Addicted to projects: cultural policies in times of projectification

Culture is one of the areas of human activity, where projects always seemed to be a natural form of performing activities (Lindgren & Packendorff, 2007). The project, seen as a 'promise of both controllability and adventure'... [ view full abstract ]

Culture is one of the areas of human activity, where projects always seemed to be a natural form of performing activities (Lindgren & Packendorff, 2007). The project, seen as a 'promise of both controllability and adventure' (Sahlin-Andersson, 2002; Packendorff & Lindgren, 2013) perfectly meets the needs of unique, experimental and unpredictable artistic undertakings. Therefore, unlike many sectors undergoing projectification (especially reinforced by the EU funding), people of culture relatively easily joined the pursuit for European money offered them in the form of projects. Theoretically projectification did not change the form of their activity - performance remained performance, vernissage remained vernissage. Same with the typical project procedures including initiating, planning, realization, and auditing, which were always present in the field of culture, even if the nomenclature wasn’t used.

But at the same time, the EU forced artists to wear a project 'uniform' and changed their ways of working, living, and even talking about their undertakings. They are familiar with Gantt charts, project steering group meetings and other phrases derived from contemporary lingua franca - language of the project management. Achieving indicators set by the EU programs has often become more important than the admiration of the audience after the exhibition or spectacle. Similar with the number of projects: the more, the better. Therefore one of the results of the current situation is that the arts and in many cases their freedom and quality fade into the background, despite the common claim that in cultural organizations art and business have to be balanced or integrated (Eikhof & Haunschild, 2007). The most important is the formal apparatus accrued on the project work and the schizophrenic chase after new projects in order to survive. Cultural policies strengthen this process and don’t suggest important topics that should be elaborated in the works of arts. They seem to change artists into office workers, and the arts in numerical reports of achieved indicators.

In our paper we want to reflect on the process of projectification in cultural polices and analyse the example of ‘Culture 2007-2013’ program. We use the approach defined by McGuigan (2004) as ‘critical and reflexive cultural policy analysis’ which, as he explains, ‘is permitted to ask awkward questions about the conditions of culture and society in the world at large that go beyond the self-imposed limitations of management consultancy and policy-wonking’ (Belfiore, 2009). The research question, which we investigate, is:„How the EU cultural programmes affect the national cultural policies, cultural organizations, and artists?”. Our discussion concerns example of Poland and is based on the analysis of the EU funded cultural programmes, such as Culture 2000, Culture 2007-2013 programme, and regional operational programmes funded by the EU.