Welcome to Leadership Worth Sharing, a podcast in which ACEVO chief executive Jane Ide chats with civil society leaders about their professional experiences, challenges, wellbeing, and their journeys in the sector.
In this episode, Jane talks to Moira Sinclair, who left her CEO role at the Paul Hamlyn Foundation a few months ago. Moira shared her journey as a leader and into civil society, and they talked about finding her voice and the power of art when it comes to social impact.
Transcript
Jane Ide 00:00
So I’m delighted to welcome today, Moira Sinclair, until very recently, the Chief Exec of the Paul Hamlyn Foundation. And I think I’m right in saying, Moira, was that you were there for about 10 years, weren’t you? And was that your first chief exec role? You’ve been at the Arts Council I think prior to that.
Moira Sinclair 00:16
Yeah, I was an executive director at the Arts Council, and of course, that’s a bigger organisation, so I sat on the executive board there, but yeah, that was my first and probably last chief executive.
Jane Ide 00:28
Well, you made you made you made a good choice, then to be there for 10 years. So I’d love to hear a little bit more about that, and maybe, maybe that’s some one of part of what we can get into as we think about leadership and the different roles you’ve had, but you’ve also had, I know, a very extensive, very varied career across executive and non executive roles, particularly within the sector. So I’m wondering if we could just start just by, you know, talk us through a little bit about what that what that career journey has been for you
Moira Sinclair 00:55
Sure, when I was thinking about this podcast, I thought that I’d start in Watford, actually, which is, I grew up around there, and I was one of those interesting children. I think, I think I was super precocious in some ways, and very nerdy and shy in other ways. My parents found this place a community volunteer led Art Centre in Watford called the pump house, and so that’s where I’m going to start my journey. It’s me there. So it’s out of school provision Saturday mornings. I think it was 20 pence to go. It was run by volunteers, and it was a youth theatre provision for for young people. And I found out kind of home on stage, a voice for myself on stage. So it was a really safe and happy space where I achieved something of my own potential. And that was a really formative experience for me. I was also lucky, because at school I had people who kind of recognised that and fed it. So I had this profound interest in theatre, not arts, with a capital A because I didn’t know what that looked and felt like, and neither did other people in my family, actually. But when it came to studying, I went to university, and much to my I think some of my families discussed I did a drama degree at Manchester University, so they wanted a professional. I come from families of migrants and immigrants, and they really wanted a professional. And instead, they got me doing theatre which was not a proper job, not a proper job, by any stretch of the imagination, but when I came out, that mentor had no idea of how to do it. I didn’t have a network, I didn’t have a family background. I knew I wasn’t going to be an actor by that stage, and that’s what had taken me in. But you’re surrounded by talent, and you sort of gradually realise that’s probably not your calling. So I started in stage management, and it used to be laughably called profit share in those days, so you learn your business while earning nothing. And that’s a big issue nowadays in our sector, actually, that it relies a lot on people’s passions and enthusiasms. I think the difference then, and we’re talking back in the 1980s was that I could get support, so you could get housing benefits. In those days, rents were a bit cheaper. There was always space to make work as well. There were empty spaces, and I was young and confident, and so that’s what I did. And I did freelance stage management for the first sort of period of my career, always interested in wider impact at that point, access, as it was called then so kind of sign interpreted performances, youth theatres, working with older people, a whole series of different ways of Thinking about that. And then, like many women in careers, I had a baby, and being on the road and touring with theatre companies and having a small child is not actually incredibly compatible. There are lots of people who do it, and I have huge amounts of admiration for them, but for me, it became really challenging. So I looked for a job where I was a bit more secure, and went to work in local government. And I was the community arts Development Officer for South Bedfordshire District Council, which no longer exists, actually, but for those people who don’t know where that is, that sort of outside of the capital in the south east, in Dunstable, which is is a an area which is outstanding natural beauty. Actually, the downs are around, but the town itself doesn’t make much use of that, collectively, and it was an interesting place to be. So I worked alongside colleagues in local government, in planning, in community development, in economic development, actually, to think about the role of arts and culture as contributors to what good society looks like. And it was the first time I think I began to think strategically about communities, kind of their experiences, how that shaped them, and also to think about systemic inequality. So it was a great grounding for me in strategy development, and made me very conscious of that sort of code switching between different departments in local government to get the message across about what a wonderful, healthy, vibrant community life looked and felt like. So I did that. I thought I’d only go for a year. I loved it, actually. I found it a really interesting and stimulating environment. I think I was very lucky to be in local government at the time when people were creatively thinking about some of these challenges. From there, I then went to run a small Arts and Health charity. So actually, although I hadn’t been called a Chief Exec. I think I was called director there. I was in charge of that. And vital arts is a small Arts and Health charity sitting within a much bigger institution, which is BARTs and the London NHS Trust. So the organisation was based at the Royal London in Whitechapel, but also worked across into some Bartholomew’s hospital in the city. So I took with me that ability to speak different languages, planning, construction, health, into a new setting. And the concept of the charity was to think about making the experience better for staff and for patients, actually a more human experience. And we ran the arts programme in the school. We worked on public art programmes in new buildings. We had a staff choir, a whole series of interventions in that space. Went from there to claw leadership. So I was a Clore Leadership Fellow. That’s the cultural claw programme, because there are two at a point in time when I was just beginning to think about what I needed to stretch myself and the Duffield claw. Duffield foundation established this incredible resource, I think, for people who want to explore leadership in the social sector. So I did a year’s fellowship, and about halfway through that fellowship, it became clear to me, not to anybody else, that I wasn’t going to go back to the job that I was seconded out of. And this job at the Arts Council came up. The Arts Council is the national funding body for Arts in the UK, and they were looking for someone, I think the job was called External Relations in those days, but they were looking for someone who could work with local government, health, education, to make the case for arts and arts investment. And of course, it just looked like somebody had written the job description, which is one of those Pure Flicks in a not very linear career path. And I was at Arts Council for 10 years. And for all of our colleagues who know the world, the world of non departmental government bodies and dpbs, you apply for your own job about once every three years. So that’s why I stayed, because it was really varied. And eventually ended up working on the Olympic programme, which was a great privilege with a whole loads of other people that something that was phenomenally exciting. Ran the London office and then the London and South East offices, and sat on the executive board there, which was a fantastic national viewpoint. And then at the point of which I thought, well, I won’t leave the Arts Council. I’ll stay because it’s stimulating and interesting, the job at Paul Hamlyn Foundation came up, and I had always said that if that job came up, I would go for it, because it’s a completely values led organisation, and one that I felt really aligned to. It had that wider footprint, which I absolutely loved, and it took me back to the roots of social justice, which I think were very formative when I was very, very young. So it just felt to me as though it was I just couldn’t believe that anybody else should do that job except me at that point in time. And it was an enormous privilege, and I loved every minute of working there. I’m deeply fond of the organisation and what it does and why it does it. And again, for for those who don’t know it well, it’s a grant making institution, so set up by Paul Hamlin when he was alive, and with the money that he’d made from his publishing empire and a remit to think about social justice and to think about what grant making made in that context. So that’s the kind of the trajectory. It makes it sound like there was a linear path. There absolutely wasn’t. I’m sure that’s the case for many people.
Jane Ide 10:09
Yeah, it’s what I love, the concept of squiggly careers. Similarly, mine’s gone all over the place. And I think, I think, I think interesting. I think sometimes it’s easier for women to have those squiggly careers than you know, perhaps for men, because we are given a little bit more leeway to step out, step back, step across, step in different ways. And I think that’s hugely valuable, but that’s that’s probably a conversation for another day, but, but I’m thinking listening to you that if I can pull a couple of threads out of that, and I’d be interested to see if this is what you think, as well. The threads that are coming through for me in that are of you as a connector, as a translator and as a facilitator of somebody who’s making things happen and enabling other people to make things happen. Would that? Would that be fair?
Moira Sinclair 10:58
Yeah, I think it would. It’s an interesting observation, because I’ve I used to use it with the team at Paul Hamlyn a lot, and organisations like Paul Hamlyn sit in this strange space because they are charities, but they’re certainly not delivering frontline and I would always say that I felt our role was to create the space in which others can do their work to the best of their abilities, and I felt the same at the Arts Council. The Arts Council isn’t an arts organisation. It’s an organisation that’s there to equip and sustain arts practice in the country. So yes, I think you’re right. I would say facilitative and connection. And I do see connecting pieces. I think it’s one of my strengths as a leader. And I don’t know if everybody sees that in the same way that I do. So I think we should just explain you have very recently stepped away from Paul Hamlin after your 10 years there. How did that sense of connecting, being a connector, being a facilitator, how did that inform the way you led that organisation for that 10 years and previous leadership roles that you’ve had? I think there’s a couple of things. I think one is, I think if you work in theatre actually, and you work at backstage, it is inherently a collegiate art form. It is very, very rare that theatre isn’t it doesn’t involve an enormous number of people all working together in pursuit of common purpose. So I think that is something that you learn, and it’s a leadership strength that you can pull through. It’s also very delivery focused. Actually, there is a point in time when you you have to put the show up. The audience is sitting down, and it’s 7:30 and you have to get it on, and it has to come, you have to manage budgets and all of those sorts of practical things. So I suspect people would say I’m relatively delivery focused, and occasionally that sort of drive to right now we’re going to get on and do it now is, you know, I think is an interesting leadership quality, which occasionally you can leave people behind if you’re not careful. I think there is something about that kind of deep interest and commitment to people achieving their potential. I think that comes from my own life experience, but I think it also has driven me as a leader, and I think that influences the way I manage people. I tend to want to see people kind of thrive and do their best. I don’t expect them to sit with us forever. I quite interested in being able to look at my Arts Council team from 10 years ago and see what they’re doing now, and hoping that they’re out there running the world actually in, you know, changing lives, and because people took a chance on me at various stages, I like recruiting excellent people, and I by excellent people, it’s not necessarily the people who are qualified in a particular shape, way of doing things. I think I’m interested in seeing talent and nurturing that and bringing it through.And lastly, when it’s I do have an aversion to and a questioning of pointless rules. I’m not very good at it. I wasn’t very good at it at school actually. And I’m very compliant and very well behaved on in most instances, but that sort of questioning of rules for the sake of it. And I think actually, having worked in local government and worked in an ntpp, there are a lot of rules which you can get quite frustrated about in both settings. And you do sit there thinking, why on earth do I have to do it in that way? There is a quicker, more effective way of doing things. So yeah, maybe that’s something about leadership too.
Jane Ide 14:47
Well, I think it’s certainly something about leadership in in civil society and in social justice and social action, isn’t it? Because I think almost by definition, the sector is founded in the ability of people to look and say, that’s not right. We can do that better. There’s a problem there that we need to solve, and the rules aren’t solving it so. And I suppose, in a way, that that leads on to my next question, because I think one of the things I’ve I’ve had a little bit of experience of working in the cultural end of the charity sector. Not for long, I was there for about 18 months, and one of the things that I learned there very quickly was that in many ways, although so many organisations in that part of the sector are set up as charities or social enterprises or civil society organisations, whatever way you want to define them, in many ways, they have to operate in a very, very commercial space or in a very commercial way, and don’t necessarily see themselves as charities in inverted Commons. So I was really interested, given your length of experience and the different ways in which you’ve worked in arts and culture within civil society, and also knowing that you know as a funder, you were working with others in the more traditional civil society charity space as well. What do you think is the relationship between arts and culture and broader social impact? What? What is the difference that it makes?
Moira Sinclair 16:10
I mean, it’s a it’s a big question, isn’t it? I think it’s, I think the relationship’s actually really close, and I don’t have much headspace for the argument, which has raised its head again recently, that you have artistic excellence on one side of a gender and community engagement and social impact on the other side, and those two aren’t inextricably linked. And it’s this kind of argument that you think you’ve put to bed, and then somebody raises it again, and you have to go round circle. I think you know as human beings that we need the space to express ourselves. We need the space to connect with others. We need storytelling. Actually. We need to make sense of our worlds and arts and culture. Can do that in a way that I can’t think any of anything else that can. And actually, a lot of the charities that those wider charities that you talk about, that I’ve seen and worked with a phf, for example, at Paul Hamlyn Foundation, they’re using arts and culture in some shape or form to help them further their mission, their charitable objectives. So, you know, when I think about what it did for me as as a small child, it quite literally gave me a voice. And you know, nobody believes it now that I was so shy and dealing with all sorts of stuff that you shouldn’t be dealing with when you’re a child. And having that space, creating that environment, was so important. But I’ve seen it, you know? I’ve seen arts and culture work in summer youth productions in South Bedfordshire, when we had 150 young people on stage, most of whom the there were, at least some of the community would have said, you know, there’s no point wasting any time and effort on that person, because they’ve got nothing to offer us, and they’re just out to cause trouble. And then you see them on stage shining and, you know, I had a Director of Community Services who could not speak when he came to see the production. He was so moved by what was happening on the stage, and he just didn’t understand that that capacity was in the community that he served East London dance, where I was a chair, has a fantastic programme for older people, which is partly about, I mean, it is absolutely about dance, but it’s also about challenging perceptions of older people in our society, and it’s also hugely health giving. I’m Chair at Factory International in Manchester now. Fantastic artist called Jeremy teller did a, made a piece of work called what is the city by the people, and he created a 60 metre catwalk in the middle of Manchester, and members of the public citizens walked that catwalk, getting the kind of validation that they they didn’t usually get for the work and for the roles that they played in their society. And of all, I’ve got a got a quote for you, the telegraph, of all people you know, not not known for its understanding of our sector. Said, this is a beautifully simple idea, a piece tapping deep into the power of public spaces to generate fleeting human connections between strangers. For many participants, it was more than a parade. It was an act of self affirmation, arts and culture, for me, it’s not a separate thing. If we talk about health and we talk about education and we talk about the right to a vibrant life, then access to all shapes of culture is part of that as well. It moves me, still. I wouldn’t be doing my chairing roles now, if it didn’t sometimes I think the art sector, well, I think the art sector is behind its counterparts in the wider charity sector. Sometimes in understanding that that describing that social impact, talking about it, is not a bad thing to do, and the partnerships that we create with business and universities and educators, they’re a positive thing. They’re a positive thing for society. I
Jane Ide 16:13
I think I’d almost go further and say it’s not that. It’s not just that it’s a positive thing to do, but it’s a very under told story, I suspect, in general, and I was, I was going to pick up on, I was thinking, when you were talking about your your early days in the in the local authority, and that role of connecting people across different different departments, different functions. And it just struck me. It was one of those moments of, oh yes. I remember those golden days when people in public sector organisations had the capacity, had the culture of being more open to these things and instinctively, without any evidence whatsoever, because I’m not in that space now, but it feels as though that is one of the things that must have got lost in the last 1015, years, with public services coming under huge pressure. I don’t hear a lot of people. I hear a lot of people talking about the challenges of commissioning social care and care homes or or education. I I can’t remember the last time I heard a conversation that might relate to local authority involvement with arts and culture and the impact that can have on local communities. So I may be very ill informed, but I’m just interested, from your perspective, is that, is that the case?
Moira Sinclair 21:50
I think there are local authorities who are still doing it and doing it really well and being incredibly creative about the way in which they bring resources to bear. You know, I couldn’t, I’d be remiss not to talk about Manchester City Council, actually, in that context, who I think have understood for many years the role that culture can play in animating the city, in employability, in job creation, as well as being a good thing of and of itself. So I think there are local authorities who really get that. But from a people’s perspective, I think it’s really hard to put your head above the parapet when you are struggling with resources, and this stuff can feel quite soft. And again, the wider charity sector would, I think, recognise the same challenge that when you’re looking at bin collection, talking about something which feels like a nice to have, rather than an absolute necessity, is hard work, and you get battered when you work in those kind of environments. I don’t mean physically, but I mean you do get exhausted by trying to make the case over and over again. I don’t think people have stopped caring about their their role in the local authority as sort of being of service to their local communities. I just think that’s narrowed so much.
Jane Ide 23:11
I think in a way, that’s that’s a good leading to the next area I really wanted to explore with you, which is coming back to your own leadership career and your role at Paul Hamlyn, and obviously in that role, you were leading really significant work in grant making, you were in the position to have the funding to give to others. But I I’ve certainly seen, I’ve been in the sector seven or eight years now, and I’ve certainly seen some, what feel like some quite big shifts in the way funders have operated, the way they thought about what they’re there to do. They thought about their own mission, about the way they use their power and their resources. And I’m really interested, obviously, from your perspective, on the inside of all of that, what, what do you think is has really changed in the world of grant making in the time that you were at the foundation?
Moira Sinclair 23:57
Yeah, it’s interesting, isn’t it? Because I, like, I think as many leaders do, you go in with a real sense of what you want to change, and the kind of enthusiasm and drive to do that, and perhaps a degree of naivete about what that change actually looks and feels like, until you’re right inside an organisation. So when I was leaving, I looked back and I did an interview in civil society, sort of three months after I started work, and I talked about the kind of privileged position that funders occupy, and the challenge of being staying relevant and connected. By that, I meant the kind of White Tower syndrome. I’d been in a space where I’d been to funders who sort of sat in these ivory towers in London and then pontificated about what was needed in Doncaster or, you know, South End. So I was really cognizant and wary of that. I talked about a need for more openness and transparency, and I talked about moving to longer term funds. Funding and needing a more tailored approach to grant making. And again, because I’d come through an NDP background where there’s quite a lot of restraints on that, I wanted to use the platform of an independent funder to challenge some of those norms. And I also thought that there was a more of a partnership between funders and charities and the media working together, and I’d be interested to get your view on this, but I said this was 10 years ago. I said we needed to present a better narrative for the sector, and that the public didn’t really understand the context in which charities operated, and I still don’t think they really understand the context in which charity operate. In simple metrics, Paul Hamlyn foundation went from being a 20 million pound funder to a 40 million pound plus funder in that time. So there was a huge and I think that’s happened in quite a few of the bigger foundations. They’ve really amped up their grant making. But as important for me was that how we did it, and I think that’s what you’re alluding to, the how we what, how we fund, the kind of behaviours that sit underneath that. And so I think there’s a couple of things that I would credit. One is a colleague, Jane Steele, who was really interested in transparency and openness, and we built on her work, and she had been instrumental in getting us to commit to the 360 degree giving platform, which kind of just started publishing data. And we think that’s so normal now that we forget that 10 years ago was a really radical act to actually say where the money was going. We also, under her remit, were signed up for the Centre for effective philanthropies, grantee and applicant survey, which was an anonymised way of us hearing back how we were doing and how useful we were or not. And that would talk about things that you’d expect, like our, you know, our processes for getting grants, too long, too much, too much admin. But it would also talk about things like our people and whether they understood the sectors they were funding and actually were adding any value in. You know, we all talk about convening and partnerships that the questions actually unpicked what that meant for us, so we had all of that interest and data coming in.We were early signatories for Ivar’s eight commitments on as funders, which looked at things like, you know, a commitment not to waste people’s time, to ask relevant questions, to kind of act with some urgency. That meant during things like COVID, we could go to our trustees and ask them to put some money on the table, which they did really quickly. I mean, within, I think within three, I think within a week, we’d written to all of our grant holders at the time and said, Don’t worry, we’re with you. Just get on with what you need to do and come and talk to us when you’re ready. You know, I don’t think we would have done that 10 years ago. But also, the trustees said, yes, let’s put more money on the table. So we had an extra 20 million, which meant we could respond when things were getting extremely tight for people and they couldn’t get access to funding, and the demand for services had come and gone through the roof. So I think that change was all underway and happening, and felt really natural and easy to lead, actually, in the sense that I was really clear about what needed to happen and could corral people around. The energy was there. I think what was harder, and you and I have talked about it before together, is understanding that power dynamic and what it how it was really showing up and playing. So I had a quite naive version of that, which was, will be more relational, and we will sort out representation in our organisation, because we can’t be a good grant maker if we don’t sort out the representation. And those two things were absolutely important things, but they didn’t take us nearly far enough, and it was too the change was slow as well, so that was already happening. And then we had, you know, George Floyd’s murder, we had COVID 19. We had the impact of COVID on minoritized communities. I think there was sector wide really challenging conversations at that point, and what truly embodying racial equity in our culture and in our systems and processes meant what it meant to be a social justice funder, which we claim to be, and as did a lot of others, I think that that was under a lot of scrutiny. There was a lot of pressure at that point for us to do better than we were doing. And…I yeah, I think that was an interesting time for the trusts and foundations world, the land for charity sector more broadly, actually, so we were all grappling with it. I think I was very, very lucky that I had a staff team who wanted to sit in that space and work it through and work it through with some patients, actually, because I think there was a danger that that it could have gone off in all sorts of directions, which wouldn’t have been helpful in the middle of a crisis, which is exactly what the world was in. So I think that challenge has made us a better funder, but it didn’t it was not easy, and it’s not finished yet, and I know a lot of colleagues are worried that some of that essential work in our sector is beginning to drift. Having said, this is really important, we must do better. We all did for a year and a half, and then suddenly it started to drift. And then with what’s happening in the States as well, that sense of, oh, dei is off the agenda is, is something I think we have to be really vigilant about, because I really don’t want us going backwards again.
Jane Ide 31:07
Yes, no, I think many of us would would share that concern and recognise, as you say, the last five years since the pandemic, have been a time of enormous work and effort, and yet, like pushing the snowball up a hill, we we’ve hardly even started the impact that we need to have. But I suppose again, that that that you’re doing a great job, because you give me some great leads into the into the things I want to explore with you. Because you know, again, coming back to you personally, as a leader, you stepped away from Paul Hamlyn after 10 years. And I guess one of the biggest challenges for all of us is we all. We all, at some point will come to the end of our time with the organisations we lead, hopefully a time of our own choosing. But you know, you never quite know what’s around the corner. But one of the challenges is always, how do you hand on the organisation in a good way. How do you hand on the mission, the purpose, the intent? How do you hand on the pieces of work that you’ve achieved and you hope that somebody else will carry and build on, and not just chuck in the bin the minute you’ve left the room, I suspect. But also, how do you hand on those pieces of work? They’re not finished, and you’ve just, you’ve just highlighted that, that this, this work, particularly around anti racism, about anti oppression, about the funders. I’ll pick out the funders role, particularly in this conversation, funders that understanding of the deep power imbalance and how that can be addressed and used in different ways. How do you hang How did you prepare to hand all of that on for the organisation and also for yourself?
Moira Sinclair 32:49
Yeah, it’s really hard, isn’t it? I think partly it was about getting the rationale really clear for the organisation and for the trustees and for the staff as well. So that sort of sense of, if we fundamentally believe in social justice as an as an organisation, as a funder, and if we want to push for change, then we have to get our houses in order, in order to be able to create the conditions for the more hopeful future. You know, you can’t be that in that facilitative collegiate role if actually, everyone’s looking over your shoulder and going, Yeah, well, they might say it, but look what they’re doing. You know, those two things are not married up. So I think that sort of sense of living values loud and proud and being accountable to the people who need our support. It was was something I could kind of build that shared sense of that’s what we’re there to do. So I think that was a pretty strong driver through the organisation, and if that meant it fed into the recruitment process, you’ll have to talk to Halima about how well we handed over an organisation. But from my perspective, I think I could step away, because I felt that that was strongly held in the organisation at all levels. I also think there is a fantastic senior leadership team at Paul Hamlyn Foundation. And that’s a joy to be able to leave to somebody, and, you know, for the next person, to nurture, but they are supremely competent and able, as well as holding that vision piece. So it meant that my successor was coming into something that wasn’t, you know, for want of a better well, it wasn’t a basket case. It gave her time. There was time and space for the organisation would continue to function well, while she got to know it and it got to know her. And that feels to me like a really, if you can do that as a leader, leave the organisation stable and sustainable. That feels like a good time to be able to step away. It doesn’t mean there isn’t room for improvement, by the way. It just and you as the person walking out have to, have to, we talked about this as well, but you have to have low ego. You can’t be sitting there going, I’ve achieved everything she she’s just got to look after it. That’s not fair, is it? Isn’t what’s the joy of her coming into a role if she can’t change things and move things on?
Jane Ide 35:25
And the world around is changing anyway.
Moira Sinclair 35:27
The world is changing anyway. And then there are some practical things, you know, that a clear timetable for handover. So, Halima and I actually had a conversation about, I can’t remember our exact analogy, but it was something to do with moons and suns. You you could only have one, you know you could. You can only have one chief exec, not have a two people doing the role. But you can’t have two different people claiming that leadership space at the same time fair on the organisation. So there comes a moment when one of you really does have to step away. I’ve never been Do you remember the old days when someone would say, I’m leaving and I’m going to stay for a year to see the new person in and, oh yes, not necessarily that old, but I have to. I’ve heard, I’ve heard examples of this not that long ago. To be quite honest, to me, it’s slightly odd, yes, but that, to me, feels desperately unfair for everybody actually, including the person who’s leaving. But so her Oliver and I agreed on that sort of the moment of transition, the moment when she became the chief exec and I stepped away. And apart from that, you know, there it is a strange process, because the minute you say you are going the whole organisation with the in the nicest and Curt, most courteous way, in my experience at Paul Hamlyn Foundation, start looking over your shoulder, because you’re not the person who’s going to make the decisions in future. Yeah, and that’s human nature. So you you have to live those values of being open and transparent and generous, and you have to say to the organisation, that’s fine. Yes, I know, you know, there were a couple of moments where I thought, hold on a minute. That’s quite major. And nobody’s actually told me it’s happening, what’s going on. But overall, yeah, I think we got the timing about right as well. So there was long enough for the organisation to adjust, but not so long that it became a real drag for everybody.
Jane Ide 37:26
I think, I think your point about ego is a really big one in this and I’m sure you have, as I have in the past, worked not necessarily in the sector, I should say, but I’ve worked with with other leaders who just couldn’t quite countenance the fact that the world would go on without them. And, funnily enough, it did, but, but I think there’s something very important about that, that recognition I certainly feel in my own role here. ACEVO, I’m very fortunate. I count it as a real a very helpful thing that I have met and talked with each of my predecessors. ACEVO is coming up for nearly 40 years now, and I’ve met each of my predecessors and I and that’s helped me be absolutely clear about something I knew anyway, which is, I am one in a line. You know, we’re passing the bucket on. Vicky passed the bucket to me. I will pass the bucket on to somebody else in due course. And I think that that really helps kind of tone down that, that ego sense of whether it’s about me, but I’m also very much thinking as I’m listening to you talking, the greatest transition in all of this has to be the one that you’ve gone through personally. So Halima, yes, has moved into a new role, and we all as leaders, we all know what that feels like. The organisation has transitioned from your leadership to Halima’s leadership, but you personally as Moira, you have stepped away from that, that identification as the chief executive Paul Hamlyn Foundation into an entirely different space. So what does that feel like, and how’s how have you handled that?
Moira Sinclair 39:00
Are you coping? You’re right. I think there’s a couple of things. One is, I think there’s a peculiarity about being a funder as well in this, which is, you know, a lot of people are very interested in talking to you while you are chief executive of the Hammond Foundation. And funnily enough, it’s not because it’s your Moira. It’s because you’re perceived to have access to the chequebook, and if you lose sight of that as a funder, even while you’re doing the job, you’re on hiding to nothing, because you start to make assumptions which are just not based on truth. So I’ve always tried to hold it there. It doesn’t mean it’s been easy. I mean, I think bits of it, it’s really interesting. So I did a coaching credit accreditation just before I left, and partly that was to enable me to validate something that I had been think I’ve been doing anyway, and I wanted to make sure that I was going to offer good value to people. Because I do think there, I think this is a time limited window, but I think there is a period of time if you’ve been a chief exec, and also if you’re a chair, when you can add value in supporting leaders, because you’ve been through it relatively recently, and because the context hasn’t changed that much since you stepped away. So I’m hoping that a mix of being a chair and a trustee and a coach can add some value to a sector that I really still care about, and in adding value that is good for me as a human being, it makes me feel productive, which is a definite trait that I need to be nurtured. I also think there’s something quite interesting about beginning to find one’s own voice again, which sounds I think people might raise their eyes and what are you talking about. But I think particularly at Arts Council England, and to some extent, as a Chief Exec. Anyway, you moderate yourself. You have to. You’re not speaking for yourself. You’re speaking on behalf of your organisation. Perhaps for this next phase of my life, I can speak a bit more on the things that matter to me and the things that I care about, I can speak up a bit more. So maybe there’s a little bit of me beginning to test myself on that, because it’s tough being a leader at the moment. You know, as a membership organisation, it’s really tough out there, and I think leaders do need support. They need allies, and they need critical friends, and they need that coaching piece as well. I think that energises me, and I think it allows me to think about, yeah, being useful and productive for this next phase.
Jane Ide 41:52
I absolutely love that book ending of you started your journey. You started talking this afternoon, your journey of finding your voice as a child, and now you’re bringing it full circle. And I completely recognise what you say, that all of us who are leaders to a greater or lesser degree, we cannot. We are we aim to be authentic. Obviously, we want to be honest, we want to be clear about who we are. But it’s not your voice that is heard, it’s your organisation, it’s your role, the voice that is heard. So I think that’s a really lovely looping of where you started to, where you’ve come to, and and I have to say, and I don’t mean this as as flippantly as it might sound, I am, I am certain that you will find that lots and lots of people do want to know you, but you’ll now know that it’s not because you’ve got access to a check, which is really, really good news. Thank you, Maria. We’re going to run out of time, and it’s been such a fascinating conversation. So many things I’d love to talk through with you more, but I’m going to finish with one last question, which is, given the journey you’ve had inside and outside of the sector, and particularly that perspective that you have on on being a leader and leadership within our sector. If you had one message for somebody who’s just at the start of their career as a chief executive, what would it be?
Moira Sinclair 43:14
I think it would be, go for it, and let’s not have that imposter syndrome thing. So I think I’d say to people, think back to what’s got you here at all points in my What did you call it the wiggly line career? Squiggly career? Yes, yes. You know, I think you have to find in you the space to acknowledge and embrace what you’ve achieved so far, because we are picking up skills and experience all the time. So I would say, do that and then give yourself permission to continue to learn. Because that certainly, in the last 10 years at Paul Hamlyn Foundation, I have changed my stance and changed my leadership style, and you can’t do that if you if you think you have to be perfect all the time. So I would say this is more than one thing, isn’t it? But yeah, give yourself permission to learn as you go and put support in place, from from peers, from the board, from membership bodies. You should not and cannot do it on your own. You need someone or something else out there standing alongside you.
Jane Ide 44:29
Our listeners won’t be able to see. But of course, I am nodding very vigorously to that last point, because that is why we exist as a key vote. And I think you know it absolutely is the root of how we came to be. And thank you. Really, really great advice for anybody, I think, anybody, any stage of their chief exec career, but particularly those who are starting out, particularly that point about let’s not have that imposter syndrome. I like that. Let’s, let’s, let’s just not have it. It shouldn’t be a thing that we have to think about. Thank you, Moira, it’s been a real pleasure talking to you, and I am very much looking forward to seeing what we haven’t even touched on, all the things that you do as a trustee and as a chair, and there’s huge amounts of things that you already and still continue to do in our sector. I’m sure you will still continue to be extremely active, but I’m looking forward to hearing what you do with your own voice as well. So thank you very much indeed.
Moira Sinclair 45:24
It’s a pleasure. Thank you for having me.