all

about the questions of objectives but we

what we like to contribute here with the

valuebased approach it's about not

objectives but fundamentals of their practices

practices

uh which we uh defined like valuedriven

uh purposes. And the questions it's to

what extent these organizations while

accepting different funding and

different objectives of uh different

funders are able to act upon their own

purposes and uh at the same time being

worth uh bringing worth to the others or

realizing impact. Um to answer these

questions um we propose to go to really

to the fundamental to the essentials of

the organizations or their values. Uh

here I listed very briefly to have an

idea what kind of organizations we work.

This is um small and mediumsiz

organizations in the cultural sector uh

in tin where they work with uh designers

and homeless people or educators who are

going to their vocabul vocational uh

institutions and provide different type

of educations or uh projects like

Rotterdam uh unlimited festival we have

a limit time span or the program of

creative community uh of um art council

m actually we evaluated the entire

creative community programs or broadcast

uh uh program from the national uh

broadcaster in the Netherlands oral

history group it's a network for archive

for oral yeah oral history uh in Greece

the consortium it's a small independent

uh center for uh visual arts museum it's

LGB museum in Berlin uh I don't list all

but just to have an idea uh I will

reflect my experience with uh this small

and mediumsiz organizations who are

working from the bottom up perspective. Um

um three layers of evaluation tool what

we call quality evaluator because indeed

we're trying to um evaluate the quality

of the practices

through different values of uh either

the organization itself or the profile

of the funer or even on the policy.

level. Uh we had the chance to evaluate

um different policies towards certain

sectors. Uh on the first layer, it's all

about of course value co-creations in

our in our um when we talk about value

based approach, it's how these values

coming are constructed or coming at

place and how they uh inform or motivate

or drive the internal operation of the organizations.

organizations.

uh but also to what extent they uh are

worth it uh for the others for the

broader communities for the uh local

communities or uh so forth. So this is

the questions we trying to answer

through understanding the different

values. We adopting the value human

basic human values uh framework experts

and adapted it to our value base value

clusters uh

of I mean here it's only uh how to say

translations of what Schwartz proposes

different possibilities and let's see

how this translate in the cultural

sector by identifying the different

clusters of virus. uh well I just keep

it a little bit shortcut uh to keep

count with the time but in general the

valuebased approach it's three stages

approach so on the first first stage we

indeed um identify together in the

participatory manner with the uh u uh

organizations what are those values

which really uh define their purpose or

those values who are most important and

you can see how diverse could be

clusters uh they're not all represented

for all organizations then not all

organizations pursue all this but of

course we're trying to map in this

sector what it's relevant and then we

trying to zoom in in each category each

cluster of this and for example for the

arts council of malt program if you look

into their their well-being uh purpose

uh they really

define it like self-confidence or

creativity on the personal trade, uh

skill development, talent development,

inclusion on the community level, it's

uh very much related to the sense of

belonging, collaboration, diversity,

acceptance and so forth, so forth. So in

this way, we trying to explore those

values who are really really important

for the organizations that we are

working with and we do this in a very

reflective manner. This is not with uh

existing matrix or uh just we are trying

to um let organizations through

different methods. Sometimes we use also

art related methods uh to explore their

own course their own fundamentals

and by this uh trying to uh keep as

reflective as possible the practice.

Um the third uh then the next stage is

to try to see how these values informs

the relationships with or of

organizations with the different

stakeholders because it's turn out as we

know that and one organizations

share different values with the

different stakeholders and this helps

them very much to understand how to

position themsel within the different

stakeholder groups. As you see for

example here this is constra this is

designers working with shelters homeless

shelters in tin. Now this is um program

for uh of the municipality they they

adopted it uh for their purposes but it

was the beginning as a bottomup project

from designers and anthropologist. uh so

they define they uh uh it was clear that

innovations it's relevant for example to

the social workers as a new way of

innovations or the designers students or

the tutors and so forth so forth. So

relating in this way the stakeholders

groups with the values of the

organizations we uh help them

organizations to align their purposes

with the different groups of

stakeholders and then they have can have

more um uh core activities which can

support each of the uh realization of

each of the values.

Um this is the third stage uh where

uh we trans we trying this is the

assessment we don't call it evaluations

evaluations as agree it's a quite

complicated um concept it's usually

connected to very well definfined

indicators when we talk about values

this is impossible

uh so we are working with rather

assessment which include judgments uh

and this doesn't mean it's not um of

course it It's not a objective note but

it's require much more attention. It's

much more uh longer process of um

investigating the different possibilities

possibilities

because we are following the dei

framework also from that values only can

observe through experiences. So we

cannot measure something which is very

abstract by the value of creativity or

the value of innovation unless we

observe it in some kind of behavior um

or experiences

uh from those who uh are engaged. So

here to illustrate what does mean uh

shifts in value in our terms. It's this

is again for the custo

um assessed the importance of the value

of innovations before the uh project

start and then after two years again we

enter of course we have a different also

moments through the um this period of implementations

implementations

uh to monitor uh the different um

adjustment between the values. Uh and

you can see that for example this is the

the the dark blue it's basically the expected

expected

defined in the beginning of the program.

The light blue it's the experience of

the program and then the differences

that realizes

uh actually we co-impact. So the change

that they can contribute to um in this

term here it's the first one it's

innovation in terms of new working

methods for the social workers. So

social workers in the Costa Betsa um

project find important uh change that

they adopted new method of working which

was um let's say design based um for the

innovation in terms of new learning for

the students for the design students the

expectations met. So this is affirmation

of the expectations and we cannot talk

about change of of the perspectives of

the value but rather affirmations of uh

these values. The next one is the um

attitude to the attentions of the

empathy to the others uh in like the

value of sharing which also the ex

experience what exceeding the uh the

expected. So we can have uh you can

consider uh like the change of the

attitudes and so on and so on. I mean um

we use uh qualitative and quantitative

methods in a way we first uh starting

with um when we're talking about let's

say these value maps here. uh this is uh

derived from uh focus groups uh with uh

organizations and their stakeholders to

identify uh which is the most important

values that they like to identify and uh

what else uh what is the benefits for

the organizations let's say uh I was

asked to reflect a bit um on the Left

side you see the per the purpose defined

by the Azai. This is associations for uh

volunteer education uh in tin uh where

they trying to um

provide services to the regular uh

education system and uh help them to

solve the serious issues uh they have.

And uh before we enter the conversations

they were defining their purpose as

decrease in dropout rates of the student

and all these numbers were always

illustrating uh the way uh the

achievement or the impact. When we enter

our work with us at the end we figure

out that despite beside their uh

objectives to decrease the dropouts

they're doing much bigger job and much

important job they are putting the

flourishing of the students and uh as a

priority in their work. So they

contribute to much bigger purpose than

simply uh decrease the dropouts of the

students. Um and then since they

realized that um they really focus to

provide this service by allocating their

resources on these purposes and

eventually this help them also to reach

the other objectives which is uh output

uh rather than um realizing a specific

value. Um so in this sense complementing

one type of evaluations which is very

quantitative very instrumental with the

value based approach um the

organizations could see the full picture

of the operation and moreover they could

align their objectives not their

objectives their purposes with the

objectives of the funders for example uh

because I agree with the previous

speakers that often uh this Um

uh differences between objective and

purpose actually can crowd out the core uh

core purpose core ideals of the cultural

organizations and this is what we call

instrumentalization. So trying to avoid

uh them to look beyond to look uh only

to meeting the objectives of the uh

funding supporters actually can um

damage uh their work in a way that they

can decrease efforts towards what they

really important for. Uh what this could

be important for the funders. Um this is

maybe it looks like a little bit

complicated but I was in a hurry to

produce something just abstract yourself

from the numbers but this is different

organizations. This is oral history

group. Uh they all listed here. Uh this

is all the possible values we evaluate

for them and um there uh the most

important values for each organizations.

It's in the different colors you see

here. So the idea is that if you see all

these uh clusters of purposes that one

organizations like to achieve and then

when you multiply it by all the

different organizations

you can actually see uh the different

grouping of these uh organization in

your portfolio like a funer and you can

be more uh aware of what they're really

uh uh pursuing as a core of the

operations and support this core instead

of imposing let's say objectives which

might be not uh very relevant for their

own purpose or be aware that for example

for a consortium which is a uh let's say

um contemporary artistic uh center if

they are focusing on this purpose but

they uh somehow um searching uh or you

expect from them to put efforts on the

societal relevance. They doing this only

because this is strong that their

knowledge, creativity, inventions and independence.

independence.

uh it's very strong um value for them

and only because of that they can

contribute to the different societal uh

purposes like uh contributing to the

communities local communities to uh

re-engage with the art uh to uh be more

active in the arts uh uh co-curation and

so forth. Um to conclude

I just like to say that uh through the

lenses of the valuebased approach I also

learn uh about this multiplicity of

values but also stakeholders or

partnerships which organizations are

trying to achieve in their operations

and I think uh as a villager um I see my

role here to support them really

understand better how this balance

between social and cultural and societal

uh work for them and it's very different

from in the different context I agree

also that uh situated uh oper practices

are very important we call it context so

each context of the organizations can be

different and they can um this is why we

work a lot with the proxies which

reflect on these differences of the

context so thank you very much and I

hope to have possibilities in the rooms

to explore uh further on your questions.

>> Thank you very much Lucy. Um I hope we

can now like move to the breakout rooms.

We are distributed randomly to the

breakout room rooms. Uh no choice unfortunately.

>> I think they're coming along the

breakers. just a few seconds and

um yeah the speakers are going to yeah

divide themselves and everyone can

choose uh which one to >> okay

>> okay

>> thanks for the clarification

>> and we're going to uh have about uh I

think 20 minutes because we are running

a bit late um so yeah we'll uh

automatically close them around uh for

2022 maybe

>> thank you let me know if you if you see them.

them.

>> Yeah, we see them.

>> Okay, perfect.

>> Sorry. Uh are we automatically allocated

or I have to choose also?

>> Anybody can choose the room where to go.

>> I mean you are in one room and Laura and

I went are in on the other room.

>> Okay. So I be both in the same. No I

Okay. I don't need to choose. You

I would invite you to go to room one and

two if you want.

I think there are still 15 people who

didn't join any breakout room. So, um we

encourage you to join number one now

because everybody's joining number two

for some reason. Um,

>> Okay. So I I don't see where I can join the

the

>> I also can't see the breakout room forms

anywhere. It's clicking around.

>> Okay. Let's check why maybe I see.

>> Yeah, that's why I thought it would be

good to just split us.

>> Or we can also assign you randomly.

Maybe it'll do it.

>> Yeah, just assign me to some group.

Okay. Yeah, because uh I can't see

anywhere the breakout room option.

>> Okay, that's weird. Not sure why.

>> Well, now I have

>> Okay, Ludikica will assign you.

Okay. [Music]

We are still expecting the group one, right?

I suppose their conversation is very interesting.

interesting. 20.

20. They don't want to leave the breakup

They don't want to leave the breakup room.

room. in maximum 60 seconds they will close.

in maximum 60 seconds they will close. >> Yeah, they're back. I think we have

>> Yeah, they're back. I think we have already like 20 something.

>> Yep. Okay. Welcome back everybody to the to the big room in the Zoom this

to the big room in the Zoom this afternoon. Um there were two I suppose

afternoon. Um there were two I suppose very interesting breakout room

very interesting breakout room discussions going on in parallel. Um so

discussions going on in parallel. Um so I attended the group uh one right or

I attended the group uh one right or group two with Ludma I don't remember

group two with Ludma I don't remember the number and yeah group two was Miller

the number and yeah group two was Miller group one was with Laura and I went uh

group one was with Laura and I went uh so um

so um let me see is everybody here who who

let me see is everybody here who who from FA was I think who were you in that

from FA was I think who were you in that group

group who from you would like to say a few

who from you would like to say a few words in a couple of minutes about the

words in a couple of minutes about the conversation in group one with Laura and

conversation in group one with Laura and Iwen.

Iwen. >> So I was in that room. I guess it's

>> So I was in that room. I guess it's better if Laura or I uh talk instead of

better if Laura or I uh talk instead of me. But if you want otherwise I can just

me. But if you want otherwise I can just uh say that there were different

uh say that there were different perspective not only from the foundation

perspective not only from the foundation sector which not always happened in our

sector which not always happened in our meeting which is uh something very

meeting which is uh something very positive uh and uh lots of follow-up

positive uh and uh lots of follow-up discussion. The last one was on AI which

discussion. The last one was on AI which I found extremely interesting because

I found extremely interesting because it's connected to several other

it's connected to several other conversation we're having and so this

conversation we're having and so this idea of um someone mentioned not from

idea of um someone mentioned not from this group but heard that someone felt

this group but heard that someone felt that maybe AI could bring something more

that maybe AI could bring something more neutral to uh developation practice

neutral to uh developation practice which was absolutely not shared by the

which was absolutely not shared by the group for a number of reasons. Uh, but I

group for a number of reasons. Uh, but I think yeah, Laura or Iwan if you wanted

think yeah, Laura or Iwan if you wanted to.

to. >> Yeah,

>> Yeah, >> I think I'm not sure how I'd go about

>> I think I'm not sure how I'd go about summarizing the conversation. I also

summarizing the conversation. I also didn't really get a chance to take

didn't really get a chance to take notes. Um, but I think this point about

notes. Um, but I think this point about neutrality came up in the sense of also

neutrality came up in the sense of also discussing whether the role of the

discussing whether the role of the evaluator is to be neutral or not,

evaluator is to be neutral or not, whether neutrality is something that is

whether neutrality is something that is achievable or even something we should

achievable or even something we should be aspiring to. We also talked quite

be aspiring to. We also talked quite extensively about the sense of shame uh

extensively about the sense of shame uh that especially Iron sort of perceives

that especially Iron sort of perceives funders as often having about their role

funders as often having about their role and sort of discomfort with the power

and sort of discomfort with the power that they have uh the power of

that they have uh the power of decision-m and how certain kind of

decision-m and how certain kind of practices seem to be rooted in that

practices seem to be rooted in that shame and we talked I think Veronica

shame and we talked I think Veronica spoke uh very beautifully also about the

spoke uh very beautifully also about the importance of making implicit things

importance of making implicit things explicit and transparency as a kind of

explicit and transparency as a kind of antidote to that shame and I'm sure I've

antidote to that shame and I'm sure I've missed some things out so please uh

missed some things out so please uh somebody jump in with uh anything to

somebody jump in with uh anything to say. uh Alfa asked about the

say. uh Alfa asked about the peer-to-peer funding and I uh and then

peer-to-peer funding and I uh and then asked what's the difference apart sets

asked what's the difference apart sets apart from um the traditional funding

apart from um the traditional funding mechanism and my answer is basically

mechanism and my answer is basically that there is assumption that like uh

that there is assumption that like uh the like apart from the traditional

the like apart from the traditional funding that's a peer-to-peer thing but

funding that's a peer-to-peer thing but even within the peer-to-peer funding

even within the peer-to-peer funding there's a lot more work need to be done

there's a lot more work need to be done uh especially to understand different

uh especially to understand different kind of social proximities and how that

kind of social proximities and how that translate into social dynamic. How do we

translate into social dynamic. How do we understand the kind of social dynamic in

understand the kind of social dynamic in the bigger purpose of the funding is

the bigger purpose of the funding is that kind of work hasn't been done yet.

that kind of work hasn't been done yet. And then I think uh we we need more more

And then I think uh we we need more more work in around that. So I think that's

work in around that. So I think that's more or less that.

more or less that. >> Yeah.

>> Yeah. >> Well, thank you. Uh I would like to then

>> Well, thank you. Uh I would like to then yeah from our group actually with Lumila

yeah from our group actually with Lumila maybe Lumila you can say a few words

maybe Lumila you can say a few words from your perspective.

from your perspective. Oh yeah, it was interesting to discuss

Oh yeah, it was interesting to discuss uh about what value means uh in terms of

uh about what value means uh in terms of the different processes how this reflect

the different processes how this reflect the different context of the different

the different context of the different organizations which I found

organizations which I found um always important questions because uh

um always important questions because uh these values changes with different

these values changes with different contexts we know and it's important to

contexts we know and it's important to acknowledge that uh the other things was

acknowledge that uh the other things was um interesting to reflect the

um interesting to reflect the practitioners perspectives

practitioners perspectives of uh a need of uh tools which really

of uh a need of uh tools which really reflect their own practices, the core of

reflect their own practices, the core of their practices um and not only the

their practices um and not only the objectives of their supporters or the

objectives of their supporters or the funders. Um what else? Um we also uh

funders. Um what else? Um we also uh reflect on the

reflect on the yeah the practical issues how to find

yeah the practical issues how to find where to find these kind of tools.

where to find these kind of tools. Yeah, I think this was more or less.

Yeah, I think this was more or less. >> Yeah. And also from the funers

>> Yeah. And also from the funers perspective that I think that was

perspective that I think that was interesting that uh you also asked how

interesting that uh you also asked how the funders evaluate uh and there is a

the funders evaluate uh and there is a great variety. I think it's not only for

great variety. I think it's not only for this particular group but in every

this particular group but in every foundation in every funding organization

foundation in every funding organization we all um adapt our tools or choose the

we all um adapt our tools or choose the evaluation or the monitoring tools or

evaluation or the monitoring tools or those tools for extracting the value um

those tools for extracting the value um or our contribution or the contribution

or our contribution or the contribution also of the arts and culture in

also of the arts and culture in different ways that are suited most to

different ways that are suited most to um to our purposes or that seem to us

um to our purposes or that seem to us that suit us best. But there are many uh

that suit us best. But there are many uh other tools out there and many other

other tools out there and many other experiences that uh I think are worth to

experiences that uh I think are worth to be explored uh by funders. Um I

be explored uh by funders. Um I particularly found it very interesting

particularly found it very interesting when a few years ago um I did as FILA

when a few years ago um I did as FILA member a tapo exchange u through filea

member a tapo exchange u through filea which was facilitated by file by luchia

which was facilitated by file by luchia to uh actually learn from other

to uh actually learn from other foundations in the network how they do

foundations in the network how they do their evaluations and I learned

their evaluations and I learned enormously only with the two or three

enormously only with the two or three visits um that really there is a lot out

visits um that really there is a lot out there that we could learn um of course

there that we could learn um of course from different perspectives I clearly

from different perspectives I clearly believe that this conversation is not

believe that this conversation is not finishing here and um also um as um

finishing here and um also um as um speaking on behalf of the capitalist

speaking on behalf of the capitalist board of the arts and culture punders

board of the arts and culture punders forum I hope that we could continue uh

forum I hope that we could continue uh or at least like take stock of this

or at least like take stock of this first conversation

first conversation uh it's not first but it's actually

uh it's not first but it's actually something that we can document and we

something that we can document and we can actually transfer further and think

can actually transfer further and think as funders in arts and culture what can

as funders in arts and culture what can we do next how can we value our own

we do next how can we value our own experiences, knowledge and the knowledge

experiences, knowledge and the knowledge that is brought to us by by um experts

that is brought to us by by um experts like Laura and Iwan and Lnila. So I

like Laura and Iwan and Lnila. So I think it's not one webinar. I don't want

think it's not one webinar. I don't want to finish this with one webinar because

to finish this with one webinar because the topic is extremely valuable for all

the topic is extremely valuable for all of us. I want to thank um everybody to

of us. I want to thank um everybody to thank Miller Iw and Laura our speakers

thank Miller Iw and Laura our speakers as well as all of you. Uh and uh of

as well as all of you. Uh and uh of course we will value very much um any

course we will value very much um any recommendations or ideas that you might

recommendations or ideas that you might have uh um that you might have after

have uh um that you might have after this conversation any suggestions how

this conversation any suggestions how can we actually do um this better or

can we actually do um this better or what else would you like to learn from

what else would you like to learn from the arts and culture funders forum

the arts and culture funders forum webinars. So um we I hope this is not

webinars. So um we I hope this is not the last topic that we discuss about

the last topic that we discuss about evaluation and I hope uh that we could

evaluation and I hope uh that we could continue this conversation on a

continue this conversation on a different modus. Thank you very much

different modus. Thank you very much once again also to the organizers from

once again also to the organizers from Filea.

Click on any text or timestamp to jump to that moment in the video

Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds

One-Click Copy125+ LanguagesSearch ContentJump to Timestamps

Paste YouTube URL

Enter any YouTube video link to get the full transcript

Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds

Get Our Chrome Extension

Get transcripts instantly without leaving YouTube. Install our Chrome extension for one-click access to any video's transcript directly on the watch page.

Add to Chrome — Free

Works with YouTube, Coursera, Udemy and more educational platforms

Get Instant Transcripts: Just Edit the Domain in Your Address Bar!

YouTube

←

→

↻

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF8uR6Z6KLc

YoutubeToText

←

→

↻

https://youtubetotext.net/watch?v=UF8uR6Z6KLc

YouTube TranscriptPreparing your results…