CURATORIAL WORKPLACE WELLBEING SURVEY: REPORT
APRIL 2024
CONTENTS
The Association for Art History began a curatorial initiative in 2019 to promote, advance and advocate for the value of curatorial work in the UK.
As part of this initiative, we launched in November 2023 a national survey about the workplace wellbeing of art curators in the UK.
The survey was developed by the Association’s Curatorial Committee, consisting of current and former curators working for a range of organisations across the UK. It built on the work of the Museums Association, which had undertaken a survey of the museum sector about workforce wellbeing a year earlier and had found that a majority of museum workers (58%) felt ‘less good’ or ‘significantly low’ work satisfaction.
We recognise that many roles within museums face wellbeing challenges but wanted in our survey to focus specifically on art curators, aiming to establish a clear picture of their workplace wellbeing after a period of, in many instances, severely reduced institutional budgets, restructurings and redundancies.
INTRODUCTION
WELLBEING
Wellbeing is associated with feelings of happiness, health and comfort, as well as a sense of purpose, inclusion and being valued. Although wellbeing is normally discussed in terms of individuals’ self-perception and their personal lives, it is self-evident that the workplace has a major impact, either positively or negatively, on people’s sense of wellbeing. In launching this survey, we were keen to highlight and foster discussion about the sometimes overlooked connections between workplace life and art curators’ mental health and overall happiness.
Focused on workplace wellbeing, this survey offered curators the opportunity to comment on aspects of work not usually considered under the umbrella of wellbeing (often seen as something personal and domestic) but which colour individuals’ perceptions of how they feel at work. These included salaries (whether individuals feel that they have the financial means to keep themselves comfortable), career progression (whether they feel hopeful about their futures), and institutional culture (whether they feel valued).
Good workforce wellbeing, we believe, is an indicator of a wellfunctioning and productive organisation. By contrast, poor workforce wellbeing is associated with not only individual distress and widespread low morale but also reduced creativity and innovation, together with a worrying loss of knowledge and skills when individuals leave the sector or choose not to join it.
Or to quote one of the respondents to the survey:
Staff wellbeing underpins the delivery of quality services for the public and adherence to best practices in museums, not to mention more capacity for creative thinking and collaboration.
INTRODUCTION
METHODOLOGY
Our survey sought to identify:
How art curators felt about their workplace wellbeing
Whether it had improved or worsened in recent years
The key factors impacting workplace wellbeing, either positively or negatively
What organisational factors affected workplace wellbeing
Whether certain aspects of the role of art curator affected workplace wellbeing
What more did curators wish to see done
The survey, which ran for five weeks, was completed by 266 art curators. This relates favourably to the c.210 responses to the Museums Association’s survey from curators and those working in collections capacities in all sectors (history, science, military, art, etc).
Respondents ranged in rank from senior managers to curatorial assistants, with the majority being curators (45%) and senior curators (24%). All types of organisations were represented, with the national museums providing a large proportion of respondents (49%). A quarter came from a combination of university, regional, local and council-run museums and galleries. 17% worked for independent organisations, and 8% of respondents were freelancers. 81% of respondents identified as women, 14% as men, and 5% preferred not to say. The largest age groupings (of 187 responses to this question) were ages 35–39 (24%), 40–44 (19%) and 45–49 (14%). Engagement with the survey was particularly strong, with 1,381 comments in the free text boxes, present in 17 of the survey’s 27 wellbeing-related questions.
2 1 3 4
The great majority of respondents (93%) felt that curatorial workplace wellbeing is an issue that needs to be highlighted and addressed.
81% felt that they had encountered challenges to their workplace wellbeing.
Many (75%) felt that their organisations did not take their wellbeing seriously. 66% thought talking about wellbeing problems with a line manager was ‘not very effective’ or ‘not effective’. Respondents’ comments indicated that, although some organisations had begun to address wellbeing issues for staff in general, there were many that did not, or did not do so effectively; none had introduced measures specifically for curators. Very few respondents felt positively about their organisation’s workplace wellbeing programmes.
A majority (63%) said their workplace morale, including their wellbeing, had become worse over the last three years.
The top factors contributing positively to wellbeing were thought to be (in order): flexible working; good work relationships; and a sense of making a personal contribution. People did not cite here management-led wellbeing programmes as contributing to their workplace wellbeing. The most effective steps individuals had taken to improve their workplace wellbeing included (in order): developing knowledge and skills; making time to enjoy the collection or benefits offered by the organisation; changing their working practices; and practising greater self-care, both in and out of the workplace. KEY FINDINGS
Respondents identified the following organisational factors as detrimental to their workplace wellbeing: excessive workload (70%) poor pay (67%) lack of clear paths towards career progression (59%) poor management (57%) not being valued by senior management (56%)
In their comments, respondents highlighted the impact on their wellbeing of pandemic-era staff cuts and restructuring: they felt they now faced excessive work demands and were often expected to work long hours without additional pay. Many regarded their salaries as not commensurate with their years of education (and associated debt), experience and skills, and some reported that they struggled to make ends meet, particularly if living in London or facing commuting and childcare costs. Respondents also pointed to what they saw as longstanding, systemic problems within the sector, including a diminution of respect for the curatorial role and associated expertise, and misperceptions about the multi-faceted and often pressured demands of curatorial work today. They reported a sense that curators were thought lucky or privileged to have their jobs and that this notion was used to justify low pay and expectations of going above and beyond as standard.
Respondents did not see core aspects of modern curatorship as inimical to their wellbeing: the great majority identified working with artworks, artists and the public as positive factors. Some respondents, however, noted that they found dealing increasingly with complex social and political issues emotionally taxing. Other observed how much the curatorial role had changed and expanded in recent decades, creating new pressures on them, and they called for a review and reassessment of expectations surrounding curatorship.
Respondents asked the Association for Art History to continue to highlight this issue of workplace wellbeing for art curators, feeling it was not sufficiently recognised. Several asked the Association to help make the case for better pay and offer guidelines for improving workplace wellbeing for curators. KEY FINDINGS
DETAILED FINDINGS
WELLBEING AND MORALE
93% (of 261 responses) felt that curatorial wellbeing is an issue that needs to be highlighted and addressed. Those who disagreed explained that they chiefly had done so because they felt that wellbeing was an issue for all staff and not especially for curators.
Those who felt that this was an issue stressed in their comments the effects on their wellbeing of overwork and poor pay above all else. They also referred to the increasingly pressured nature of the curatorial role today and a feeling of not being valued within their institutions. Other factors negatively affecting curatorial wellbeing included the difficulty of securing curatorial jobs, the precarity of short-term contracts, and the personal strain involved in dealing with challenging topics. Poor workplace wellbeing was experienced by curators as ‘stress’ and ‘burnout’.
81% (of 240 responses) felt they had experienced challenges to their workplace wellbeing personally, and a further 14% through the experience of colleagues. Only 5% said they had not experienced challenges related to workplace wellbeing.
63% (of 233 responses) felt their overall morale, including their workplace wellbeing, had deteriorated in the last three years. 19% felt it was roughly the same. 18% felt it had improved.
Only 21% (of 194 responses) felt they had achieved a viable and acceptable life-work balance. 43% said they had not achieved this, and a further 36% said they had not but were hopeful of doing so.
58% (of 265 responses) felt that they had been trained ‘not very well’ or ‘not at all well’ in understanding or serving campaigns to promote art’s capacity to improve public wellbeing. Some pointed to an incongruity in being asked to promote art as a source of the public’s wellbeing while feeling that their organisations did not make staff wellbeing a priority.
31% (of 224 responses) felt that belonging to a protected group or having protected characteristics had affected their wellbeing. In their comments (57 in all), respondents cited a range of perceived difficulties, including being a woman, too young, too old, having caring responsibilities, being neurodivergent, being working class, working within a predominantly white institution, and antisemitism.
DETAILED FINDINGS FACTORS AFFECTING WELLBEING
70% (of 222 responses) cited excessive demands in relation to the amount of work expected as a negative factor affecting their wellbeing over the last 12 months.
67% (as above) cited lack of appropriate financial remuneration.
65% felt it was not effective to discuss their problems with their line manager.
This was followed by lack of scope for career progression (59%), poor management (57%), and a sense of not being valued (56%). Other key factors identified included a lack of investment in curatorial skills and expertise (47%), the effects of redundances and staff cuts (46%), unreasonable expectations regarding the number of hours to be worked (43%) and a negative workplace culture (42%).
INSTITUTIONAL PROVISION
75% (of 213 responses) felt that their organisation did not take the wellbeing of curators seriously. Comments indicate that many institutions had not begun to address staff wellbeing or done so effectively. There were 106 comments elaborating this view, as
In terms of positive factors over the last 12 months, 67% (of 219 responses) appreciated having a flexible or hybrid working pattern. 60% appreciated good working relationships, and 50% valued a sense of contributing. Other positive factors had relatively low response rates. The most significant were socialising with colleagues (35%), scope for individual creative expression (32%), and sense of job security (28%).
From the responses and comments, it is clear that art curators enjoy the essential aspects of their work. 77% (of 220 responses) found the nature of their collection or the art they dealt with had a positive effect on their wellbeing, as did interactions with the public (71%) and artists (62%). In their comments, however, curators pointed to a range of other factors that mitigated these positive effects, including a lack of lifework balance and the challenges posed by new social and political agendas.
opposed to 38 comments that expressed a positive or neutral view of their organisation’s concern for the wellbeing of curators (although these referred to wellbeing provisions for all staff rather than anything specifically directed towards curators).
DETAILED FINDINGS
LOOKING TO THE FUTURE
Respondents identified the following as measures that had been or could be taken to improve curatorial workplace wellbeing:
Significant increases in salary
Flexible and hybrid working
Realistic targets
Strict adherence to contracted hours
More permanent roles, fewer temporary contracts
Improvements in laborious administrative processes
Acknowledgement from senior managers of the pressures on curatorial roles
Senior staff role-modelling conversations about workplace wellbeing and the steps they take to protect their own
Recognition, appreciation, thanks Research time, research leave
Specified days without meetings
Training and skills development
Clear paths for career progression
Peer-to-peer networks
Access to free or low-cost counselling
Workplace wellbeing activities, eg, walks, coffee club, yoga
Wellbeing days off A wellbeing manager
194 respondents identified the steps they had taken as individuals to improve their workplace wellbeing. 85% said they found it effective to develop their skills and 71% to pursue creative activities. 84% said they felt it positive to practice self-care activities out of the workplace (more sleep, exercise, better nutrition, spiritual practice etc), and 62% inside (participate in work social events, help others etc). 65% said they had modified their working practices, suggesting that many curators are actively seeking to improve their workplace wellbeing and that of colleagues.
Answering the question ‘How could the Association for Art History support your wellbeing as a curator?’, respondents (118 in total) called in different ways for the Association to advocate for the greater recognition of the skills and value of curatorship and to lobby for better pay. They also requested a set of guidelines for institutions, advice for line managers, and training or practical suggestions for individuals.
QUOTES
Much of the value and impact of the survey lies in respondents’ often extensive comments, and we have consequently chosen to include here some representative examples. Written informally, the comments show many curators struggling to reconcile their aspirations with current workplace realities.
It seems inconsistent and not viable in the long term for curatorial, production and other staff to be delivering ‘wellbeing’ experiences for audiences while themselves struggling with poor working conditions, low pay, stress and anxiety.
It is a sector where people are strongly devoted to their jobs. We all work far longer hours than we’re supposed to, and we are emotionally connected to our work. It takes its toll, especially when the work that we do is not recognised or valued higher up.
I find my job enormously rewarding, I would just like to have more time to do it, or more realistic expectations for what I can do. I feel like I am failing.
Curatorial pay is appalling, and especially so relative to curators’ qualifications [...] The bottom line is that it just does not pay to work if you have children: my take-home salary is less than our childcare costs and I am dependent financially on my betterpaid partner. This is terrible for morale, mental and ultimately also physical health. It also flies in the face of efforts to diversify the profession and to break away from a perception of art history being the preserve of the privileged few.
Poor pay and heavy workloads are something I’ve encountered in every curatorial position I’ve held. […] There is also a deep issue with lack of progression within this field. I have spoken to numerous junior curators who longer feel it’s viable to continue in a curatorial role due to lack of financial remuneration and career progression.
I think a lot of people work at maximum capacity for a really long time which is why burn out, depression and anxiety are big within the sector.
We are all exhausted and at the point of burnout, but the institution continues to develop more projects and programmes without any indication of how these will be resourced. We have asked for our wellbeing to be put on the risk register, but no actions have followed.
My workload has been extreme, especially relative to how little I am paid. At its worst point in the past year, I was working almost double my full-time hours and ended up hospitalised. Our team headcount has been at a reduced level for the past two years and there seems to be little regard for the impact that this has on workload. Symbolic gestures seem to be given greater priority than basic operational needs.
My organisation is very aware of wellbeing challenges and is taking various steps to mitigate these and improve wellbeing, especially through training, cultural change and in-house wellbeing initiatives. In particular, these relate to equity, diversity and inclusion in the workplace. While I think these are generally appreciated and are starting to have a positive impact on work culture, the organisation is unfortunately unable to tackle the biggest problems of poor pay and overwork, owing to funding shortfalls.
There is more conversation around wellbeing and I feel very supported by my direct team and manager – however, institutionally there is much more to do and changing the culture takes time. At the moment the narrative doesn’t quite match with the expectations of tasks and work to be achieved.
They fob us off with ‘well-being’ courses or activities that aren’t useful. We were once offered a group therapy session which no one attended.
Increased public access via direct connection with emails and social media (institutional not personal) have left curators overwhelmed with often mis-informed queries. This is particularly so when dealing with ‘colonial’ and cultural collections. Responding respectfully is necessary of course but it is time consuming and can be extremely demoralising. The wellbeing of curators to cope with these factors, over and above everything else, is not taken into account.
I work now away from the museum sector, after 16 years. I am happy, I have my life back, I have finally recovered from the burn out. I never want to experience that level of stress again.
The fact that you have initiated this survey feels very supportive. The report that arises from it, and how that information is disseminated will be critical. The AAH can help to support curators’ wellbeing by highlighting that there is an issue, and by making concrete recommendations for actions that institutions can take.
REFLECTIONS
The survey’s findings paint a concerning picture of a profession that feels worn out and worn down. We recognise that the survey may have attracted a disproportionate number of responses from curators who, for whatever reason, are already interested in wellbeing issues. As the great majority of respondents identified as women and are in their 30s and 40s, perhaps disproportionately so, many of the respondents may also face additional stress caused by combining work and family responsibilities. However, the survey –and, in particular, the many references to ‘stress’ and ‘burnout’ by respondents – should be seen as a wakeup call.
For the respondents, the key issues were overwork and poor pay, and the distress these caused was not lessened by the wellbeing measures being promoted within the relatively few organisations that have put wellbeing programmes in place. Many respondents experienced the measures as symbolic gestures or sticking plasters covering more fundamental issues. Individual line managers might provide sympathy, it was noted, but were unable to change the realities of an excessive workload; and offers of, for example, yoga sessions did not lessen the sense of being significantly underpaid. The survey’s findings suggest a need to review the efficacy of existing wellbeing programmes, not necessarily to alter them but rather to reframe them within a much deeper commitment to workplace wellbeing encompassing core factors of workload, pay, clear paths of career progression, and more evident appreciation of the value and values of curatorial work.
REFLECTIONS
The survey’s findings pose the questions: what would need to change for institutions to prioritise the workplace wellbeing of curatorial staff alongside other institutional priorities? And what do art curators, in particular, need to do to feel better supported and generally happier in their work? These are fundamental questions that, we feel, need to be debated within all art organisations.
This discussion will need to acknowledge some of the broader, systemic factors that have led to the deterioration of the workplace wellbeing of curators. Reduced financial support for museums and galleries from government and private funders has fuelled recent staff cuts, leaving many art curators in the position of trying to do the work of previously larger teams. Inevitably, this has had a negative impact on knowledge of and attention to permanent collections, and reduced job satisfaction. In addition, a focus over many years within the museum sector on income generation and the adoption of a market-led approach have arguably led to what some perceive as a devaluing of curatorial input.
Today, as the survey indicates, many art curators feel that their loyalty and passion for their work are being exploited beyond what is reasonable or healthy, and change is needed.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. PRIORITISE WORKPLACE WELLBEING
We recommend organisations explicitly prioritise the wellbeing of all staff, creating what the Museums Association has called, in its recommendations, a ‘culture of care’ for staff, freelancers and volunteers. In this respect, it would be helpful if, to help validate this topic as a key matter of general concern, senior figures spoke openly about the importance of workplace wellbeing and how they themselves manage this in their lives.
2. BE LED BY THE NEEDS OF CURATORS
We recognise that this ‘culture of care’ may look different for different organisations, professions and individuals. We therefore recommend that organisations engage directly with different teams, recognising their different needs, and ask individuals what measures would help most. A one-size-fits-all approach to workplace wellbeing may seem just and efficient but misses the point that people’s experience of the workplace is likely to differ according to their roles.
Supporting curators, we feel, requires an acknowledgement of the changes to the role in recent years and the increased pressure many now face, whether through taking on additional responsibilities because of staff cuts or engaging with sensitive social and political issues (for example, climate change and colonial legacies). This acknowledgement should encompass the provision of practical guidance regarding the role of curators in relation to such areas and advanced academic development and training for those who want or need to deepen their engagement with those topics, as well as, ideally, space for discussion with colleagues inside and outside their institutions. Furthermore, as a majority of curators feel increased wellbeing when working with art, artists and the public, a strategy that aims to improve the workplace wellbeing of curators will look to remove, or at least significantly reduce the impact of, factors that take curators away from these wellbeing-enhancing aspects of their role.
RECOMMENDATIONS Studies show that wellbeing is associated with, for example, a sense of participating in valued activities, working towards personal goals, having a sense of agency, receiving appreciation for achievement, and enjoying positive social relationships. Paying close attention to these factors in setting targets fosters a wellbeing-focused workplace culture in general. Concern for curatorial workplace wellbeing, however, may also require adjustments to the ways tasks are framed and scheduled to suit better the needs of curators through the different phases of their working lives. It is significant here that, of all measures taken by management, respondents showed the greatest appreciation for postpandemic hybrid working schedules, which particularly help those dealing with family responsibilities and/or needing longer periods of unbroken time for creative thinking, research and writing.
3. CONTROL WORKLOADS
Most of the survey respondents expressed the view that their workloads were excessive and that they were routinely working long hours. Expectations surrounding curatorial roles need urgently to be reviewed and adjusted to fit normal contracted hours. This may well necessitate some radical rethinking about what museums and galleries can deliver with current staffing, and indeed a consideration of the potential benefits of reducing contracted hours to ease stress and facilitate self-directed wellbeing measures. For their part, individual staff members need to monitor how they can best protect and prioritise their wellbeing in relation to what is expected of them, but the control of workloads is, above all, an issue requiring policy guidance and action by directors and senior managers.
RECOMMENDATIONS
4. IMPROVE PAY
The Museums Association found that from 2017 to 2022 the Consumer Price Index, the government’s preferred measure of inflation, outpaced the salary growth of curators and collection management staff particularly badly – by no less than 17%. Curatorial salaries, we believe, must be raised to better reflect their professional expertise and the required investment in post-graduate education. This is often similar to that expected for academics, who are typically significantly better paid. We encourage museums and galleries to undertake salary benchmarking for curators which takes the pay for similarly-educated academics and professionals outside of the museum sector, including the Civil Service, into account. Salaries, of course, affect pensions, and without significant improvement the effect of paying curators less than similarly qualified colleagues in other spheres will be to perpetuate disparities in living standards beyond the workplace itself. As the majority of curators are women, such disparities reflect and contribute to an unacceptable gender pay gap and gender pension gap in the UK.
5. OFFER PATHS TOWARDS CAREER PROGRESSION
We encourage the leaders of museums and galleries to recognise curators’ frustration and stress in working for institutions in which there appear no obvious routes towards promotion (beyond waiting for someone to leave and hoping to be appointed in their place). Consider creating different grades within the curatorial cadre and publishing staff structures within teams and departments so that new recruits can see how they might progress. Also commit to a programme of better preparing curators for long careers in the sector and possibly specialised management and research roles through, for example, mentoring, training courses, shadowing, secondments, academic development and greater research time. In this regard, the major national museums, may be best placed to model, on behalf of the sector, new approaches to the training and development of curators through the different stages of their careers.
6. RESPECT CURATORIAL WORK
Work can be challenging but should not damage people’s physical or mental health. We applaud those organisations that already offer a range of wellbeing-related benefits, including optional paid counselling for staff diagnosed with work-related stress, anxiety or depression, and urge more to do so. RECOMMENDATIONS
Many curators reported feeling that their voice, knowledge and skills now count for less in their institutions than in the past. We urge that leaders of arts organisations show respect for and highlight the value of curatorial expertise and knowledge to help foster a workplace atmosphere that is conducive to public service and the development of expertise – as well as, crucially, the workplace wellbeing of curators. Appropriate resourcing and acknowledging that expertise requires time to be developed are significant markers of respect.
7. OFFER ACCESS TO EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE SCHEMES, INCLUDING PAID COUNSELLING
The Association for Art History will communicate the findings of the survey to leaders of museums and art organisations and encourage action to be taken to support curatorial workplace wellbeing through addressing the cultural, resource and structural issues cited in the survey’s findings.
In addition, we hope to work with partner organisations to organise workshops and discussions about the matters raised in the survey and best practices. We will continue to provide wellbeing resources on our website.
To address more systemic problems around workload and pay, we will work on our own and with partners to make the case to funders and policymakers for increased resources for museums and galleries and for better remuneration for curators.
Finally, we will share the report as widely as possible within the curatorial community to help raise awareness of this issue, one of the survey’s prime aims. In all of this, we hope that individual curators will recognise that they are not alone in concerns they may have about their workplace wellbeing and will find this survey a useful tool in advocating for changes at an individual or institutional level. NEXT STEPS