A controversial “reimagining” of the South Australian Museum has been taken off the table, following a government review of proposed changes which would have seen 27 positions abolished.
In February, the museum’s chief executive David Gaimster announced a restructure of the North Terrace institution’s research and collections division, with a vision of creating a more contemporary experience for visitors to the site.
But those changes would have seen 27 full-time positions in the division abolished and replaced with 22 new jobs, which the Public Service Association (PSA) said would be of lower classification and pay.
Premier Peter Malinauskas said the proposed changes, which were driven by the museum’s board, were now being withdrawn “in totality”, with board chair Kim Cheater resigning from his position.
“The proposed restructure to the South Australian Museum is off, and it’s withdrawn,” Mr Malinauskas said.
“The deliberations that were made that led to that proposed restructure [were] not an ideal process. It was short of the mark.”
In April, the state government intervened in the proposed restructure after protests raised public concerns about the museum’s future.
A panel was set up to conduct a premier’s review, which made six recommendations aimed at building a “solid governance” framework for the museum.
One of the recommendations was to halt all the suggested changes, saying “no functional or structural changes should be proposed until these recommendations are completed”.
The premier said all six recommendations, including a $4.1 million injection to the museum and a “new strategic plan”, had been accepted.
“Now we re-set, we recalibrate and contemplate a new future for the museum that ensures that it’s a living institution that serves our community in a modern era,” Mr Malinauskas said.
Former Flinders University deputy vice-chancellor Robert Saint has replaced Mr Cheater on the museum’s board, with Mr Malinauskas saying the change would help “recalibrate” the institution’s outlook.
The premier said a lack of funding in the last decade had contributed to the proposed restructure, and that the new funding would help secure the museum’s future.
“Was lack of funding one of the drivers of the proposed restructure? Yes,” he said.
“We can’t be serious about wanting to recalibrate the path the museum is on without being serious about putting more money into it.”
Arts Minister Andrea Michaels said research would “continue to have a strong future at the SA Museum”, and thanked Mr Cheater for his service.
‘Need for a complete strategic plan’
The premier’s review panel was scathing about the proposed “reimagining” of the museum, saying that while the need for change was “clear”, the communication and rollout caused confusion and an erosion of trust in the board.
“While the new strategic vision endorsed by the board is valuable, it does not replace the need for a complete strategic plan and a defined research strategy,” the review found.
It stated the museum’s own self-assessment of its research and collections division “concentrated on immediate budgetary concerns, rather than engaging in a thorough strategic discussion”.
The review also found the museum currently received “relatively lower levels of public funding compared to other state and territory-funded museums across Australia”.
The Public Service Association agreed, saying it was obvious that more funding was needed.
“We’re pleased to see that there’s been some new funding and we hope that that is sustained and enhanced into the future,” general secretary Natasha Brown said.
One of the review’s recommendations indicated the museum’s galleries and exhibition spaces needed to be “enhanced”, because they were only a third of the size of what was required.
Much of the museum’s collection is not able to be displayed due to space constraints, which the review said created “a gap between the research conducted and its public-facing presentation”.
‘Distressing and incredibly difficult’
Tensions between the museum’s executive and its staff were already high when the premier’s review was announced in April.
The review was initially flagged for completion by July, and research staff have had their jobs hanging in the balance for close to five months, the PSA said.
Ms Brown said the stress and uncertainty caused a number of staff to resign.
“It’s been incredibly distressing and incredibly difficult for our members at the museum, having to deal with the uncertainty, having to deal with the day-to-day not knowing whether their jobs are going to be on the chopping block or not,” she said.
She said Professor Saint had a big task ahead, as the board’s presiding member, to rebuild trust between the executive and staff.
“It’s obvious that there has been a lot of trust lost due to the conduct of the museum leadership,” she said.
“The new chair will have a lot of work to do in terms of re-establishing that trust and building a better relationship going forward.”
David Gaimster will remain in his role as chief executive, and Ms Brown said Dr Gaimster would also need to work to rebuild trust.
“It’s obvious that he’ll need to get on board with the new direction of the museum,” she said.