Abstract
This paper explores the characteristics and activities of board members in art organizations. It describes two case studies within international artists’ residencies in France and Germany. Adopting a grounded theory approach, our study identifies the different characteristics of board members such as friendship, competence and diversity, together with board activities such as controlling, advising, legitimating, helping, exchanging and deciding. The contributions of this research are twofold. First, contrary to most governance literature, the independence of board members and board monitoring roles do not seem to be important issues for the two art organizations involved. Instead, friendship and networking appear to be key factors for the board, helping the organizations to be successful by giving them more chance to survive and grow. Second, as specific board members in the two cases studied, executive directors play a continual role of “governance entrepreneurs,” building and managing various board-related organs to counterbalance the influence of fund providers. In this way, executive directors attempt to satisfy their predominant public fund providers and to help the artists’ residencies survive.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adams, R. (2009). Governance and financial crisis, ECGI, Finance Working Paper, pp 1–27.
Adizes, I. (1972). Boards of directors in the performing arts: A managerial analysis. California Management Review, 15(2), 109–116.
Agid, P., & Tarondeau, J. C. (2007). Governance of major cultural institutions: The case of the Paris Opera. International Journal of Arts Management, 10(1), 4–18.
Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2007). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory Advance Access, 13, 1–29.
Anthony, R. N., & Young, D. W. (2003). Management control in nonprofit organizations. Burr Ridge: Mac Graw Hill.
Becker, H. (2006). Les Mondes de l’art. Flammarion: Champs.
Bhagat, S., & Black, B. (2002). The non-correlation between board independence and long-term firm performance. Journal of Corporation Law, 27, 232–273.
Boyd, B. (1990). Corporate linkages and organizational environment: A test of resource dependence model. Strategic Management Journal, 11(6), 419–430.
Brown, W. A. (2007). Board development practices and competent board members: Implications for performance. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 17(3), 301–317.
Charreaux, G. (2008). À la recherche du lien perdu entre caractéristiques des dirigeants et performance de la firme: Gouvernance et latitude managériale. Working Papers FARGO 1080502, Université de Bourgogne.
Christensen, S., & Westenholz, A. (1999). Boards of directors as strategists in an enacted world: The Danish case. Journal of Management and Governance, 3(3), 261–286.
Clarkson, M. (1995) A stakeholder framework for analysing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92–117.
Cornforth, C. (2001). What makes boards effective? An examination of the relationships between board inputs, structures, processes and effectiveness in non-profit organizations. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 9(3), 217–227.
Cornforth, C. (2004). The Governance of cooperatives and mutual associations: A paradox perspective. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 75(1), 11–32.
Glaeser, E. L. (2002). The governance of not-for-profit firms. NBER Working Paper 8921.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine Publishing Company.
Godard, L., & Schatt, A. (2005). Caractéristiques et fonctionnement des conseils d’adminitration français. Revue française de gestion, 5(158), 69–87.
Greenwood, R., Li, S. X., Prakash, R., & Deephouse, D. L. (2005). Reputation, diversification and organizational explanations of performance in professional service firms. Organization Science, 16(6), 661–673.
Hau, H., & Thum, M. P. (2009). Subprime crisis and board (In-)competence: Private vs. Public Banks in Germany. ECGI–Finance Working Paper.
Hillman, A. J., & Dalziel, T. (2003). Boards of directors and firm performance: Integrating agency and resource dependence perspectives. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 383–396.
Hopt, K. J. (2009). The board of nonprofit organizations: Some corporate governance thoughts from Europe. ECGI Law Working Paper, pp 1–29.
Huse, M., Minichilli, A., & Schoning, M. (2005). Corporate boards as assets for operating in the New Europe. Organizational Dynamics, 34(3), 285–297.
Jones, C., Hesterly, W. S., & Borgatti, S. P. (1997). A general theory of network governance: Exchange conditions and social mechanisms. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 911–945.
Kim, K., Nofsinger, J., &Mohr, D. (2010). Corporate governance. Pearson Education.
Lapierre, L. (2001). Leadership and arts management. International Journal of Arts Management, 3(3), 4–11.
Martin, P. Y., & Turner, B. A. (1986). Grounded theory and organizational research. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 22(2), 141–157.
McFarlan, F. W. (1999). Don’t assume the shoe fits, working on nonprofit boards. Harvard Business Review, 77(6), 64–80.
Nopper, A., & Lapierre, L. (2005). Tony hall and the royal opera house, covent garden. International Journal of Arts Management, 7(2), 66–78.
O’Regan, K., & Oster, S. (2002). Does the structure and composition of the board matter? The case of nonprofit organizations. Working Papers, Yale School of Management’s Management Research Network, pp 1–28, 28p.
Paulus, O. (2003). Measuring museum performance: A case study of French and American Art museums. A model to analyze possible tools. International Journal of Arts Management, 6(1), 50–63.
Pfeffer J., & Salancik G. R. (2003). The external control of organizations. Stanford University Press.
Provan, K. G., & Kenis, P. (2007). Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory Advance Access, 18, 229–252.
Quinn, R. E., & Rohrbraugh, J. (1983). A spatial model of effectiveness criteria: Towards a competing values approach to organizational analysis. Management Sciences, 29(3), 363–377.
Radbourne, J. (2003). Performing on boards: The link between governance and corporate reputation in nonprofit arts boards. Corporate Reputation Review, 6(3), 212–222.
Rindova, V. P. (1999). What corporate boards have to do with a strategy: A cognitive perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 36(7), 953–975.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory. Sage Publications: Procedures and Techniques.
Turbide, J., Laurin, C., Lapierre, L., & Morissette, R. (2008). Financial crises in the arts sector: Is governance the illness or the cure? International Journal of Arts Management, 10(2), 4–13.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to Catherine Urquhart for her helpful methodological advice. This article has benefited from the grant ANR-08-CREA-035 (IMPACT Intermédiaires de la création artistique, autonomie et organisation de la création. Analyse sociologique et prospective stratégique).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Paulus, O., Lejeune, C. What do board members in art organizations do? A grounded theory approach. J Manag Gov 17, 963–988 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-011-9207-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-011-9207-0