A key responsibility in my new role as Head of Research at Tate is to work closely with colleagues to refresh our existing strategy for research across the organisation. We are in the middle of this collaborative activity and I want to take a moment to reflect on aspects of this process as it is taking shape.
I see real value in having a strategy for a number of reasons, the most obvious one being that it will articulate a strategic direction and map out not only what we are aiming to do but also how and when we are going to go about it. Crucially the strategy will also set out why we are prioritising certain strands of activity and ways of working. In this way the document will manifest our values and provide clarity. It will also make transparent the approaches we are likely to adopt, particularly in terms of how we will work with colleagues and collaborators internally and externally.
Incorporating these elements into a strategy is fairly fundamental as I have discovered. Sitting waiting for a train the other day I idly typed ‘how to write a strategy’ into my phone. Reading through the advice that immediately surfaced it became clear that key steps in the strategy-writing process include:
- Outlining our vision, purpose and goals, as well as our responsibilities
- Articulating what we want to change and how we want to grow
- Evaluating our current position – what are our strengths and weaknesses, where are the opportunities and what might the possible blockers be
- Establishing priorities and setting out the steps that will enable us to achieve what we are setting out to do and when
- Identifying how we will know that we have achieved the changes
I am fortunate in that we already have a clearly identified vision for research that has been agreed by Directors within Tate. The work we are doing now is focused on how we translate that vision into a set of strategic and realisable aims and objectives with an associated delivery plan. It certainly involves reviewing with colleagues across the organisation how we have got to where we are now and where we want to be in five year’s time. It requires taking on board the organisation’s priorities, seeing how these translate into the types of research we need to be doing. It also invites productive speculation – what could we do that we have never done before? What are the changes we need to introduce and how can we do this successfully? Who should we be working with that we might not have engaged with prior to now?
A further positive element of working on the strategy is that it is prompting in-depth thinking and dialogue with people across and beyond Tate. This thinking and talking is already contributing to one the changes we are seeking to bring about – that of embedding research across the organisation. At the same time this continuing input is refining and enhancing our original ideas. Ultimately the strategy will be the product of many people’s ideas, which will mean it is more likely to be relevant and useful to the widest range of colleagues and collaborators.
Linda Tuhiwai Smith writes in her brilliant book ‘Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples‘ that ‘systemic change requires capability, leadership, support, time, courage, reflexivity, determination and compassion.’ I would agree with all of those and add that it also requires a plan. Writing the research strategy is only a starting point. We are mindful that we need to keep referring to and amending the strategy as we go, rather than writing it and then putting it on a shelf never to refer to it again. Our plan is to publish the research strategy on the Tate Research website once it is signed off, to keep it visible for us and others and to help us implement the changes it will outline.
PRAM 