Hang tight while we fetch the video data and transcripts. This only takes a moment.
Connecting to YouTube player…
Fetching transcript data…
We’ll display the transcript, summary, and all view options as soon as everything loads.
Next steps
Loading transcript tools…
The Heart of Culture: Measuring Value Beyond Statistics | Cultural Philanthropy in Action | Philea - Philanthropy Europe Association | YouTubeToText
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.
Share:
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
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
Share:
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
Transcript Extraction Form
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.
Chrome Extension