Goodbye to good museum directors? Three topics of discussion on the new call for proposals

There has been a lot of talk in recent days about the language barrier that Culture Minister Gennaro Sangiuliano would like to impose for the call for applications for the competition by which as many as thirteen new directors of autonomous museums will be appointed to replace those whose terms are expiring. Sangiuliano’s idea is to include, as a requirement for applications, knowledge of the Italian language based on special internationally recognized tests. The minister’s alleged stunt has sparked passionate discussions, but it should be remembered that Sangiuliano has not invented anything: knowledge of the Italian language is already among the skills assessed by the committee. These discussions thus overshadowed at least three issues that no one is talking about, but which are definitely more important than the familiarity that the next directors will have with our language.

First, the issue of reappointment. Thirteen directors are expiring, and some of them have reached the end of their second terms (these include Eike Schmidt, director of the Uffizi, Marco Pierini of the National Gallery of Umbria, and Paola D’Agostino of the Bargello). Rumors circulated in April that the call for applications should exclude from the possibility of applying those who have already directed the same museum for two terms. Thus, a director who has already collected two consecutive terms at the same institution will not be able to apply for a third term, but will instead be able to apply to direct another museum. For example: Eike Schmidt will not be able to run again for the Uffizi, but he will be able to apply for, say, the Galleria dell’Accademia, the Bargello Museum, or the Pinacoteca di Brera. At this point the problem that arises is both one of merit and method. What would be the point of this rotation where a director has done well? Why cannot a director who has distinguished himself for eight years see his appointment renewed for another four years? What obstacles prevent a director from having a third term at the same museum? If he has proven his worth and efficiency, what is the point of preventing him from continuing his work at the same institution? As for the method, an important element should be noted: in the old notices, it was stipulated that it was impossible for the appointment to be renewed beyond the second term (specifically, the term of office was set at four years, with the possibility of renewal for one time only: this was established by Decree-Law 50 of April 24, 2017, including its amendments introduced by Law 96 of June 21, 2017), not of the impossibility of reappointment (an eventuality that at least the aforementioned decree-law does not mention). Are we sure, then, that preventing a director from running again for the museum he or she has directed for two terms will not open a new season of appeals and counter-appeals, which will inevitably end up damaging the operations of our museums?

Second, the issue of requirements. Past calls for applications placed at least five years’ experience in management roles, in public or private bodies and organizations, or in public and private companies, both in Italy and abroad, as a mandatory constraint. Five years, then, looking at the candidate’s past. But no one has ever posed the problem of setting requirements with the future in mind: what happens if the final choice falls on a candidate close to retirement age who has a horizon of a couple of years ahead of him or her, and if the director decides to retire mid-term? It has already happened at the Borghese Gallery in 2020, when Anna Coliva retired and the directorship was entrusted for three months on an interim basis to Cristiana Collu, director of the National Gallery of Modern and Contemporary Art, and then a new competition was held that, five months after Anna Coliva’s retirement, led to the appointment of the new director, Francesca Cappelletti. Again, the museum’s operations may be affected. Wouldn’t it then be the case that the call for proposals would ensure continuity? In other words: is it possible to give an appointment to a candidate who will exceed retirement age during his term and may therefore decide to retire?

Third, the choice of minister. Also according to rumors, it seems that contrary to what used to happen in the past, when the minister (who appoints the first-rank museum directors) was passed a trio of finalists by the selection board, with the new announcement the shortlist of names will be broader. It is not known how many candidates the minister will choose from. However, this is an option that is likely to perhaps exaggerate the minister’s discretionary power and, conversely, reduce the relevance of the committee. The announcement would seem to be in the home stretch, but there may still be time for some adjustments.

Warning: the translation into English of the original Italian article was created using automatic tools. We undertake to review all articles, but we do not guarantee the total absence of inaccuracies in the translation due to the program. You can find the original by clicking on the ITA button. If you find any mistake,please contact us.