This paper aims to contribute to the governance and accountability literature, by examining how governance processes influence accountability objectives in the context of UK arts organisations.
It uses empirical data from interviews and secondary sources to examine the governance mechanisms used by government to direct and control arts organisations, and the perceptions regarding their effectiveness in achieving accountability objectives.
The findings show that the government’s value for money rhetoric used to govern art organisations had the unintended consequence of diverting resources away from sociocultural objectives, and reprioritising politico-economic objectives. Arts organisations were pressured to think like businesses to raise funding, cut costs and scale down their sociocultural activities. Interviewees from arts organisations attempted to unshackle from government rules by portraying themselves as champions and protector of arts and culture.
Despite the unbalanced power relationship, arts organisations countered the value for money discourse of government by showing their uniqueness and how they contribute to the realms of arts and culture.
