As chairman of the Irish Museum of Modern Art, Marie Donnelly proposed Brian Kennedy as the institution's new director. Two board members stepped down in protest at the way the appointment was handled. Kennedy withdrew. Donnelly resigned. It then emerged that a senior politician had lobbied her not to appoint Kennedy. She suggests a way forward for the museum

Aidan Dunne's article a fortnight ago raised the question of whether the Irish Museum of Modern Art would be better, in present circumstances, to leave the dust to settle rather than attempt to headhunt a new director. It is a valid question, and one that raises several others.

There is that of the very notion of director as supremo, for example, the traditional museum concept of a leader whose personal vision sets and then dominates the agenda.

It is at least arguable that the complexities of a modern museum demand a different, more contemporary style of management, with a team-based emphasis. The director's role would then be to co-ordinate, motivate and manage the various critical elements: curation, exhibitions, education and research, development, public facilities and so on.

IMMA's articles of association are largely silent on the nature and role of the office of director and chief executive. The board decides on the emphasis to be given to the various aspects of the role.

The board I chaired decided to give more weight to artistic and curatorial vision and experience than to any of the other required characteristics in its search for a director. As it happened, the board decided to offer the position to an individual whose expertise was such that the question did not have to be asked: Dr Brian Kennedy is a world-class museum director and an outstanding chief executive. The point is that there may be more than one way to run IMMA.

Dunne is right about IMMA's staff. They have done an admirable job in the most difficult circumstances. Instead of rushing to appoint a supremo, however, IMMA might now benefit more from a strengthening of its core functions, in particular its curatorial and exhibitions work, which are at the heart of an art museum's life. It is the programme of a museum that is the driver for everything else, not least private-sector funding.

An adequately resourced curatorial and exhibitions function would allow the museum to think differently about what it requires of a director and chief executive.

The key difficulty with this proposal, however, may be the board itself, or, more accurately, the structure of the board. Every chief executive needs a board that is committed, informed and independent. In the absence of structures that ensure such a board is always in place, there is perhaps no alternative to having a chief executive who is also the principal author of policy, strategy and vision. What the board then does is another matter.

The statutory basis for appointing the board is, in my view, fundamentally flawed. The entire board is appointed by the Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands, and it is replaced every five years. It is difficult to imagine a system less conducive to the proper long-term functioning of a museum of art.

When I was first approached about chairing the board I insisted, as a condition of my acceptance, that the board have legal and financial expertise. The Minister, to her credit, accepted my view and appointed two individuals of outstanding ability. This kind of intervention by the chairman should not be necessary. Structures should be in place to ensure a board has the required competence.

I suggest, however, that amending legislation is not immediately necessary to bring this about (although, in the longer term, such change is, I believe, both necessary and inevitable). The Minister could quite easily decide to delegate the nomination of some or all board members to another body or bodies.

The Arts Council could play a role, as could the universities. The Office of Public Works might well be consulted. As chairman, I took steps to secure a more active international council for IMMA, a body that might also play a role and that might allow for deepening relationships with one or more world-class museums of contemporary art, with potential for cross-participation in their boards.

We need to get away from the provincialism of board appointments. It would be a sign of a mature democracy were the State to deem it unnecessary to exercise control over matters of cultural and artistic expression.

Bruce Arnold expressed this view succinctly last year, when he wrote that those responsible for board appointments to specialist institutions covered by the terms "arts", "culture" and "heritage" - if not all state institutions - must cease using the power for the purpose of political patronage.

It would be wrong, however, to be despondent about IMMA's prospects. As I pointed out in a publication to mark the museum's 10th anniversary, these are still the very early days of IMMA's first 100 years.

The real achievement of IMMA in its first decade has been its ability to articulate issues of contemporary art, to give a voice to contemporary art in Ireland where previously there was silence and to challenge the Irish public with a programme that was brave and inventive. All of this was achieved with a budget that can most kindly be described as unusually small.

Now that a distinctive character has been forged, it is time for IMMA to strengthen its presence both in Ireland and on the international art stage. IMMA is a national institution first, with a remit that extends to the entire country.

Equally, however, IMMA cannot fulfil its obligation to the Irish public unless it engages enthusiastically, comprehensively and continuously with the international art community. This is a long-term endeavour.

Dunne is right, therefore, to urge caution. There is nothing wrong with leaving things as they are for the time being. IMMA is not going away.

It would be a great pity if the urgent were now allowed to drive out the important. The crucial task is to build a museum of enduring value, with structures that will support rather than weaken its institutional framework. The only really urgent task is to ensure that the existing management team is sufficiently resourced and supported while better structures are put in place.

Instead of hiring a new "supremo" director, IMMA might adopt a team-based management style.

This would place further responsibility on the board. New structures should ensure IMMA's board is committed, informed and independent.

In the absence of legislation to ensure this, the Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands, above, could delegate the appointment of the board.