Comments on the future of MLP (Tom & Tim)

The following comments have been received so far:

FROM TOM PERRIGO

• As you may know I hosted Jeanne abd salz(?) for a week in Perth and we spoke a bit about this
• Yes there is a need
• Yes it should continue and stay as a biannual program
• Yes it should be either be linked to a University OR an existing leadership programme. There is a very good one in WA funded in part by the Resource Sector and the State Government The primary advantages are tied to the need to continue a continuous programme for the graduates of the initial course and to develop a continuous mentoring programme using the rich sources produced by the initial coursesI have made preliminary enquiries and it is highly monies would be available for these initiatives the major universities are also interested
• Yes to the last question AND those senior people from industry who fund and support the sector would also welcome active participation this has a number of major benefits

Hope this helps. Tom

FROM TIM SULLIVAN

Is there an ongoing role for the MLP in Australia?
Yes. I reckon the current model is good—it encourages thinking about leadership in the specific domain in which we work; it awakens those essential multidisciplinary perspectives for people looking beyond the narrow silo of their own discipline and to embrace thinking about the whole organisation; it provides an instant network of peers in a learning context which is invaluable (probably most effective if they are geographically close enough to keep in touch); the refresher keeps alumni in touch and could be used to develop mentoring relationships with graduates who are applying skills in leadership roles. The biggest step any of us take is that first one of moving into roles with significant position power and decision-making accountabilities. Getting to talk with and about others who exercise leadership in all those roles helps prepare for taking them on.

If so, how often, how long per course, and who are the presenters?
I like the model now—a residential program with a well-developed curriculum and refreshers at regular intervals.

How is it funded/ is it tied to an organisation or university?
If the other institution helps bring something to the learning situation, it is ideal. The University business school ought to be able to bring focused case studies and panels of people in leadership roles to talk with (panels or lectures or fireside chats). I think it is important that international examples of good practice are included—we cannot afford to be parochial in our little world—the diversity of experience in other nations and regions is helpful. I think it is important that Museums Australia stay engaged with it because it is so crucial in succession planning in the sector.

Who are the people that it would address – new intake or only alumni or both?
See above—both. It’s a good model in my view.

Do we see mixing art gallery people with museum people a good thing for the course?
Absolutely! The number of institutions which do both make it important to maintain the links. And although we may seem miles apart at times, we SHOULD be much closer and be fostering more effective relationships across the sector.

Who needs to be influenced if we are to move forward?
MA, CAMD, CAAMD: it is up to us to make the generous support of the Darlings work in developing the caper we love working in and want to see flourish.

More to come . . .