![Sample our Museum and Heritage Studies journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5945/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Museum-Heritage-Studies.jpg"})
Abstract
The value of risk management as part of collection management is well recognised as evidenced by its increasing use internationally, both in large and small collecting institutions and by the range of methodologies that have been developed. However, for some organisations, including large collecting institutions, these methodologies are potentially out of reach and/or may not be the optimum approach for their needs. This is also likely to be the case for many smaller collecting organisations that lack in-house conservation expertise and operate with limited resources. This paper looks at the benefits of a ground-up approach based on the International Standard ISO 31000: 2009 Risk Management—Principles and Guidelines and of an enterprise-wide approach to risk management for collecting institutions. Collections are core business for heritage collecting institutions and in this context the management of risk to collections should be integrated into the management of financial, facilities, programming, and health and safety risks at a whole-of-organisation level. This paper reflects on lessons learnt, changing perspectives and developments in the author’s experience of using, and training others, in risk management for collections.
Résumé
« Une progression à travers la gestion des risques pour les collections—de la base à l'échelle de l'entreprise »
L’importance de la gestion des risques dans le cadre de la gestion des collections est bien reconnue, comme en témoigne son utilisation croissante à l'échelle internationale, tant dans les grandes et les petites institutions responsables de collections que par l'éventail des méthodologies qui ont été développées. Cependant, pour certaines organisations, ces méthodologies sont potentiellement hors de portée et peuvent ne pas présenter la meilleure approche de leurs besoins. C'est particulièrement le cas pour les petits organismes de collecte qui manquent d'expertise interne en matière de conservation et qui opèrent avec des ressources limitées. Cet article se penche sur les avantages d'une approche ascendante reposant sur la norme internationale ISO 31000: 2009 Management du risque—Principes et lignes directrices ainsi que sur une approche globale de la gestion des risques pour les institutions de collecte. Les collections sont l'activité principale des institutions du patrimoine culturel et, dans ce contexte, la gestion des risques pour les collections devrait être intégrée dans la gestion des risques financiers, des installations, des programmes et des risques pour la santé et la sécurité au niveau de l'organisation globale. L’article se penche sur les retours d’expériences, le changement de perspectives et les évolutions dans l'expérience de l'auteur quant à l’usage et la sensibilisation à la gestion des risques pour les collections.
Zusammenfassung
„Eine Progression durch das Risikomanagement für Sammlungen—ground-up bis institutionsweit“
Der Wert von Risikomanagement als Teil des Sammlungsmanagements ist überall anerkannt,bewiesen ist dies durch seinen weltweiten Einsatz und durch die Anzahl entwickelter Methodologien. Allerdings liegen für einige Institutionen diese Methodologien möglicherweise außerhalb der Reichweite und sind eventuell auch nicht die beste Wahl für ihre Bedürfnisse. Dies ist besonders bei kleineren sammelnden Institutionen, denen in-Haus Bestandserhaltungsexpertise fehlt und die mit begrenzten Ressourcen arbeiten, der Fall. Dieser Artikel untersucht die Vorteile einer “ground-up” Vorgehensweise, die sich auf den internationalen Standard ISO 31000:2009 Risk Management—Principles and Guidelines stützt. Ebenso wird ein Ansatz untersucht, der mit einer institutions-weiten Vorgehensweise für sammelnde Institutionen arbeitet. Sammlungen stellen das Core-Bussiness für kulturelle Institutionen dar und in diesem Zusammenhang sollte das Management des Risikos, dem die Sammlungen ausgesetzt sein könnten, integriert sein mit dem Management des finanziellen Risikos, des Arbeitsschutz-, des IT-, und des Gebäuderisikos auf der Ebene der Gesamtinstitution. Dieser Artikel reflektiert die gelernten Lektionen, die sich ändernden Perspektiven und Erfahrungsentwicklung des Autors durch die eigene Anwendung von Risikomanagement und dem Coaching anderer im Risikomanagement für Sammlungen.
Resumen
“Una evolución de la gestión de riesgos de las colecciones, desde la base hasta la empresa”
El valor de la gestión de riesgos como parte de la gestión de colecciones está claramente reconocido. Así lo demuestra su uso creciente a nivel internacional, tanto en instituciones de colecciones grandes como pequeñas, y la gran variedad de metodologías que se han desarrollado. Sin embargo, estas metodologías están potencialmente fuera de alcance de algunas organizaciones y puede que no sean el mejor enfoque para satisfacer sus necesidades. Éste es el caso de organizaciones con colecciones más pequeñas que carecen de conocimientos sobre conservación y operan con recursos limitados. Este artículo analiza los beneficios para instituciones con colecciones en utilizar un enfoque de gestión de riesgos desde la base teniendo en cuenta la Norma Internacional ISO 31000: 2009 Gestión del riesgo: Principios y directrices y desde un marco institucional. Las colecciones son el negocio central de las instituciones de patrimonio cultural y, en este contexto, la gestión del riesgo para las colecciones debe integrarse en la gestión general de los riesgos financieros, de instalaciones, de programación y de salud y seguridad de la organización. El documento reflexiona sobre las lecciones aprendidas, los cambios de perspectiva y el desarrollo del autor a través de su experiencia, usando y enseñando a otros la gestión de riesgos para las colecciones.
摘要
“从基层到企业范围的藏品风险管理进展”
作为藏品管理的一部分，风险管理的价值通过国际上大型和小型收藏机构日益增长的使用以及制定出来的一系列方法得到了充分认可。然而对于某些机构而言，这些方法或许遥不可及，并且不一定是满足其需求的最佳方法，特别是那些内部保存修复专业知识欠缺和运作资源有限的小型收藏机构。本文着眼于基于国际标准ISO 31000：2009⟪风险管理——原则与指南⟫的基础方法以及企业范围内 适用于收藏机构的风险管理方法的优点。收藏是文化遗产机构的核心业务。在这种背景下，藏品风险管理应整合到整个组织层面有关财务、设施、规划和健康与安全风险的管理之中。作者结合自身实践与培训他人的经历反思了他在藏品风险管理领域所得到的经验教训、观点的转变和能力的提升。
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank the organisations that have provided her with opportunities to apply risk management for collections and to provide training to others in this important area, notably the National Museum of Australia, National Library of New Zealand and the Alexander Turnbull Library, the British Library, Significance International and the Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa.
Notes
1 Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009 Risk Management—Principles and Guidelines (Sydney and Wellington: Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, 2009), https://infostore.saiglobal.com/en-au/Standards/AS-NZS-ISO-31000-2009-1378670/ (accessed 16 December 2017).
2 The Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) ‘is a joint initiative of the five private sector organizations … and is dedicated to providing thought leadership through the development of frameworks and guidance on enterprise risk management, internal control and fraud deterrence’. See https://www.coso.org (accessed 16 December 2017).
3 Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission, Enterprise Risk Management—Integrated Framework— Executive Summary (The Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission, 2004), 2, https://www.coso.org/Documents/COSO-ERM-Executive-Summary.pdf (accessed 16 December 2017).
4 National Museum of Australia, NMA Risk Management Policy, internal policy document, (2015).
5 Cordelia Rogerson and Paul Garside, ‘Increasing the Profile and Influence of Conservation—An Unexpected Benefit of Risk Assessments’, Journal of the Institute of Conservation 40, no. 1 (2017): 34–48.
6 Paul Hopkin, Fundamentals of Risk Management (London: Kogan Page Ltd, 2010). Abbreviated definitions of Hopkin’s four levels of risk maturity are: Naïve—organisations are unaware of the need for the management of risk or do not recognise the value of structured approaches to dealing with uncertainty; Novice—organisations are aware of the potential benefits of managing risk, have not implemented risk management processes effectively and are not gaining the full benefits; Normalised—organisations have built the management of risk into routine business processes and implement risk management throughout the organisation; Natural—organisations have a risk aware culture with a proactive approach to risk management in all activities such that the consideration of risk is inherent to routine operations.
7 Audit Office of New South Wales, ‘Risk Management Maturity Assessment Tool’, Audit Office of New South Wales, 2015, https://www.audit.nsw.gov.au/ArticleDocuments/197/Assessment%20of%20Risk%20Management%20Maturity%20and%20Toolkit%20September%202015.pdf.aspx?Embed=Y (accessed 3 November 2017).
8 Australian Government, Department of Finance, Benchmarking Survey 2017—Risk Management Capability Maturity Level, https://finance.gov.au/sites/default/files/risk-management-capability-maturity-levels.pdf (accessed 2 November 2017).
9 Cf. Robert Waller, Cultural Property Risk Analysis Model: Development and Application to Preventive Conservation at the Canadian Museum of Nature, Göteborg Studies in Conservation 13 (Göteborg: Göteborg Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis, 2003); Agnes W. Brokerhof and Anna E. Bülow, ‘The QuiskScan—A Quick Risk Scan to Identify Values and Hazards in a Collection’, Journal of the Institute of Conservation 39, no. 1 (2016): 18–28.
10 The author has provided training in risk management for collections—based principally on AS/NZS ISO 31000: 2009—to a range of organisations through ‘Significance International’ See http://www.significanceinternational.com/ (accessed 16 December 2017). Other risk management training was provided in 2012 for museums and the public in Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch and Dunedin through National Services Te Paerangi, Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa, following the earthquakes in Christchurch; and to conservation staff at the National Museum of Australia.
11 ‘The Community Heritage Grants (CHG) program provides grants of up to $15,000 to community organisations such as libraries, archives, museums, genealogical and historical societies, multicultural and Indigenous groups. The grants are provided to assist with the preservation of locally owned, but nationally significant collections of materials that are publicly accessible including artefacts, letters, diaries, maps, photographs, and audio visual material.’ The NMA is a partner in this programme and provides preventive conservation and collection documentation workshops to award recipients once a year. See https://www.nla.gov.au/awards-and-grants/chg (accessed 16 December 2017).
12 National Museum of Australia, Collection Care and Preservation Policy, Version 1.0, 6 December 2012. The policy is due for review in 2018. See http://www.nma.gov.au/about_us/ips/policies/collection_care_and_preservation_policy (accessed 31 October 2017).
13 Risk appetite is the amount of risk that an organisation is willing to accept to achieve its objectives. The risk appetite can vary across different categories of risk. Risk categories identified in the NMA Enterprise Risk Management Policy include, but are not limited to, risk to reputation, health and safety risks, financial risks, and compliance risks.
14 Rogerson and Garside, ‘Increasing the Profile and Influence of Conservation’, 35.
15 Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, HB 266: 2010 Guide for Managing Risk in Not-for-Profit Organizations (Sydney and Wellington: Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, 2010); New South Wales Department of State and Regional Development and the Global Risk Alliance Pty. Ltd, Risk Management Guide for Small Business, Significance International, http://www.significanceinternational.com/Portals/0/Documents/2005-sme-risk-management-guide-global-risk-alliance-nsw-dsrd.pdf (accessed 7 November 2017). An online search indicates guides from other parts of the globe are available.
16 Collections Trust, Benchmarks in Collections Care 2.0, http://collectionstrust.org.uk/resource/benchmarks-in-collections-care-2-0/; Birmingham Museums Trust, Risk Awareness Profiling Tool (raptonline), http://www.raptonline.org.uk/welcome.asp; various authors, ‘Agents of Deterioration’, Government of Canada, https://www.canada.ca/en/conservation-institute/services/agents-deterioration.html (all accessed 1 November 2017).
17 Chris Parkin, ‘Book of Kells Damaged on Australia Trip’, Independent, 13 April 2000, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/book-of-kells-damaged-on-australia-trip-279696.html (accessed 1 November 2017).
18 AS/NZS 4360:1999 was the second edition of AS/NZS 4360:1995, which after its third edition was revised and redesignated as AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009.
19 See Rogerson and Garside, ‘Increasing the Profile and Influence of Conservation’, 37.
20 Independent Expert Peer Review Group on the 2004 Lindisfarne Gospels Condition Report, ‘Report of the Independent Expert Peer Review Group on the 2004 Lindisfarne Gospels Condition Report’, Pennsylvania State University, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi = 10.1.1.168.2413&rep = rep1&type = pdf (accessed 16 November 2017).
21 The UK’s parliamentary record Hansard, 25 February 2004, vol. 418, cc386–94, provides some insights into this context: http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/2004/feb/25/lindisfarne-gospels (accessed 16 December 2017).
22 Cf. Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009, 1.
23 Seminar held at the Centre for Creative and Cultural Research, University of Canberra, 21 June 2017, (Ir)replaceable: A Discussion about Heritage, Conservation and Future-making, https://www.canberra.edu.au/research/faculty-research-centres/cccr/events/irreplaceable (accessed 14 November 2017).
24 Cornelius Holtorf is Professor of Archaeology at Linnaeus University and is a co-investigator in the Heritage Futures project: https://heritage-futures.org/people/cornelius-holtorf/ (accessed 13 November 2017).
25 As cited in from Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Vicki Humphrey
Vicki Humphrey ACR has been Head of Conservation at the National Museum of Australia since 2011. Prior to this she was Head of Conservation at the British Library from 2003 to 2008, after 13 years as Assistant Director of Artlab Australia. Vicki was the first conservator employed at the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew and established the conservation studio there. From 2009 to 2012, Vicki was the Quality Assurance Consultant for Collections Protection to the National Library of New Zealand and the Alexander Turnbull Library during their major redevelopment works. She has used risk management methodologies in a range of consultancies and training workshops. Vicki is an accredited conservator, a Fellow of IIC and has an International Certificate in Risk Management.