Power and Structure in Theater: Asymmetries of Power 3658422793, 9783658422790

Citation preview

Thomas Schmidt

Power and Structure in Theater Asymmetries of Power

Power and Structure in Theater

Thomas Schmidt

Power and Structure in Theater Asymmetries of Power

Prof. Dr. Thomas Schmidt Master Program Theater- and ­Orchestra-Management University of Music and Performing Arts Frankfurt a. M., Germany

ISBN 978-3-658-42279-0 ISBN 978-3-658-42280-6  (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-42280-6 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature. The registered company address is: Abraham-Lincoln-Str. 46, 65189 Wiesbaden, Germany

For Noah

The Tyrant is, in effect, the enemy of hope. (Stephen Greenblatt 2018)

Power tends to corrupt and absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely. (Lord Acton 1887)

No emotion robs the mind so completely of its ability to act and think as fear. (Edmund Burke 1757)

The publication refers to the results of the study Art and Power in Theater (2018), a cooperation project between the Master’s Program Theater and Orchestra Management at the University of Music and Performing Arts Frankfurt/ Main and the ensemble-network. Ms. Magdalena Strömberg, assistant of the study program (2017–2018), has accompanied and supported the evaluation of the study results.

Acknowledgments

I thank my family, and my son for the precious time and courage he gives me. I thank my close friends and colleagues who have supported me in recent years. Without their encouragement, nothing would be possible. I thank my assistant Magdalena Strömberg, who has accompanied the study from the beginning and supported me in the preparation of the data. I also thank my colleagues from the ensemble-network, the cooperation partner of this study. I thank the 1966 participants, who took the time and effort to participate in the study and express themselves for the first time in this form. I hope that with this publication I can express my gratitude and confidence that more and more will change in the future and that each publication of this kind contributes to the further reform of the theater landscape—no matter how strong the headwind may blow. I thank the Society of Friends and Supporters of the University of Music and Performing Arts in Frankfurt am Main (GFF) for their support. I thank the students, assistants and alumni of our Master’s program in Theater and Orchestra Management at the University of Music and Performing Arts in Frankfurt/Main, with whom I have been in a lively and creative dialogue for over ten years, as well as the colleagues of our department, the dean’s office, and my university, the presidet, the management and staff, for their support. And last but not least I thank my publisher, my editor, and the production management for their excellent care of this eighth joint book project.

XV

Contents

1 Power as a Political Resource—And as a Decision-Making and Management Tool in Theater. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2 The Peculiarities of the German Theater System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 2.1 The Theater Landscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 2.2 Organizational Structure and Organizational Chart of the Theater. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 2.3 Management and Organizational Culture in Public Theaters . . . . . . 37 2.3.1 Management Models: Ethics of the Organization and Leadership Culture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 2.3.2 The Types of a Modern Organizational Culture. . . . . . . . . . . 41 2.4 The Role of the Artistic Director and His Central Function in the Theater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 2.4.1 Management Requirements for an Artistic Director . . . . . . . 44 2.4.2 Isomorphism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 2.4.3 Power Generates More Power. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 2.4.4 Further Roles and Players in the Theater. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 2.5 First Conclusions and Options. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 3 Power and Organization. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 3.1 Power As a Social Phenomenon. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 3.1.1 The Staging of Power in Elias and Kantorowicz. . . . . . . . . . 61 3.1.2 The Struggle for Power in Machiavelli . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 3.1.3 Power Consolidation in Thomas Hobbes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

XVII

XVIII

Contents

3.1.4 Friedrich Nietzsche, Thomas Macho, and the Will to Power. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 3.1.5 Lord Acton, Hannah Arendt, and the Corruption by Power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 3.1.6 Power as a Diversity of Power Relations in Foucault . . . . . . 70 3.1.7 Symbolic Power in Bourdieu. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 3.2 The Destructive Side of Power—Abuse and Violence. . . . . . . . . . . . 76 3.2.1 Power, Abuse, and Narcissism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 3.2.2 Power and Structural Violence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 3.2.3 Spaces of Violence: Elias, Baumann, Baberowski. . . . . . . . . 84 3.3 Organization, Structure, and Power. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 3.3.1 Power Through Political Language and Symbols in Pfeffer and Edelman. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 3.3.2 Rationalization of Decisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 3.3.3 The Social Construction of Societal Reality . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 3.3.4 Significance and Role of Political Language. . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 3.3.5 Structural Asymmetry, Structure, and Power. . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 3.3.6 Ambiguity in Organizations as Power Potential (March, Simon, Olsen). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 3.3.7 Formal and Informal Power Structures in Crozier/ Friedberg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 3.3.8 Structure Influences Action and Generates Power (Giddens, Mintzberg). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 3.3.9 Power, Imbalance, Conformity, and Consensus (Burawoy) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118 3.4 Organizational Culture as a Carrier of Power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 3.5 Can Power be Measured?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 3.6 Ethically Regulated and Controlled Influence Versus Power. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 4 Power and Abuse in Theater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 4.1 General Situation of Participants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 4.2 Social and Work Situation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 4.3 Abuse of Power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 4.4 Sexual Assaults . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184 4.5 Representation of Employees’ Interests at the Theater . . . . . . . . . . . 200 4.6 Protection of the Personal Rights of Theater Employees . . . . . . . . . 219 4.7 Education Context. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233

Contents

XIX

4.8 The Internal Locking of Theaters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239 4.9 Summary Assessment and Classification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282 5 Results of the Study in Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285 5.1 The Results of the Study in Numbers and Overviews. . . . . . . . . . . . 285 5.1.1 Social Situation and Working Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285 5.1.2 Current Presence of Power Abuse at German Theaters. . . . . 293 5.1.3 Sexual Assaults . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 5.1.4 Involvement of Representatives of the Works Council . . . . . 298 5.1.5 Protection of Employees’ Personal Rights at the Theater. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299 5.1.6 Education Context. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300 5.1.7 The Internal Locking of Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301 5.2 Currently Experienced Forms of Power Abuse in Theater . . . . . . . . 302 5.2.1 Percentage Distribution of Power Abuse. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304 5.2.2 Experienced Forms of Power Abuse—Explanations. . . . . . . 304 5.3 Brief Overview of the Study Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335 6 Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337 6.1 The Basic Forms of Structural Power in Theater. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338 6.2 Power-Reducing and -Containing Measures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 350 6.2.1 Ethical Theater Management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352 6.2.2 Team and Process-Oriented Structural Reform of Theaters (TPSR-T). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 380 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 399 Appendix 1—Theater Crises in D, AUT, and CH 2008–2019 (March 2019). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 401 Appendix 2—Value-Based Code of Conduct for the Prevention of Sexual Assault and Abuse of Power (German Stage Association, DBV 2018). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403 Appendix 3—Code of the Performing Arts Action Alliance (Excerpt) (as of: 12/08/2018). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 405 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407

List of Figures

Fig. 1.1

Crises and abuse of power in theaters in D, AUT, CH (2008–2019) (Schmidt 2019). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Fig. 1.2 Management and structural errors in theaters (Source: own representation). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Fig. 2.1 Classic model of a two-division house—1st and 2nd level (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Fig. 2.2 General Directorship or Intendanten-model with strongly centralized departments (Schmidt 2018). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Fig. 2.3 Dual leadership of artistic director and managing director in a GmbH (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Fig. 2.4 Basic structure of an organization according to Mintzberg. (Source Schmidt 2018, after Mintzberg 1979) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Fig. 2.5 The simplified structure of the technical/workshop and the drama department (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Fig. 2.6 Directorate model with central production team (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Fig. 2.7 Matrix organization of a theater of the future (production flow model) (Schmidt 2018). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Fig. 2.8 The organizational models of public German theaters (Schmidt 2019) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Fig. 2.9 Power and leadership concepts related to the theater. (Source Schmidt 2019, after: Schreyögg 2016; Wien and Franzke 2014) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Fig. 2.10 The most important players in the theater and the attributes of their power. Draft (Schmidt 2019). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

XXI

XXII

Fig. 3.1

List of Figures

The relationship between physical and perceived results and power considerations, political language, and symbolic activities (Pfeffer 1981, p. 183, Fig. 6.1). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 Fig. 3.2 The language levels of theater operations (Schmidt 2018). . . . . 101 Fig. 3.3 Formal and informal organizational structures in the theater (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 Fig. 3.4 Organizational-cultural perspectives and paradigms. (Schultz 1994; after Matys 2014, p. 60) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 Fig. 3.5 Power distribution in the theater (I). Matrix of potentially powerful actors. (Schmidt 2019; after Pfeffer 1981; Matiasek and Nienhüser 2010) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 Fig. 3.6 Power distribution in the theater (II). Matrix of powerful actors—Future. (Source: own representation). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 Fig. 3.7 The six types of power in the theater. (Schmidt 2019; after French and Raven 1959). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 Fig. 3.8 Leadership through power and influence in the theater. (Schmidt 2018; after Krause 2004). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 Fig. 4.1 Distribution of participants by type of theater and profession (2018) (Schmidt 2018). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 Fig. 4.2 Distribution of average income (Schmidt 2018). . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 Fig. 4.3 Living conditions of theater artists in D (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . 155 Fig. 4.4 Participant groups staggered by daily working hours (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 Fig. 4.5 Weekend work and compensation at German theaters (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 Fig. 4.6 Current presence of power abuse at German theaters (with the option of multiple mentions) (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . . 165 Fig. 4.7 Experienced forms of power abuse in the theater (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 Fig. 4.8 Existential threats and power abuse (Schmidt 2018). . . . . . . . . . 183 Fig. 4.9 Forms of innuendos in theater (Schmidt 2018). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185 Fig. 4.10 Initiators and Perpetrators of Assaults (Schmidt 2018). . . . . . . . 193 Fig. 4.11 Currently and historically experienced forms of abuse of power. (Source: own representation). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268 Fig. 4.12 The power triangle in theater (Schmidt 2018). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270 Fig. 5.1 Fluctuation ranges and representativeness of the study (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286

List of Figures

Fig. 5.2 Fig. 5.3 Fig. 5.4 Fig. 5.5 Fig. 5.6 Fig. 5.7 Fig. 5.8 Fig. 5.9 Fig. 5.10 Fig. 5.11 Fig. 5.12 Fig. 5.13 Fig. 5.14 Fig. 5.15 Fig. 6.1 Fig. 6.2 Fig. 6.3 Fig. 6.4

Fig. 6.5 Fig. A.1

XXIII

Number of performers and artistic staff (DBV 2018; Schmidt 2018). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286 Distribution of Participants by Type of Theater and Profession (Schmidt 2018). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287 Distribution of average incomes (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . 288 Asymmetry of incomes—Average fees of participants (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289 Living conditions of artists at theaters in Germany (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290 Sample calculation for an in-house wage agreement with a redistribution model (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291 Participant groups staggered by daily working hours (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292 Weekend Work and Compensation at German Theaters (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292 Current Presence of Power Abuse at German Theaters (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293 Experienced Forms of Power Abuse (Schmidt 2018). . . . . . . . . 294 Existential Threats and Power Abuse (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . . . 295 Forms of Indecency in Theater (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 296 Offers and assaults (Schmidt 2018). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 Experienced forms of power abuse in German theaters (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305 The eight basic elements of structural power in the theater (Schmidt 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349 Core themes of ethical management in the theater (BMAS 2011; Schmidt 2019). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 358 Competency requirements for professional success. (Source: 4managers, 2019) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 364 Leadership styles according to Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee applied to the theater. (Source: Goleman et al. 2002; Schmidt 2019). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 368 Criteria for Moral Leadership in Theater according to Covey (Schmidt 2019). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 373 Crises and power abuse in theaters in D, AUT, CH (2008–2019). (Schmidt 2019). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 401

1

Power as a Political Resource—And as a Decision-Making and Management Tool in Theater

This study is about people who love the theater, who have dedicated their education and their lives, their dreams and their entire strength to it. They work as performers, assistants, staff members of the operations office, PR, management or administration, as stage managers or prompters, as makeup artists or prop masters, as carpenters, technicians or tailors, as set designers or as members of the theater management. They all wish to be part of a successful production and part of a successful theater, they wish to contribute, to prove their knowledge and skills, and to be recognized and respected for it. For this, they work many hours a day in the theater for very little money, far beyond regular working hours, and are also willing to rehearse and perform, build, paint, set up and light on weekends. However, the ability of artistic directors to motivate their staff has decreased significantly in recent years, and in many theaters has given way to a brittle, sarcastic or tense relationship between staff and management. This is the average. And of course, there are still many exemplary artistic directors who are there for their colleagues, protecting and developing them. But there are also the black sheep, which have become unmistakable because since the founding of the ensemblenetwork and since #Metoo, more and more theater employees have come forward and are no longer willing to tolerate and accept abuse of power. This study aims to give them a voice, and at the same time, to determine on a scientific basis and with modern measurement methods who is affected by power, abuse, and violence, and to what extent. This study also has a personal background. I was still a very young person when my grandfather, then a busy actor at a major playhouse, left the theater before his 60th birthday because he could no longer bear the pressure of the directors, the artistic director, but above all the artistic director’s dreaded tantrums. My grandmother, a successful opera singer who worked with Berghaus, Felsenstein, © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 T. Schmidt, Power and Structure in Theater, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-42280-6_1

1

2

1  Power as a Political Resource …

and Herz, with Dessau, Masur, and Konwitschny, among others, also prematurely ended her career because the abuse of power of her artistic director became increasingly unbearable. But the topic remains a constant issue in our family. 20 years later, my brother, who was studying acting at the time, gave up his dream job because he could no longer bear and support the constant, intrusive, and manipulative pressure at the acting school and theater and the abuse of power by teachers and directors. He completely left the theater and studied film directing in Munich to work in the neighboring genre from then on. Another ten years later, the acting division of the theater where my father worked as an actor was dissolved due to political inconsistencies, media opportunism, and the inexperience and narrow-mindedness of the artistic director. My father had the chance to move to the renowned neighboring theater, but he was exhausted from the many years as an ensemble actor, frustrated by the experienced power and abuses of power by artistic directors and amateurish directors, so he declined this opportunity to work independently and choose his projects. When I was younger, I wondered if it was just my family – perhaps because of a particular sensitivity—that was affected by perceiving the power of artistic directors in theaters as such, recognizing the toxic status of some of them, and the negative or even destructive management of the houses that had taken hold in the theaters. The many conversations I initially participated in as a silent observer, which my grandparents or my father and later I myself had with befriended theater artists from many houses, showed me that this was not the case—similar and far more serious problems everywhere. So not special cases, but a more widespread phenomenon? For over twenty years, I have been dealing with theater from various perspectives. The issue of power and abuses of power has always been virulent, and where it was part of my work and my publications, it was always treated with great seriousness—as far as my sources of information reached at that time. My publications, especially Theater, Crisis, and Reform (2016) repeatedly points to this phenomenon, which is still unexplored and paradoxically scientifically neglected in the theater sector, with great emphasis. For several years, at the latest with the founding of the ensemble-network, it has become clear how long the affected artistic directors in Germany have managed to downplay the issue of power, abuse, and violence and sweep it under the rug so that nothing becomes public. The fear of the artists has helped them in this. So it is not just one of many problems that need to be solved in the theater, but one of the most serious and important structural issues that hinders reforms and urgently pending modernization processes. Since Burgtheater Vienna (2014), theaters in Trier (2015), Bern (2018), Schwerin (2019), Karlsruhe (2020), Volksbühne Berlin (2021) and Berlin Festspiele (2021), a.o. there have been increasing cases in which untenable artistic directors are dismissed (Fig. 1.1 and 1.2), and #Metoo

1  Power as a Political Resource …

3

Theater Crises

Number1

Management errors

41

Structural error

44

Mistakes of cultural policy

41

Lack of supervision

28

Abuse of power

18

Nepotism

12

Total

50

Fig. 1.1   Crises and abuse of power in theaters in D, AUT, CH (2008–2019) (Schmidt 2019)

MANAGEMENT AND STRUCTURAL ERRORS at theaters in D, AUT and CH (2008 - 2019)

(as at: 02/28/2019)

2008: Berlin (State Opera), Leipzig (Opera) 2009: Wuppertal, Stuttgart (State Opera) 2010: Bremen, Hamburg (drama), Gera/Altenburg, Weimar 2011: Darmstadt, Leipzig (opera), Bonn, Görlitz; Cologne (theater), Halberstadt, Schwerin 2012: Mannheim, Frankfurt (drama); Leipzig, Eisenach, Halle, Cologne (opera) 2013: Wuppertal, Eisleben, Dessau 2014: Burgtheater Vienna, Düsseldorf (drama), Schleswig-Holsteinisches Landestheater 2015: Darmstadt, Halle, Rostock, Zwickau/Plauen, State Ballet Berlin 2016: Munich (Kammerspiele), Hagen, Potsdam, Trier, Bern, Wuppertal 2017: Halle, Volksbühne Berlin 2018: Chemnitz, Cottbus, Cologne (drama), Darmstadt, Meiningen, Erl (Festival), Bern 2019: Schwerin, Halle, Berlin State Opera (until end of February)

Fig. 1.2   Management and structural errors in theaters (2019) (Source: own representation)

(2018) contributes emphatically to the clarification of discrimination and sexual violence. The idea of surveying employees at theaters has existed since 2016. I

4

1  Power as a Political Resource …

then researched the theoretical material, developed theses, and an extensive questionnaire that I could test beforehand. In the spring of 2018, I can finally launch the survey with the ensemble-network, the cooperation partner of this study, with the goal: hopefully getting enough answers to the many questions about power and structure in the theater. When the first responses come in, it becomes clear that the material (1966 participants, almost 60,000 data sets) is much more extensive and the results are more serious in several respects than expected. The analysis of the response part alone has the scope of a single publication. In addition, there are analyses of theater structures from an organizational theory perspective (Chap. 2), as well as a theoretical examination of the topics of power and violence (Chap. 3), in order to give the investigation a solid theoretical basis. But it is not only the scope, but also the content consistency of the material that already indicates when viewing the first data sets that the facets of power and violence in the theater and their structural anchoring are more far-reaching, diverse, and shocking than had been expected. Stephen Greenblatt, one of the most important Shakespeare researchers of our time, writes in his book Tyrant. Shakespeare on Power, that power has been a part of the theater since the beginning (Greenblatt 2018). This makes the theater an institution that knows how to reflect society and at the same time think beyond it. Greenblatt is dedicated to the content side of the theater, the material that playwrights provide as a basis for productions. This dramatic material also illuminates the functioning of power processes that reflect the theater as an organization. It soon becomes clear that structure and power are two formative, closely interrelated aspects of theater operations. The German theater—and the structurally related Austrian and German-Swiss theater—is still based on the patriarchal structures of 1900 and has hardly undergone any significant changes. While the theater continued to develop in terms of content and form, it remained trapped in the early structures. This leads to friction and more and more bottlenecks in the operation of theaters today: A long-term evaluation shows that there have been a total of 50, or an average of four major crises in the theater every year in the German-speaking area in the past twelve years (2008-2019)—with a strong accumulation in 2018 and 2019, as had never been seen before (Appendix 1). Of the crises, 80% (41) were caused by inadequate management and/or unsustainable organizational structures (44), see Fig. 1.1, which often mutually reinforced each other. In 18 cases, there was an abuse of power, and in another twelve cases, nepotism, favoring close associates in the awarding of contracts, engagements, or positions in the theater—a usually well-guarded secret and actually a taboo. About 80% of the crises are those of cultural policy (41 out of 50 crises),

1  Power as a Political Resource …

5

which made wrong decisions or did not effectively counter the crises and their causes. 50% of the crises were triggered by a lack of or missing supervision by supervisory boards and were not sufficiently combated by them (28). Figure 1.2 shows the crises related to the years between 2008 and 2018 and the affected theaters. This long-term study only covers crises that have received public reception through the media or public discourses. A number of other crises remain persistent rumors, secrets, or personal narratives of those affected and cannot and should not be listed here. The seriousness of the situation has now also been recognized by the German Stage Association (Deutscher Bühnenverein), which, under pressure from the ensemble-network and the public, published a “Value-based Code of Conduct for the Prevention of Sexual Assault and Abuse of Power” at its annual general meeting on June 9, 2018, in Lübeck (Appendix 2). The beginning of the present study (March 2018) precedes the publication of the code by a few weeks, and the associated survey has already stirred up some dust and received widespread distribution among the ensembles, which has also not escaped the attention of the artistic directors, whose pressure to act in the Stage Association has thus increased significantly. With this work, I also want to examine to what extent the demands of this code are actually being realized and which approaches cannot be realized due to the structure and culture of the theater. The code formulates its concern as follows: “We show attitude and encourage each other to prevent any form of assault or discrimination. Gender justice and equal opportunities are essential for us. We face the challenge of reflecting and living the diversity of our society in our houses. Internally, we show each other respect and appreciation. We ensure a cooperative collaboration in the companies and a social interaction with the willingness to openly address and resolve conflicts. We strive for clear and trustworthy communication at all levels of our houses.” (DBV 2018b)

Overall, the contents of the code are well-formulated and address all the critical issues that have come to a head in the months leading up to the annual meeting of the Bühnenverein. This also involves a clear responsibility of the artistic directors: “In this context, the management and executive level of each theater and orchestra have special duties of care for the employees. As members of the Deutscher Bühnenverein, we face this responsibility and see it as our task to ensure a discrimination- and fear-free working environment with this value-based code of conduct.” (DBV 2018b)

6

1  Power as a Political Resource …

Here, two statements are of particular value: the duty of care of the artistic directors and the goal of a discrimination- and fear-free working environment. To what extent and in what quality this is already in place, I will examine with this study. If this code is one day implemented by all theater directors and management members, there may no longer be open forms of abuse of power in the future. Until then, it is important to publish each case in strict monitoring so that the public can participate and form an opinion, as happened in July 2018 at the Stadttheater Bern in Switzerland. The Swiss stage association—at that time still under the artistic director of the Bern theater—had not yet developed and adopted a code of conduct by this point. Therefore, the foundation board of the Bern theater seemed to refer to essential contents of codes from the economy in the moment of crisis. I mention this case here at the beginning because it will serve generations of theater students as a classic example to analyze how close power and abuse of power can be, and how rarely and late this is reflected by artistic directors and supervisory boards (Tobler 2018). The thesis of this work is: It is the asymmetrical structures of the theaters and the far-reaching power of an artistic director based on them, that lead in some theaters to the person and their actions as the head of a theater being considered omnipotent and untouchable. Serious mistakes are made in the exercise of the office and in dealing with employees, as will be demonstrated in this study. According to various press reports, there are artistic directors at German and Swiss theaters who enter into love relationships with subordinate employees and reveal this too late or not at all to supervisory boards and employees— even though the relationships in the house may have been known for months and already have real consequences for other employees. In addition, there are directors who, shortly after taking office, first create the artistically representative office of the artistic director or, in addition to the artistic director’s office, also take over the managing director’s office, as various media report, crowning themselves and thus systematically and without consequences undermining the specifications of a supervisory board and their own employment contract (Tobler 2018). Combining so many different tasks in one function leads to an almost uncontrollable accumulation of power and an unclear concentration of tasks. Not for nothing does the four-eyes principle apply in every organization, which is hollowed out by this. The director should primarily be a manager without appearing artistically himself, and vice versa. However, some artistic directors succeed in pushing through their goals through clever lobbying on their own behalf—at the expense of order in their own house. These cases, which are highlighted and analyzed in detail in this study, unfortunately become examples of abuse of power and nepotism, as the motives of a power-conscious and low-empathy personality

1  Power as a Political Resource …

7

are linked to the immature organizational structure of the theater business. The results of this study will clearly show that these are not isolated cases and that a whole series of theaters are affected. While in the 1990s and 2000s the financial crisis posed the greatest threat to public theaters, mostly due to a melange of planning mishaps and miscalculations of audience behavior, coupled with cultural policy pressure and budgetary constraints of municipalities and states, since 2010 it has been primarily internal crises that have put theaters in difficult waters. The focus is on management errors and structural problems, which are favored by a lack of supervision and misjudgments of cultural policy, thus promoting the abuse of power, as the analysis of the crises of recent years shows. The artistic directors often seem to forget that it is not about them, their reputation, their income, or their career, which they still fight for with incredible selfevidence in the face of the greatest mistakes, but about the future of a theater and the jobs of an average of 300-400 employees, each of whom is at least as important as that of the artistic director. Instead of hubris, a sense of proportion and equal footing among theater employees should prevail again, each of whom occupies their place in the cosmos of a theater. It is often forgotten that the artistic director is primarily one thing: the responsible manager of the theater, as long as politics does not finally begin to responsibly divide this task with new management models. The “sole rule” not only impairs the reform and innovation capabilities of the important institution of theater but also favors the excessive power of employers and the theater directors commissioned by them, which often inevitably leads to conflicts with the ensembles and employees. This can hinder the development of the artistic potential of the theater, its renewal, and thus also its future. This publication is based on the results of the study Art and Power in Theater, which was conducted in May 2018. With 1966 participants, it is the largest study with these focus in the field of theater worldwide. The results of this study are to be presented here for the first time in English and placed in a scientific context. The theoretical basis is the examination of power-theoretical works, among others, by Pierre Bourdieu (1992), Jeffrey Pfeffer (1982), John Galtung (1975), Anthony Giddens (1988), as well as Michel Crozier and Erhard Friedberg (1993), but also with newer considerations by Marie-France Hirigoyen (1999). As the results of the study will show, the power constellations outlined above are not an isolated case in the German-speaking theater landscape. The cases often resemble each other and point to similarly structured elements in the management and organization of theater operations. These include:

8

1  Power as a Political Resource …

• The Intendant-centered theater model, which has secured the sole power of the Intendant since around 1905. At that time, Max Reinhardt and others succeeded in developing the city theater model that had been in force until then in such a way that the intendant combines and secures all important power positions—those of the artistic director, the and the manager or impresario (Rühle 2005)—to this day. • The strong concentration of power with the Intendant that goes beyond this, through the Intendant-contract, the house right and other insignia, such as the disposal rights over all resources and the personnel sovereignty. This is associated with the right to dismiss all employees, especially the artistic ones, without giving valid reasons; the so-called “Normalvertrag Bühne”, a special contract for the employed theater-artists refers to this euphemistically as nonrenewal (meaning: release and devaluation, as we will see later). • The divisional organization model, in which the theater’s employees and production processes are organized according to administrative principles, but not according to the actual production flows. This is a major reason why the theater operation works with low productivity and burns unnecessary resources day by day within an elaborate discussion, coordination, and utilization culture. • The simultaneous occurrence of a latent subversion culture, as is generally the case with autocratically designed systems, and which manifests itself in the resistance of ensembles and affiliated non-profit organizations (ensemblenetzwerk, dancersconnect, regie-netzwerk) and in alternative organizational forms (Weimar model, private legal forms, directorates, resistance to mergers, etc.). Five years after a major management and financial crisis in 2014, the situation at the most important German-speaking theater, the Burgtheater in Vienna, is in 2019 by no means better. In a letter to the supervisory board and the Ministry of Culture, over 60 named artists of the theater, including a large number of ensemble members, complain about the abusive behavior of their former Intendant, and of some other male directors. According to the statements of the former ensemble members, this letter is about the kind of intransparent administration, xenophobia, and various forms of verbal and psychological humiliation of women by the former Intendant, but also about a constant climate of fear in rehearsals and in the theater (Standard 2018). The colleagues describe that during the rehearsal processes, “questions about sexual practices, racism, and the defamation of homosexuality” were repeatedly raised by the Intendant and the scenic directors in order to humiliate women, people of color, and homosexuals in a harsh manner

1  Power as a Political Resource …

9

(ibid). According to the reports, this is not about individual cases, but about systematic and structural abuse over five years, which takes place in various forms and facets: through humiliation and fear-mongering, through insults and defamation, through shaming and exposure. However, the former Intendant has, of course, not commented on this. In doing so, the employees describe very clearly how difficult it was for them to speak up at all five years later, that it took many of them years to think about what had happened, to dare to communicate with each other at all, even years after the artistic director had been dismissed for mismanagement and could no longer impose any sanctions. This permanent atmosphere of structural fear has led to mutual distrust over the years, in which none of the employees could any longer determine who was helping the perpetrator, who was the beneficiary, who was the follower, and who was the humiliated—which made conversations and initial action possible only five years later. The action of writing this letter was therefore necessary and to be understood as an outcry because the former artistic director, due to his good networks from the old days, was now again receiving directing assignments from his old comrades at major German theaters in the East and West, as the local artistic directors apparently could not successfully resist the charisma of their old friend—even against the vote of the ensemble. The processes of power, as can be seen on the following pages, do not run linearly, as in classical physics. They can lead to people defending themselves only after years because they realize what has happened to them. The ongoing debate, which was and is loudly and sustainably heard in the theater landscape through some writings and the work of the ensemble-network, has led to actors and artistic staff in the ensembles beginning to talk to each other, communicating more quickly and clearly than before, so that the perpetrators are at least no longer protected. The many examples are telling—and yet they must be carefully examined and disclosed. They illustrate the two possible and to be investigated sides of abuse. On the one hand, the cold form of power abuse by fearful and at the same time driven artistic directors, who in the end are frightened by their own power and the resulting actions, and on the other hand, the artistic directors and directors who embody the self-confident power type and who, due to decreasing caution and ignorance, accumulate everything that the textbook describes as mismanagement: unclear structures, constant expansion of power, nepotism, and finally, in rarer cases, sexism, racism, and phobias. How can the theater, a 120-year-old power structure persist in the second decade of the 21st century in an economic and political model protected by a parliamentary democracy without visibly losing influence? The reasons for this include, among others:

10

1  Power as a Political Resource …

• in the enclave of the protected working public theaters, • in the protection of their organizational structures by politics and the theater association, as well as • in the peculiarity of the often rocky path of an artist to the artistic director and the power-conscious personality type of the artistic directors in the German theater business that emerged or was reinforced in this process, which I will elaborate on in separate chapters, who naturally want to hold on to this model with all their might and means. Artistic directors are not trained in the German-speaking world. A corresponding education is largely rejected; it should primarily be the artistic path that qualifies them for the office. Although there is now further training by the German Theater Association at the LMU in Munich, this only takes place on a few extended weekends alongside the job. Nevertheless, this course is a small start. The only full-time degree program that directly and focusedly aims at careers in theater and music businesses is the Master’s program in Theater and Orchestra Management at the University of Music and Performing Arts in Frankfurt am Main, which, however, focuses on the future of the theater, structural reforms, leadership, cultural politics, lifelong learning, entry into management, and different possible paths within the organizations so that younger graduates can also forge paths to the positions they want to work on one day, including their own, modern concepts that will be developed by them by then. It is still assumed in the theater scene that a scenic director does not need to bring any special training beyond their artistic signature, and he or she is still considered predestined for the position of director. How this came about is difficult to explain rationally, as directing an artistic production with 20 people, embedded in an already pre-structured, functioning theater operation managed by managers, and among largely like-minded people, has little to do with managing a 400-person operation (or larger), with numerous conflicts, crises, communication levels, and highly complex management requirements. It is this mixture of hubris and ignorance that makes the job of theater management a delicate business against the backdrop of increasingly complex conditions. And it is surprising that, in particular, the political supervisory bodies take so little influence on the selection of qualified directors and the associated organization of theater operations, which are subsidized by municipalities and states with an average of 25 million euros per theater and year (80% of the total budget) and play a prominent role locally as an important employer and cultural actor. Political bodies can therefore only be congratulated on decisions such as the recent appointment of a dual leadership at the Landestheater Marburg or at the Komische Oper Berlin,

1  Power as a Political Resource …

11

which includes a managing director who brings qualifications for this business. But also the appointment of three equally entitled theater directors at the Theater am Neumarkt and at the Theater Gessnerallee in Zurich is exemplary and forward-looking (Nachtkritik 2019a). In German culture (politics), however, there is still a mixture of generalistic and genius principles: The artistic director is considered not only as an artist but also as the only possible, brilliant manager of a large organization. They are entrusted with the keys and all rights without their knowledge and abilities being checked. How quickly this can fail if only one of the framing conditions is no longer correct is shown by the 50 cases of crisis of the last ten years that none of the appointed directors could solve. (Figure 1.2) How outdated the artistic=general director model is today is evidenced above all by developments in the wider environment: The completely changed signs in the economy, in nonprofit organizations (NPOs), and even in public administration companies, where directorial principles and collective management models, lean, flexible, and teamoriented structures, etc., are successfully negotiated and implemented. How is the sole representation of the director reflected today in the theater environment? Although there has been a movement against the omnipotence and sole representation claim of directors, against the injustice, and against smaller and larger power abus with the ensemble-network for three years, so far only the tip of the iceberg has found its way into the press. Silence is still preferred. In many places, the function of the director, who is sometimes even called General Intendant in a strictly military manner, is virtually untouchable. There are also a number of examples where, according to press reports, there was a scandal without the director having to leave his post (immediately). Even more questionable are the cases in which it is reported how managing directors propose by expert opinion to close several divisions and dismiss entire ensembles before they themselves change the playing field and go to a new theater to continue their “restructuring work” and thus their own career. A scorched-earth tactic that testifies to how little the theater really means to these actors and how strong their own ego is. Here, too, there may be a lack of profound training in the areas of management of cultural organizations and NPOs, which would have been necessary to keep a large cultural operation artistically, economically, and personally not only on course but also crisis-proof, to further develop and position it for the future (NNN 2015). The tasks that a theater director faces today are so diverse that they require profound training and continuous professional development. I will work out which substantial competencies this training must include, in addition to the classic areas of human resources and business administration, organization and planning, strategy development and operational management, marketing and audience

12

1  Power as a Political Resource …

development, communication and political lobbying, based on the results of this study. Demographic aspects, markets, aspects of modern personnel management, artistic formats, production forms, methods of modern economic planning, audience loyalty, diversity and inclusion, technical aspects, digitalization, and much more are advancing so rapidly that a single artistic director can no longer cover all these areas alone, which are all necessary to keep a theater stable on course, to lead and develop it. However, there is another component that leads to this self-sufficiency and enclave-like nature of theaters: the psychology of power. This is also related to the change processes that occur when a person has uncontrolled and disproportionately large powers for a long period of time. The Berlin historian Jörg Baberowski describes the facts in his book Spaces of Violence, in which he reveals the mechanisms of blinding out one’s own failures. The longer someone is in power, the less able they are to critically reflect on their own exercise of power, especially since it is tempting to increasingly draw control to oneself and to silence critical opinions (Baberowski 2017). This also applies to theaters on a smaller scale. In addition, there is a large discrepancy between the perception of one’s own achievements as a director and the reception of these by one’s own employees or close people. Now it is not the case that the work of theaters would not also be checked by the shareholders, but the supervisory boards mainly focus on the control of audience numbers and economic indicators, annual financial statements and economic plans. Questions about management, organization of operations, strategy development, and personnel management are not checked, even if criticism of a director’s management ignites, as the cases of Rostock, Darmstadt, Schwerin, Cottbus, Bern, and most recently Halle and the Berlin State Opera show (Nachtkritik 2019b; Becker 2019). Lessons are also not learned from crises. Thus, a somewhat less toxic, but by no means well-managing artistic director may follow a poorly managing one, who is then treated like a prophet and savior, just because a few parameters of work improve. These misjudgments occur because theater colleagues have no idea what are the standards in other non-profit organizations and in the economy: that justice and balance prevail, that manners are right, that there is no shouting, but modern and transparent communication, that transgressions and abuse of power are tolerated as little today as nepotism and concentration of power. The issue of power has largely been ignored in cultural management, particularly in the area of theater operations and management. Paradoxically, it is always pointed out that an inappropriate accumulation of power could not even occur in

1  Power as a Political Resource …

13

the theater, because the operation differs so much from the “normal operation” of the economy—and that where there is no profit, power supposedly cannot get out of hand. This, too, is a legend, as the results of this study show. For power seeks various new forms, in which artistic operation is primarily about recognition, fame, and sublimation, and much less about returns and the expansion of markets. Long ago, business, non-profit organizations, and public administrations have transformed into modern managed operations, in which not only the latest scientific and methodological findings are applied, but also compliance and ethical corporate governance, because otherwise the scarce, excellently trained workforce would migrate to other areas. It is the labor market that determines the enforcement of good working conditions. The lack of highly qualified economists and social scientists, as well as technicians and engineers in the economy, leads to a great bargaining power for these influential groups. The artistically, administratively, or technically employed at German public theaters, who are dwindling as permanent employees—their total number is now below 40,000 employees in almost 130 companies (DBV 2018a)—, form a minority compared to the employees of large economic sectors. Their bargaining power is insignificant in the face of an army of unemployed artists, especially performers and musicians, who can move up to the vacant positions at any time without being able to question the working conditions. Moreover, the number of annually trained actors, singers, and dancers from state and private schools, which is well over 400, exceeds the real chances in the labor market, so that directors can confidently fall back on young artists who replace the aging performers at the critical age. A circulus vitiosus arises, putting older artists under pressure because a host of younger ones follow, whose fees are up to 50% below those of the experienced ones. Another reason is the low degree of trade union engagement, which is around 7% among stage performers, while musician colleagues are 99% organized (Theopolis 2019). In any case, the ensembles could learn from the orchestra musicians in terms of organization and bargaining power. The colleagues in technology and trades are also much better organized. They have a relative majority in the personnel representations of the theaters and can thus better enforce the interests of the permanent employees. The interests of the artists are often forgotten or described as non-negotiable because the directors claim that every artist in the ensemble always finds an open door and that all problems can be discussed confidentially. This is a legend at many theaters, otherwise, there would not be so many conflict cases in the theaters and regularly more than 20% of all performers would not be extended or leave their ensembles in each season (Chap. 4).

14

1  Power as a Political Resource …

This is also a symptom of the asymmetry of power: The unclear, undefined distance between the employees and artists of the ensemble and their leader, which leads to trust relationships being imperceptibly burdened and successively exploited by the director. I myself have participated in some non-renewal discussions in which the director not only symbolically cut the tablecloth between himself and the dismissed person, with whom he had been regularly engaged in friendly conversations just months before, until suddenly a rapid loss of trust occurred and the director was no longer willing to continue working together. The “skillful” director combines all this with accusations, disappointment, and preexercised breach of trust, which takes away any motivation for the intimidated non-renewal candidate to fight for their employment through trade unions or legal means. Anyone who goes to a “good friend” of the players, as the director often presents himself, does not want to suspect anything bad and believes that they can turn their situation around with good arguments, although the first letter, the so-called invitation to the hearing (non-renewal hearing), in 90–95% of all cases already signals a firm decision to terminate. The actual termination (non-renewal) usually comes by registered mail a few days after this conversation. The combination of the various elements: • Theater structure and corresponding organizational culture • Insignia of a strongly pronounced, little controlled power • Knowledge and experience gaps as well as lack of training and further education for leaders • Lack of distance between artists and artistic director is a prerequisite for the exploitation of power attributes by artistic directors. Accumulated complaints and journalistic contributions about individual incidents have led me to increasingly deal with the topic of power in the theater. As part of an in-depth examination of theater structures, it had already become apparent that an excessive concentration of power is an inherent component and guiding principle of the theater (Schmidt 2016). However, to what extent the boundaries between structures and power and between verbal and physical violence, psychological terror, and sexual assaults actually blur can only be clarified by a study specifically aimed at these questions and precisely demonstrated based on the statements of the study participants. How shocking these often very brief statements on individual questions are and how much material they simultaneously open up for analysis, I would like to illustrate at this point using selected examples, which I will return to in the context of all results in the investigation part. But they should already make it clear

1  Power as a Political Resource …

15

in this introduction that assaults and violence occur and that more than 50% of all participants in this study are or have been affected. The statements often involve crossing boundaries or blurring the lines between verbal and physical violence, for example when a leader adopts a threatening posture and thus intimidates and threatens the employees under his supervision. Shouting and verbal threats, here also in combination with sexual intrusiveness (“getting too close”), are not trivialities, not minor offenses, but power abuses that make it clear that the leaders who use these methods are certainly not suitable for their tasks, and that the affected theater is a toxic organization as long as these forms of power application are uncommented, not published, and not sanctioned: “Shouting with physically threatening gestures, getting too close.” (Participant 712) What is a slap in the face in the context of a theater? How heavy is a boundary violation when it comes to bringing out a production that five, ten, maybe even twenty thousand spectators will see and that will become an important building block in the theater’s schedule, which is fighting for attention and legitimacy? In the following theater, a director slaps an actress without being sanctioned— a physical assault that also represents a severe discrimination against an actress. The assault is accompanied by an insult and caused because the theater director tolerates and encourages violence in the rehearsal process—a chain of toxic incidents. The theater makes this form of assault possible by not holding anyone accountable. Is this just an oversight or does it already have a system? This is undoubtedly a destructive leader in a toxic organization, neither is he able to fulfill his tasks, nor does the theater provide the framework for safe and protected work without power abuse. The artistic director fails by allowing these abusive incidents. The only option to enable and initiate a reversal from this dead end: In the future, artistic directors must be measured by providing protection and ensuring adequate framework conditions, and if this is not achieved, exposing, punishing, and immediately relieving the perpetrators of their tasks—even if it concerns themselves. “As a beginner, I was slapped by a director because I criticized him for actually tolerating and protecting violent play or rather not play, but behavior of his main actor towards other colleagues. To the slap, he said: ‘I won’t take anything from you, beginner!’” (Participant 242) Even more extensive is the repertoire of abuse of power that a participant in another house must experience and endure, in which psychological terror and physical assaults are mixed. Apparently, this artistic director has created a perfect and at the same time perfidious system of dependencies of his employees for himself, which is not without reason equated with a “slaveholder mentality” (17) by them. In addition, psychological and physical pressure is exerted alter-

16

1  Power as a Political Resource …

nately to threaten and exercise power, to nullify co-determination rights, to withhold information, and to establish a multi-class system in which distinctions are made between the good and the bad, the “loved and unloved,” and corresponding privileges are granted or withdrawn within a reward system. The fact that not a single ensemble member and not a single employee dares to break out of this system and expose it, protect victims and accuse perpetrators, testifies to an authoritarian system of fear that is implemented in parallel, and to the psychological and physical pressure exerted on each individual to permanently press them into the system of oppression and violence shaped by the artistic director; but it also testifies to careerism and opportunism in art operations, which obviously make such a system permanently possible, and which becomes possible due to the high dependency relationship of the artists on their artistic directors until the last breath of their respective contract, which mentally never ends because an artistic director can end any career with a dozen calls to friendly colleagues and potential future employers. “Withholding of information, two-class ensemble (loved and unloved actors), pressure exerted by the management, no co-determination rights in anything, physical assaults by the artistic director, slaveholder mentality of the management.” (Participant 17) Sexual violence can also be associated with nasty and suggestive swear words in psychologically simpler structured people. Nevertheless, it can of course repeatedly succeed for these people to get into leadership positions or become directors, especially for one reason: The fewest of the affected theater directors—almost all former directors—are sufficiently psychologically trained to recognize the special structuring of personalities early enough and/or to react adequately to it. And very few of them have used their time to catch up on the knowledge they obviously lack, through further education, educational leave, sabbatical years with educational reference—there are infinitely many possibilities today not to have to remain where one has been left behind as a student, assistant, and young director. On the other hand, on the structural side, they often have sole decision-making power over appointments and promotions, so that naturally, those who support the power structure are much more likely to benefit than those who endanger it. Education, knowledge, and competencies are power—people with a very good education can much more easily endanger and expose the power of leaders who lack educational segments and personality competencies and who tend to abuse power than those whose educational profile is secondary. The consequence of this should actually be that a theater director never has sole power in personnel appointments and engagements with personnel responsibility, and especially not when it comes to areas that directly affect their own work area. The

1  Power as a Political Resource …

17

logical consequence of this is that a director must have an adequate psychological and personnel management education to be able to fulfill their very demanding tasks today. A healthy organization must have balanced power balances, otherwise, there is a risk that the theater will become a toxic organization. Otherwise, what happened to participant 1564, up to humiliation and complete discrimination, will happen: “Yelling that I couldn’t do anything. Swear words up to the C-word. Groping.” (Participant 1564) Sexual assaults are the order of the day, affecting as many as 6.9% of all participants, so they are no longer to be underestimated in scale. But they never happen only as sexual acts. Sexual assaults are linked to discrimination, mobbing, exposure, and defamation, so that the female employee at the affected theater is caught in a web of power instruments to force her into sexual concessions and at the same time increasingly humiliate and subjugate her as a woman: “Improper touching by the boss, being portrayed as weak because one is a woman, questioning credibility and slander during illness…” (Participant 39) It is usually the youngest, like participant 1846, those at the very bottom of the hierarchy—assistants, beginners on stage, young artistic staff—who are repeatedly exposed to humiliations and sexual advances. An assault must also be considered a power assault that failed due to the good and clever defense of the victim—under different circumstances or with another person, it might have succeeded and caused more damage, and it will certainly happen again if no one stops this perpetrator. The fact of an attempted assault—a attempted rape—normally disqualifies a person from all tasks and positions involving personnel and management responsibilities. Why should the theater not be subject to the same rules as all other areas of society? Politicians are immediately shown the red card, business bosses receive their contract termination, and the small employee is fired. In the future, these processes and facts should be monitored and investigated more closely and comprehensively in the theater, with the aim of removing perpetrator personalities from the system or excluding them from future careers in the theater for a longer period, for the protection of colleagues and for the restoration of a healthy, power- and violence-free working atmosphere in theaters: “As a directing assistant, I was exposed to everything possible: humiliations, outbursts of anger, ambiguous offers, sexual/erotic assaults (which I was able to fend off).” (Participant 1846) Many of these forms of abuse, as the study results will show, come from directors who act narcissistically, or from managers who have been directors for years and have lost touch with reality. Their hubris leads them to believe that they can afford anything because no one stops them anymore, because they are surrounded

18

1  Power as a Political Resource …

by yes-men who secure their own advancement and career with this ticket. Is the purpose of the theater that the bad, toxic, and destructive qualities are inherited like in a bad snowball system from mentor to protégé and from master to apprentice, while the sensitive, intelligent, empathetic, and emotional artists are left behind because they are eroded by a macho-patriarchal atmosphere in theaters, or how else should the remark of participant 1846 be classified? Again, an isolated case or a symptom of power asymmetry? “At my previous theater, I was yelled at, burdened with overwork, punished with bad casting, paid less than younger men, and sexually harassed by a colleague and my director.” (Participant 146) At least the 56% of participants affected by power assaults in this study are no longer isolated cases and cannot be dismissed with clever arguments. The next step should therefore be a fundamental reappraisal and close dialogue between the central processing office THEMIS, the Theater Association, and the ensemble-network, so that the injustice done can be sanctioned and future injustice can be excluded. The examples above (participants 17, 146, 242, 1564, and 1846)— five out of about 3,400 statements—are intended to introduce the topics of this publication and prepare for the research results, analyses, and the insights derived from them. They are just a small excerpt—still far from the worst cases—from an overall view of the working conditions, power abuses, and structural problems at the affected theaters and in the theater landscape, and the resulting suggestions for change made by the study participants. Against this background, I have developed the present study on the subject of art and power in the theater, which deals with the working conditions of artists in theaters in 38 questions. The large response of 1,966 participants speaks to the high relevance of the topic. The theoretical framework of this work consists of two fields: the social power theories, here primarily Pierre Bourdieu’s (1992), as well as the structural theories from management and organizational research, by John R. P. French and Bertram Raven (1959), Murray Edelman (1964), Jeffrey Pfeffer (1982), Anthony Giddens (1988), Michel Crozier and Erhard Friedberg (1993), which provide me with important theoretical foundations. My initial questions are: On what structures and agreements are power relations based in contemporary German theaters? Why does power abuse still occur in theaters today, at the end of the second decade of the 21st century, and what structures promote this? Who is affected? And to what extent? The starting thesis of my work has long been part of my considerations:

1  Power as a Political Resource …

19

Power is not only a firmly anchored part of theater work in German public theaters, it is the structure- and organization-forming concept of theater operations and has successively replaced the primacy of the artistic. Power in this form is particularly favored and enabled by the director-centered model and the function of the artistic director, allowing the artistic director almost uncontrolled decision-making power in all areas of the theater. This is one reason why power abuse and assaults in the German theater system may be recorded to a greater extent than in comparable areas of society. This also applies, by the way, to parts of the public Austrian and Swiss theater systems, which are structurally exactly based on the public German theater system, and consequently have to deal with similar structural and power problems, as the examples of the Vienna Burgtheater and the Bern Theater have amply demonstrated (Tobler 2018). The hermetic nature of the theater as a self-contained employer and as a societal heterotopia leads to the fact that such incidents rarely become public, and, if they do happen, their clarification is often suppressed and prevented. Since most assaults are kept silent and not punished, there are so far no scientifically collected and reliable figures on German public theater companies. Reliable results and findings are now available for the first time with this study and will be presented in the following chapters. In the second chapter, I will deal with the structural conditions and peculiarities of German city theaters, which are the prerequisite for and vehicle of power of the artistic directors. I will discuss the current organizational types of the artistic director-centered theater model—with a single ruling person at the top—and show from here various alternative models in which power is shared directorially and in teams, and the theater organization is organized better and more neutrally along the production flow of the staging phases, instead of aligning it rigidly and pyramidally according to departments and areas as before. In the third chapter, I will deal with various power theories in order to explain and classify the occurrence of power and its forms as well as assaults from a sociological, philosophical, and psychological perspective. I am concerned with four interrelated areas: In the first section, I examine power as a social phenomenon, the staging of power in Norbert Elias, the will to power in Friedrich Nietzsche and Thomas Macho, the corruption by power in Hannah Arendt, power as a variety of power relations in Michel Foucault, and finally Pierre Bourdieu’s symbolic power. The second section is dedicated to the destructive side of power, namely abuse and violence, in order to get closer to the subject of this study; it deals with the psychological connotation through the narcissism of the perpetrators, power in connection with structural violence, and spaces of violence in Norbert Elias, Zygmunt Baumann, and Jörg Baberowski. In the third

20

1  Power as a Political Resource …

section, I open the topic of power once again to the organization and its structures, which I have already touched upon in parts in the second chapter. Anthony Giddens and Henry Mintzberg clearly state that structure influences action and generates power. The fourth area finally deals with the long-neglected area of organizational culture. The fourth chapter opens the practical study in nine major sections, in which I discuss and analyze the results of the individual subtopics in analogy to the narrative of the questionnaire. The first two sections are dedicated to the general and social situation of the participants of the study in order to provide an overview of their social and functional composition. This is followed by the two main sections of the study on the abuse of power and sexual assaults. The further sections deal with other subtopics of the study, such as interest representation, personality protection, the training context, and the internal structural locking of the theater. The following fifth chapter is an overview chapter that once again prepares the results of the study for all those who want to deal more deeply with the topic or who are particularly interested in numerical material and tabular overviews, which I would like to provide so that many more scientists and organizations can continue to deal with the topic. In the sixth chapter, I deal with two subtopics that I consider important scientific outcomes of the study, with the basic forms of structural power, and the power-dampening and -containing measures, in the context of which I—but this is still a future prospect—propose a team- and process-oriented structural reform of the theater. There is still a long way to go until then. The first step is the hardest and often also the most painful, it means dealing with the topic more and more deeply than before, dealing with the results of this study, and drawing the appropriate consequences from it. One goal should be to make the affected theaters places again where all artists and employees are happy to go to work, rehearse, and perform, and can look each other in the eye. Then the theater will become a little more the center of society again. But that is still a very long way to go.

References Baberowski, J. (2017). Räume der Gewalt (4. Aufl.). Frankfurt a. M.: Fischer. Bourdieu, P. (1992). Die verborgenen Mechanismen der Macht. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp. Crozier, M., & Friedberg, E. (1993). Macht und Organisation. Die Zwänge kollektiven Handelns. Königstein: Beltz. DBV. (2018a). Theaterstatistik. Köln: Deutscher Bühnenverein. DBV. (2018b). Wertebasierter Verhaltenskodex zur Prävention von sexuellen Übergriffen und Machtmissbrauch. Jahresversammlung in Lübeck. Köln: Deutscher Bühnenverein.

References

21

Edelman, M. (1964). The symbolic uses of politics. Urbana: The University of Illinois Press. French, J., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Hrsg.), Studies in social power (S. 150–167). Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research. Galtung, J. (1975). Strukturelle Gewalt. Beiträge zur Friedens- und Konfliktforschung. Reinbek: Rowohlt. Giddens, A. (1988). Die Konstitution der Gesellschaft: Grundzüge einer Theorie der Strukturierun. Frankfurt a. M: Campus. Graber, R., Stuiber, P., & Weis, S. (02. Februar 2018). Aufschrei auf offener Bühne: Burgtheater-Mitarbeiter stehen gegen Machtmissbrauch auf. Der Standard. Greenblatt, S. (2018). Tyrant, Shakespeare on power. London: Bodley Head. Hirigoyen, M.-F. (1999). Die Masken der Niedertracht. Seelische Gewalt im Alltag und wie man sich dagegen wehrt. München: Beck. Nachtkritik. (2019a). Komische Oper Berlin: Neue Intendanz. Interne Lösung. https:// www.nachtkritik.de/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=16362:komi sche-oper-berlin-neue-intendanz&catid=126:meldungen-k&Itemid=100089. Zugegriffen: 31. Jan. 2019. Nachtkritik. (2019b). Opernintendant in Halle nicht verlängert. https://www.nachtkritik.de/ index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=16452:update-opernintendant-inhalle-nicht-verlaengert&catid=126:meldungen-k&Itemid=100089. Zugegriffen: 22. Febr. 2019. Pfeffer, J. (1982). Power in organizations. Marshfield: Pitman. Rosinski verlässt Theater Rostock. (25. November 2015). Norddeutsche Neueste Nachrichten. Rühle, G. (2005). Geschichte des deutschen Theaters (S. 1876–1933). Frankfurt a. M.: Fischer. Schmidt, T. (2016). Theater, Krise und Reform. Eine Kritik des deutschen Theatersystems. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Schmidt, T. (2019). Die Regeln des Spiels. Programm und Spielplan – Gestaltung im Theater. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Theopolis. (2019). Verifizierte Auskunft über den gesellschaftlichen Organisationsgrad von Bühnen-DarstellerInnen am 02.02.2019. Tobler, A. (2018). Der letzte Akt ist noch nicht geschrieben. Der Bund. v. 14.08.2018. von Becker, P. (2019). Die Macht und die Herrlichkeit. Debatte um Barenboim. Der Tagesspiegel. vom 25.02.2019.

2

The Peculiarities of the German Theater System

Of course, not all the world is a stage, but the crucial points where it is not are not easy to find. Erving Goffman (1959, p. 67)

2.1 The Theater Landscape The German theater landscape, which consists mainly of publicly funded theaters, independent groups and production sites, festivals, touring and private theaters, is still one of the densest in the world. The majority of theaters are organized under public law—even though by now almost half of these 140 theaters are set up as public limited liability companies (GmbH). In the public theater system, a total of almost 40,000 employees work (DBV 2018). Public theaters fulfill the cultural-political development, education, and supply mandate with theater performances, accompanying programs, and education, which is why they can be found not only in the metropolises, like most independent groups and private theaters, but also in the regions. This privilege is unique in the world and makes this system so worth preserving. The group of public theaters consists of three types: The most prominent are the approximately 33 state theaters, which are under the sponsorship of the federal states and the respective municipality at the location. An example is the former Weimar City Theater (German National Theater Weimar is the historical correct term), which was converted into the Thuringian State Theater in 2008 and is now supported and financed by the state of Thuringia to about 80%, while the city of Weimar only holds and finances the company to 20%, instead of 100% as it once did. Some federal states, such as Hesse, maintain © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 T. Schmidt, Power and Structure in Theater, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-42280-6_2

23

24

2  The Peculiarities of the German Theater System

three state theaters (Wiesbaden, Kassel, Darmstadt) for regional parity reasons, and there are even seven in Berlin (three state operas, three state theaters, and one state ballet). North Rhine-Westphalia is the only federal state without a state theater because it relies on purely municipal supply through city theaters. The approximately 80 city theaters, which are usually supported and financed by the municipality at the location, are the largest group among the public theaters. This includes theaters in all other major and many medium-sized cities. The approximately 271state theaters finally form the third group. They are usually supported by a special-purpose association consisting of the municipalities that mainly host the theater. Examples include the state theaters in Esslingen, Neuss, Marburg, Landshut, Rudolstadt, and many others (Schmidt 2016). Theaters such as the Berliner Schaubühne are not officially part of the public theater landscape. Although they are publicly funded, they have private shareholders—a misleading legal form considering the financing ratios. I have already prepared various important aspects of the organization of the German theater landscape, the framework conditions of the theaters, their internal organization, and the course of their production processes and will incorporate them into this work again and again (Schmidt 2012, 2016, 2018). The theater as an organization is determined by five variables: • • • • •

Organization size and quantity/quality of resources, Personnel, their qualifications and artistic significance/direction, Production processes and modernity of the technologies used, Structure of the theater operation, and Organizational culture.

The 140 theaters in Germany all operate according to the same principle. At the center is the production of stagings, which are based on a program and scheduling. In this, all planned productions for the next season are recorded, including the premiere dates, the respective directing teams, the musical direction in the opera, and the choreography in dance/ballet, which are responsible for the productions. For this purpose, in-house directors and choreographers or guests can be used. The number of productions per theater averages 24 new stagings per season, plus the revivals of the repertoire from the previous season and an extensive

1 The

approximations refer to annually changing statistical statements on theaters, which are reduced by mergers, structurally changed by shareholder and legal form changes, and threatened by closures, especially in the east of the country.

2.1  The Theater Landscape

25

and often very demanding accompanying program, which is a lot, considering the increasingly scarce capacities of the houses. Peak values of over 40 productions per season were achieved, for example, by the Schauspiel Düsseldorf in the 2017/18 season. Smaller theaters can only implement 10–15 productions per year, which strongly depends on the available resources of the house (Schmidt 2019). The productions are usually rehearsed in a period of six to eight weeks, then performed for the first time in front of an audience in a premiere, and then go into a performance process of—depending on the piece—five to 20 performances. The rehearsal process is very diverse. I have detailed and analyzed the course elsewhere (Schmidt 2012, 2019). The organization size of theaters is measured by their resource equipment. This includes personnel, financial equipment, material resources, buildings and other infrastructure, as well as the number of divisions. The houses vary greatly in terms of organization size (DBV 2018; Schmidt 2018). In the following sections, I would like to focus particularly on the aspects of structure and organizational culture, as these two areas have a direct connection to the subject area of the study Power and Structure in Theater. The organizational structure of the theater is based on the division of labor between the major areas of ensemble, artistic divisions, administration, management, and technology. Due to the associated variety of contracts and the different working modalities, the coordination of the five areas is very demanding and is carried out by decentralized units (KBB, Technical Director, Administrative Director, offices of the Managing Director and the Artistic Director) before converging centrally with the Artistic Director, who is responsible for all decisions: • Artistic direction and management are responsible for strategy, management, coordination, personnel management, and motivation; • the administration is responsible for administrative areas, including: finances, legal matters, wages and fees, general personnel matters; • the artistic divisions are artistically and personally coordinated by Artistic Directors; • the use of the ensemble (rehearsals and performances) is planned in coordination with the management by the Artistic Operations Office (KBB) and the division management; • the technology is coordinated by the technical management and the technical boards. Henry Mintzberg therefore compares a good management structure (organigram) with a map (Mintzberg 1979). The organizational structure encompasses aspects of horizontal design (structural organization, organizational chart) and vertical coordination of processes

26

2  The Peculiarities of the German Theater System

(process organization). In it, the respective competencies of the areas, departments, and functions are mapped. It is intended to serve the achievement of organizational goals, i.e., the goals anchored in the best case in a mission statement of the theater, and to support the theater management in organizing the work in the theater in such a way that these goals are achieved (Schreyögg 2016, p. 25 ff.). The objectives of the individual theaters may differ from one another. They are usually anchored in rules of procedure or statutes. In most city theaters, for example, the goal of providing the population with theater performances in the respective disciplines, plus a children’s and youth theater program and corresponding theater education measures, is recorded. In the larger state theaters in the metropolises, artistic excellence and national and international appeal, as well as the organization of festivals and international guest performances, are also important. Finally, the regional theaters are responsible for providing people with theater in the area through a permanently established, regional guest performance operation. The relationship between structure and power exists on various levels. First, referring to Max Weber, who stated that the creation of any order would establish a relationship between the actions of the actors involved and power. As will be explained in more detail in Chap. 3, there are significant differences between power and authority in Weber’s definitions (Weber 1922, p. 38 f.), who clearly states that power, with the enforcement of one’s own will against the reluctance of others, goes much further than authority, which is based on obedience but not necessarily on the bending of will. Norms, rules, and instructions for action do not have to exist or be perceived in a power context. Power merely denotes an “enforcement possibility” but is “amorphous” and ahistorical with Weber. Weber, who is strongly influenced by his studies of public administrations, bases his considerations on the claim of authority, with which the superordination and subordination in organizations, i.e., the hierarchy—represented in the organizational chart with its hierarchical gradient—is created and justified. However, this hierarchy has the potential to expand the relationship of authority to power relations, which in many cases are used and experienced congruently. In some cases, as I have described in the examples of theaters in Vienna (Schmidt 2016) as well as in Bern, Trier, and Rostock in the introduction, they go far beyond the classically defined framework of authority and violate ethical and moral guidelines, often severely and to the great personal or institutional disadvantage of many participants.

2.2  Organizational Structure and Organizational …

27

2.2 Organizational Structure and Organizational Chart of the Theater The organizational structure of public theaters has evolved historically and has introduced essential central elements in each era, which characterize it today. The most central elements are undoubtedly the hierarchy and the artistic director as the sole decision-maker, which have dominated the structure of theaters for over 150 years. It is aligned with the associated nationalization or municipalization of the largest part of the theaters, to public administrations. This is also the reason why state theaters with state funding have larger administrative apparatuses than city theaters, whose administrative apparatus only imitates a smaller municipal authority. However, city theaters are often much more suspiciously observed, controlled, and financially restricted by city councils than the larger state theaters. The more generous ministries also usually provide these with disproportionately more special funds (DBV 2018). This organizational subordination under public administration corresponds to the principle of isomorphism, that is, the approximation of the organizational structures of the weaker, dependent organization to the structures of the stronger organization (Meyer and Rowan 1977). This is derived from the financial and political dependence of theaters on their political shareholders (ministries, city administrations, cultural office, treasury). Of interest for this consideration is the basic structure of the theater, which extends from a general director at the top, through the level of division and area managers (directors), to the departments and individual employees. The following should be noted: • • • • • •

the divisional structure, the strong centralization, the steep hierarchy, the small number of cross-sectional departments, the resulting low permeability for vertical communication, the promoted horizontal communication and decision-making structure.

In this greatly simplified classical general director model of a theater, see Fig. 2.1, here in a two-division theater with drama and opera, it becomes clear how much the work of the theater is tailored to the general director. He is the

28

2  The Peculiarities of the German Theater System Intendant

Office of the Intendant

Drama

Opera

Dramaturgy

Operaons Office

Technology

Administraon

PR/Markeng

Fig. 2.1   Classic model of a two-division house—1st and 2nd level (Schmidt 2018)

sole decision-maker, all directors work for him and report to him. The general director’s office controls the immediate work, the assistants perform a mix of secretarial work, travel agency, special projects, research, lobby, and speech department tasks—depending on their qualifications, but also depending on the general director’s ability to motivate and develop the employees of his office. At the level below the general director are the divisions and areas, which are represented by their respective managers. However, the divisional structure has little to do with the current artistic production flow, which begins with the concept and ends with post-production (see Fig. 2.5). The current structure leads to divisions being organized, working, and producing separately from one another, and therefore not always representing common content approaches. As a rule, the general director invites his directors to weekly management meetings, where the essential operational aspects of theater work are discussed. In doing so, he often acts in a presidential manner, with overall supervision and decision-making power over all areas. However, since most general directors are also artistic directors themselves, they additionally assume the function of a division director, which is why the functional levels are mixed. Strategic aspects are discussed with the supervisory bodies and usually decided in the committee meetings. In the directorship model with staff functions and centralized departments (Fig. 2.2), the artistic director has further strengthened his direct access rights by making the departments of operations office and PR, as well as the previously decentralized dramaturgy in the departments of drama and opera, into staff departments, whose autonomy is even more limited because they do not have a directorial function there, but rather a supporting staff function. (Deviations in staff departments are possible)

2.2  Organizational Structure and Organizational …

29

Intendant

Drama

Office

PR

Operaons Office

Dramaturgy

Opera

Technical dept.

Management

Finance

Personal

Legal issues

Ensemble

Ensemble

Stage

Directors

Kapellmeister

Lighng

Management

Management

General Counsel

Dramaturgy

Repetors

Sound

Accounng

Processing

Contracts

Assistants

Directors

Props

Wages and fees

Guests

inspicaon

Dramaturgy

Mask

Payouts

Soufflage

Assistants

Workshops

Ticket Sales

Fig. 2.2   General Directorship or Intendanten-model with strongly centralized departments (Schmidt 2018)

This allows the artistic director to operate on two levels: with direct access to the four staff departments (which can also include administration2) and on the second level with decision-making rights in the four areas of drama, opera, technology, and administration. Their heads are also subordinate to the artistic director but can act more autonomously. In some cases, the artistic director even takes over the management of an artistic division in a dual role, thus increasing his access, influence and artistic possibilities. This organizational chart also shows two other peculiarities: the size and depth of the individual divisions/areas,

2 An

example is the Theater Gera-Altenburg, 2010/11, when the administrative director was also the artistic director’s assistant, so there was no threshold at all (Schmidt 2011).

30

2  The Peculiarities of the German Theater System

which can contain six or more sub-departments or teams in drama, opera, and in the technical departmnt and are differentiated within themselves. The workshops alone consist of up to eight different groups—carpentry, metalworking, painting hall, plastering, armor and weapons master, women’s and men’s tailoring. The depth of the staggered hierarchy becomes clear when each division is headed by a director who, in turn, can have his own office and assistants. The individual sub-departments are subordinate to them—clearly visible in the administration department, which consists of the three sub-departments finance, personnel, and law. These heads are then in charge of groups or teams that deal with administrative tasks, guest management, and other subtasks. A tightly organized hierarchy for decades that is in urgent need of fundamental changes. Newer models, especially those subject to the legal form of a limited liability company (GmbH), rely on a so-called dual leadership consisting of the artistic director and a manager of the theater elevated to the position of managing director (MD). In most cases, we find an inauthentic dual leadership in which the MD is still subordinate to the artistic director. In an authentic one, he is at least pro forma on an equal footing with the artistic director. Pro forma means that the articles of association of a GmbH can provide for the equal rights of two directors. However, the introduction of the term “artistic managing director” as an additional predicate for the artistic director should be questioned as a model, because there is no such thing as artistic business. It is about economic, personnel, legal, and property issues that the artistic director cannot solve. Out of concern that a sole managing director could gain too much power, this function has been doubled with the artistic director, without the latter ultimately being held accountable. So far, in cases of budget overruns and economic plans, on average, only one in ten cases has an artistic director been held accountable—most recently in Bremen (2008) and Vienna (2013–2015). We also speak of a pro-forma-equality, because the artistic director is the first point of contact for politics and media, regardless of the legal structure, and therefore has the communication and conceptual authority over the theater and its decisions, especially since he can shape it artistically and thus visibly, unlike his managing counterpart. This can then reverse if the artistic director only fulfills his management tasks inadequately, so that the managing director becomes the first point of contact and has to take over the management completely. Figure 2.3 shows the model of a dual leadership. The dual leadership model (DLM) illustrates how the classic dichotomy of the theater between artistic direction and management is represented. Each of the two leaders is responsible for four relevant areas in their respective spectrum:

2.2  Organizational Structure and Organizational …

31

Supervisory Board Intendant

Managing Director

Office Intendant Operaons Office

Drama

Opera

Dramaturgy

Office MD Authorized signatory

Finance

Personnel

Law

PR

Sales

Technical Dept.

Fig. 2.3   Dual leadership of artistic director and managing director in a GmbH (Schmidt 2018)

The artistic director for the two divisions, dramaturgy, and the operations office, the managing director for administration, communication, sales, and the technical department—with communication in artistic-content-related matters also being the responsibility of the artistic director if the statutes of a theater provide for this. In the case of a GmbH (Ltd.), the supervisory board hovers above the management. In other legal forms such as the Eigenbetrieb (municipal operation), there is usually an inauthentic dual leadership consisting of an administrative director and artistic director. The scientific examination of organizational charts goes back to management scientist Henry Mintzberg, who first dealt with this topic in his groundbreaking study Structuring of Organizations in 1979. Mintzberg rightly refers to organizational charts as maps. “Although organizational charts do not describe informal relationships, they represent an accurate picture of the division of labor and show at a glance: 1. which positions exist in the organization, 2. how these are grouped into units, and 3. how formal authority flows between them (describing the use of direct reporting relationships).” (Mintzberg 1979, p. 37)

32

2  The Peculiarities of the German Theater System

However, Mintzberg goes far beyond this in his analyses. He develops models of the formal and informal flow of decisions and information, which are part of an organization’s processes, using diagrams: • • • • • • •

the flow of formal authority, the flow of regulated activities, the flow of informal communication, the implementation of communication systems, the work constellations, the flow of regulated decisions and activities, and the flow of ad-hoc decision-making processes (Mintzberg 1979, pp. 35–64).

In order to derive insights for an ideal organizational structure of the theater from the analysis, it is worth taking a look at its basic structure of the Five Basic Parts of Organizations (Mintzberg 1979, p. 20, Fig. 2.1). Mintzberg has divided an organization according to its relations to the actual production processes, which he called Operating Core. A Middle Line, which can be described as middle management, connects the management, the Strategic Apex, with the production departments. To the left and right of this are the Technostructure, departments of strategic planning (operations office, dramaturgy) and controlling, and the Support Staff (PR, sales, contract department, and parts of the administration) arranged. From this basic structure, see Fig. 2.4, the organization can be arranged in different variants. In the case of the theater, it is a functional and hierarchical arrangement of the individual departments. The peculiarities compared to classic companies and organizations are: • The individual departments have a varying depth of staffing, which results in a low congruence in the coordination of work processes. • The work levels are much deeper and more differentiated than the often very simply structured technostructure and the support departments. The overview in Fig. 2.5 shows that the technical areas, which should be considered part of the working level in the theater because workshops, sound and lighting departments are directly involved in the creative processes, have a depth of five levels. The drama department has a depth of only three levels: from the head of the theater to the executing directors and the ensemble of actors. A set designer has half a dozen contact persons at the workshop level. If they work directly with the technical direction, it must ensure the transmission of information—which is

2.2  Organizational Structure and Organizational …

33

Management

Technostructure

Middle Management

Support Staff

Working level

Fig. 2.4   Basic structure of an organization according to Mintzberg. (Source Schmidt 2018, after Mintzberg 1979)

not possible for either the technical direction or the workshops with 25–30 productions per year (in larger theaters). Therefore, the set designer must negotiate directly with the working level, which, according to the organizational structure, is not authorized to make decisions without consulting the masters, the team leaders, and the department heads. This complicates the flow of communication and decision-making, which repeatedly leads to irritations and delays in the production process. If the artistic director or managing director is called for help, they can override the entire hierarchy with a decision. It would be better to introduce a central production manager with extensive decision-making powers. This bundles the organizational, communication, and decision-making process, as shown by the directorate model with a central production team (Fig. 2.6). Let’s look into the future of structures in the theater: This includes, among other alternative models, the matrix model (MATRIX 1, see Fig. 2.7), in which the divisions are effectively merged into a common ensemble and the staff is organized according to the production flow. At the core of the matrix are the vertical areas:

34

2  The Peculiarities of the German Theater System

Management

Technical Direc on

Administraon

Stage manager

Lighng manager

Manager workshops

Joinery

Locksmith's shop

Carpenter

Locksmith

Operaons Office

Management Drama

Sales

Direcon team

Painng room

Painters

PR

Costumes

Laminators

Men's tailor

Director

Stage Costumes

Master

Dramaturgy

Ensemble

Assistant

Women's tailor

Fig. 2.5   The simplified structure of the technical/workshop and the drama department (Schmidt 2018)

• Ensemble, management, program and conception, production, post-production, as well as the horizontally running areas related to these, • Drama, opera and dance, plus the two management areas, • Directorate and ensemble spokesperson. This results in a matrix structure, with which the theater productions are produced in their different phases by the respective teams. They are supported by cross-sectional teams. The productions are supervised by the production managers across the board. The function of the artistic director is divided and henceforth taken over by a directorate (Board of Directors). At its core, it consists of the manager (theater management), the three heads of program, planning, and production, and depending on the size of the theater and the business model, a head of support or marketing and communication, and an ensemble spokesperson. Alternatively, the ensemble spokespersons—as shown in Fig. 2.7—are integrated as a level between the directorate and the artistic management level with the department heads to enable direct communication there. The model promises: • a significant reduction of excessive hierarchies, • a stronger team orientation, • a non-authoritarian management model (directorate),

2.2  Organizational Structure and Organizational …

Administraon

Joinery

Arsc direcon

Producon

Manager workshops

Locksmithery

Support

Management Board

Technical direcon

Stage light sound

35

Producon Team

Painng room

Costumes

Producon manager

Direcng teams

Assistants

Actors

Pool: Directors and Ensemble

Fig. 2.6   Directorate model with central production team (Schmidt 2018)

Board of Directors: Manager, Artistic Director(s), Program Director, Producer ENSEMBLE SPEAKER

DIRECTOR ACTING

LEAD MUSIC THEATRE

LEAD CHOREOGRAPHER

ENSEMBLE

MANAGEMENT

Communication, administration, marketing, sales, dispatchers

PROGRAM

Dramaturgy, direction, choreographers, conductors

PRODUCTION

Producers, dispatchers, assistants, technology

POST-PRODUCTION

Marketing, Sales, Education, Performance Manager, Technical staff

Fig. 2.7   Matrix organization of a theater of the future (production flow model) (Schmidt 2018)

36

2  The Peculiarities of the German Theater System

CONDUIT CUT

IntendantenModell 1 Intendant

IntendantenModell 2 Intendant

Intendant

Intendant

Dual leadership model Intendant, Managing Director Intendant

Directorate model

MATRIX 1

Management Committee

Directorate

Members of the directorate Committee, central production team as the core

Team Leader Team orientation; primacy of production flow (PF);

SPECIAL HEIT Classical director model with subordinate areas/ divisions Strict hierarchy

Strongly centralized departments; direct connection of departments to director

Dual leadership of Intendant and Managing Director; Shared responsibility

Structure

Strict hierarchy Hierarchical; authoritarian; delayed DM

Dichotomous Hierarchy Hierarchically Divided; Improved DM

Directorial Hierarchy Circular; Split;

Matrix

Communication Hierarchical From top Down

Hierarchical from top to bottom

Hierarchical from top to bottom

Significantly improved DM circulated.

Circulating, exchange.

Production flow classic (PF)

classic

classic

classic

PF oriented

Decisionmaking (DM)

Hierarchical; Authoritarian; Delayed DM

Divided; nonauthoritarian; fast DM

Fig. 2.8   The organizational models of public German theaters (Schmidt 2019)

• better exchange through expanded and facilitated, circular communication, • fewer delays in decision-making and production processes due to the clear allocation of responsibility, but also • through an organizational structure along the production phases. In the following Fig. 2.8, I have compared the essential features of the five organizational models discussed here with each other. I have selected seven criteria to compare the models: • • • • • • •

the management model the functional scope of the management the respective peculiarities of the model the structure of the organizational type the type of decision-making (DM) the form of communication the model of the production flow (PF).

2.3  Management and Organizational Culture …

37

It is striking that significant changes in the organizational structure and the access rights within the theater only occur with the directorate model (organization type 4). Until then, the artistic director has distinct rights and is at the forefront of the strict hierarchical order with his powers. The respective peculiarities in organization type 3 do not change this, in which the artistic director is assigned an executive director or second, usually managing director. Here we have type 3 a, with a genuine equality between the two, and type 3 b, with the managing director subordinate to the artistic director, as is stipulated in most artistic director contracts. Unfortunately, only a few supervisory boards and auditors have noticed that this leads to an absurd shift of responsibility onto the commercial director while simultaneously shifting power in the opposite direction. The model can only work if both actors actually work on an equal footing and at eye level, and this is perceived as such by the employees and politics. If this does not happen, the model can lead to significant problems and internal power struggles that harm the employees and the reputation of the theater and can often lead to considerable friction. Only organization type 4, the directorate, establishes a necessary division of responsibility and power that is adequate for such a complex and inherently dichotomous and highly differentiated operation. Responsibility, communication, production flow, and decision-making are tailored to the directorate. From there, a directorial hierarchy emerges, which can be enriched with team elements in more advanced subtypes. In the model discussed above (Fig. 2.6), the directorate is in charge of five major areas: management, program, planning, production, and support (marketing, communication, sales, education, development, technology). In organization type 5, the matrix organization, the hierarchical structure is broken up by a team-oriented organizational structure that is based on the original production flow in theater operations, thus becoming a resource-saving, productive, and participatory theater model of the future, from which various subtypes can be further developed, focusing on specific criteria such as participation, justice, ethical management, or sustainability.

2.3 Management and Organizational Culture in Public Theaters Andreas Wien and Normen Franzke write that the culture of an organization is shaped by its leadership, management style, and type of management, as well as by issues of power, control, and moderation. They have investigated the extent to which power influences organizational culture in their study on corporate culture:

38

2  The Peculiarities of the German Theater System “The power aspect examines the interplay and interaction between the employee and the supervisor. Do both fit together like building blocks, or is there an emotional distance? In the case of exclusive purpose relationships, the rules and norms are at the center of the cultural dimension. If there is a low emotional distance, according to (Edgar) Schein, the growth of culture is pursued by its members.” (Wien and Franzke 2014, p. 15)

Accordingly, a positive, strong corporate culture cannot grow where the emotional distance or the associated emotional tensions between management and employees are above average. This is where I would like to start with my further considerations.

2.3.1 Management Models: Ethics of the Organization and Leadership Culture Apparently, ensemble members still hold back from openly criticizing their management. An initial indicator of impending changes is the fact that complaints and requests for support to the ensemble-network are increasingly piling up. Moreover, the results of this study will show in more detail that there are not only emotional tensions but often even an emotional break between management and employees in the theater, which is based on mutual lack of trust and respect after the management has treated their employees with little respect for years. I will discuss this further in Chap. 4. Another important aspect is the ethics of the organization, which is reflected in the organizational culture. A weakly developed ethic leads to a less progressive and fair organizational culture and vice versa. It depends heavily on how the ethical rules and standards are practiced by the leaders and to what extent they are internalized by the employees. However, there is also the danger of a rift or break in the organization if artistic directors presume to ignore, cross, or even blow up ethical boundaries. I have already mentioned examples from recent years (Chap. 1). Furthermore, the leadership concept and leadership style are relevant in this context. The closely related leadership culture is an essential part of the organizational culture and at the same time a part of management. Wien and Franzke define three leadership models: 1. Leadership through control and supervision 2. Leadership through team development and by Objectives 3. Leadership through communication, knowledge management, and moderation (ibid., p. 154 f.)

2.3  Management and Organizational Culture …

39

Model 1: Control and Supervision In this traditional-hierarchical model, employees align themselves directly with their superiors, who rely on discipline and subordination, on instructions and orders, and usually act in a demanding or even commanding manner. If this does not happen, the manager intervenes in the respective execution of the employees. There is no real teamwork in the sense of a task culture. “The traditional-hierarchical model is based on power, delegation, control, and direct steering.” (Wien and Franzke, p. 154)

There is a lack of a pronounced understanding of the managers for their employees, who are usually exposed to high performance pressure and feel little motivation, which in turn leads to considerable frustrations and loss of quality, which an artistic operation like the theater cannot afford. The creativity of the employees is not promoted and developed, and there is no equal footing between management and employees. Model 2: Team Development and Management by Objectives (MbO) This model is based on a preliminary stage of real team development (Model 3). The actors form project-related teams, for example for individual productions, and try to take on as much responsibility as possible and prepare decisions for the management. The communication channels change compared to Model 1 and now run directly between the individual employees. Ideally, the manager only intervenes when he or she deems it necessary—a gateway for interference and mistrust remains. Wien and Franzke therefore describe the character of the model as unstable because, in their view, it threatens to immediately turn into a control and supervision model in crisis and problem cases (ibid.). However, the model already bears traits of a team model. Model 3: The Manager as Communicator, Knowledge Manager, Moderator This model is the most advanced. The actors (employees) concentrate as much responsibility and decision-making power on themselves as possible. The leader is now a moderator who takes care of the networking of employees and teams. He collects information and knowledge and distributes and applies it according to the status of the respective tasks and developments. He draws his power from his wealth of knowledge and his training, as well as from “trust, self-control, and indirect control,” as Wien and Franzke describe; however, hardly any longer from a possible intervention at any time, as in the two preceding models.

40

2  The Peculiarities of the German Theater System

Another significant difference from Model 2 is that the teams here are recognized, i.e., sustainable, as they also take care of the quality assurance of their work, e.g., through target control or feedback systems. The control is minimal, indirect, and preferably motivating, and eye level is guaranteed. Wien and Franzke describe the first model as exclusively suitable for leading employees with simple tasks. The more complex the task level, the greater the required creativity and trust, the more likely the second or third model will be preferred, as otherwise, there can be great dissatisfaction among employees and high fluctuations (ibid., p. 154 f.). So far, the fluctuation of employees in the theater is limited—despite the predominant use of Model 1. The NV Bühne contract for theater artists rather prevents the usual fluctuation, as it often intimidates the artists and ties them to the theater. The majority of terminable employees at the theater fear non-renewal every autumn, which makes them endure and perceive the possible stay as a great gift. Nevertheless, there is sufficient, albeit so far unquantified, fluctuation through own terminations of contracts, the change to other houses, or freelance work. An organizational-theoretical view of the leadership culture in theaters suggests that Model 2 and 3 offer the best conditions for a good theater operation. Nevertheless, the current theater operation is characterized by leadership model 1, control, and steering—although the theater employees perform complex and highly differentiated, demanding, and creative tasks, the success of which depends on a high degree of freedom for the development of artistic creation, which is hardly possible to the desired extent in the narrowness of control and intervention. This leads to a conflict that is permanently fought out in the organizational structure as well as in the organizational culture of the theater, with the result that the necessary stability within the theater cannot be generated. In this respect, the leadership culture in the theater is based on a combination of power culture with a culture through control and intervention. In Fig. 2.9, I have linked and combined the three leadership models with the various power models according to Schreyögg and Koch (2016) to determine specific correlations that indicate good leadership concepts. The choice of the appropriate leadership concept is based on the aspects that are important and that must be introduced within the framework of the exercise of power. While in the first model, primarily coercion, persuasion, and information are used as media of power, the picture already changes in the second model, in which legitimation, the use of rewards, charisma, knowledge, and the mastery of the environment are added. In the third model, these aspects are reinforced, while coercion is replaced by knowledge and personality, and the information power of

2.3  Management and Organizational Culture … Vienna/Franzke → Schreyögg Power through:

Steering and control

Legitimation

-

41

Team and MbO

1

2 X

Communicator, moderator, knowledge manager X

Reward

x

x

X

Coercion

X

-

-

Personality/Charisma

-

x

XX

Knowledge and skills

-

X

XX

Information power

X-

X+

X+

Environment/situation design Power of persuasion

-

x

X

X

x

x

3

Fig. 2.9   Power and leadership concepts related to the theater. (Source Schmidt 2019, after: Schreyögg 2016; Wien and Franzke 2014)

the management turns into that of the employees—all important prerequisites for leading employees well and fairly.

2.3.2 The Types of a Modern Organizational Culture The Irish economic and social philosopher Charles Handy identified four culture types for an organizational culture in his study Understanding Organizations: power culture, task culture, person culture, and role culture (Handy 1993). The power culture is characterized by the power of individuals who are responsible for making important decisions. These managers are the most important actors in their organization and their main decision-makers. The employees have no choice but to follow the instructions of their superiors. The opportunities to articulate their views are severely limited, which often leads to unrest. In the task culture, teams are formed to which specific tasks are assigned. These teams consist of actors with similar specializations. Each team member contributes equally to the solution of the tasks. The person culture can be found where individual directors and managers feel more important than the organization itself. These individuals are more interested in pursuing their own concerns and career plans than those of the company. The loyalty of these directors towards the organization is severely limited in these cases.

42

2  The Peculiarities of the German Theater System

The role culture refers to organizations that assign tasks and roles to actors that best match their specialization, education and qualification, and interests in order to achieve the best possible performance. In these cultures, everyone is responsible for their area of responsibility, for which they take ownership. Power lies in the hands of many, arising from the responsibility that actors take for their area of responsibility (MSG 2018). Handy has thus developed exemplary prototypes in a first step, which cannot be directly related to real organizations. Nevertheless, they allow an approximation based on the characteristics that apply to the organization to be described, in this case, the theater. “Handy assigns corresponding entrepreneurial activities to the four culture types. He recommends role culture for routine activities, power culture for crisis situations, and task culture for innovative projects.” (Wien and Franzke, p. 38)

In my view, theaters with old-school and traditional artistic directors are most likely to have a power culture, while artistic directors whose own development is more in focus may mix this power culture with a person culture. Ideally, however, a role culture, which would do justice to the high degree of specialization and division of labor, combined with an innovative project-oriented task culture and the project teams anchored therein, which are used in every staging process, would be best suited for the theater. 

The power culture enforced by the artistic director and the role culture of the theater are diametrically opposed: they cannot be combined, which is why there are always frictions and crises.

This possibility is considerably restricted by the primacy of the artistic realization of the artistic director. Not only does he have the priority to realize himself at any time and with all available resources, but he also has the primacy to decide independently and without objective standards on the extent and orientation of the artistic realization of “his” employees. His will and artistic direction are the measure of all things, with them the future of dozens of artists and employees, indeed the entire theater, careers, development paths, artistic destiny, and happiness in life are decided. This is all the more true since every artistic director knows and can assume that especially the performers and young assistants obediently accept orders like soldiers and seize every opportunity, however small, to show and realize themselves, no matter how small this crumb may be.

2.4  The Role of the Artistic Director …

43

Andreas Wien and Norman Franzke classify the power culture as an autocratic organizational form, in which democratic decision-making is hardly possible or not desired. It is originally attributed to traditional family businesses, in which the families hold the majority or all of the company shares: “The power culture can be assigned to an autocratic organizational form. The organizational form is characterized by strong hierarchical levels. Due to the deep structure of the organization, democratic decision-making is not possible, but is made by the top management level. The power potential is therefore highly centralized. The power culture can be found in traditional family businesses, in which the owner leads the company in a patriarchal manner. The success of the company in this culture depends on the decision-makers.” (Wien and Franzke, p. 37)

Like a patriarchal family business, long-serving artistic directors also view “their” theater, reacting insulted or with lawyers when the shareholders let the contracts expire in order to artistically reorient the theater, or to end an unhappy collaboration with an artistic director, as can be observed time and again. All other characteristics also apply to the artistic director-centered theater: • • • •

strong hierarchical levels with deep structure, decision-making by the artistic director, central power emanates from the artistic director, the success of the theater depends heavily on the concepts, programs, and decisions of the artistic director.

These are the levers that need to be adjusted to make the theater fit for the future. However, this will hardly be possible without intervening in the role and function of the artistic director. In order to understand how artistic directors act and decide, I will deal with the artistic director as a prototype of the autocratic city theater, with his role and his central function in the theater in the following section.

2.4 The Role of the Artistic Director and His Central Function in the Theater Depending on the legal form, theaters are led by an artistic and an managing director. In most cases, the artistic director is the theater director, who is assigned to a managing director in a GmbH, or an administrative director at other theaters. In this respect, the theater director not only has a great responsibility for the artistic area of a theater, but as a personnel and economic director, he also oversees administration, finances,

44

2  The Peculiarities of the German Theater System

and technology, which gives him access to all resources of the theater. In addition to responsibility and access, there are two other aspects that strengthen and legitimize the artistic director in his role: The contract of the theater director (Intendanten-Vertrag) and the direct legitimation by politics. The contract is now based on a model contract of the German Stage Association (Deutscher Bühnenverein), to counteract the fact that some of the shareholders in the federal states are trying to curtail and contain the power of the theater director with their own model drafts. In contrast, a model contract is now being used, which is intended to preserve the rights of the director and therefore precisely defines and freezes them, including the house and access rights to personnel and finances. This legitimizes the theater director as the sole ruler. The second legitimation is obtained by the fact that politics, represented by shareholders and committees, sees the director as their true and worthy interlocutor. At a city theater, the conversation with a second director, a representative, or another director is usually sought less often, although they are the actual experts. Accordingly, the invitation practice of cities and countries for important meetings, conferences, and celebrations is also designed. Thus, the high power potential of the theater directors can be derived and understood from a double public legitimation, the transferred responsibility, and the granted access rights. Even in the case of obvious crises, artistic directors are hardly ever held accountable and rarely asked in time to clarify grievances or vacate their position. In far too many cases, theater directors are still held on to even when the theater has already suffered damage, as in Rostock (2014), Trier (2016), Karlsruhe (2019), Berlin Volksbühne (2020), and Berlin Festspiele (2021). In both cases, there were serious human errors, but also major structural problems and inadequate corporate governance, especially with regard to supervisory duties and the regulations of the management’s behavior. Many artistic directors, however, are not willing to voluntarily regulate or share their too large responsibility and realization space even after repeated mistakes. They defend their rights with the help of the theater association, which declares the obviously questionable artistic director system to be without alternative despite all criticism and regular scandals.

2.4.1 Management Requirements for an Artistic Director This development of power concentration, which goes back to Max Reinhardt (1873–1943), has its reasons. Most theater directors believe that this is the only way they can maintain their freedom: a large power and responsibility space

2.4  The Role of the Artistic Director …

45

always promises a large space for the development of their own artistic ideas. This, in turn, gives rise to the desire of many directors and theater makers to become artistic and theater directors themselves after years of service as an assistant, young director, or dramaturge, later as a senior director or chief dramaturge, without knowing the administrative burdens they will face or being adequately prepared for them. And this, even though the management requirements grow larger year by year with ever new topics and can no longer be managed by one person with appropriate professionalism. These tasks include, among others: • • • • • • • • • • • •

Good corporate governance Strategic management Organizational development Planning methods Environment and competitor monitoring Professional lobbying Moderation of dialogue with stakeholders Modern personnel management, diversity, and inclusion Corporate and labor law Developments in other legal areas, such as contract, tax, and copyright law Works constitution or personnel representation law Modern financial management.

Today, a theater director stakes out his field between representative (representation of the theater to the outside world), strategic (securing the future), and operational tasks (personnel, finances, construction and renewal, contract negotiations, meetings) and should actually focus on the programmatic and artistic development of the theater. Since the time of Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749–1832), the formal role of the artistic director has only changed marginally (Fischer-Dieskau 2012). Although there has been a separation of economic and artistic tasks in Germany since about 1871: The impresario took over the tasks of a manager, which became too much for the artistic director, usually the “first actor of the ensemble” who played himself in the ensemble and took on up to eight productions per year, and which no longer corresponded to his intention and training (Rühle 2008). Later, the position of the administrative director subordinate to the artistic director was created, thus the artistic director retained access to the administrative side. The theaters in Germany have been similarly structured in this aspect for almost 150 years and are therefore repeatedly confronted with the same problems.

46

2  The Peculiarities of the German Theater System

Without taking into account the operational and structural concerns of the Theater, politics generally does not support a change in the management structure and the associated departure from the presidential leading figure. The knowledge about the theater and its “old” structures stored in ministerial and municipal bureaucracies has been preserved. No one wants to take risks in the form of changes there; they would have to come from the elected politicians. In Mannheim, this led to a heated debate for months, as a result of which the Mannheim mayor was finally able to push through the model of a management team (directorate) against the restoration of the general directorate model with a wafer-thin majority in the city council. The letter from three former general directors of the theater, co-signed by half a dozen stage association-related directors of other theaters, which speaks out against a team and in favor of a general directorate, testifies to the low flexibility in the minds of those who have climbed the highest ranks of the career ladder in the theater and do not want to give it up anymore (Peters et al. 2012). The city of Mannheim fortunately rejected this request, as the artistic and economic results of the theater were indeed significantly better than with the model of the predecessor, who had shown herself overwhelmed and overloaded by the many tasks of the large theater. Here, the directors gathered in the stage association tried to protect their director model and the associated power, against the background of the hardly plausible argument that theater art and artistic success require a sole and final decision-maker. This is a very simplified and shallow statement, which is refuted by the successes of many companies and theaters based on teamwork ad absurdum. The theater has always been based on the work of teams and collectives and is particularly good where hierarchies are dismantled (Theaterhaus Jena, Mühlheim, Marburg, Theater Gessnerallee, Schauspielhaus Zurich and Theater am Neumarkt in Zurich, Schauspiel Essen (2023), Schauspiel Halle (2023), Staatstheater Wiesbaden (2024), among others). The director is the contact person and person responsible for cultural and local politicians. Dealing with directorates or small team managements (Dortmund, Mannheim, Jena, Marburg, Zurich, Lübeck, among others), which can present themselves much more competently, divisionally, and networked towards politics and thus stronger and less vulnerable, is foreign and somewhat suspicious to politics oriented towards presidential operating systems. Nevertheless, there is hope that especially private stakeholders will push for cultural policy to make the urgently needed changes to internal organizational structures and the processes based on them in the long term. A step in the right direction is to increasingly consider collectives for directorships.3 3 In

2019, this was successfully implemented at the Gessnerallee in Zurich, a theater and production house of the independent scene.

2.4  The Role of the Artistic Director …

47

Alternatively, directors should delegate tasks with the corresponding decisionmaking authority to their colleagues. This should not be done in the usual way, so that, for example, the director of drama is first given all responsibility and decision-making power, only to have it taken away from him shortly afterwards, as has happened several times in recent years (Deutschlandfunk 2015; Di Falcone 2016). Instead, these powers must be clearly disclosed in the organizational chart and to the employees and may not be revoked without the decision of the supervisory board. In principle, this is also a reason why theaters can only renew themselves so sluggishly and why reform attempts remain half-hearted if they do not start with the role of the director.

2.4.2 Isomorphism The theaters reflect the structures of their shareholders and sponsors according to the rules of isomorphism in neo-institutional organization theory (Meyer and Rowan 1977). Isomorphism states that dependent organizations, which include theaters, fundamentally align themselves with the stronger and more influential organizations in the so-called organizational field. The multiple dependencies of theaters on their sponsors and shareholders, as well as on other strong stakeholders in the field, in turn leads to a strong dependency that also seals and manifests the power relationship between the supporting and executing organization. By copying (or having to copy) the administrative structures of municipalities and ministries, theaters not only lose their administrative independence, but also forfeit many freedoms that are possible for a cultural organization—for example, organizing themselves as an NPO instead of public administration. They also miss the great opportunity to organize themselves in analogy to the production processes of the performances—which would be advantageous for the operation, resource consumption, employees, and ultimately the quality of the productions, which seem to play no role in the official organizational considerations. Instead, the hierarchical divisional organization is awkwardly and vertically imposed on the theater against the flow of production, so that at each interface, communication deficits, bottlenecks and conflicts inevitably arise, as is common in theaters today. Although theaters are euphemistically described as supposedly the last utopian places, they de facto still operate like early bureaucratic agencies. With the application of administrative structures, new problems arise that only allow for the production of excellent art to a limited extent, rather than promoting it.

48

2  The Peculiarities of the German Theater System

At the same time, these structures cement the role of the theater director. Analogous to the role of a minister or a mayor, the theater director is no longer understood as a designer and artistic leader, but as the head of an agency and the chairman of committees. Each additional task that would reasonably be distributed to new, additional management members or board members or directors in any other type of company remains the responsibility of the theater director and is subject to his delegation.

2.4.3 Power Generates More Power Power always generates more power. In a short time, young, committed artistic directors become power-conscious people who learn to demarcate themselves externally from the interests of politics. However, they increasingly transfer their associated psychological change inward, into the theater, into collaboration with the directors, with the assistants in their own office, with the ensemble, and the employees. And so, empathetic, creative people who are not actually prepared for the world of cultural politics, cultural business, and its refinements soon become a type of theater director who sacrifices their ideals and exchanges them for interests, especially since power brings with it a number of flattering effects that one does not want or cannot do without after a short time. The theater director model (Intendanten-Modell) and the power exercised by theater directors also have collateral effects that strengthen the model: • The gradient continues to increase from top to bottom, and the hierarchical habitus is imitated and reinforced on the lower hierarchy levels. • The leaders of the lower levels also demand authority, and every Bad Governance continues in this. • The next hierarchy levels are subject to a form of psychological imitation, with which they adopt the behavior of the artistic director, even in similar arguments and forms of articulation. • As a result, the artistic director model is strengthened and remains invulnerable: due to anticipatory obedience and the associated imitation by the lower ranks in the hierarchy. Michel Foucault aptly describes this with the image that a kind of surface or power field is created by the exercised power, through “a system of relays, connections, transmissions, distributions, etc.” (Foucault 1976, p. 114).

2.4  The Role of the Artistic Director …

49

Of course, there are also major conflicts within the theater management when the individual department heads have to fight for the allocation of resources. This can be abused as a power instrument when the theater director and the managing director allocate resources not only according to need and performance, but also according to sympathy or self-interest, without coordinating with the college on the second management level. This is always the case when close friends, relatives, and other close actors suddenly “move up” into management tasks and, with the enabled access to resources, further expand and strengthen their own and the artistic director’s power position (Berliner Ensemble, Bern, Cologne, Vienna, among others) or take on important staging tasks and projects that are disproportionately equipped with resources, which must then be compensated for by the other areas and productions.

2.4.4 Further Roles and Players in the Theater If one wants to examine the theater and the structures and power relations anchored in it more closely, it is important to also describe the other influential and powerful actors in the theater in order to better explain and analyze the power tectonics. These include: Shareholders, supervisory board, artistic director and managing director, department head/chief director, chief dramaturge, operations director/chief planning director, technical director; ensemble, employees, and staff representation. (DBV 2015)

In Fig. 2.10, I have attempted to define these actors more precisely and describe them based on five characteristics. These include: objectives, resources, influence, degree of organization, and legitimacy. In doing so, I have developed a five-point system with which I evaluate these attributes of power for the first time in a selfcontained manner against the background of their overall significance for theater operations. In doing so, I have assigned a score between 0 and a maximum of five points, depending on the potential importance of the three most important group-related individual aspects of an attribute. In this way, I can present a first, approximate proposal for the distribution of power among the most important actors in the theater. It becomes clear that the four actors shareholders (23), artistic director (23), managing director (22), and ensemble (24) are roughly on par in the count, depending on the extent to which the respective groups actually exercise and perceive this power, which will and must continue to develop, especially among the

50

Shareholder (city/state)

Supervisory board

Intendant

Management

Division Director

Head or chief dramaturge

Chief dispatcher, operations director

2  The Peculiarities of the German Theater System Targets

Resources

Influence

Organization degree

Legitimation

Preservation and development of the theater depending on the political situation 4 Control and supervision of activities/ business of the theater, strategy, election of artistic director and the managing director.

Subsidy between 70 % and 90 % per location, economic power 5 approval of the economic plans

Greatest influence on the future of the theater, its structure and reforms. 5 Influence on distribution of financial resources; selection of the theater director Strategy of the theater

High: Inner network in city and countryside, furthermore in DBV

High: as historical institutions as well as financiers of theaters

4 Preservation of power; own and artistic successes of the theater; next step in the merry-go-round

3 Access to finances, artistic staff

5 High: on all artistic processes, in financial and personnel aspects

4 Very high: DBV (German Stage Association)

5 economic stability, future of the theater, expansion of power

4 Personnel, financial and material resources Preparation of the planning template

4 Very high: on all non-artistic processes, personnel contracts

5 High: DBV, Networks

5 Artistic success Power expansion Resources

5 Personnel of the division, distribution of ress. to stag

4 Staging process

3 Low to medium

3 Artistic stability of the theater; own artificial influence, power expansion

3 Play schedule, influence on current productions

3 2 Artistic planning Medium: and programming Dramaturg. Society

3 Planning security; access to resources, Power expansion

3 Planning, influence on distribution of personnel, space and time

3 = 14 3 2 Artistic Planning, Low, networking Function, Daily, weekly cation experience and monthly dispos

4 High: representatives of the political groups of the city council, as well as the ministry.

5 = 23

Very high: as it performs the control and security function

5 = 21

Director's contract, political and artistic legitimation; company contract 5 = 23

Contract, social contract, task portfolio, respect

5 = 22

Director's assignment, experience, artistic success 3 = 14

Function per se; innovations; degree of networking

Fig. 2.10   The most important players in the theater and the attributes of their power. Draft (Schmidt 2019)

51

2.4  The Role of the Artistic Director …

Technical director

Ensemble

Staff representation or works council (depending on the legal form of the theater)

3 Planning security, free space, resources

3 Technical staff, planning

3 Technical planning

2 Means, Various technical companies

2 = 13 Function, experience, safety

3 Justice Livelihood security Participation, diversity

2 Own manpower, artistic potential

2 Artistic processes

3 Medium, but: ensemble network; often direct access to artistic director

3 = 13 Core of the theater, experience, artistic success

5 Preservation of the personnel base, fair payment, compliance with labor laws

5 None, to be assigned by management as needed,

4 Influence on employees Approval of hiring, firing, salaries, rosters

5 Very high: via trade union and employees of the company

5 = 24 In principle high, but may vary depending on topics

4

0

4

5

4

= 18

Fig. 2.10   (continued)

ensembles, and may then possibly lead to a completely new balance of power in the theater. This is the first insight The ensembles potentially have significantly more power than has been reflected by most of their members so far and than is generally perceived. Considering the power that the theater director usually actually exercises, and how little the ensemble, the managing director, or the shareholders use the power that is due to them, this is very surprising. Real and potential power are still quite far apart here. Surprisingly far behind are the directors, who, in terms of perception, are among the powerful and influential actors of the theater. As long as they are not elevated to the status of the first management level—equal to theater directors and members of the directorate—they will never be able to occupy a significant position and not be able to appear as modernizers. They actually only exercise as much power as the theater director allows them. It is also interesting that the shareholder who appoints the theater director has, on average, only as much power and exercises it as the artistic director himself, while the supervisory body ranks even lower. This shows how quickly the director—once elected—can usually emancipate himself and develop and expand his

52

2  The Peculiarities of the German Theater System

own power potential. However, it also shows that the greatest potential of the shareholders lies in the appointment and dismissal of the director, but they paradoxically hand over the actual control after the election to him or the supervisory board. Both indicate that either the shareholders and the supervisory body have too little, or even more clearly, the theater director has too much power. A circumstance that the shareholders are responsible for, who have uncontrollably increased his power and the extent of his public legitimacy with his contract. Based on this contract, directors can hardly be replaced and only against the full payment of the remaining term of the contract, which is often not financially possible for the municipal theater operation or the theater. So, conflicts and disputes are avoided, and even where there has long been a need for action, they are still allowed. The hesitation in replacing theater directors is evidence of this. Also noteworthy is the classification of the staff representation, which, mainly due to a lack of resources, lags significantly behind the first management level and the ensemble, which at least has its own personnel resources and direct channels to the theater director. This may explain the low degree of organization of the artists, who are hardly organized in trade unions and are only underrepresented in the company committees. Only the ensemble-network leads to a significant sensitization in thinking here.

2.5 First Conclusions and Options I have already discussed the topic of organizational models, which is only briefly outlined here, elsewhere (Schmidt 2016). However, I will only be able to make a theoretical and conceptual classification of the link between structure, organizational culture, and power in the following chapters and taking into account the results of the study. What is striking about the consideration made here is the range of options of the theater director-centered model, which is still practiced at 125 of 130 public theaters, and which is varied again and again, but is questioned by almost no theater and no sponsor. Only in very few theaters are there so-called directorates. In Stuttgart, one also speaks of a directorial model, but this is the model of a theater company with three autonomous operating parts, which are led by equally autonomous individual directors. However, there are also movements back to the general directorship, the “super form” of the director-centered model (Nuremberg, Bremen, and others). In Bremen, a functioning directorate, which had been well established from a transitional solution after the involuntary dismissal of Hans-Joachim Frey (Nachtkritik 2010), was unfortunately reversed (Klett 2017). Also, in Nuremberg, Weimar or Kassel, the opportunity was missed

2.5  First Conclusions and Options

53

to exchange the general director model for a directorial model when choosing the new management. The debate has since evolved. It is becoming increasingly clear in Bern, Trier, Rostock, Darmstadt, and others that there is hardly an alternative to dismantling the theater director model. A single person cannot shoulder the multitude of tasks and the resulting demands of such a large theater company with its diverse topics, challenges, and problems. However, to actually establish a management team, it takes more than just introducing a so-called “management” at the second level and then talking about teamwork, as has been done in Bern for reasons of power retention. The actual management ultimately remained with the former director, who merely used the committee to give his power a democratic veneer (Tobler 2018a, b). Such attempts to conceal power or emphasize team play by theater directors should give pause for thought. A leader—whether a board member of VW or a director of a theater—cannot seriously call themselves a team player if they insist on the right of sole representation. A board member of VW, however, works with up to ten other board members and may indeed be forced to work as a team. The theater director does not have this compulsion. And it is precisely this gap that the directorate model aims to fill by abolishing the function of the single director and dividing it, forcing the directors to work together with the managers of the other areas for the benefit of the theater and its employees, thus contributing to a balanced and sustainable development of the theater based on the skills and knowledge of many. It is therefore about a real turning point that must not only be modeled but also paradigmatically represented—through the transition from a single-interest driven to an expertise-led management. The analysis of public theaters in Germany, Austria and Switzerland and their organizational structures is primarily intended to better classify and evaluate the results of the study in chapters four and five. Nevertheless, some initial conclusions can already be drawn at this point: • Striking is the concentration of organizational models in the German speaking theater landscape, which are fundamentally tailored to the theater director, in the director-centered model, but also in the dual leadership of the GmbH consisting of the artistic director and usually subordinate managing director. Only with the significantly less common directorate model (organization type 4, see above) are essential elements of the organizational structure and access rights within the theater changed and reformed. Until then, the theater director has too extensive intervention rights and is at the forefront of the strict hierarchical order with his powers.

54

2  The Peculiarities of the German Theater System

• Even more reform-oriented, however, is the matrix model (organization type 5), in which the theater operation is restructured analogously to the production flow, namely into the areas: program, planning, production, management, and support. With this structure, the advantages of the directorate model could be combined with the advantages of faster communication and better decisionmaking ability, providing the theater with a new development basis. • Another insight from this section is that a positive, strong corporate culture cannot grow where the emotional distance or the associated emotional tensions between management and employees are too great and there is no equal footing between the individual hierarchical levels, i.e., the model is too hierarchical and not permeable enough. This, in addition to the directorial model, speaks for flat hierarchies, team solutions, transparency, permeability, and equal footing. • At the same time, the corporate culture must be included in all considerations for a current or future management model of the theater. If this refers only to models of control and monitoring or a Management by Objectives, the corporate culture will not be part of the organization to the extent and support internal processes as it could be in models of motivation, moderation, and knowledge management. I will complete and condense my considerations on this in Chap. 6, against the background of the study results. • At this point in my research, it becomes clear that the leadership culture in the theater is currently based on a combination of power culture with a culture of control and intervention. The choice of the appropriate leadership concept is made according to the aspects that correspond to the interests of the theater directors and that must be introduced within the exercise of power. While in the model of control and monitoring, coercion, persuasion, and information are primarily used as media of power, the picture already changes in the second model, a Management by Objectives, in which legitimacy, the use of rewards, charisma, knowledge, and the mastery of the environment are added. In the third model of Leadership by moderation and motivation, these aspects are intensified, while coercion is replaced by knowledge and personality, and the information power of the management turns into that of the employees— all important prerequisites for leading the employees well and fairly. • Referring to the four types of power according to Handy, I found that theaters with old-school and imprinting directors are most likely to have a power culture, while directors whose own development is more in focus tend to mix this power culture with a person culture. Ideally, however, the theater would have a role culture that would meet the high degree of specialization, the high division of labor, and the desire for stronger team orientation and participation

2.5  First Conclusions and Options

55

of the employees, combined with an innovative task culture corresponding to projects and the project teams anchored therein, which are used in every staging process. • The power culture enforced by the theater director and the role culture of the theater are diametrically opposed: they cannot be combined, which is why there are always frictions and crises in the theater. The possibility of reforms is considerably restricted by the primacy of the artistic realization of the theater director. He not only has priority to realize himself at any time and with all available resources, but he also has the primacy to decide independently and without an objective standard on the extent and orientation of the artistic realization of “his” employees. His will and his artistic direction are the measure of all things. • Today, a theater director defines his field between representative (representation of the theater), strategic (securing the future), and operational tasks (personnel, finances, construction and renewal, contract negotiations, meetings) and should actually focus on the programmatic and artistic development of the theater. The diversity of tasks and responsibility in leading a theater has increased steadily in recent years and will continue to grow in the coming years: all these tasks can no longer be solved and managed by one person, which is why I propose a division of labor at the top of the theater and the establishment of the directorates and team solutions described above. On the one hand, this relieves the omnipotent theater directors and allows them to concentrate on their artistic work; on the other hand, the theaters gain a significantly expanded scope of knowledge, skills, and competencies due to a new composition at the top, which a single person can no longer provide today. However, the division of power at the top of the theater is also associated with the distribution of power and the resulting reduction in the power of an individual. • The distribution of power in theaters is very uneven due to the functional divisions of individual positions, the statutes of the theaters, and the contract structures of their directors, and is mostly tailored to the theater director or general artistic director. However, initial studies show that the ensemble of actors has a significantly higher power potential than its members themselves assume. In particular, their responsibility for the results of the production processes and the quality of the productions leads to the ensembles taking their responsibility and rights in the theaters much more seriously and thus contributing to a structural change.

56

2  The Peculiarities of the German Theater System

References DBV. (2015). Berufe im Theater. Köln: Deutscher Bühnenverein. DBV. (2018). Theaterstatistik. Köln: Deutscher Bühnenverein. Deutschlandfunk. (26. Mai 2015). Zoff am Staatstheater Darmstadt. Di Falcone. (14. Februar 2016). Machtkämpfe in Bern. Der Bund. Fischer-Dieskau, D. (2012). Goethe als Intendant. München: DTV. Foucault, M. (1976). Mikrophysik der Macht. Über Strafjustiz, Psychiatrie und Medizin. Berlin: Merve. Goffman, E. (1959). Wir alle spielen Theater. Die Selbstdarstellung im Alltag. Texte und Studien zur Soziologie. Stuttgart: Piper. Handy, C. (1993). Understanding Organizations. Oxford: Oxford University Press. HNA. (22. Februar 2019). Documenta 15: Indonesische Künstlergruppe leitete Kassler Kunstschau. Zum ersten Mal übernimmt ein Team die Verantwortung für eine Documenta. Hessisch-Niedersächsische Allgemeine. Klett, M. (23. Februar 2017). Die Einheit in der Vielheit. Nachtkritik.de. https://www. nachtkritik.de/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=13649:am-beispielbremen-marcel-klett-macht-sich-gedanken-zur-kollektiven-leitung-von-theatern&catid =101&Itemid=84. Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363. Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organizations. London: Pearson. MSG. (2018). Management-Study-Guide. The Charles-Handy-Model. https://www.managementstudyguide.com/charles-handy-model.htm. Zugegriffen: 18. Sept. 2018. Nachtkritik. (2010). Verheerende Bilanz: Abschlussbericht zur Intendanz von HansJoachim Frey in Bremen. Enorm angewachsen. https://doi.org/https://www. nachtkritik.de/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4949:veheerendebilanz-abschlussbereicht-zur-intendanz-von-hans-joachim-frey-in-bremen&catid=126 &Itemid=100089. Zugegriffen: 25. Nov. 2010. Peters, U., Schultz, U., Schwab-Felisch, H., et al. (2012). Keine falsche Leitungsstruktur für das Nationaltheater! Offener Brief der ehemaligen Intendanten des Nationaltheaters Mannheim und der Intendanten Jürgen Bosse, Joachim Klement, Michael Klügl, Markus Müller, Dietmar Schwarz und Peter Theiler an den Oberbürgermeister der Stadt Mannheim. Über den Deutschen Bühnenverein verteiltes PDF-Dokument vom 01.12.2012. Rühle, G. (2008). Geschichte des deutschen Theaters, 1876–1933. Frankfurt/M.: Fischer. Schmidt, T. (2011). Theater im Wandel. Vom Krisenmanagement zur Zukunftsfähigkeit. In K. Bekmeier-Feuerhahn, S. Höhne, et al. (Hrsg.), Jahrbuch Kulturmanagement (S. 161– 180). Bielefeld: Transcript. Schmidt, T. (2012). Theater-Management. Eine Einführung. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Schmidt, T. (2016). Theater, Krise und Reform. Eine Kritik des deutschen Theatersystems. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Schmidt, T. (2018). Elemente des deutschen Theatersystems, Essentials Praxis Kulturmanagement. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Schmidt, T. (2019). Die Regeln des Spiels. Programm und Spielplan-Gestaltung im Theater. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

References

57

Schreyögg, G. (2016). Grundlagen der Organisation. Basiswissen für Studium und Praxis (2. Aufl.). Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler. Tobler, A. (14. Juli 2018a). Berner Stadttheater: Intendant Märki tritt zurück. Der Berner Intendant Stephan Märki hat seine Liebesbeziehung zu Sophie Krempl aus der Geschäftsleitung bekannt gegeben. Beide treten zurück. Der Bund. Tobler, A. (14. Juli 2018b). Der letzte Akt ist noch nicht geschrieben. Der Bund. Weber, M. (1922). Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Grundriß der verstehenden Soziologie. von Johannes Winckelmann (Hrsg.), 5. Rev. Aufl. 2002. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. Wien, A., & Franzke, N. (2014). Unternehmenskultur. Zielorientierte Unternehmensethik als entscheidender Erfolgsfaktor. Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler.

3

Power and Organization

“Any serious analysis of collective action must therefore place power at the centre of its considerations, because collective action is basically nothing other than day-today politics. Power is its ‘raw material’.” Crozier and Friedberg (1993, S. 14)

The asymmetry of power in theaters is favored by a series of external and internal conditions. A significant condition of theater work in German public theaters lies in the hybridity of the organization, which consists of two major parts, with the long-term oriented, administrative part being more oriented towards political guidelines, while the artistic part of the house tries to differentiate itself from this and act and work autonomously. The artistic director is, in the best case, a moderator between both sides. With his abilities, knowledge, and expertise, he must try to bring both sides into constant and creative communication and work processes. If he fails to do this or favors the artistic work too much, he may lose control of the management of the entire house. Moreover, the theater, due to its close connection to cultural politics and state sponsors and its insistence on non-state action as an NPO, stands between the two fields. Alongside museums, concert halls, large orchestras, publicly funded film production companies, and galleries, the theater thus becomes a new type of organization. It is a middle ground between society and heterop. The main beneficiary of the asymmetry of power and at the same time one of its essential factors is the theater director, who holds the title of artistic director (Intendant) and—nomen est omen—is the one who intends and enforces. The favoritism occurs in several ways: © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 T. Schmidt, Power and Structure in Theater, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-42280-6_3

59

60

3  Power and Organization

• through politics, which appoints the artistic director, • through the ensemble, which depends on its artistic director, and • through the theater staff, who are subject to the artistic director’s authority and usually follow these instructions precisely. The asymmetry is already programmed here, especially since most staff members (have to) engage in this power relationship and usually only criticize it subliminally. Only recently has a stronger awareness of power processes and injustice in theaters emerged. The asymmetry is reinforced by the—not necessarily unselfish—interest of the theater director in advancing his own artistic career or the careers of friends, and sometimes even relatives. The processes associated with the appointment as artistic director or director, learning and exercising power, lead to an organization repeatedly practicing new nuances of power exercises—to which the staff can react with obedience, rebellion, or subversion. Essentially, however, the theater operation is characterized by the axis power—obedience. An institution that has been under the curatorship of a powerful artistic director for over 200 years will not be able to free artistic processes and ensembles from the influence of power without a clear structural break, because an outdated understanding of power has “burned” into the organizational culture of the theater. The power of artistic directors, the structures, and the organizational culture of the theater are interdependent. Changing the structures will sustainably change the power attributes of the artistic director and the culture of the theater. Even if supervisory bodies try to get a grip on the problem of power abuse in theaters, the artistic directors receive support from the German Stage Association. I have already described how long such processes of detachment can take. The premature dismissal of an artistic director is always a sign of weakness of the shareholders and supervisory bodies, who have exercised their control and corrective functions far too negligently and too late. What power means, how it arises, and where it leads, I would like to explain in this third section, which should form the theoretical basis for the study. At the same time, this section should serve as an instrument of explanation—but not as an excuse for the use of power. In the results of the study on art and power in the theater presented in the fourth chapter, it will become apparent how strongly the asymmetry of power in the theater is also connected with the working methods of the artistic director, the specific organizational culture, and the prevailing work and interaction ethics.

3.1  Power As a Social Phenomenon

61

3.1 Power As a Social Phenomenon Power permeates the entire society, reaching every small area, even into families, friendships, and love relationships. “Since the entire social sphere is conceived as permeated by power, there is no place outside of power.” (Felgenhauer and Bornmüller 2018, p. 14)

In the humanities and social sciences, power is a regularly and diversely discussed topic. The most important and frequently used definition for social sciences was provided by Max Weber: “Power means any chance, within a social relationship, to assert one’s own will against resistance, regardless of what this chance is based on.” (Weber 1922, p. 28)

Weber belongs to the thinkers of substantialist power theories, which assume a sovereign ruler. Already with this definition, which is still valid today, the clear asymmetry of a power relationship is precisely outlined. It is about the enforcement of the will of the power-possessing actor against another actor. Power is exercised by a tangible subject over another subject, which can also be an organization.

3.1.1 The Staging of Power in Elias and Kantorowicz An essential aspect of the exercise of power is its staging. Norbert Elias writes in The Court Society about the perception of power by the subordinates: “The people do not believe in a power that is present but does not visibly appear in the appearance of the ruler himself. They must see to believe.” (Elias 1989, p. 179)

Ernst Kantorowicz has cleverly elaborated on this in his essay The King’s Two Bodies, which distinguishes between an invisible mortal and vulnerable body of the sovereign and the staged and spiritual, immortal body of the king, which is also the “scabbard” of the mortal body. This later opens up the possibility of distinguishing between the king and kingship, between subject and institution. The king can be mentally and physically weak—if his office and his staging tell of his strength, he will not be doubted by the princes and his court (Kantorowicz 1957).

62

3  Power and Organization

Katrin Felgenhauer and Falk Bornmüller recall the example of the King of Staging, the Sun King Louis XIV, who every morning in the act of the so-called Lever brought 200 courtiers, mostly from the high and middle nobility, into his morning room to have them dress him and thus demonstrate his power and affection. The greatest favor was granted to the courtier who was allowed to empty and clean the chamber pot. “Because the legitimacy of his rule can fundamentally be questioned, the ruler must always strive to skillfully stage his power in front of the audience—but the possible failure lies in the necessity of staging.” (Felgenhauer and Bornmüller 2018, p. 15)

In relational power theories, the other major group of theoretical power concepts, the view is held that power is exercised and staged through relationships and much less through central hierarchies. Herfried Münkler, one of their representatives, writes about the “invisibility of the enforcement of order,” which is typical for democratic forms of rule. He holds the view that power is both limitedly visible and invisible, possibly in a distant analogy to Kantorowicz: “What has become completely visible and thus, in a broader sense, also calculable, cannot actually be called power; and what is completely invisible and hidden can be apostrophized as power in a theological sense, but hardly in a political one.” (Münkler 1995, p. 213).

Bornmüller and Felgenhauer describe this as emancipated power, “which is no longer embodied but carries itself” (Felgenhauer and Bornmüller 2018, p. 19). Power takes on a fictional character. In their volume, the two authors gather voices of scientists who propose models for connecting the two major power concepts. The starting point is always the consideration that there are already numerous approaches to an overlap between the two areas. After reading power-theoretical writings and conducting my research in the field of cultural institutions, I can agree with this assessment and also with the idea that sovereign rulers and subject-to-subject relationships do not have to exclude each other any more than central hierarchies and trustful relationships. If one examines more closely how a theater is structured, one will understand that this goes hand in hand (Chap. 2).

3.1  Power As a Social Phenomenon

63

3.1.2 The Struggle for Power in Machiavelli In power research, in addition to Max Weber, a dozen critical authors dominate a discussion that has been conducted with high intensity to this day—some of them for more than 500 years. These include Niccolò Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes, Charles de Montesquieu, later Friedrich Nietzsche, Lord Acton, Hanna Arendt, Michel Foucault, and Pierre Bourdieu, as well as scientists from management and organizational research such as Murray Edelman, Jeffrey Pfeffer, Henry Mintzberg, Michel Crozier, and Erhard Friedberg. The scientific and systematic examination of power begins—building on ancient precursors (Plato’s Republic and Aristotle)—in the Renaissance with Niccolò Machiavelli (1469–1527). The Florentine author and philosopher primarily dealt with the effects and use of instruments of power and has significantly influenced power research to this day. In his main work The Prince, he focuses on the enforcement of power claims with violence, which should be used quickly if no other means are available. In the famous quote, he recommends that the prince as ruler “[…] should carry out all acts of violence that he cannot avoid, […] all at once, so that he does not have to start anew every day […].” (Machiavelli 1513, p. 39)

Hennis confirms that Machiavelli’s statements are a “technique of acquiring and maintaining power for arbitrarily applicable purposes” (Hennis 2000, p. 118). Above all, the issue of securing power will run through a series of further theoretical approaches over the following centuries. In this context, an important aspect comes to light, which is of great significance for the examination of theater operations: that Machiavelli does not refer to hereditary monarchies, but to those spheres of power that are acquired, newly established, and defended by other, “‘fortunate circumstances’ newly acquired, newly ordered, and defended. For the hereditary monarchy is much less exposed to attacks from internal enemies than those that must first be consolidated and balanced against envious, adversaries, and competitors, against whom Machiavelli develops his strategies.” (Anter 2012, p. 25)

Here, a first reference to the artistic director becomes apparent, who treats his office as if it were hereditary, but only receives it for a limited time, and therefore finds himself in a conflict between a princely/dominant habitus and the behavioral codes of higher-ranking employees during his respective appointment. In

64

3  Power and Organization

this respect, Machiavelli’s strategies can also be applied to the preservation of the artistic director’s office, which must be fought for, consolidated, and defended. The most enduring theater directors in Germany have managed to exercise their office for decades without being challenged, because their strategies for securing their office echo those of Machiavelli’s masterpiece. First and foremost, with some limitations, are Frank Castorf, who was artistic director of the Volksbühne in Berlin for 25 years, and Claus Peymann, who held the same position at the Berliner Ensemble for almost 20 years—both were replaced in 2017. But also power-conscious artistic directors like Oliver Reese, who rose from dramaturge to interim artistic director at the Deutsches Theater, then at the Frankfurt Schauspiel, and since 2017 at the Berliner Ensemble, must be mentioned here. They present themselves externally as liberal, enlightened, and eloquent servants of their theaters and act autocratically internally, with personnel policies and management that neither allow critical arguments nor potential adversaries, as I will show using examples that are confirmed by the results of the large survey. The theater as an organization has an immense power problem solely due to the—compared to other social areas—disproportionately hierarchical gradient and an asymmetry of power that allows at least these two types of artistic directors to move almost uncontrolled in the theater landscape. Also, because they control the relevant committees that determine the allocation of artistic director positions and the regulatory policy of the German Stage Association. They not only control the largest operas (Munich, Frankfurt, Hamburg) and dramatic theaters (Berliner Ensemble, Burgtheater Wien, among others), but are also important members of large associations and are honored with awards by a policy that is not always able to distinguish between appearance and reality. It is therefore not surprising that it is the artistic directors who would have to bear the majority of the responsibility for the results that this study has produced. Artistic directors are often Machiavellians who—and this will be substantiated further—possess a healthy degree of power consciousness and indifference towards ethical aspects of their field of responsibility. They regularly disregard these aspects, which has less to do with a conscious or intentional break with ethical paradigms than with a transmoral disposition, as J.G.A. Pocock describes it in his book The Machiavellian Moment (Pocock 2016). According to Dolf Sternberger, however, this disposition can very quickly lead to a systematic amorality (Sternberger 1958), as it arises after years of uncontrolled power. The initially mentioned cases of abuse of power and nepotism already clearly demonstrate this (Chap. 1, Appendix 3; chap. 4) and are surpassed by the diagnoses of power analyzed in the study.

3.1  Power As a Social Phenomenon

65

Guilt, if this term is even appropriate, lies primarily with politics, which neither exercises its supervisory and control duties properly, nor takes structural measures to modernize theater organizations and thus also curb and contain power positions. Suggestions for this have already been made, but have largely remained unanswered by the committees of the responsible German Stage Association, because they obviously do not want to discuss the function of the artistic director—the topic is taboo. Where there is shadow, there must always be light, and so there are many exemplary examples of artistic directors who carry out their work conscientiously, amicably, liberally, and yet with the highest quality. For example, there was the Oberhausen artistic director, Florian Fiedler, who is looking for new ways to involve artists (till 2022), as well as Niklas Stemann and Benjamin von Blomberg, the artistic director of Schauspiel Dortmund, Julia Wissert, the theater directors in Schauspielhaus Zürich. They belong to a small, growing group of reform-oriented artistic directors who stand against the Machiavellians. All of this is already the beginning of a counter-process that takes place parallel to the current restoration tendencies and announces essential changes.

3.1.3 Power Consolidation in Thomas Hobbes Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679) is considered the first great political theorist. With his Leviathan, he created the most influential parable on the role, function, and power of the modern state. His theory is based on the idea that there is a justification for any form of human claim to power inherent in natural law. In Hobbes’ view, power is limited by a state that emerges from a legal order to prevent war, internal unrest, and poverty. The appropriation power of individuals over nature and the resulting primacy of humans in it justifies this privilege of rule and exercise of power. What sounds dangerous today was a prerequisite for nation and state formation in Hobbes’ time. Hobbes therefore suggests transferring power to a legal entity to be created and thus concentrating it: the state. In this way, conflicts and wars arising from the above-mentioned claims to power are to be contained. This also completely redefines power. Hobbes—we will also find this in the theater—distinguishes between natural and instrumental power and highlights the process of acquiring power: “The power of a man, generally speaking, consists in his present means to obtain some future apparent good and is either original or instrumental. Natural power is the eminence of physical or mental abilities, such as extraordinary strength, beauty,

66

3  Power and Organization intelligence, skill, eloquence, generosity, and nobility. Instrumental power is the power obtained through natural power or by chance and serves as a means or instrument for acquiring more power, such as wealth, reputation, friends, and the hidden workings of God, which is commonly called fortune.” (Hobbes 1651, p. 66)

How much Hobbes is concerned with power consolidation is evidenced by the following passage in Leviathan. He states “a continual and restless desire for power after power, which ceaseth only in death, to be a general inclination of all mankind, and the reason thereof is not always that a man hopes for a more intensive delight than he has already attained to, or that he cannot be content with a modest power, but because he cannot assure the power and means to live well, which he hath present, without the acquisition of more.” (Hobbes 1651, p. 75)

The fewest directors of the group of Machiavellians can’t imagine a life without the position of theater director, without the associated privileges and insignia of power, because their successful path to the top has not taught them to think in existential alternatives that do not come with a corresponding reputation and legitimation. This life principle of the theater director is diametrically opposed to that of many artists, as most of them have to worry year after year: about the favor of their leaders, about the extension of their contracts, about the increase or adjustment of their fees, and about the approval of rehearsal-free periods. The dependency of the subordinate and thus subordinated artist is a total dependency, as it no longer occurs in other social areas because sufficient regulatory mechanisms have been established there. It is also a double dependency, as on the one hand, the normal social dependency aspects, such as contract security and fee, play a major role. However, the employed artist becomes vulnerable and manipulable only through their own urge for artistic realization, which usually only has a chance of realization if it is compatible with the ideas of the director. These, in turn, can change over the years, accompanied by fluctuating interest in their own artists, whose livelihood is tied to this interest. For this reason, the security strategies of the two sides also look completely different. For the directors, it is called power security, while for the artists, it is livelihood security through quality, productivity, subordination, and obedience in order to be able to pay for housing, food, and clothing. By obedience, a modern obedience is meant here, in which forced and voluntary obedience increasingly mix inseparably with each other, which can lead to long-term psychological damage as well as psychological disorientation and emptiness in the affected artists, to name just a few of the possible negative effects to which the director-centered model can lead.

3.1  Power As a Social Phenomenon

67

In Thomas Hobbes, there is another important finding for the theater, namely, that communication and the marketing of one’s own position count as the operative business of the powerful in order to maintain their own power, which anticipates an element of the later paradigm of the two bodies taken up by Kantorowicz: “Being in the reputation of power is power because it attracts the followership of those in need of protection. […] Likewise, any quality that brings a person the love or fear of many, or the reputation of such a quality, is power, as it is a means of obtaining the help and service of many.” (Hobbes, p. 66)

This also reminds us of the directors, who must convince their modern dependents—their employees—that they are the only possible powerful ones. Anter writes: “Hobbes’ examples show: One already has power when one is considered powerful.” (Anter, p. 30)

This can gloss over a significant problem when appointing new directors: that the selection committee may have made the wrong choice. Since directors are usually trained in artistic means of expression, it is not too difficult for them to cover up a lack of management knowledge by communicatively highlighting other areas. Andreas Anter points out that with Hobbes and the Enlightenment, there is a “break in the history of thinking about power.” In addition, “the close connection between the phenomena of power and the interest in order becomes apparent” (Anter, pp. 31 f.) To this day, the concept of order is associated with the idea that it cannot be established without power, rigid structures, and a steep hierarchy, at the top of which sits an all-powerful person.

3.1.4 Friedrich Nietzsche, Thomas Macho, and the Will to Power In Friedrich Nietzsche’s work, the theme of power is of great importance. In his posthumous writings, he writes: “[W]hat man wants, what every smallest part of a living organism wants, is a plus of power.” (Nietzsche 1982, p. 712)

68

3  Power and Organization

Nietzsche’s main argument in this context is the will to power: “Our drives are reducible to the will to power. The will to power is the ultimate fact to which we can descend.” (Nietzsche 1884, p. 327)

Two very strong, existentialist arguments pointing to the inherent striving for power in every human being, which Nietzsche considers as the engine for change. In his work Good and Evil, Nietzsche goes so far as to understand the entire drive life of humans as a manifestation of the will to power (Nietzsche 1886, p. 601). In doing so, he formulates an aspect that Sigmund Freud will call the so-called partial drive 30 years later (Freud 1920, p. 248) German cultural historian Thomas Macho also deals with this aspect of human power. In his considerations, he refers to a highly functionalist view regarding the interplay between power preservation and potential power renunciation: “One cannot simultaneously […] exercise power and renounce it. The will to power cannot be opposed by a will to powerlessness.” (Macho and Mayer, p. 42)

This argument will later be useful in the analysis of self-descriptions of theater directors who claim not to be interested in power. Power rarely goes hand in hand with power renunciation. Of course, both Nietzsche’s and Macho’s investigations must be placed in a critical context, and their theses cannot be unreflectively applied to the analysis of power behavior in theaters. Nevertheless, Nietzsche’s influence on modern and postmodern cultural sociology is too great to neglect his theory. The same applies to the highly honored philosopher Macho. The will to power should be taken into account in the analysis as well as the desire for a “plus of power,” which we find a few centuries earlier, only slightly differently formulated, in Machiavelli.

3.1.5 Lord Acton, Hannah Arendt, and the Corruption by Power Another scholar who dealt with the subject against the background of a parliamentary career is the British Lord Acton (1834–1902), who coined the important phrase: “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely.” (Acton 1955, p. 335)

3.1  Power As a Social Phenomenon

69

Hannah Arendt will confirm this sentence. Nothing has become more generally accepted in modern times than the conviction that “power corrupts.” (Arendt 1960, p. 199). For this reason, Acton recommends stronger control of the powerful: “If there is any presumption it is the other way against holders of power, increasing as the power increases. Historic responsibility has to make up for the want of legal responsibility. Power tends to corrupt and absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority: still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse hearsay than that the office sanctifies the holder of it.” (Acton 1955, p. 335)

Anter therefore concludes: “One of the lessons of history is: It is desirable under all circumstances to prevent absolute power and concentration of power. However, as historical experience shows, hardly any power is interested in being controlled; it must always be forced to do so. The constitutional safeguards for this are well known: limitation of power, separation of powers, and legal binding of state power.” (Anter, p. 44)

Anter addresses the aspect of power control through a separation of powers, which is, of course, also relevant for organizations such as theaters. Omnipotence, as an artistic director has at the top of a theater, must be contained, not only by supervisory bodies but also by limiting the areas of power, by legally binding all decisions, the internal division of power, and the formation of strong committees within the theater, including ensemble boards and employee representation. The greater the autonomy of theaters from politics, the greater the risk of concentration of power. On the other hand, this also offers a great opportunity for organizational and structural freedom within the organization, in which modern management models, teams, appropriate participation, and control bodies could develop. Merely cutting off the sole leadership of the artistic director and integrating them into a collective management body (directorate) would defuse the current situation. For as long as power is not reduced and controlled, it will be abused, as Montesquieu formulated: “Eternal experience teaches, however, that every person who has power is driven to abuse it. […] In order for power not to be abused, it is necessary to bring about, through the arrangement of things, that power checks power.” (Montesquieu 1748, p. 215)

70

3  Power and Organization

The various “power bases” differentiate themselves further in the course of their development, with sociological, psychological, and social-psychological aspects having a significant influence. Both Hannah Arendt and Michel Foucault describe power as a phenomenon that naturally occurs in all social relationships and structures and simultaneously contributes to their further differentiation. In this respect, power is not inherently pejorative. However, it requires regulation and, at the same time, psychological reflection, by means of which boundaries are defined that must not be crossed in order to largely avoid or reduce irreparable asymmetry. In my view, this also includes the analysis of the long-term development of power and power instruments against the background of societal changes. Power is an aspect with high adaptability and speed. Therefore, with clever application, power is always able to adapt to any change and develop freedom within it. Boundaries must be set to protect employees and organizations from these freedoms.

3.1.6 Power as a Diversity of Power Relations in Foucault Power theories in the late 20th century are essentially shaped by two French philosophers, Pierre Bourdieu and the already mentioned Michel Foucault. Both approach the phenomenon and its effects differently, and yet their statements complement each other to form a very precise and effective image that can be used as an instrument for power analysis. Michel Foucault deals with the apparatuses of power in various phases and works. He analyzes these primarily in three areas, which include • the power-wielding control institutions of the state (prison, school, hospital, psychiatry; Discipline and Punish, 1976), • the three essential power techniques—modern disciplinary power, panopticism and normalization power, and • the so-called bio-power (The Will to Knowledge, 1977). Foucault defines power as a “multiplicity of force relations” (Foucault 1977, p. 113). In this context, he sees, for example, work, which is an essential aspect of the exercise of power in theaters and other organizations, as non-existential for human life and existence: “Human life and time are not naturally work; they are pleasure, instability, celebration, rest, needs, accidents, desires, violence, robberies, etc. And this whole explo-

3.1  Power As a Social Phenomenon

71

sive, momentary, and discontinuous energy must be transformed by capital into continuous and constantly available labor power on the market. Capital must synthesize life into labor power, which implies coercion: the coercion of the system of seizure.” (Foucault 1976b, p. 117)

To relate this to the theater, it must be taken into account that most artistic employees and performers in the theater, up to the management levels, have not chosen this profession for economic reasons. The majority feel called to the theater in a specific artistic way and would reject the path to other fields of study and more lucrative professions. Considering that over 80% of all artistic employees in the theater have an academic degree and about 40% of them receive only the average salary of a semi-skilled worker, measured by pay groups 4 and 5 of the public service, the impulse of the calling becomes even clearer. Although not even 40% of all artistically employed people and especially the performers know before entering the profession what working conditions, economic insecurity, and humiliations they will experience—a major failure of the training institutions, which do not provide sufficient information and sensitization. Nevertheless, the vast majority would engage in this activity again and again. This is also an indication that work is not understood as wage labor in the classical Marxist sense, but as a fulfilling extension of a world of inclinations and interests, or, as Foucault describes it above, of “pleasure, instability, celebrations, rest, needs, accidents, desires,” and at the same time is dangerously misunderstood. For the work, the work process at the theater, is the linchpin of the hierarchical structure, through which artistic directors and scenic directors define themselves, and through which they, as Foucault describes, can exercise coercion, sometimes even uncontrolled power. Power is consistently one of the most important themes running through Foucault’s work, and it is part of his signature concept of the apparatus, which he understands as a grid of unequal, mobile, material power relations. In it, there is always something that “in a certain way escapes power relations; something that is by no means a more or less pliable raw material, but a centrifugal movement, a reversed energy, an escape.” (Foucault 1978, p. 204)

Foucault thus extends the approach to a much more current and adaptable concept of power, which I will draw on in the examination of power relations in the theater, together with essential insights from his colleague and contemporary Pierre Bourdieu (see below).

72

3  Power and Organization

Unlike most theorists in this field, Foucault also recognizes a positive side of power, its productive force and effectiveness, which leads to more experiences, an obedient body, and an individual inner world (Foucault 1976a, 1977, 2005). Only with the theoretical opening of power towards its potentials is a socially accepted value of its use activated, which allows theater directors (Intendants) to make use of it in a socially recognized way—but controlled and contained, as we have learned from the other authors (see above). Hans-Herbert Kögler summarizes Foucault’s concept of power and comes to the following assessment, which I would like to quote here in conclusion: “In fact, according to Foucault, insofar as we understand ourselves as individually responsible and equipped with a normed conscience, in this normed individuality we are nothing but: a product of modern power.” (Kögler 2004, p. 89)

As an essential positive product of the effect of power, one can therefore describe counter-movements to the power of intendants today, as initiated and carried out by the ensemble-network, Art but Fair, and the initiatives of individual artists, groups, and trade unions. Foucault himself writes that where there is power, there must also be antagonists: “Where there is power, there is resistance. And yet, or rather precisely because of this, resistance is never outside of power. […] Power relations […] can only exist by virtue of a variety of resistance points. […] Resistances do not originate from completely different principles […]. They are the other side in power relations, the indispensable counterpart.” (Foucault 1976a, p. 117)

3.1.7 Symbolic Power in Bourdieu Also, Pierre Bourdieu, who plays a prominent role in French sociological theory towards the end of the 20th century, repeatedly refers to this topic. His primary concern is to uncover the “hidden mechanisms of power” that can arise in a society due to origin and education (Bourdieu 1992). Bourdieu describes the themes of power, domination, and symbolic violence as the center of his work: “I think that the center of my work consists in analyzing the foundations of the symbolic forms of domination, the symbolic violence of colonial-type power, cultural domination, masculinity, so many powers whose commonality is that they are exercised, as it were, from structure to structure.” (Bourdieu 2001, p. 166)

3.1  Power As a Social Phenomenon

73

Bourdieu’s reference to the connection and relation between power and structure is noteworthy, which I will address in the following chapters. Bourdieu distinguishes two forms of power, a material and a symbolic one. The material refers to a person’s habitus in a specific field, which they can achieve due to economic, physical, and/or cultural power. In contrast, he develops the principle of symbolic power, which he equates with symbolic violence. Bourdieu understands this as “that gentle, imperceptible, invisible violence for its victims, which is essentially exercised through the purely symbolic channels of communication and cognition, or more precisely, of misrecognition, recognition, or, in the extreme case, feeling.” (Bourdieu 2001, p. 8)

The essential difference from the other forms of power is the aspect that people do not willingly submit here, but that these are forms of power that appear concealed in order to confirm power relations and enforce one’s own goals against the interests of others: “Symbolic domination […] does not unfold its effect in the pure logic of the recognizing consciousness, but through the perception, evaluation, and action schemes that are constitutive for the habitus and that, beyond the control of will and conscious decision, establish a deeply obscure cognitive relationship.” (Bourdieu 2001, p. 70)

Symbols and Ritualized Power in Theater However, these symbols must already be known to people, or they are quickly initiated into them. These are aspects that we recognize in the theater as ritualized forms of power that are reflected in the organizational culture: • The artistic director has power in their theater director’s office—the spatial center of the theater (next to the stage)—, behind their desk or at the conference table: they are rarely contradicted, instead, people listen attentively, nod, and agree. Here, they conduct job interviews, talks with their directors and production teams, as well as with the artists for their own productions, conversations with politicians, stakeholders, media, and potential cooperation partners. • At the theater director’s table, discussions about contracts and non-renewals take place, and year after year, existential decisions about artistic and professional careers are made here.

74

3  Power and Organization

• Power is expressed by the symbols in the theater director’s room: the size and height of the room—in contrast to the cramped space in the backstage area of a theater—, the table, the arrangement of chairs, the number of telephones, the pictures and photographs, the books, texts, materials, with which the self desired intellectual or artistic background of the director is to be “exhibited.” • The theater director exercises power by assigning the departments and areas to the individual floors of the backstage area, thus defining the proximity or distance to the director and the routes to the director’s office. • The theater director exercises power through his sheer presence, in the sense of the “two bodies of the king” (Kantorowicz 1957), who is represented by the insignia of his power: an artistic director is always present because power and danger always emanate from them. • Power is demonstrated by the privileges of the theater directors: the vehicle they use, their parking space directly behind the theater, their clothing, the number of their office staff and the number of departments directly subordinate to them, the scope of their artistic work (position as drama or opera director, number of productions), the available days off, the right to express themselves publicly at any time, which usually no other employee of the house is entitled to, their salary, their contract, which guarantees them high severance payments and special rights. • Power is held by the person sitting behind the scenic director’s table: the director decides on castings and the significance of roles in the production, he gives instructions, commissions the assistants to make certain arrangements, uses the performers at their own discretion and interest, determines the scope of rehearsals, and exercises extensive institutionalized criticism after each rehearsal unit. • Power is held by the employee in the anteroom of the artistic director: they grant access to the director and schedule appointments for conversations with him, synchronize his private life with his professional life, know his preferences as well as the currently favored or fallen artists and employees. They regulate telephone and physical access to the “king.” Lothar Peter and Stefan Möbius write in relation to Bourdieu: Acceptance and the associated concealment of power arise when, “the symbols have a specific recognition value for those affected. The symbols have the task of triggering interpretations of meaning in those affected, which result in the acceptance of social power.” (Möbius and Peter 2004, p. 49)

3.1  Power As a Social Phenomenon

75

Essentially, Bourdieu’s aim is to show that the basis for an ideal concealment of power is the elaboration and highlighting of common systems of meaning and interpretation, through which identity and legitimacy are created, and thus also a certain recognition and unquestioning acceptance: “Symbolic power is a power that exists to the extent that it succeeds in gaining recognition, in obtaining recognition; i.e., a (economic, political, cultural, or other) power that has the power to be misrecognized in its truth as power, as violence, as arbitrariness.” (Bourdieu 1992, p. 82).

The crucial point, therefore, is that the employees recognize and confirm the state of power—and thus the structure of power relations (organigram, chain of command and communication, decision-making rights, personnel sovereignty, house rights)—: “Symbolic violence is a constraint that cannot come about without the consent that the dominated cannot refuse the dominant (and thus the domination) if he […] has only cognitive instruments for reflecting on his relationship to him that he shares with him and that, since they are nothing other than the embodied form of the structure of the power relationship, make this relationship appear as natural […].” (Bourdieu 2001, p. 218)

As with Bourdieu on a societal level, we also find specific lines of distinction on the level of the theater, with which the status spaces and domains of power are demarcated and regularly established. This allows the structure of the theater to be symbolically maintained without the power of the artistic director, the hierarchies, the inequalities, and the lack of justice being questioned. Based on this, and in reference to Weber’s concept of charisma, Bourdieu ultimately develops the important concept of symbolic capital. “Symbolic capital […] is not a special kind of capital, but what becomes of any kind of capital that is recognized as capital, i.e., as (actual or potential) force, power, or ability to exploit, and thus as legitimately recognized.” (Bourdieu 2001, p. 311).

Symbolic Capital and the Self-Evidence of Access to Power Symbolic capital is one of the foundations for the power of artistic directors, with which other forms of capital—for example, cultural capital—can be replaced. It includes reputation, general and—if available—specific artistic prestige, the ability to develop programs and productions.

76

3  Power and Organization “The social world bestows the rarest good of all: recognition, prestige, that is, quite simply, the right to exist. It is capable of giving meaning to life, and, by consecrating it to the highest sacrifice, even to death. Few things are as unequal and perhaps nothing is more cruelly distributed than symbolic capital, that is, social significance and the right to life.” (Bourdieu 2001, p. 309 f.)

This form of modern right to exist is particularly the basis for the self-evidence of access to power instruments and their exercise in artistic fields. And this power is primarily used to expand the reputation of the artistic director. For this purpose, he may use any means necessary, and since he is hardly controlled, it can lead to transgressions that are then—in the course of a scandal damaging to the theater— finally exposed or “swept under the rug.” The subsequent downfall or fall is not only a personal one, but above all a damage to the affected organization, which can hardly be compensated for by money—as the examples from Bremen to Rostock, Trier to Bern, and Wien to Erl (Dargel et al. 2018) as well as from Volksbühne Berlin to Maxim-Gorki-Theater Berlin, and from Berliner Festspiele to Badisches Staatstheater Karlsruhe in the years between 2019 and 2021 show.

3.2 The Destructive Side of Power—Abuse and Violence Power and power abuse are not the same. Power is a legitimate means to enforce the interests of organizations or individuals in companies and administrations, in culture, politics, or sports. However, it is important that it is used constructively, fair and controlled. Destructive use of power leads to the damage and humiliation of other people, resulting in losers and victims in these relationships (Berner 2018).

3.2.1 Power, Abuse, and Narcissism Volker Faust sees power abuse closely related to a dangerous pathological narcissism, in which the main danger is that the affected and dominated people are manipulated and functionalized by the power holder, who seeks to strengthen his self-esteem: “Things are different with power abuse when the person concerned uses his position to satisfy interests and needs that have nothing to do with the factual task of his social role, which primarily or exclusively serve his ‘personal self-adulation,’ his

3.2  The Destructive Side of Power …

77

vanity, and ultimately his pathological narcissism. Or, to put it in a simple conclusion: Pathological narcissism, in contrast to healthy narcissism, is characterized by the fact that other people are functionalized (i.e., ultimately forced into a foreign task) with the help of power to stabilize the power holder’s self-esteem.” (Faust 2018)

An extremely unfortunate construction when artists striving for their work and livelihood find themselves in an employment situation based on a pathologically founded relationship. In such a case, the affected manager should urgently seek psychological help—but who points this out to him if the supervisory bodies only intervene with delay? For the manipulated employees, it is to be hoped that they will find their way out of this situation unscathed. Help should be offered to them in every form. Pathological narcissism is a clinical picture. Those affected, in combination with a responsible function and task on which many positions and artistic careers depend, as well as many tax millions waiting for meaningful use, may cause great damage. Quite apart from the wishes of the audience and stakeholders and the associated reputation of a cultural organization. In this respect, my repeatedly proposed suggestion to examine every candidate for the position of a theater director through an assessment and to scrutinize their competencies and psychological profiles is also to be understood. This has long been common practice in business and also in theaters in Switzerland. The assessment should be carried out by experts, not by colleagues from the theater association who represent their own interests. Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic deals with the sometimes close relationship between narcissism and leadership 2016 in the Harvard Business Review, as already pointed out by Schopenhauer and Freud: “Note that the connection between narcissism and leadership is nothing new. Both Schopenhauer and Freud pointed out long ago that there is a natural tension between people’s selfish and prosocial drives.” (Chamorro-Premuzic 2016, p. 3)

He describes the serious mistakes narcissistic leaders tend to make and that they should be avoided: “Unfortunately our admiration for charismatic leaders comes at a price: perpetuating the proliferation of narcissistic leaders. […] Their firms tend to perform in a volatile and unpredictable fashion, going from big wins to even bigger losses. They are often involved in counterproductive work behaviors, such as fraud. They are also more likely to abuse power and manipulate their followers, particularly those who are naive and submissive.” (ibid.)

78

3  Power and Organization

Marie-Francoise Hirigoyen arrives at a clear definition of psychological violence in everyday life, particularly in the field of arts, where narcissism is very pronounced, which she assigns to the realm of perversion: “The characteristics of a narcissistic personality are quite widespread (egocentrism; need to be admired; intolerance to criticism). […] A neurotic takes everything upon themselves and struggles with themselves. Perversion includes a strategy of exploiting and subsequently destroying others; without any feelings of guilt.” (Hirigoyen 2001, p. 152)

Otto Kernberg, who worked on borderline disorders and narcissism in 1978, comes to the following conclusion: “The main features of narcissistic personalities are thus grandiose ideas, an extremely egocentric attitude, and a striking lack of empathy and interest in their fellow human beings, even though they crave their admiration and recognition.” (Kernberg 1978, p. 262)

According to Hirigoyen, there is a test to describe and expose narcissistic personalities: “The narcissistic personality is generally described as follows (i.e., it has at least five of the following characteristics): • the person has a grandiose opinion of their own importance; • consumed in fantasies of limitless success, of power; • believes they are ‘special’ and unique; • has an excessive need to be admired; • thinks they are entitled to everything, that everything is owed to them; • exploits others in interpersonal relationships; • lacks empathy; • often envies others; • displays arrogant attitudes and behaviors.” (Hirigoyen, p. 154)

Based on the results of this study, I can conclude that, according to this definition, narcissistic personalities are often found at the top of the theater. Narcissism seems to be a helpful prerequisite for not only achieving high positions but also successfully maintaining and stabilizing one’s position in them. In this context, a lack of empathy and exploitation form a toxic mixture that poisons any collaboration in the medium term and inflicts wounds on those who were victims of this collaboration.

3.2  The Destructive Side of Power …

79

Chamorro-Premuzic comes to a conclusion that I agree with: new selection criteria must be found in the search for new leaders, through which, in my opinion, for example, the special qualities and eligibility of female applicants for the position of a theater director can also be appreciated. “The big question then, is whether the criteria we use to evaluate and select leaders will evolve. If so much evidence has accumulated about the detrimental effects of narcissism and other dark-side personality traits, why do we keep selecting for precisely those traits instead of excluding candidates who possess them? Perhaps it is true that our unconscious views of leadership are rooted in archaic prehistorical archetypes, which would explain the almost universal preference for strong (and despotic) masculine risk takers over and above vulnerable, self-critical, and feminine leaders. […] If we are serious about evidence-based talent management and able to apply what we preach, then narcissistic leaders ought to be a species facing extinction.” (ibid, p. 4)

Forms of abuse of power arise from the psychosocial and structural situation of those who abuse power and those who have to endure the abuse. Fundamentally, it is always about moral, physical, psychological, and/or material boundary violations, which occur when a person in a position of power crosses the line of professional conduct and pursues personal interests and goals. These can go far beyond the satisfaction of narcissism described above and unfold on this basis. They can include forms of corruption, intimidation, creating an atmosphere of fear, withdrawal of recognition and resources, favoritism of close persons (nepotism), and the establishment of a system of cronies, as well as sexual and other physical abuse. In cases of physical and psychological abuse of power, the personal integrity of the counterpart is violated, who often cannot or can only belatedly and without chances of success defend themselves. Although 18 cases of abuse of power and 12 cases of proven nepotism have been uncovered at German theaters in the last ten years (until 2019; see Fig. 1.1), structurally and culturally, nothing has usually changed in the affected organization, so that neither a critical and serious examination of the events nor the necessary reforms could take place. Many directors successfully resist their dismissals and have expensive contracts paid out, only to find employment as a theater director or at least as a well-paid scenic director at another theater shortly thereafter. These are the consequences of an old system of maintaining power that helps those who have once been admitted to the circle of theater directors, like one of those secret fraternities whose power and rules are indecipherable and hardly conquerable by outsiders.

80

3  Power and Organization

Abuse of power can thus be summarized as occurring in various ways, through: • Influence, manipulation, indoctrination • Concealment • Envy and exploitation • Arrogance and lack of empathy • Defamation • Blackmail and threats • Physical and psychological attacks • Corruption and similar legal violations • Nepotism and crony relationships • Violation of equality and parity principles. One form of abuse of power is the mixing of private and professional obligations, into which those affected are drawn by the powerful, and from which they can hardly or not escape because they fear negative consequences for their professional path at the theater (castings, contract extensions, vacation days, recommendations). This leads to role confusion, which allows the power exerciser to further manipulate and use the affected person in their favor. Fear is played with in various forms. Sexual assaults can also occur, ranging from sexual innuendos, humiliations in rehearsal processes, intrusive invitations, unwanted touches, to sexual contacts, some of which are enforced with blackmail, threats, and physical violence. The theater is a predestined place for this, because with casual manners, the usual addressing with informal “you” (“Du” in German), joint celebrations, and physically and emotionally intimate work processes, especially between theater directors, scenic directors, and performers, a pretense of togetherness is created that is not real, but appeals to the high commitment of the performers and assistants to the theater and manipulatively connects to it. This pretense becomes a parallel social reality, next to which there are fewer and fewer other valid realities and social areas. The manipulated victims fall very quickly and abruptly back to the ground of reality when they are expelled from the inner circle of the powerful—for example, when they have made themselves unpopular with criticism and unwelcome demands. The collective system of employment contracts of the German Stage Association, the so-called NV-Bühne, an instrument of structural violence par excellence, creates the possibility of pronouncing a non-renewal of the contract, i.e., termination, based on the flexible justification of insufficient artistic results—an aspect

3.2  The Destructive Side of Power …

81

that does not even have to be further specified by the theater director in a nonrenewal conversation. This is a real and manipulatively used threat scenario that every performer, employee, and director will face at some point in their career and against which they can hardly do anything, ultimately only submitting to it. It is the final capitulation of an artist to their artistic director and the organization to which they once committed themselves to make art and not to have to fight for their own existence. In the end, the only help is: to sue. In this respect, the artistic professions in the theater are partly similar to the so-called helping professions, in which leaders and performers with a high creative talent and sensitivity reach the feelings of other people, but can also abuse or be abused. Hans-Jürgen Wirth writes about this: “Their early developed sensitivity and their pronounced talent for empathizing with the emotional state of their fellow human beings predestines them for a helping profession, but at the same time makes them susceptible to either being narcissistically abused by others or, conversely, to functionalize others to stabilize their own selfesteem.” (Wirth 2007, p. 168)

It is an important insight that people also abuse other people in order to stabilize their own self-esteem, as an important prerequisite for performing the tasks of a leader well and compensating for any lack of qualification. The only correct answer, in addition to changing the structures, must therefore be to subject future theater directors and scenic directors to voluntary psychological assessments, by means of which the general motivation, leadership and management skills can be determined, as well as the susceptibility to narcissism and the abuse of power can be ruled out—as a prerequisite for possible admission in a narrower selection process. This is only legitimate and to be supported against the background of the high position of power that a theater director occupies, in the responsibility for the entire organization and its future, for the staff, the location in the city, the program, the productions, and the resources.

3.2.2 Power and Structural Violence A further differentiation of terms is made by Johan Galtung, who expands the traditional concept of direct violence, which refers to the intentionally destructive behavior of an individual or a group of people to harm individuals, to include cultural and structural dimensions. He thus develops the violence triangle that

82

3  Power and Organization

is still valid today. In it, he describes structural violence as an impairment of life chances and quality of life. “Structural violence is the avoidable impairment of basic human needs, or, more generally expressed, of life, which reduces the real degree of need satisfaction below what is potentially possible.” (Galtung 1969, p. 168)

His definition of violence is focused on the satisfaction of needs and the realization of the human being, which is also of great importance in the theater. Almost every artistic staff member works in the theater to realize themselves, and therefore accepts significant losses—in fees, development opportunities, and job security. Most of them have already dreamed of securing a permanent place in the theater during their youth and education, without knowing that their own potentials will be curtailed, the possibilities for self-realization reduced to a minimum, and subordinated to the wishes of the artistic director and the directors. In these moments, too, the direct exercise of violence against staff members takes place. “Violence occurs when people are influenced in such a way that their current somatic and mental realization is less than their potential realization.” (ibid., p. 9)

Galtung also refers to this form of violence as invisible manipulation. This is “built into the system and manifests itself in unequal power relations and consequently in unequal life chances” (ibid., p. 12). According to Galtung, it is only the inequality that creates structural violence, from which the dependent cannot free themselves. Often they do not realize that the structures are the source of their dependency and their suffering, especially since they do not question the structures, “the hierarchies and power relations, but take them for granted” (Baberowski 2017, p. 114). These forms of manipulation and structural violence, which leave no physical but emotional and psychological traces, are often perceived as “normal” or “natural” in the first years of working in theaters, and in later years skillfully circumvented or accepted. Many submit, only a few rebel. And if they do, they soon receive a nonrenewal notification, the professional end in the organization, and often the career end for an artist in their middle years. Only through mentorship and the protection of older artists does one learn that it is by no means normal for one person to determine everything and to curtail one’s own rights to practice the profession, and that this curtailment must not go so far as to prohibit and make impossible the critical communication and reflection of the theater’s work.

3.2  The Destructive Side of Power …

83

In many young artists whom I have advised over the past twenty years, both at the beginning of their careers and later on, it has repeatedly been noticed that one should never make plans and develop a career without considering the theater director. In fact, I have never experienced an area of such great dependency as in theaters, even though I myself have also worked in business, in the field of political consulting and executive, in NPOs, and at colleges and universities. In cultural organizations, a good education, thorough preparation, and mentoring during the first steps, as well as joining forces with like-minded individuals, are of great importance for one’s own career path and quality of life. The paradigm still holds that a group is stronger than an individual. Theater directors, in particular, fear criticism from groups of employees and their ensembles when they act in unison. Emancipation, therefore, also requires a process of group formation and discipline, which may not necessarily find fertile ground in the individualistically oriented artistic professions. Preparing and implementing this involves a lot of consultation and educational work. Structural violence also has an organizational dimension, especially when it manages stagnation and prevents changes and reforms in theaters. The current reform of theaters is such a lengthy process partly because stagnation is deliberately maintained, out of fear of dismantling the privileges of the current one-man directorships. Whether this dismantling must inevitably be painful also depends on the extent to which the current artistic directors participate in the restructuring process of the theater landscape. However, remaining stagnant is not a sustainable state. Where stagnation reigns, structural violence “becomes part of the system, stabilizes the order, and operates in secret. Only in dynamic societies, where changes are not perceived as crises but also as opportunities, will it even become apparent that structures cause violence. People want change, but the structures prevent what they want from succeeding.” (Baberowski, p. 113)

Today, structural violence is linked to forms of abuse of power as follows: • • • •

“Discrimination of any kind Unequal distribution of income and educational opportunities Unequal life expectancies due to limited access to medical care General and specific wealth disparities.” (Waldmann 2004, p. 431)

84

3  Power and Organization

In particular, the aspects of discrimination, unequal distribution of resources, and interest-driven granting or restriction of access to opportunities for improving work and quality of life are forms of abuse of power that we find in the theater. As much as Galtung’s concept is criticized today, especially from a conservative perspective, it is crucial for the analysis of abuse of power. With it, the interfaces and fluid transitions between power and violence become so clear that Galtung’s categories can also be applied to categories of power. In addition to direct power intervention, there are also forms of indirect, structural, and cultural power that have a much deeper anchoring in society and organizations, in norms and values, as well as in prevailing discourses (Foucault 2005). The concept of institutional power is also valid. In English-speaking countries, the abuse of power is referred to as Abuse of Power and, even more broadly, as Power Harrassment (power overreach). Institutions with comparatively closed social cycles, such as hospitals, prisons, psychiatric institutions, schools, and the military, are particularly prone to this. Anglo-Saxon lexicons list a good dozen different forms of abuse: • Abuse of authority, • Abuse in markets through monopoly positions, • “Ad hominem” abuse, which targets individuals, • Rankism, which targets subordinates (bullying), • Defamation, • Persecution, etc.

3.2.3 Spaces of Violence: Elias, Baumann, Baberowski “The history of modernity… is a history of power concentration.”

Jörg Baberowski takes a different approach in his studies on Spaces of Violence, dealing very impressively and intensely with the topic of violence as an expression of the abuse of power (Baberowski 2017). In doing so, he critically examines the concept of civilization and progress as used by Norbert Elias and later modified and developed by Zygmunt Baumann. For Baberowski, modernity is an essential starting point for the concentration of power, power abuse, and the exercise of violence. I will investigate the effects of this on theaters and their employees. Norbert Elias, to whom Baberowski refers, still confidently assumes that the process of civilization brings progress and tames power. In his view, modernity

3.2  The Destructive Side of Power …

85

and civilization systematically arise through economic densification and interweaving, through regulation, political centralization, training of employees, and delegation of power instruments (weapons, prisons, etc.) from the central power to groups specialized in these tasks. For Elias, civilization equals progress (Elias 1997, p. 373 f.). Zygmunt Baumann criticizes Elias’s view of these processes and comes to the conclusion that violence is only shifted and the instruments of its execution are placed in the hands of only a few privileged individuals (see also Baberowski, p. 70). “Even when means of violence are centralized and removed from any control, unprecedented goals can be achieved without technical perfection. The number of people who perished in the last two centuries as a result of this militarization is historically unprecedented.” (Baumann 2002, p. 112)

According to Baumann, modernity is a vast “space of destructive violence” characterized by the pursuit of unambiguity and the transformation of the conceivable into the feasible. Baumann’s criticism of the glorification of modernity overlaps here with the criticism of the Frankfurt School on the Project of Modernity, which was laid down by Theodor W. Adorno and Max Horkheimer in the Dialectic of Enlightenment (1944). Baberowski concludes: “The history of modernity is not the history of the civilization process, but rather a history of power concentration.” (Baberowski, p. 75)

The state monopoly on violence protects people from power and violent outbreaks of our neighbors, but it does not protect us from the violent outbreaks of those who have the means to do so. This is not only about “weapons” in the narrower sense, as Baberowski suggests (ibid., p. 78), but about the mandates of exercising power in organizations and access to modern communication tools. In cultural organizations as well, power is becoming increasingly centralized. A “peak” was the synchronization of theaters by Goebbels during the time of National Socialism (1933–1945), which still has an impact even after the end of this dark phase of German history. The theaters in both East and West Germany remained nationalized1 and still are today. And even though the Federal Republic

1 The

term nationalized also includes municipalization.

86

3  Power and Organization

of Germany is now a federal state in which municipalities and states primarily regulate cultural and educational areas, it is still the state that sets the rules and defines the boundaries. This leads to the so-called Intendant carousel—the career path of intendants from one theater to the next—transferring concepts of theater management and principles of internal power exercise from one theater to another without regarding the special situation and the environment of the next theater coming. There is another aspect, that of the internal subordination of organizations by their leaders. Following the principle of order, which is also an attribute of modernity, all members of the organization are to follow them and their ideas and orders. The philosopher Wolfgang Sofsky speaks of a “societal need for community formation” and the desire to enforce a “homogeneity of culture”, which ultimately becomes the essential basis of political guiding principles, and which excludes and repels everything that does not submit or subordinate itself to these guiding principles (Sofsky 2002, p. 77). In the case of theater, one could say that the theater system, consisting of the theaters, their networking with each other and with the German Stage Association, gives theater director (Intendants) relative power. The theaters themselves and the function of the Intendant as the unrestricted leader of the organization, strengthened by the intendant contract, the rules of procedure, and the networking with cultural politics, ultimately grant the Intendant absolute power. What they make of it, we will see in the following chapter (see Chap. 4). Absolute power can be accompanied by arbitrariness, violation of ethical rules and sometimes even laws, as well as the elimination of bureaucracy—in the guise of artistic work and the closely related artistic freedom. This premise is a basis for the exercise of power by leaders in theaters, which, as we have seen, is directly derived from the development of the organizational structure and specific psychological prerequisites. While a leading actor during Goethe’s time at the Weimar, Hamburg, or Mannheim theaters was still an equal partner who negotiated with the intendant about castings, play selection, and fees—also for his colleagues—today, he is a rather powerless member of the ensemble who, as an ensemble spokesperson, may speak but is only rarely a serious negotiating partner (Daniel 1995; Herrmann 1999). This is another important reason why the ensemble-network wants to strengthen and enforce the negotiating power of ensembles and their spokespersons. After reading Baumann and Baberowski, it becomes clear that the theater is a specific heterotopia of powerful Intendants, in which individual regulatory achievements of society are repeatedly successfully suspended because this suspension is declared as a prerequisite for successful artistic work processes and sold to politics and their own employees as such. I also expect further insights from the results of the study for this.

3.2  The Destructive Side of Power …

87

Although there are disputes about the concept of artistic freedom, in my opinion, it is extended far too much in favor of the power maintenance of the theater directors. Thus, the directors have been much more successful with their strategy than the shareholders and the employee representatives. In this way, a director, even more so a directing theater director, can override the legal working time regulations, which limit a working day to a maximum of 10 hours, for the artistic staff at any time. In fact, actors work during the final rehearsal week from 9 am to midnight, including short breaks, but always available for makeup times, costume fittings, warm-ups, voice exercises or singing, run-throughs (Durchläufe) and communication rehearsals (Verständigungsproben), the long main and dress rehearsals, followed by lengthy corrections and even longer critique sessions at the end of the day. In addition, there are the regular interventions of the theater directors, who usually approve a production shortly before the premiere. The closer a production gets to the premiere, the more insecure the inexperienced directing teams become, and they try to experiment and change things, especially in the last two weeks, because their reputation, their progress, and their future career depend on the results on stage. But not only the scenic directors are affected. All other artistic staff members, especially the performers of each production, are also affected. The specific working conditions at the theater, characterized by a triad of injustice, underpayment, and insecurity, lead to the fact that employees and ensemble members usually do not dare to rebel. This is reinforced by the fact that art colleges produce new graduates every year who are willing to submit to humiliating working conditions and replace the critical minds who can be dismissed for minimal “artistic” reasons due to the inadequate employment contracts of the NV-Bühne. An example was the unfortunate treatment of two female spokesperson at the Leipzig Schauspiel ensemble, who were fired by the theater director in 2022, because they dared to speak openly and critically to the theater director about his management style. The theater, with its archaic structures, overrides the achievements of Good Governance, especially when power is abused and turns into violence, be it physical or verbal, emotional or sexual violence. “[W]ith the collapse of order, the hour of the ruthless and determined strikes, who empower themselves to do what others only dare to think.” (Baberowski 2017, p. 33)

It is the privilege of the ruthless to go the furthest in the struggle for power. It should therefore not be surprising if they later act most ruthlessly in exercising their power to secure it. And it should also not be surprising that those who work in close proximity to these powerful artistic directors, the department directors,

88

3  Power and Organization

scenic directors, dramaturges, advisors, and assistants, learn from their theater director how a theater is run “successfully” from their perspective and with the instruments of a powerful person, meaning: in the strategic interest of the theater director. Those who manage to critically reflect on this situation often subsequently choose an alternative path to the theater. People are often permanently changed by such situations. It depends very much on which theater director was their director or mentor. In addition, there is the longing for artistic self-realization, which is repeatedly thwarted in the case of subordinates. This creates the urge to make it to the top in order to implement and live out this longing. From here, the step to crossing boundaries is not far. People are capable of much more than many would like to believe about themselves. To secure their territory, their life path, their career, and the resources necessary for their own existence and future security, many would willingly cross the boundaries set by themselves or society. If the theater can rightly be called its own world today, in which everyone must find their place to live (i.e., work) in order to remain permanently anchored in it, then the rules of the theater also apply, with which the rules of society are repeatedly reinterpreted or circumvented creatively from the top down. The permanent engagement with artistic staging and representation fantasies, which are subject to no other rules than those of the boundlessness of art, has an impact on the theater directors, especially those who also direct the rehearsals and the stage themselves. Their ideas of leadership collide with the strict laws of a modern organization or a modern business with 300, 400 or more employees and an annual turnover between 10 and 100 million €. A managing director, or an administrative director, who is subordinate to the artistic director and at the same time responsible for the operational capability of the business, but has little insight or access to the artistic area, can only have a very limited effect here. At this point at the latest, the question must be asked why the artistic and administrative management power are still placed in the hands of a single person by the shareholders, who is often not sufficiently qualified for this. The fig leaf of a subordinate administrative director should not deceive, who can hardly achieve anything if both the contract of the artistic director and the basic order of the theater stipulate that the artistic director is the master of all resources. The presentation of the various forms of power and violence once again clearly shows the fluid transition between these two social phenomena. If you combine the individual forms, you get a clear picture of the options available to theater directors today to discipline, subordinate or use artists according to their own wishes. With power-oriented theater directors, one can expect that they are not only aware of their abundance of power, but also of these options and care-

3.3  Organization, Structure, and Power

89

fully weigh which instruments to use on which occasions. However, the abundance and the huge spectrum of complex tasks prevent even reform-minded artistic directors from dealing more intensively with modern techniques of personnel management and development, with which they could curb the use of power or structural violence. Much then remains only on the surface. The instrumentarium of personnel management alone is so huge that clever use could curb some forms of power abuse. The prerequisite for this, however, is knowledge of these instruments, which unfortunately cannot be expected in classical artistic careers, as is common among artistic directors. This knowledge must be acquired, whereas the use of instruments of power and violence has always been part of human existence and is refined in the course of professional careers, as Elias, Baumann, and Baberowski unanimously state (Elias 1997; Baumann 2002; Baberowski 2017). In addition, power and violence have now become part of many staging processes in drama and opera and initially playfully, later habitually, penetrate and seep into the social reality of the theater until they are no longer questioned.

3.3 Organization, Structure, and Power Organization theorists and management practitioners have been intensively dealing with issues of power in organizations since the mid-20th century. For cultural institutions, especially theaters, there are no studies in this area so far (2018/19), so I am entering new territory with this study. The analysis of the structural conditions of theaters (II) and power theories (III 1, 2) should form the theoretical basis for this. In the following section, I would like to discuss further relevant organizational theories. In the first part, I will focus on the findings of Murray Edelman (1964) and Jeffrey Pfeffer (1981), who deal explicitly with power in organizations and their essential instrument, political language. In the second part, I will deal with the concept of structural asymmetry, as well as the investigation of collective action in power relationships by Michel Crozier and Erhard Friedberg (1993).

3.3.1 Power Through Political Language and Symbols in Pfeffer and Edelman In my analysis of the significance of power in organizations, I refer, among other things, to an important study by Jeffrey Pfeffer from 1981: Power in Organiza-

90

3  Power and Organization

tions. The book deals with power and influence in organizations, focusing on the use of political strategies to secure and expand power2 (Pfeffer 1981, p. 179 ff.). In his considerations, Pfeffer starts from the basic idea that decision-makers in organizations have power and exercise it—in addition to conventional means— through political language, primarily to influence the behavior and belief of organization members. They themselves are political actors within an organization, pursuing their own interests and wrapping them in a specific political language, with the aim of maintaining and expanding their own power through “linguistic persuasion.” This could be understood as a postmodern power concept, in which power is not only a concept based on rationality and invested in tangible areas. “The argument advanced here is that political actors use language on the expressive level to impact the attitudes and beliefs of organizational participants. Substantive, instrumental results are determined by the distribution of power in the situation.” (Pfeffer p. 182)

An example is that political language, unlike pure language (Speech, Talk), contains elements that—in contrast to rational decision-making processes—can refer to symbolic activities or rituals, which in turn only evoke symbolic results and sensations. These are aspects that anticipate Edgar Schein’s discoveries, who depicted artifacts, rituals, and signs in his classic pyramid of organizational culture. (Schein 1984) Schein’s considerations emerged only a few years after Pfeffer’s study. Organizational concepts of the 1980s dealt in depth with this “2nd level,” influenced by the discovery of an organizational culture as a new dimension in the management sciences, which had been strongly shaped by rational considerations up to that point, and as an essential, new level of internal power relations. Pfeffer describes how political language and symbolic outcomes are related as follows: “[…] the relationship between symbolic and substantive outcomes and political language and power-dependence relationships is displayed. The argument is that political language operates largely with and on symbolic outcomes and sentiments, such as attitudes, beliefs, and social perceptions. At the same time, the conditions of power and interdependence, which characterize the social context, operate to affect the allocation of positions, budgets, and other substantive resources and decisions.” (Pfeffer, p. 183)

2 At

its core, I refer to the sixth chapter of the book, titled: Political Language and Symbols: Mobilizing Support and Quieting Opposition.

3.3  Organization, Structure, and Power

91

Substantive Outcomes

Sentiment Outcomes

(allocations or decisions with physical referents)

(feelings, attitudes, beliefs, perceptions or values)

Power-DependenceConsiderations

Large effect

Small effect

Political Language and Symbolic Action

Small effect, Except as strategies affect the mobilization and use of power

Large effect

Fig. 3.1   The relationship between physical and perceived results and power considerations, political language, and symbolic activities (Pfeffer 1981, p. 183, Fig. 6.1)

No one will dispute that there is political language and symbolic actions everywhere: in politics, sports, healthcare, social security systems, culture, and of course in the economy. Pfeffer makes it very clear how strongly this area or power concept is pronounced and which areas of our lives it permeates sustainably. It is important to imagine that both areas exist side by side without hindering each other. The only important thing is to recognize the areas and either use them or isolate them in such a way that a thorough analysis is possible. In Fig. 3.1, which I have taken from Pfeffer’s study, it becomes apparent which relationships exist between classical power concepts and the concept of Political Language, in relation to the two levels: substantial results and sensations. The close connection between the classical measures and the measures based on the concept of political language becomes clear here.

3.3.2 Rationalization of Decisions Pfeffer further elaborates on his considerations of political language and explains that the essential task of political language and the associated symbolic activities lies in the justification and rationalization of decisions that are based on power and influence, and thus have no rational basis. However, once these decisions have gone through this supposed rationalization process, they are accepted by the members of the organization as if they were based on analysis, planning, contracts, scarcity or abundance of resources, use of knowledge, or other so-called hard facts. Most members of the organization do not notice the difference but generally accept the decisions. Pfeffer describes it as follows:

92

3  Power and Organization “The task of political language and symbolic activity is to rationalize and justify decisions that are largely the result of power and influence, in order to make these results acceptable and legitimate in the organization. In fact, without this legitimation and rationalization, the exercise of power is hindered.” (Pfeffer, p. 184)

With political language and symbolic activities, the decisions and actions of a leader or a group are justified, which are subject to power and have been triggered by it. Upon closer analysis of these processes, however, it becomes clear that not only the actions and results of the exercise of power are justified and accepted, but also the carriers of this power. The greater the degree of justification and the less doubt about their power attributes, the greater the gain in power for the decision-maker. This can also be found in the theater. With each justifying decision, the power of a director is strengthened. The sum of his successful decisions is the cushion of his power, which is only questioned when wrong decisions have consumed the cushion. In the theater, these are specific and very sensitive decisions: • Enabling artistic development (directions, programs, castings) • Making recommendations • Distribution of budgets for artistic productions (based on a business plan created by the managing director) • Non-renewals of artists • Fee negotiations • Approval of free spaces (days off, vacations), etc. However, political language in Pfeffer’s sense does not mean the language of politicians or politics in general. He refers to processes in which decision-makers, i.e., managers and leaders of organizations, which Pfeffer calls so-called political actors, use a political language to sell their behavior and the belief of the other members of the organization in them with the greatest success: “The argument advanced here is that political actors use language on the expressive level to impact the attitudes and beliefs of organizational participants. Substantive, instrumental results are determined by the distribution of power in the situation.” (Pfeffer 1981, p. 182).

Everyone knows political language, even if they do not call it that themselves, in situations where one wants to win others over, convince them, or even persuade them. We learn political language in our childhood when we try to get our parents’ consent to go to bed an hour later, in school when we want to win o­ thers over for

3.3  Organization, Structure, and Power

93

our projects, and later on repeatedly in private and professional life. Political language becomes a problem when it is used to convey content that is morally indefensible, promotes injustice and power, or when the gap between potential and promised results is so large that one must speak of untruth and manipulation. The understanding of the work of theater managers, who are responsible for multi-million budgets and the existence of many people, and who are also responsible for organizational stability and artistic success, is quite large among most theater professionals. That is why artistic directors are repeatedly given a vote of confidence, even though disappointment with their work has grown significantly in recent years, as the cases mentioned in the introduction (Fig. 1.1) show. However, when decision-makers try to exploit the privileges of their position to such an extent that the ideological gap between the employed first servant of the theater and the unassailable all-decider moves irreversibly far apart, committees, shareholders, and cultural policy—or the entire staff—must intervene on behalf of the theater, as it happened at the Karlsruhe State Theater (2019), a.o.. This is the moment when they must relieve the artistic directors of their duties, as has happened several times recently (Rostock, Vienna, Trier, Bern, Darmstadt, etc.). Otherwise, fiefdoms are created, as was the case with the Berliner Ensemble, the Berliner Festspiele and the Volksbühne for a long time, with artistic directors who have become detached from politics and whose replacement, following the contract rotation, was then misunderstood as a declaration of war and publicly misinterpreted—to the detriment of the theaters, their leaders, and cultural policy. Pfeffer develops a helpful approach to the analysis of power in organizations by explaining language and symbols as tools for the use and abuse of power. Pfeffer’s colleague Murray Edelman goes even further in describing that language and symbols are important for mobilizing support and that they have the power (authority) to take the wind out of the sails of resistance against decisions to be made (Edelmann 1964). These situations and connections are also known in the theater. The theater director consolidates and cements his power also through manipulation, by using political language—especially well-intentioned, but ultimately open or vague promises—and symbolic actions (a new logo, a new brochure, a press conference, a new cooperation) to disperse and undermine criticism from outside or opposition from within. He meets internal criticism with praise and good roles for the yes men or disperses it—symbolically—through non-renewals for the no-sayers, the reverberations of which trigger gratitude and fear among the other employees, a toxic amalgam that seals further criticism. The director undermines informal meetings of the ensemble, which are actually only intended for independent team-building, by hiring informants,

94

3  Power and Organization

and prevents the informality of these meetings by imposing his—not always desired—presence or that of his assistants. Thus, he has a wide range of possibilities at his disposal, which are borderline in terms of ethical organizational leadership and respect for employees. Again and again, there are situations in which even directors at the second management level are dissatisfied with the artistic director’s management work, his artistic concept, and his (non-)management approach, and wish for a change of course, as recently in the summer of 2018 at the Staatstheater Darmstadt, with the result that some valuable directors left the house in protest and the artistic director was placed under stronger supervision and curatorship of the Ministry of Culture. The press did not learn of this because the artistic director skillfully diverted attention to symbolic actions. In most cases, it is not about a rebellion—even if some more sensitive artistic directors might see it that way—but about transparency and exchange, as well as concern for the institution, its finances, and personnel. It was certainly a step that none of the involved directors took lightly; none of them wanted to be labeled as disloyal. However, the artistic director is well aware of the regularly low impact of his directors: The power structure of the theater is built in such a way that the decisive political committees—in the case of Darmstadt, the then-serving Minister of Culture—must ultimately believe him, because the crisis of the artistic director is always a crisis of the Minister of Culture, who cannot politically afford or cope with a crisis or, in case of doubt, just wants to have peace. Nevertheless, the directors have achieved a change in the perception of the structural and personnel problems of the theater, as the artistic director is now only a manager on call, under strong control, and can hardly take any risks. The greatest potential to challenge the power of the artistic director usually comes from the ensemble and courageous employees. The directors of the second management level in Darmstadt, who officially terminated their cooperation with the artistic director, are an exception. In the last ten years, there have been various forms of rebellion by employees against their artistic directors in Gera (2011), Trier (2016), Munich (KS, 2017), Cottbus (2018), Erl (2018), Cologne (2018), Darmstadt (2018), Bern (2018), Karlsruhe (2019), at Maxim-Gorki Theater (2020), Volksbühne Berlin (2021), and Berliner Festspiele (2021), which have gained great visibility and impact. Often, politics wants to cover up a scandal, which has not been successful in these cases because the press, other politicians, and the public today have a much greater interest in clarification than ten years ago. The example of the theater in the city Halle, where the two artistic directors of opera and drama made their contract extension dependent on the non-extension of the central managing director above them, showed very precisely the wavering of

3.3  Organization, Structure, and Power

95

politics, which in the end sided with the managing director, who, in their opinion, would provide the most stability to the entire construct of five different organizations in the medium term (Nachtkritik 2018). A decision that can be debated because the theater loses an excellent opera team and strengthens the position of a managing director who has gradually expanded his omnipotence in Halle and made himself nearly untouchable. In doing so, politics did not take into account that the professional vita of the managing director points to stations of scorched earth. But the desire for stability was greater than that for artistic excellence and justice. The quintessence of this: A year later the managing director on top of the Halle Theater Society had to leave because of internal and external pressure. He was exchanged for a chartered accountant who had never worked in a theater before and was neither qualified nor trained for a management position. A typical political short circuit reaction, as is now evident in the conflicts between her and the new team-management of the dramatic theater. These problems would be eliminated with a genuine directorate and the associated separation of power, leading to the independence of the individual directors, who would then only be committed to the institution, their function, and the associated tasks, but no longer to an artistic director (Trier, Darmstadt) or a superior managing director (Halle), whose erratic decisions must also be supported even when they are obviously wrong. Even in such situations, a theater director can manage to quickly dismiss openly critical directors at the next level. The reasons: disloyalty and breach of trust. However, disloyalty and breach of trust as facts are legally questionable, as the critics are indeed loyal to the institution, but not to the mistakes of the director. From the perspective of the powerful in the theater, in addition to the aforementioned instruments of political language and symbols, there are also a number of other instruments available that can be used to consolidate their sole rule. There are two major issues here: The energy that the director invests in maintaining his own power is ultimately lacking for good and far-sighted leadership of the institution and for the development of an ambitious program and excellent artistic productions. Moreover, these instruments are often used uncontrollably. The only body that could control the director and curb his power fundamentally does not focus on the level of operational decisions and is mostly only interested in success stories, as well as in the economic results and the maintenance of a certain economic stability. The director can act as he pleases under the seal of artistic freedom, especially since the committees no longer have any influence on programmatic cornerstones or artistic conception due to the director’s model contract of the German Stage Association.

96

3  Power and Organization

3.3.3 The Social Construction of Societal Reality When considering power in cultural organizations such as the theater, it is important to address the aspect of constructing one’s own reality, as we find it in the theater with its rituals, ceremonies, and language. Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann were pioneers in 1980 with their groundbreaking publication The Social Construction of Reality (Berger and Luckmann 1980). Published shortly before Pfeffer’s study, it significantly influenced it. Pfeffer also speaks of a: “[…] socially constructed nature of organizational reality. This means that while events have physical referents, such as patterns of promotion, budget allocation, and so forth, the meaning of these events is open to a social interpretation. It is this interpretation that determines how the outcomes of organizational politics are perceived and what various actors feel about justice, as well as the legitimacy of the decision results.” (Pfeffer 1981, p. 186)

This can explain why the actual results of management decisions are not always identical—or need to be—with the reception of these results by the members of the organization and their associated feelings. A “good” manager is, in this sense, one who can deal with these feelings, who plays and masters the keyboard of expectations and hopes. However, there is also the danger that he throws smoke bombs that deceive the actual results of his work, especially when his own work gets into trouble. Who could do this better than an actor or, even better: a scenic director, whose life task is to invent, develop, and direct roles and characters in the specially created reality of a production? The power that a good director has over his actors could hardly be greater and is similar to that of a puppeteer over his puppets or an officer over his recruits, who contribute depending on their life experience, but only start—and usually too late—to doubt when a battle/production threatens to fail. A good director will be able to easily transfer this ability to the next higher level of the theater organization—if he wants to make use of it as a theater director = artistic director. Perhaps he can no longer distinguish between the use and non-use of these abilities in a higher context because his own created reality has pushed itself too much into the foreground. How dangerous this is, is once again stated by the parameters of the theater: The theater director is responsible for the professional existence of hundreds of people, for the preservation of an organization and cultural technique that is repeatedly questioned by politics, for the eco-

3.3  Organization, Structure, and Power

97

nomic balance of the house, and the proper conduct of all relevant economic and artistic actions. Jeffrey Pfeffer and Gerald R. Salancik already considered in 1978 the influence of the social environment on the perception of legitimacy and legality of decisions. It becomes clear that the classification of the legality of a decision is not subject to factual aspects per se, but primarily to the environment, which develops templates with certain keywords (cues) for how certain decisions or actions are to be classified (Salancik and Pfeffer 1978). The social environment determines how the dimensions of a decision are to be assigned to one another and which goal or good is to be valued higher, “whether equality is more important than equity, and which set of values and goals is more important than the other, etc.” (Pfeffer 1981, p. 187). Whether a decision is fair and just or unfair and at the expense of others depends on the social norms of the environment, which have evolved and refined over the course of a developmental history. The theater has its own history, in which it was long considered good manners not to question the decisions of a director even when they were, to put it mildly, absurd and counterproductive. How else can it be explained that theaters like in Bremen or in Vienna were almost single-handedly driven into bankruptcy by a director, while a functioning administration with a finance department, the controlling of the shareholders, and a supervisory board had to watch without intervening and preventing the worst. It is this supposed inviolability of a director that leads even his controllers and critics not to dare to question his decisions, let alone prevent them. And it is precisely in this state of inviolability, in which one becomes closest to oneself and elevates oneself above others, that first smaller, later larger mistakes and finally abuses of power arise, which become more and more self-evident because there is no longer any corrective, and because those who dared to correct are condemned and defamed. Marie-France Hirigoyen writes about this: “In order to stay in power and control others, one initially uses harmless machinations that become increasingly violent when the employee resists. First, one takes away his critical judgment until he no longer knows who is right and who is wrong. One stresses him, puts him down, monitors him […], so that he constantly feels compelled to be on guard. […] The employee is cornered. He tolerates more and more and does not dare to say that it is unbearable.” (Hirigoyen, p. 80)

Based on this, Hirigoyen identifies a set of different developmental stages and instruments of these successive abuses of power:

98

• • • •

3  Power and Organization

Refusing direct communication Demeaning and discrediting Isolating, harassing, and leading to errors Sexual harassment (ibid., p. 81 ff.)

The mistakes of the director can take on various dimensions and develop in different ways in the various theaters over the years: Be it the freehand awarding of a contract to close acquaintances, the employment of relatives and close people, the warning of critics, the excessive number of free tickets for relatives, friends, and good acquaintances, the sending of expensive gifts and champagne and the payment of overnight stays in the best hotel for theater critics and editors-in-chief at the expense of the theater, the lack of presence in the theater during working weeks and later even at premieres, and finally love relationships with employees and the promotion of these to ensemble or management members or to the hierarchical level of a deputy theater director, director or curator, as it happens again and again in German-speaking theaters. The social environment constructs the reality of the theater and its director, and the reality of the theater—and its inhabitants—contribute significantly to the daily small and large power offenses, that we encounter in theaters. They weaken their societal legitimacy as well as their artistic achievements sustainably, and thus also the future prospects of the theater landscape, which is only as good as its legitimation and good compliance. Pfeffer concludes from this, also referring to Karl Weick’s text Cognitive processes in organizations (1979), that the work of a leader is more like a priest than a (financial) manager. “It is the task of those exercising power within organizations to employ social processes such as these to ensure that the results of power will be received as legitimate and justifiable… Weick has noted that managerial work can be viewed as managing myths, symbols, and images, and that the manager may be more of an evangelist than accountant.” (Pfeffer, p. 187 f.)

3.3.4 Significance and Role of Political Language Returning to the starting point of this section: C.W. Morris and Louis Pondy, to whom Jeffrey Pfeffer refers several times in his study, describe the role and significance of political language most concretely:

3.3  Organization, Structure, and Power

99

“Sharing a language with other persons provides the subtlest and most powerful of all tools for controlling the behavior of these people.” (Morris 1949, p. 214)

Pondy writes about this himself: “Language is after all one of the key tools of political influence.” (Pondy 1978, p. 91)

In this context, Louis Pondy speaks of the dual ability of a good manager to give things meaning and a language that reaches as many people as possible with high leverage in order to spread the positive meaning of decisions and actions widely (ibid., p. 94 f.). This makes managers increasingly politicians and sellers of what they decide, plan, and develop. “This dual capacity […] to make sense of things and to put them into language meaningful to large numbers of people gives the person who has it enormous leverage.” (Pondy 1978, p. 94 f.)

In the theater, the shared language is part of an initiation process and a continuous ritualization of phrases, idioms, and specialized expressions that have emerged in a historically grown environment and are also intensively cultivated there. In addition to the first language level of the social environment outside the theater, phrases and expressions that create a second language level include, in addition to the imperative of addressing each other informally, such sayings as: • We’ve always done it this way. • This was already done here when you weren’t even here yet. And you won’t change that either. • The curtain must go up, everything else is irrelevant (Especially when a premiere or the start of a performance is at risk or significantly delayed.). • Toi, toi, toi! - As a concept of superstition and a wish for success before a premiere or performance in German theaters, for which the actors and other participants of the production must not thank, because it supposedly brings great misfortune. There are countless special expressions in the theater. They can be found in the individual areas (technology, operations office, orchestra, drama, opera), where various technical languages are used for the immediate production processes; but they can also be found in the designation of phases of the production pro-

100

3  Power and Organization

cess itself, such as the conceptual, main, and final rehearsals, the dress rehearsal, as well as the construction rehearsal (Bauprobe) and technical setup (Technische Einrichtung). As a newcomer to the theater, one must acquire these special expressions. The vocabulary and shared language forge a bond, and when a leader uses this language to communicate their messages and decisions, they are taken very seriously. A common language also emerges during assemblies and meetings, from notices and interviews with the theater director, which usually circulate in newspapers to all departments and are read by their employees. With this and within it, a theater director can create a third language level, see Fig. 3.2, which builds on the ritualized language level and with which visions and messages can be communicated with high effectiveness. Once such an instrument has been developed, it is possible to dress even the worst news and developments in positive words, such as the decline in audience numbers and revenues, the reduction of grants, the impending, senseless merger with the neighboring theater, the need to cut jobs, the bursting of a production, the illness of the main actress in the final rehearsal week or at the premiere, or the cancellation of important guests and directing teams on the day of the rehearsal start. This list could be continued indefinitely and indicates the dangerous proximity of theater work to the ever-looming failure. Above all, Murray Edelman saw political language as an essential instrument with which interests and positions can be developed and constantly renewed and refined. “Political argument, when it is effective, calls the attention of a group with shared interests to those aspects of their situation which make an argued-for line of action seem consistent with the furthering of their interests.” (Edelmann 1964, p. 123)

Political language is a “vehicle” with which justifications for decisions can be achieved, but also allies mobilized and competitors and critics isolated. “Talk […] involves a competitive exchange of symbols, referential and evocative, through which values are shared and assigned and coexistence attained.” (Edelman 1964, p. 114)

The crucial factor here is who has language power. In the theater, this is always fundamentally the artistic director. He is— alongside the managing director—the only one who may send relevant messages, communicate directly with politicians and other stakeholders as well as the media—unless the shareholder restricts him in this regard and requests the

3.3  Organization, Structure, and Power

101

Areas

Examples

Meaning

1. Language level 2. Language level

Social reality around the theater and its language

General social, cultural and political language of the region and country

Construction of a social reality.

Phrases, idioms, special expressions

The rag has to go up. We've always done it that way here. Good luck! Building rehearsal, technical Setup, HP 0, AMA, Italian, Russian, talk-through and much more. We can do it.

Creating a distinct sense of belonging. Construction of the theater's own social reality.

3. Language level

Language created by the intendant, which may differ significantly from one's own reality

The artistic development of the theater and its employees is my main concern. There are no spectator or revenue problems. Our theater is safe. We are a team. I believe in you. I belong to you. Your jobs are safe.

It serves the orientation of the employees, the affiliation, but also the exclusion. It is intended to distribute messages and take the wind out of the sails of critics.

I am not giving notice to anyone.

Reinforcement/shifting of the social reality of the theater in the sense of the speaker. (Intendants).

Fig. 3.2   The language levels of theater operations (Schmidt 2018)

c­ oordination of all press releases, which occasionally also happens. All others, usually including the directors, must obtain the approval of the management because they do not have the authority to sign and communicate officially in the name of the theater. Of course, it is allowed for a department director, for example, to communicate with colleagues from other theaters, but only within the narrowly defined framework of the professional theater world. Edelman made two more essential observations about language in the context of power. Language is a good substitute for raw violence, and it replaces and “obscures” analytical processes to a certain extent by providing exclusively symbols instead of clear and substantial content, which, however, often have little political weight (Edelman 1964, p. 124). There are numerous examples from the theater, some of which I have already mentioned, e.g. when a director in a general assembly or in a meeting with the supervisory board speaks boastfully of the great artistic and audience successes

102

3  Power and Organization

and compiles a carpet of selected euphoric audience and press voices for this purpose, instead of delivering the complete picture and presenting the actual, perhaps even declining visitor and financial development in numbers. Both, the employees of the theater, the supervisory boards, and the media will be more clearly and sustainably impressed by this than by the dry figures of the balance sheets of a season. Numbers of this kind only enter political language when they can be used to speak vividly and symbolically of success, embedded in appropriate language carpets. For this is the real goal of the director: to put his own work in a good light in order to secure options for the future—be it in the course of a contract extension and salary increase in his own theater, or in the course of applying to a larger theater, or in the sense of a general increase in his reputation. This is the purpose and content of good political communication when it has only one sender. Therefore, the democratization of language rights is an essential aspect of reforming a theater structure, which can only be achieved if a management committee with equal language rights also forms in communication, which can be extended to the employees depending on the status of the organization. Nevertheless, the communication of results in real numbers should not be underestimated for these purposes, as they can support the symbols and messages. Good results, such as the breakthrough of a magical mark among the audience (e.g.: 200,000 spectators in the past season!) or in the financial result (box office quota of 20%!), then become symbols and independent instruments of a political language themselves. Pfeffer speaks here of the fact that the results of a rational analysis and planning processes can be very helpful in the course of the condensation of political communication (Pfeffer 1981, p. 194).

3.3.5 Structural Asymmetry, Structure, and Power Thomas Matys describes in his book Power, Control, and Decisions in Organizations the structural asymmetry as an general social aspect that plays an essential role in my examination of power relations in the theater and should be another starting point for my considerations here: “Especially the analysis of organizations as a power relationship inherently contains the thesis of a structural asymmetry between labor and capital.” (Matys 2014, p. 19)

Matys further argues that:

3.3  Organization, Structure, and Power

103

“Management is forced to enforce its rule over the production process and the disciplining of the workers through market mechanisms, control strategies, technification, division of labor, etc.; on the other hand, it depends on the creative and productive potentials of living labor to be able to produce use values, which at the same time requires cooperation and consensus-seeking.” (ibid.)

Interesting is the fact, well known to us from many contexts, that management has no chance of realizing the goals and tasks, programs, and formats of the theater without the “creative and productive potentials of living labor,” which under normal circumstances should result in a cooperative relationship between management and staff. In the long term, this creates a resistance of the workers against the power mechanisms, which at the same time goes hand in hand with the interest in preserving their own jobs. It is therefore not surprising that the actors of the theater have only recently joined forces to defend themselves against injustice, low wages, and precarious working conditions (ensemble-network 2016, 2017, 2018). To analyze why this is the case, I would like to pick up a trace in the history of organizational and management theory: Frederick Taylor, the founder of Scientific Management, creates the first essential prerequisites for today’s organizational principles with his paradigm of modern division of labor: • • • • • • •

Specialization of work Hierarchization of the organization Standardization and a high degree of formalization of processes Establishment of precise, upstream planning mechanisms Selection of workers and personnel based on criteria Training, qualification, and further education for workers Monetary performance incentives tailored individually (Taylor 1922).

Taylor succeeds in separating the planning and scheduling processes from the operational work processes through these principles, thereby constituting “new power and control configurations” (Matys 2014, p. 26). Management takes control over the workers in the production processes through the associated rationalization and optimization of work. This establishes an asymmetry of power very early in the development of organizations, which can be found wherever some of the above aspects apply to the description of the organization.

104

3  Power and Organization

A crucial role within micro-political, sociological approaches is played by the so-called behavioral (behaviorist) theories, in which human decision-making processes are the starting point of a modern organizational perspective. A central point here is the so-called incentive-contribution-balance, as the fulcrum of the exchange of contributions from organizational members in the form of work and the incentives that the organization offers them in return, such as permanent employment, fees, insurance, salary increases, bonuses, promotions, further education, etc. Central here is the balance between expectations and behavior (Kieser and Walgenbach 2003).

3.3.6 Ambiguity in Organizations as Power Potential (March, Simon, Olsen) The above mentioned exchange processes do not always take place rationally and balanced. Herbert A. Simon speaks of a bounded rationality (Simon 1959), on the basis of which James G. March and Johan P. Olsen later develop the Garbage Can Model (March and Olsen 1975), which demonstrably assumes ambiguities and uncertainty in decision-making processes in organizations because • • • •

knowledge is limited, technologies are outdated, newer technologies are even unknown and unreachable, the participants of the organization change too frequently work constellations, and thus the attention of the participants for the individual processes and projects decreases, • in addition, the goals change during the course of processes (March and Olsen 1975; Kieser and Walgenbach 2003; Matys 2014). These aspects apply to the theater organization. As a result of the analyses of the previous chapter, I would like to note: 1 Knowledge in the theater is generally only limitedly available and accessible,  because employees in leading and middle positions often have not received the necessary training for their management tasks and functions, and are not making an effort to acquire this knowledge through further education. There is a lack of tender criteria for theater directors, scenic directors, and the leading and middle management of the theater, as well as job descriptions at all levels. A certain arrogance of power on the part of the leaders and the responsible cultural

3.3  Organization, Structure, and Power

105

politicians also interferes, who assume that a successful director or proven theater maker can, of course, also manage a large theater. In addition: The better the leading employees are trained, the more the employees of the organization will benefit from it. Another point is the low internal accessibility of knowledge: • There is no central system for archiving and distributing knowledge, • there are hardly any internal intranet structures in which knowledge can be collected and made available. • Even the protocols of processes, discussions, and results are limited and—if available—often destroyed or excluded by the successor in the following artistic director phase, not made available for research or archived. • There is also no structured induction of new employees into functions and work processes at all levels. The only solution for theaters is to transform them into Learning Organizations in the sense of Chris Argyris, Donald A. Schön, and Peter M. Senge, so that they become more viable for the future (Argyris and Schön 2002; Senge 1990). 2 The technologies are outdated and new technologies are difficult to access In most theaters, there is a lack of money to purchase new technologies in the areas of lighting, video, and sound, as well as in the field of communication and information technology, which in turn prevents forms of archiving, methodical learning, and the associated implementation of a knowledge culture. The technically often outdated areas of lighting, video, sound, stage, machinery, stage management, and workshops particularly affect the technical-artistic processes and productions, in which the directing teams therefore do not have access to those technical innovations that could open up new possibilities, styles, and ways of staging. As a result, learning processes that have a positive and development-promoting effect on the entire theater take place only with difficulty. Outdated technologies often lead to organizations limiting themselves in their development processes—which include productions in the theater. This is a disadvantage for artistic processes. Access to new and innovative technologies is also rarely promoted because the basic knowledge is lacking or the access routes are not opened. A groundbreaking exception is the Theater Dortmund under the direction of Kay Voges (2010–2020) with the founding of a Digital Theater Academy. (Kolle 2019)

106

3  Power and Organization

3 Frequent Changes in Personnel and Management The theater is—with few exceptions (Mühlheim/Ruhr, Anklam, Volksbühne until 2017, Berliner Ensemble until 2017, Schaubühne Berlin, among others)—characterized by very frequent changes in artistic and management personnel. There are two reasons for this: The imperfect and unfair contract of the NV-Bühne, which grants artistic employees hardly any rights to stay, but allows management regular termination options if better opportunities arise, exacerbates the asymmetry of power between the artistic director and the employees. This is accompanied by fear among the artists and increasing power of the management. On this basis, many ensembles terminate actors and assistants year after year who no longer fit into the artistic “concept”. In addition, there is a tendency to reduce the size of ensembles by cutting or not filling permanent positions and to work more with guest artists, often at the request of the artistic directors and guest directors. Many theaters falsely list guest artists as ensemble members to create the impression of a large ensemble to the outside world (DBV 2018). The frequent terminations, often for trivial reasons, and the massive use of guest artists (15% to 20% of the actors) at public theaters change the ensemble and staff structure sustainably and prevent, at least partially, the development of strong ensemble structures, with the help of which their members could defend themselves against the power asymmetry. However, this also has artistic consequences, as working with constantly changing ensembles and staff reduces the continuity in artistic work, which is an essential prerequisite for excellence and quality. A second point concerns the termination of almost all actors and artistic staff in the context of the “facilitated non-renewal” during the change of theater director (NV-Bühne). Every year, between 10 and 15 theaters change their directors, who stay at a theater for an average of five to ten years. This is associated with an immense personnel upheaval, so that the act of changing the director already exerts a high power pressure on the remaining employees, and also conveys to the newly hired employees that their contract can be terminated at any time—simply because it corresponds to the customs and culture, and the contractual situation at the public theaters in Germany. The problems here are: • the immature contract system of the NV Bühne, which provides too little protection for the artists, • the tendency for frequent non-renewals even during a term of office, instead of committing the actors to the term of the artistic director and beyond, • the tendency for staff reductions in the ensembles, and

3.3  Organization, Structure, and Power

107

• the increased reinforcement of ensembles with guest artists, • the impending non-renewals with every change of artistic director, as well as • the focus of the contracts of artistic personnel on the person of the theater director. 4 Target Systems The prerequisites at theaters are very diverse. There are theaters where management and supervisory boards deal with it very intensively and measure the work of the director by it—formally or informally, publicly or non-publicly, depending mainly on the rules of procedure and/or the guidelines of the theater. However, there are also theaters without guidelines, where target systems are still very rudimentary, allowing the director to work in an informal framework in which, for example, only the management establishes economic goals. In the theater, goals usually change. This affects conceptual, programmatic, and strategic goals of management and in the artistic areas. During an director’s term, which is usually preceded by an artistic concept and a program along with goals, these goals are taken up, discussed again and again, changed, refocused, and then presented to employees and audience members in various meetings. During my time at the Weimar National Theater (2003–2013), the artistic director changed the Corporate Image of the theater twice fundamentally within five years. Coming from advertising, he was never satisfied with the appearance of the theater. The first image, developed with a lot of money, along with the target system, later gathered dust in the archives after it was discovered that the suggestions of the theater-remote consultants were not feasible. The artistic director also changed the artistic concept and the decisive personnel positions (chief dramaturge, director of the drama department, technical director, a.o.) several times, although this did not correspond to the original image with the focus on artistic continuity. Even within the staging processes, it is not uncommon for directors to change their directing concept several times in their conceptual uncertainty in order to develop and present a coherent staging, just as an artistic director demands changes in the final rehearsals and takes a very active influence on the stagings and conceptual aspects at his house, which were originally agreed upon.

3.3.7 Formal and Informal Power Structures in Crozier/ Friedberg Another important model for the analysis of organizations and power comes from Michel Crozier and Erhard Friedberg (1993). At the center of their investiga-

108

3  Power and Organization

tions is collective action as a form of joint action by the participants of an organization, and the analysis of the resulting power relations. “Any serious analysis of collective action must therefore place power at the center of its considerations, for collective action is basically nothing more than everyday politics. Power is its raw material.” (Crozier and Friedberg 1993, p. 14)

In addition to the official power structure, which can be read from the organizational chart, there are now informal power structures that spread like a network over the entire organization and create nodes of power within it. Crozier and Friedberg speak of intra-organizational power sources, which include special control instances, expert knowledge, seniority, the way knowledge and important information are passed on, and the extent of regulations (ibid.). There is now a second, informal level that replaces or complements the formal level, as I would like to suggest here, because in the most effective power systems, both go hand in hand, seemingly. In the theater, behind the official hierarchy, the sets of rules and instruction structures, there are informal power structures. They strongly extend into the organizational culture, which is characterized by a long and changeable historical tradition, as well as by a strong connection with the artistic work and its areas. The interplay between formal and informal structures manifests itself in the theater on various levels, see Fig. 3.3. As can be seen from the examples, informal structures are often profitably used by those in power to expand their own spheres of influence and freedoms and to provide well for the closely associated clientele. If I go into these areas in more detail below, I would like to exemplify: • how present are informal power structures in the daily operational practice of the theater, • how effectively they work on both a small and large scale, and • how effectively they prevent change and reform in the theater. Organizational Chart vs. Informal Power Flows and Spheres of Influence The organizational chart (see Sect. 2.1) regulates the internal hierarchy, the arrangement of individual departments and functions, and thus the general reporting obligation, i.e., which employees report to which director.

3.3  Organization, Structure, and Power

109

Formal structures

Informal structures

Organizational chart (vertical)

Informal groupings (horizontal), power flows and spheres of influence based on organizational culture and seniority of individual strong employees*.

Official announcements: Presence of the Intendant and the GMD Responsiveness Open office doors

Unofficial reality: Low attendance of the Intendant and the GMD Not; approachable without long-term appointments Always closed and guarded by assistants office door of the director and other management members; No formal opportunities for conversation, but informal opportunities, e.g., at premiere parties, the results of which often have no lasting character; In addition: Ritualized actions; e.g., tacit opening of theater spaces on Sundays/in the summer break/between rehearsals for private use of the rehearsal spaces (yoga, Pilates, private singing lessons for third parties, private acting projects, and many more), creating a kind of parallel world in the theater. Dogs despite the ban in theaters. Television in the rooms of technicians during working hours

We can talk about everything

During the summer break the theater rooms are closed, access only for employees x, y, z, as well as members of the management. Dog ban in the theater. No television during working hours. Service contracts

Verbal sidebars, unconscionable gag contracts with only 11-month terms with no right to a second year of service, and proper non-renewals

Non-renewals

Silent termination agreements

Instructions for action and regulations

Informal regulations, for example, if stage sets are nevertheless used or rooms are opened to the public when the safety and TÜV standards of the technology are insufficient; continuation of operations in the event of poor drinking water quality or asbestos hazards

Program as official program Cast lists

Informal positions with which additional, spontaneous productions and projects can take place

Roster including official plans under the Labor Code Compliance with official channels with the bodies

Sunday rehearsals not noted therein, duty hours after the 10th hour of work or from the 11th consecutive day of work.

Informal preliminary discussions and promises/promises to cast the lead roles, or about skipping out on a artistic production to allow the actor shooting days or regeneration

Bypassing committees when making important decisions.

Fig. 3.3   Formal and informal organizational structures in the theater (Schmidt 2018)

110

3  Power and Organization

Informal spheres of influence are usually created by the power centers of strong and influential, often irreplaceable employees at various levels, who, with the appropriate experience and knowledge, can assert themselves against the decisions of a director in order to maintain or expand their own power or create a kind of counter-power. It can happen that, in addition to a weak, insufficiently trained theater or managing director, there is a strong division director who, more or less in the shadows, runs the organization while the theater director increasingly drifts into representative partial tasks and non-presence. This is associated with an informal but very real shift of power, which is not uncommon in the theater because some directors are not sufficiently prepared for these tasks. However, it can also be the case that a clever director builds up one or more of his directors to relieve himself of tedious, operational work and thus strengthen his own power. This would be a desirable doubling of formal and informal power structures from the managing director’s point of view. Other forms consist of informal, cross-divisional groups at the employee level (horizontal), through which a network-like exchange of important information takes place, combined with assistance, such as: • • • • • •

contract extension and salary increase, placement of children in the rare internship positions, on the lists of extras or provision of theater tickets at preferential prices, providing vehicles and assistance for private transports and moves, building shelves, tables, and other woodworking and painting in the workshops, etc.

However, they can also act as pressure groups if they consist of long-standing, irreplaceable theater employees and protagonists of the ensembles who have already experienced several directors and persuade or even force the director to grant them and/or the employees and ensembles freedom. Official vs. Unofficial Announcements An official announcement, for example, could be that there will be no salary increases in the coming season for financial reasons, while the director unofficially grants salary increases to the artists closest to him—under the seal of confidentiality. The potential of such an action becomes clearly visible: The director can express his clear stance on the bright side and solicit understanding, while at the same time expressing his power in a double sense by being able to bypass his own announcements at any time with a policy of double standards.

3.3  Organization, Structure, and Power

111

This is problematic from several perspectives because a secret in the theater generally does not remain a secret for long—especially in the theater director’s offices or personnel departments, there are information leaks because, after a certain period of realization, one no longer wants to be part of the system and distances oneself from the central actor=theater director through leaking—unofficially, of course. This makes a director vulnerable to blackmail, and he often has to follow up with further salary increases when the secret is revealed. Other findings include special vacation regulations that go beyond the legal claims or the house customs and are granted only sporadically. An ensemble can only defend itself against such “shadow zones” through absolute transparency: open communication about all contractual aspects and fees. Often, usage rights are also bent by allowing rehearsal or workshop spaces and vehicles to be used for private purposes. Service Contracts vs. Oral Side Agreements Even though every service contract states that side agreements require written form to become effective, every artistic staff member knows that a “director’s word”—the oral promise of a director—is already a contract, be it for an engagement, a specific fee, a casting, or the extension of a contract. These are so-called customs and oral rules, which can, however, be easily circumvented legally—by the way, to the disadvantage of a director who ends up being considered untrustworthy. However, this also happens repeatedly: promises burst because another performer or director was found at the last minute, or the fee increase goes to another staff member. A good informal network can strongly supervise a theater director if this information is disclosed. Thus, a director must carefully weigh what he wants to achieve with the additions: create exceptional rules for the artists and staff who belong to a closer and more influential “director’s circle”—otherwise, oral side agreements, which obviously no one else, not even the management, learns about in advance, cannot be understood. It only becomes problematic when the artist approaches the managing director to demand the side agreement, who is not informed and refuses to make an additional payment, approve further paid days off, or silently extend a contract that has actually been terminated—things that happen in the everyday business of theaters time and again. Here, a power struggle between the managing director and the artistic director and between the artistic director and the artist can ignite if the director lawfully resists or first obtains the permission of another authority, such as the responsible shareholder or the supervisory board. Also problematic is the practice of giving beginners and younger actors only 11-month contracts (so-called one-year-contracts), which do not automatically

112

3  Power and Organization

extend for another year of service and do not require proper non-renewal because of the missing twelfth month in the contract. These contracts are contrary to good morals, contradict the NV-Bühne (German stage contract), and urgently need to be abolished. It is also advisable for young artists to enter into such a contractual situation only if they themselves wish to do so. With this short-term contract type, the contract extension can and should be claimed. Formal vs. Informal Instructions/Regulations Bypassing formal instructions also holds great power potential for theater management. It remains to be questioned whether the person who creates regulations may also be the one who breaks them—which is a legal misconception. Because a theater director is also obliged to protect the law in a theater and to guarantee legal certainty for the employees without them having to fear that instructions will regularly be partially suspended. However, it is usually about expansions of existing regulations that a director uses to reward particularly loyal employees. In this context, the following actions have been particularly noticeable to me, both from my own experience and from numerous conversations with colleagues at other theaters in Germany and across the board: Company Vehicles  The regulation applies that company vehicles may not be used outside of working hours and regular service. However, exceptions are made when the director approves the use of a company truck for moves or other private transports, or when colleagues use company cars for private trips. A special feature is also that important guests in director productions are picked up from airports or train stations with the company vehicle, which is initially approved only in exceptional cases but often becomes the rule later on. Travel Expenses  These will only be reimbursed if a trip is required for business purposes and an approved business travel application is available. This applies to trips of the theater director and colleagues who must travel for business reasons (dramaturgs, management). The director can also specifically show his favor by initiating business trips. Young dramaturgs who earn too little to afford trips to other theaters themselves depend on these business trips to stay connected. However, the director himself usually does not have his business trips approved by the theater’s sponsor, but rather deals with them freely and accesses a contractually agreed financial pool for business trips, expenses, and outlays. In this respect, his role model function is also very limited in this area. It happens

3.3  Organization, Structure, and Power

113

again and again that theater directors enter “gray areas” when their semi-private motivated trips are billed as business trips. Some directors negotiate so-called “theater director special budgets” for this purpose—which have different names from theater to theater—from which they pay for their trips independently of the management, but they forget that only business trips approved by the management or the supervisory body and exclusively initiated for business reasons may be financed from this—no matter how high the budget is, and regardless of whether there are still free funds available in this budget at the end of the year. Company Cell Phones  Who receives a company cell phone at the theater is at the discretion of the theater management. The allocation of these cell phones is a classic power issue and is associated with mutual favors. Employees in management ranks are rewarded or punished by withholding such a cell phone from them, while colleagues with similar areas of responsibility are provided with one. In addition, there are the features of these cell phones, the flat rate, the additional options that come with more expensive contracts and can significantly burden the budget for communication tools. With these features, a theater director can strongly differentiate his favor. Rehearsal Rooms  These rooms are highly contested. Many scenic directors and actors, but also singers and coaches, work—without permission—on Sundays, when rehearsals are not legally allowed, as well as during vacations. The director usually tolerates this. However, there are also other areas in which a theater manager bypasses the safety standards of his theater, for example when the house is no longer playable, but all those involved “turn a blind eye” so that the “curtain” continues to rise night after night, as it is called in theater jargon. Often, those who insist on compliance with safety standards are insulted and accused. “We’ve always done it this way” is a popular response to this. The fact that this can endanger the health of employees and spectators is not sufficiently taken into account or ignored—a negligent act. Performance Schedules/Informal Positions No approved performance schedule is really complete in itself. Many directors and dramaturgs usually fill an already approved performance schedule with extra projects and productions during the current season, for fear of missing a special topic, a new scenic director, a format that could make the theater, the artistic director, the dramaturg known or elicit an invitation to the Berliner Theatertreffen, the most prominent election of the ten best drama productions, which are shown every May in Berlin— a kind of accolade. This also creates an overproduction, where initially there was a desire

114

3  Power and Organization

for a slow down. Thus, employees are burdened beyond the set limits. Some positions also develop informally, are tolerated, others arise directly at the artistic director’s command—using resources that are not actually available. This creates a corrupt mix, because every director in the theater’s environment knows that the artistic director can enable extra spaces and sometimes it only takes a favorable situation at a successful premiere party to obtain another project. Favoritism Systems (Nepotism)  Of course, there is also the danger of opening the door to a favoritism system (nepotism). With it, the most beloved, loyal, and close artists are rewarded, as well as partners and family members who curate extra (special projects, guest performances, readings) or contribute a staging for a festival or a season that was not planned during the entire planning and preparation period and now suddenly needs to be implemented with high urgency. Duty Rosters  There is also repeated abuse of duty rosters, e.g., to ensure that a production can be completed on time with all available resources. This includes so-called extraordinary measures such as tolerated additional rehearsals that extend beyond the 10th working hour into the prohibited area. This also includes legally forbidden rehearsals on Sundays, which deprive team members and players of their legal day of rest and increase the maximum workload to over 10 permitted working days. Many directors insist on this, especially with growing uncertainty in the second half of the rehearsal period. Circumventing Committees I remember a situation where a theater director, in the absence of an alternative, offered an opera directorship to a director who was actually unsuitable for the position at a premiere party and even promised it during the course of the conversation. The theater director actually began to informally negotiate the salary and other special conditions because he felt pressured to fill the vacant position quickly. He acted out of fear of losing his reputation and being accused of insufficient artistic networking if he did not present an opera director soon. However, neither the supervisory board nor the management were involved in this process, which led to difficult renegotiations that dragged on for weeks, during which the candidate of the theater director left the contract unsigned as leverage but already began preparing his season and the structure of the ensemble. Thus, the contract was de facto entered into, and he had the advantage of being able to drag out the negotiations until it was finally concluded in his favor—another opera director could not be won because he already occupied the position, it was too late for that, and he announced this in the theater scene very early on.

3.3  Organization, Structure, and Power

115

The offense of the theater director consisted in knowingly exceeding his own competencies because he knew that he was not actually capable of acting without the approval of the supervisory board and the management. The clever candidate, in turn, whom the theater director protected, used all conceivable leeway to secure his claim to the contract and subsequently renegotiate the conditions that were important for his program and that went far beyond the originally negotiated amount and the available resources. The candidate calculated for the theater director and the managing director how much additional and project funds he would generate if his contract and conditions were finally approved. In the supervisory board, the theater director then presented the new director for “apparent” approval, although the contract had already been signed by him and had come into effect. The budget overrun in the opera department could not be properly recovered because neither the theater director nor the opera director acquired the project funds that would have been necessary for the budget balance. On the debit side, there were still the singers and employees who were not renewed in this process. It shows what dangerous effects seemingly minor power abuses and management mistakes can have in the end. The Bridge between Actor and Organization (Crozier/Friedberg) Crozier and Friedberg’s further great achievement is the bridge between actor and organization, between the micro and macro level through the concepts of structured field of action and game. “The game thus appears as a fundamental instrument of collective action that people have invented to structure and regulate their cooperation and the inevitably associated power and dependency relationships, while still preserving their freedom.” (Crozier and Friedberg, p. 4)

Both confirm the approach of bounded rationality (Simon 1959), that organizations are not exclusively oriented towards rational and economic criteria, “but rather arenas of micro-political negotiation processes and struggles, [so] the actions of the actors can be reconstructed as the pursuit of strategies in the face of certain games, game situations, game rules, and resources (’trumps’).” (Matys 2014, p. 37)

Crozier and Friedberg assume that every action within the organization refers to power, whether it is formal or informal power patterns, of which there are particularly many in the theater (see above). Power here becomes characteristically for the “exchange relationship” based on the behavior of the leaders and the employ-

116

3  Power and Organization

ees, in our case the artistic director and his staff—making power contingent. No one is excluded from this, everyone can try to participate as strategically targeted as possible. According to Crozier and Friedberg, “invisible, informal, and implicitly strategic” behavior patterns develop between management and employees, the classic top and bottom.

3.3.8 Structure Influences Action and Generates Power (Giddens, Mintzberg) Anthony Giddens and Henry Mintzberg continue this approach in another direction: Giddens develops in his structuration theory the paradigm of the duality of structure (Giddens 1988, p. 77). The structure influences action, thus generating power, but action also generates power by influencing the structure. In the theater, the current organizational structure impairs the efficiency and quality of artistic processes, while at the same time favoring the theater director as the sole ruler. The influence of the structure is clearly given. Power also arises through the current bottlenecks, which are enforced and accepted by the structure. Because the classical theater organization chart is structured along divisions and departments, there are hardly any possibilities to further improve the effectiveness and quality of productions. Productions must be planned by the operating offices in the annual plans in box form as large blocks, often with elaborate informal preliminary and Sunday rehearsals to compensate for the directors’ uncertainty and give the performers a chance to cope with the immense learning and practice workload at all. If theaters were given an organizational structure along the production processes (Fig. 2.5), this bottleneck could be overcome. This action, namely the toleration and the associated permission for additional rehearsals during leisure time, is at the same time an exercise of power by the director, who favors an informal structure that has developed within the formal organizational structure, thereby corrupting the structure. At the same time, the affected actors often do not object to these intrusions into their leisure time. They thus become part of the power process, supporting it instead of exposing abuse, rejecting it, and fighting for fairer structures, which admittedly requires a lot of courage in the face of the well-oiled sanction mechanisms of the theater director. It becomes clear that an improvement in the working situation of the artistic staff is only possible if they manage to escape the desire for power, to ally themselves, and to advocate for a fairer structure of the theater without being punished for it.

3.3  Organization, Structure, and Power

117

A so-called anti-sanction mechanism would have to be implemented, which no longer allows a director to impose sanctions of any kind on artists and staff who complain, criticize, make suggestions, protect people, demand improvements, and ensure anonymity. A future scenario would be: A freely elected ombudsperson at the theater oversees these guidelines and prescribes possible anonymity. Henry Mintzberg, on the other hand, develops an approach of ideal types of organizational structures (organigrams), which he calls configurations, focusing on the three aspects of structure, strategy, and behavior and their interrelationship. However, he leaves Giddens’ change perspective and focuses primarily on the top-down perspective of management. In management, the exercise of power is concentrated. He distinguishes between legitimate (authority, ideology, expertise) and illegitimate influence systems (politics). However, this is not about classical politics, but about political power within the organization, which “is neither formally authorized, nor widely accepted, nor officially certified. The result is that individuals or groups fight against the influence systems and […] fight each other.” (Mintzberg 1991, p. 245, according to Matys, p. 42)

Matys summarizes the considerations of Crozier & Friedberg, Giddens, and Mintzberg in two essential considerations, which also directly relate to the theater. In this, he describes the importance of meaning constitution in organizational actors and their relation to so-called guiding principles, with which rules are created and reproduced: “Organizational actors refer to the existing rules of meaning constitution in their communicative action by using certain perception patterns or referring to certain guiding principles, thereby reproducing […] these rules […]. At the same time […] they also refer to the power structures intertwined with these and reproduce these structures through their actions.” (Matys 2014, p. 42).

This is an interpretation of power in organizations that clearly shows how an instrument, the guiding principle, can be used and changed as a power instrument. As I have already described earlier, these authors also deal with • a strategic approach to the rules, which are influenced and changed by the actors’ actions in their interest, and • the implementation of new perception patterns and guiding principles, by means of which the actors want to expand and/or consolidate their power (Matys 2014, p. 46)

118

3  Power and Organization

3.3.9 Power, Imbalance, Conformity, and Consensus (Burawoy) At the meso-level of organizational considerations, there are a number of theoretical approaches. They share the view that social and organizational systems are always co-produced and reproduced by the employees, who thus participate in the emergence of a corresponding power asymmetry. Michael Burawoy deals with the aspect of why employees in companies and organizations still perform so much despite the imbalance of power and exploitation, and thus actively contribute to their own exploitation. He also deals with how, through conformity and consensus, despotic systems could be transformed into systems of hegemony throughout history, from which a lot of power still emanates, but whose use then has to be negotiated more strongly (Burawoy 1985, p. 21 ff.). It should be noted that consensus and conformity can only be achieved after long negotiations and labor struggles and are based on a long-term cooperation between management and employees. This is often not the case in theater due to the short-term directorships, which makes it difficult to build resilient trust relationships. Here are two things to consider: The performers and artistic staff accept deprivation and social injustice in order to realize their “artistic dream”. They know that only a few of them will achieve artistic and economic breakthrough, but still hope because they believe in their abilities and in the theater. Only in confrontation with the structures of the theater and the role of the director do some of them begin to realize that it is no longer about realizing a dream, but about a form of existential confrontation in which they must find their own artistic path and at the same time their economic and social livelihood. In doing so, they also learn to deal with and circumvent power and unfreedom in the theater. It is part of the game that they and the management play together, and which stabilizes the system of the theater. Thus, the antagonism between the unfreedom of the artist and the power of the directors becomes an arrangement for a limited time, from which some artists drop out after a certain period, who are not extended and released if they are no longer needed or tolerated for whatever reason. But the director also faces the threat of non-extension by politics and the supervisory board at the end of a directorship period. This threat also has a major psychological impact on the profiles and psychological characteristics that make up atheater director, who, in addition to the best networking, usually has to be characterized by a strong will to power, a pronounced self-confidence, and the ability to present themselves in a special way in

3.4  Organizational Culture as a Carrier of Power

119

order to even get to the goal, i.e., on top of the shortlist for a directorship. Only those who bring these prerequisites and talents have a chance to be noticed and placed in the end in the fight for the few free directorships—in relation to the total number of possible applicants, contenders, and candidates.

3.4 Organizational Culture as a Carrier of Power Organizational culture is another level of reflection of power, as I have already introduced in Sect. 2.3. Schultz (1994) distinguishes between organizational and organizational-cultural perspectives and paradigms, which I take from a table by Matys, see Fig. 3.4. The goal of organizational culture approaches is to shape an organizational culture, in particular: • • • •

values and norms informal rules (language regulations, argumentation patterns) attitudes and mindsets collective expectations and beliefs (local theories),

to develop an identity and shared patterns of thought and language, through which power struggles, confrontations, and dissent can be obscured. By shap-

Perspective

Organizational paradigm

Organizational culture Culture is a tool for executing organizational goals.

Rationalistic

Organization is a means of effective service delivery.

Functionalist

The organization is a collective that seeks continuity in the execution of relevant functions.

Culture is a pattern (network) of shared values and basic assumptions that are functions of adaptation and integration.

Symbolist

The organization is a human system that contains complex patterns of symbolic Actions expresses.

Culture is a web consisting of socially constructed symbols and meanings.

The organization has a culture.

The organization is a culture.

Fig. 3.4   Organizational-cultural perspectives and paradigms. (Schultz 1994; after Matys 2014, p. 60)

120

3  Power and Organization

ing norms and patterns, a management model is developed and established, on the basis of which a “company-compliant self-regulation” (Matys 2014, p. 63) is induced, which rather accompanies the management model than questions it. This can safely be called a form of manipulation via organizational culture. In this respect, there is a particular explosive force and a great potential to conceal power, which is used and possibly even abused beyond a limit. And finding this out is the task of employee representatives and ensemble boards, who must introduce systematic methods of disclosure to protect themselves from being subjected to forms of conforming self-regulation and adapting excessively. Based on Foucault’s findings, Matiasek and Nienhüser describe techniques of individualization that are also power techniques: • “practices of personnel selection and examination • assessment centers • career systems • the institution of employee interviews • the instrument of target agreements and individualized gratifications.” (Matiasek & Nienhüser 2010, in Matys 2014, p. 63). Many of these techniques are still considered achievements for employees today. However, they are not. Employee interviews are also instruments of discipline, giving the employee a sense of participation and influence on their career. However, they are primarily a technique of separation and the exercise of power by the employer, in which they offer opportunities for development under specific conditions and expectations formulated by them. This is one reason why the ensemble network, for example, advocates for generally binding salary scales and salary transparency in theaters, to avoid separation, and thus salary adjustments are no longer tied to formal conversations. The participation of ensemble representatives in career decisions is also demanded as an act of participation, in order to counteract the principle of “divide and rule” by theater directors. Initiation rites as essential parts of organizational culture in theater To better understand theater, its structures, and the power processes developing within them, one should examine another aspect more closely, that of the initiation of new colleagues, which goes through a series of very precise rituals and is thus both an important area of organizational culture and a striking example of structural power in theater.

3.4  Organizational Culture as a Carrier of Power

121

The actual initiation process in theater, which is carried out much more bindingly than in many other open types of organizations in business, academia, culture and NPOs, is reminiscent of initiation rites in total organizations, such as the army or the police, where new employees are welcomed in a specific and very sophisticated way. The aim here is not to evaluate these processes and classify them as good or less good and fair, but to analyze them precisely. 1 Audition The initiation process of an actor at the theater usually begins with an audition, which takes place based on recommendation or application. Even actors who have been in the business for many years cannot avoid auditioning for a new director or theater if they want a chance at an engagement. Only an estimated 10% of all vacancies are directly awarded to actors in the first segment, who are often no longer interested in permanent positions, but only in guest contracts, in order to maintain sufficient freedom for shooting days in film, dubbing business, or their own programs—which can significantly improve quality of life and income. All others go through the tough procedure of auditioning for a vacancy, to which ten, twenty or more actors are invited, who, for example, are allowed to play their roles on the rehearsal stage between 2 pm and 6 pm—because the evening rehearsal already begins afterwards. These auditions have very little to do with an encounter on an equal footing. There is often no friendly greeting from the director, the spotlights shine brightly into the faces of the auditioning actors, making eye contact with the evaluators impossible, which can lead to fear and a lack of freedom in the interpretation of an audition role. The composition of the audition commission varies greatly and depends on the working style of the director. If he is a team player, he will invite his in-house directors, the department head, and perhaps also the dramaturgy. In rare cases, the ensemble spokespersons are allowed to participate, even more rarely do they have a say in the evaluation and in the pronunciation of recommendations. In principle, the artistic director can decide on his own who he admits to the ensemble and who among the auditioning actors receives a guest contract. Often, the director interrupts in the middle of the performance and asks—in order to shorten the entire procedure—for the playing of a second role or the interpretation of a musical piece before impatiently inviting the next candidate. In the best case, he invites someone to the next round or promises to get in touch within the next few days. Those who have reached this stage are allowed to stay or are invited again. In the rarest cases, a contract is offered immediately, especially since procrastina-

122

3  Power and Organization

tion has also found its way into the theater, as the casting of each vacant position is fought for as if the happiness and artistic fortune of the theater depended on it. In the second phase, the actor works on roles or characters, which can mean various things. However, many actors have experienced serious incidents of humiliation or assault during this phase (Chap. 4). Meanwhile, mainly due to the ongoing generational change among theater directors, these measures have been defused. However, it can still happen that an actress, for example, is asked to “undress” without the staging context requiring it, or that she is pushed into a scene with a staged partner for which she is not mentally prepared. Those who hesitate here often have already forfeited their chances. This does not affect the top segment of actors, who have their agencies write into their contracts that such scenes can only take place in rehearsals or performances in consultation with the actor themselves, with an intimacy coordinator on stage and after special financial compensation. By the way, I consider these conditions to be appropriate for all actors of a theater or at an audition. 2 First Conversation with the Artistic Director The first conversations with the director are conducted in very different constellations. In serious cases, the theater director, the chief dramaturge, the head of the department, and the managing director are invited, while in other cases, the theater director conducts these conversations alone. The venues can also vary and may deviate from the stereotype of the director’s office with a “casting couch”. Depending on the artistic director’s time budget and schedule, such a conversation can also take place in a café to create a more relaxed atmosphere. The theater director wants to get to know the performer and at the same time establish the power imbalance between themselves and the person to be engaged. The performer also wants to represent and negotiate their own interests in this conversation as best as possible—something many of them have never properly learned, which also explains the growing popularity of artist agencies in the field of acting and opera. Regardless of what is discussed and later agreed upon contractually, most promises made by a theater director in this conversation are already legally binding and enforceable. Of course, legal action is only taken in the rarest of cases, as no new performer or employee wants to confront the director and expose them as a liar if their promises do not appear in the written contract or are not kept at all. Performers and employees are “educated” by the structural conditions at the theater to assert their own interests only as far as they do not provoke the theater director’s displeasure, so as not to end up next on the list of those whose contracts will not be renewed.

3.4  Organizational Culture as a Carrier of Power

123

During the phase of courting a new actor, the director uses their political language to present the theater, their own artistic work, and the development opportunities for the performer in a positive light, while simultaneously assessing how the new colleague would fit into the theater’s cosmos and what role(s) they could take on within it. Promises regarding roles, free time spaces, and possible salary developments are part of the director’s advertising “arsenal”, which, as some know, cannot always be kept due to their political nature—the theater director wants to keep the competition between their performers open. This also includes the fundamentally threatening option of working with guest performers, who may take away the interesting, promised, or (vaguely) expected roles from the in-house performers because the director believes that they can only artistically realize their production in the main roles with “more talented” and well-known performers or “new” faces. This is a multiple dilemma: • In the theater, we are dealing with a series of political promises that are made with the knowledge that they cannot or will not always be kept, and • there is acceptance among the employees that the director’s promises may not be fulfilled (or cannot be), and that their own interests must be subordinated to the interests of the theater or the director. This form of political promises and the resulting mutual weighing of particular interests, which usually have very little to do with the overarching interests of the theater, contradicts the classic rules of good corporate governance, which include • Transparency of communication, • Compliance with contracts, and • Equality. Compliance regulations are also violated when political promises are deliberately used as instruments of power and thus as instruments of a power-driven, particular-interest-dominated personnel management. 3 Contract Discussion Either the theater director already takes part in the contract discussion, or he shares this task with the managing director, who takes over these discussions after the theater director has already conducted the first conversation. The contract

124

3  Power and Organization

d­ iscussion is usually scheduled after preliminary agreement on the amount of the fee and the duration of the contract with the theater director. Nevertheless, such a conversation can hold many surprises, which are expressions of the emerging power imbalance and increasing asymmetry. Many promises made by the director are not feasible. The director is already aware of these difficulties at the moment of making these promises, or he deals with them negligently because he can and wants to remember these promises only to a limited extent. Much is easily said. Nevertheless, he makes them because he absolutely wants to win the performer for his ensemble and cannot accept that there are limits to his own interests. In these cases, the theater director initiates a conflict at the expense of the managing director and the performer, often with his subtle hint at the “inflexibility” of the theater—so that the ball ultimately never lands in the artistic director’s net when a promise cannot be kept. Example: The artistic operations director has already informed that a free period for the performer to be engaged is not possible without hiring a guest, for whom, however, no budget is available. So, the contract discussion revolves around the suspension of the fee for the period of the shoot, about 6 weeks, with which the guest is to be financed. The new colleague, of course, does not agree with this at all, especially since it does not correspond to the agreements. There is the first major problem that cannot be solved without the concession of the actor or the managing director. In the end, both will have to agree on a compromise. In any case, the theater director asserts his power by deliberately ignoring the framework conditions of the theater and the conflict lines of the two negotiators, but not participating in the solution of the problem and the healing of the conflict himself. In a business enterprise, such an action would be called negligent. However, promises that are not kept are part of everyday life and the career paths of performers and employees at the theater. Theater directors are not held accountable for this. It strengthens their power and the perception of their own power potential. 4 First General Assembly The first general assembly in the new season is a highly symbolic, ritual-laden event that is carried out at every theater with different nuances. It serves to initiate new employees, but also to swear in the entire staff of the theater for the next season and the director, as before a battle—only that in the hall there is often a great communication lull and mostly from top to bottom, hardly ever from bottom to top communication takes place. This is about a demonstration of power par excellence, in which an individual stands on stage as a master of fate and holds the strings like a puppeteer, at the ends of which the new colleagues and the jubi-

3.4  Organizational Culture as a Carrier of Power

125

larians alike play their role on stage and deliver the big picture of the peaceful, creative organization that so many dream of who do not belong to it. The general assembly usually takes place on the first day of the new season, mostly at 10:00 am, before the first rehearsals begin. The employees sit in the auditorium, the artistic director stands alone or with colleagues like a tribune on the elevated stage and can look down on the employees or they have to look up to him. This top and bottom solidifies the power relationship, it is part of the ritual. Then the theater director welcomes the employees and usually gives a speech of manageable length, says a few words about the achievements of the past and his ideas for the upcoming season, and then names and welcomes the new colleagues. New management members are usually invited to the stage and greeted separately, with the director using (still) many laudatory words here. In some cases, he also allows the newly appointed ones in higher positions—general music director or managing director—to address a few words to the employees themselves. These rights are not granted to the simple new employees. All are equal, but some are more equal at the theater. In the second phase of the event, the jubilarians are named, brought to the stage, and honored with small gifts before the event ends and everyone starts their work. When you see how the jubilarians are celebrated by their colleagues, you can understand how this ritual gesture strengthens the community and thus also the power position of the director. Because the view of the 35, 40, or 45 years of service of a colleague is for all younger ones also a view into their own future, combined with the hope that the theater will still exist in this form in 30 years and that one will have a good livelihood in it. Very few theater directors are experienced speakers. They rely on their artistic training and their ability to stage, but they have often long since forgotten how to honestly and transparently stage themselves. However, such a speech means a great deal to most employees of the theater. It should therefore contain a kind of leitmotif for the coming year, it should motivate, express gratitude, but also formulate challenges that one wants to tackle together. It requires a professional writer to formulate the concept and the key points of this speech, which should not be spoken ad hoc, but carefully rehearsed. For an unprepared or poorly prepared speech that is extemporized is a disregard for the employees; one can completely do without such a speech, as it is more likely to harm the artistic director than do him any good. It speaks for the power gap at the theater, and the fact that a director can afford such a thing because he is sure of his position and his power. In a business enterprise, a board member would not allow himself such negligence. For the central speech of the year is intended above all to demonstrate and consolidate his power and strength.

126

3  Power and Organization

Most employees in the theater have an excellent sense, they register very precisely whether their theater director is speaking to them in bubbles again or has taken the trouble to carefully rehearse and deliver his speech. Occasionally there are one or two questions from the audience, usually from the staff representatives or an ensemble spokesperson, which are answered routinely by the artistic directors or which the theater director passes on to his managing director. Subsequently, the hard work of all begins for the next season. The new performers and employees have now been admitted and initiated into the community. 5 First Ensemble Meeting (Admission to the Ensemble) Usually, the first ensemble meeting takes place on the first day after the morning rehearsal or during the week, depending on the urgency of the topics to be discussed. Compared to meetings during the rest of the season, it is usually quite moderate in terms of interaction, with problems being suppressed or initially brought up very gently. Here, too, the novices are introduced and, according to the customs of the respective theater, ritually admitted to the ensemble, accompanied by the words of the ensemble speakers and the congratulations of the other colleagues. Depending on the theater, the director generally participates in the ensemble meetings or is invited by the speakers. Especially in times of crisis, the ensemble likes to meet without the director and other management members, and then also outside the theater, because the many “ears” of the director within the theater are feared. Not without reason do many directors fear these meetings, because they can really get some bruises here, unlike in all other meetings at the theater. There are two reasons for this: One must understand that actors are highly emotional personalities. With their issues and problems, they can quickly charge an ensemble meeting with a lot of energy, which can corner a director to the point where he has nothing more to argue against when it comes to broken promises, unannounced casting changes, or the use of directors against whom the ensemble has long since unanimously spoken out. Then there is a situation from which solutions can only be developed if the director makes promises that he will not be able to keep again, instead of revealing his own narrow scope. If this does not happen, the relationship between the artistic director and the ensemble quickly enters a downward spiral, in which, in the worst case, the ensemble expresses mistrust of the director, as happened in Gera in 2010, Trier in 2015, and Cottbus in 2018. The self-confidence of the actors arises from their work. They are the ones who stand on stage night after

3.4  Organizational Culture as a Carrier of Power

127

night, “put their skin on the line” and thus perform the core business of the theater, even if they do not agree with the respective productions. At the same time, they rehearse new productions every day. They realize how little they earn compared to employees of other groups and ultimately feel rightly disadvantaged, from which an agenda of action, demanding more justice and participation, can emerge. 6 First Concept Rehearsal The first concept discussion is something very special in the life of a young actor who may have just come from school to their first engagement and is confronted for the first time with the reality of theater beyond student performances. But it is also something special for all newly engaged actors who have to orient themselves in a theater. Each director conducts their concept discussion very specifically, after the theater director or the department head has greeted and briefly introduced them. Nevertheless, this concept rehearsal follows a secret ritual of presenting ideas and sketches and reading the text together at the table, during which it quickly becomes clear not only who has prepared themselves well for this first rehearsal, but also who the director particularly likes and who they like less in terms of casting. The artistic director makes his casting decision together with the department director and/or the dramaturgy, and in the best case, ensures that promises made to the actors are kept, that the development opportunities of the actors, as well as the wishes of the scenic directors, are taken into account. The more important a scenic director is, the more likely their wishes will be given priority and fulfilled, even against the more political considerations of a theater director. Casting is therefore a political action that can also be influenced by the personal interests of the director, who wants to promote certain actors. Everyone sitting in this concept rehearsal knows that they are being tested again. The asymmetry of power follows the initiated into their work and into the ensemble of the theater. 7 First Premiere The first premiere is the trial by fire for every new actor at the theater. After the premiere, there is usually a first small speech by the theater director behind the stage. At the premiere party, the director speaks a second time, officially, in front of the guests of the celebration. He generally speaks words of praise about each participant in the production, particularly about the actors. The more laudatory the words about the novice are, the higher the prestige they enjoy in the theater from then on, and the greater their future prospects in the ensemble. The more personal and heartfelt these words are, the more honest or political the praise is

128

3  Power and Organization

meant. These speeches are also political speeches that not only aim to honor the work, stabilize the theater, and keep it on course, but also to strengthen their own power. Thus, each of the seven steps of an ordinary initiation becomes a symbolic expression of the theater director’s power and its consolidation. In principle—this can also be seen very well here—there is no public action by the artistic director inside or outside the theater that is not power-related.

3.5 Can Power be Measured? Testing possibilities to measure power is not a direct prerequisite for deepening this topic, but an addition for a better understanding for those who come into contact with power and for whom it is important to research, collect data, and finally implement instruments of change. The aim is to reduce the extent and intensity of power and to change it in such a way that it continues to serve the well-being and tasks of the theater, but no longer the personal interests of a single leader or a clique of leaders. Even more essential will be that power no longer harms any employee, as is still common today, which is also precisely demonstrated by the results of the study (IV.). To measure power, there are various methodological approaches, in which one should be guided by one’s own perceptions. First, the following questions need to be clarified: Who are the powerful in this organization? And how is power distributed? To determine this, a so-called matrix of powerful actors is used, which can be quickly sketched for each individual organization with which one deals more closely. Here—in contrast to the simple yes/no suggested by specialist publications—I have opted for a scaling in percentages. The numbers mark the respective shares of the “powerful” groups in the theater. I based this on the results of research conducted between 2010 and 2012. Here, I determined average values, which can, of course, vary at individual theaters. For theaters with a sole theater director, i.e., without a second managing director, percentages of the MD must be added to those of the artistic director to represent their share of power. What is interesting about Fig. 3.5, which corresponds to the average values of a survey and accumulation of determined values at 40 houses, is that the external assessment can deviate significantly from the self-perception of the respective leaders. Although the theater director is still the undisputed most powerful actor in the theater, others have moved up in recent years through systematic work. The modernization pressure on an organizational structure increases considerably when the power potential of the director can be determined at almost 50%, but

3.5  Can Power be Measured? Topic House right Artist. Reputation House representation Access to resources PersonnelSouvereignty FinanceSouvereignty ProgramSouvereignty In %

129

Intendant Managing Directors Director 50 35 0

Dramaturg

Ensemble

Admin.

T

0

Technology 15

0

0

50

0

20

10

20

0

0

100

60

30

5

0

5

0

0

100

35

35

5

0

0

5

10

90

35

35

10

0

0

10

0

90

30

50

10

0

0

10

0

100

50

0

25

25

0

0

0

100

310 48.5

185 27.2

75 11

35 5

25 3.6

25 3.6

25 3.6

680

100

Fig. 3.5   Power distribution in the theater (I). Matrix of potentially powerful actors. (Schmidt 2019; after Pfeffer 1981; Matiasek and Nienhüser 2010)

is perceived to be 100%—organizational structure and real distributed power no longer match. This is about average values that have been determined in the context of an approximation attempt. With 310 points, the theater director (Intendant) is ahead of the managing director (185), who in turn stands out from the other directors, whose power and influence is less than in their self-perception, especially since there is usually always an theater director or general director (General-Intendant) who represents both the artistic program and distributes the resources, which often leaves the artistic director with only the execution. In Fig. 3.6, I would like to show how the distribution of power shifts when the hierarchy is flattened and the structure is changed to two levels, through the introduction of a directorate and the stronger participation of the ensemble. The Mannheim model and the former Bremen model serve as examples for this. When comparing the two overviews, it must be noted that all groups benefit from the structural change, namely by redistributing the influence and decisionmaking power of the theater director—whose function no longer exists—to varying extents. There is no group that loses power; almost every group has gained significantly, with the artistic and administrative directors being the big winners. The directors previously had only 75 points as a joint group and now have 205 and 115 points, respectively, with the artistic directors gaining disproportionately more. This would also argue for a necessary redistribution of power in the future:

130 Topic House right Artist. Reputation House representation Access to resources Personnel sovereignty Financial sovereignty Program Souvereignty

3  Power and Organization Managing Artist. Director Directors 40 20

Admin. Directors 20

Dramaturg

Ensemble

Management Technology

0

0

0

20

0

50

0

20

30

0

0

30

30

30

0

10

0

0

30

30

30

0

0

5

5

35

25

25

0

0

15

0

60

10

10

0

0

20

0

0

40

0

40

20

0

0

195 (+10)

205 (++)

115 (++)

60 (+25)

60 (+35)

40 (+15)

25 (0)

Fig. 3.6   Power distribution in the theater (II). Matrix of powerful actors—Future. (Source: own representation)

the artistic directors would gain weight in the course of a structural reform of the theater and, with this weight, be able to work on the artistic quality of the theater and its productions more significantly and independently than before. The power of the important dramaturgs will also more than double in this model, as will the influence of the significantly upgraded ensemble and the upgraded administration, which are allowed to work more independently. The managing director remains similarly high in influence, corresponding to the artistic directors, to ensure balance. The technical department maintains its position. This would indeed also be a future model from the perspective of a power balance.

3.6 Ethically Regulated and Controlled Influence Versus Power Eileen Wittmann states that empirical studies in various social areas in Germany show that over 10% of employees in German companies and administrations are affected by power abuse and the consequences of so-called destructive leadership—with the assumption that the actual number is significantly higher. According to Wittmann, leadership behavior is considered destructive when the following three criteria are met:

3.6  Ethically Regulated and Controlled …

131

1. The behavior of the manager is perceived by employees as hostile and/or obstructive. 2. It thus influences the experiences, actions, and/or relationships of the employees. 3. It occurs repeatedly over a longer period of time. (Wittmann 2017) Bennett Tepper first spoke of abusive supervision in 2000, referring to hostile leadership/management. This includes a whole range of destructive behaviors, such as rudeness, bullying, and reckless actions, ranging from public humiliation, public criticism, and ridicule, to arbitrary, baseless outbursts of anger and threats of job loss, to coercion and duress, often combined with withholding important information (Tepper 2000). The 10% of employees affected by power abuse identified by Wittmann are a starting point for my further investigations. Against this background, the question arises as to how strongly employees in theaters are actually affected by power abuse and how this relates to the overall societal average or to personnel-intensive organizations in other societal areas that are similar to the theater. The science sector can be described as a working world similar to the theater due to several conditions (high personnel intensity, high degree of subsidization, production of merit goods, strong educational and societal relevance), so it can be used as a comparison. The work psychologist Christoph Baitsch describes the working conditions in science in this context very vividly, and it is not difficult to draw significant parallels. He speaks of high “structural dependency” and the resulting “almost feudal conditions” (Baitsch 2016). The hierarchies in both areas are strongly pronounced and centrally tailored, the structural dependency of employees on superiors—here professors, there directors and artistic directors—for further career development is immense, and the selection criteria in science resemble those in the theater, there for a doctoral position or a professorship, here for an engagement or a form of promotion (promotion to resident director, to department head, to management member) and is actually based exclusively on—there scientific, here artistic—success, often without including indicators such as social skills, training, and experience in personnel management to a sufficient extent in the selection process. As trivial as this insight may seem, the subsequent questions are complex, and it is sobering that consequences are only drawn very hesitantly from this to this day. Accordingly, scientists, for example, are not systematically prepared for their leadership tasks, and the cycle of selection, “exploitative leadership” and “negative leadership” (Schmid et al. 2017) and the problems derived from it persist. The organizational psychologist

132

3  Power and Organization

Jan Schilling specifies: “In the academic context, power hierarchies are often particularly pronounced, as the superior person is crucial for one’s own scientific career… The lack of confrontation then, in turn, favors an expansion of the problematic behavior of the leader” (Schilling 2018, quoted from Scheloske 2018: 5). In addition, there are alarming results from studies on mental stress in the scientific sector. The institutes of the Helmholtz Association have conducted a survey among their young scientists. About one-third would like to leave their job and not complete their qualification phase and the closely related doctorate. Of those affected, 43% report conflicts with their supervisors over content, conceptual, or private issues that make further cooperation very difficult. The existential consequences of these power relationships are serious, as the affected individuals are young scientists for whom a doctorate is the key to further career development, without which professional advancement is not possible in the scientific sector. The science journalist Marc Scheloske derives the following question from this: “How does science deal with power and authority, and where does it set limits? The other: How does science solve the dilemma that scientific excellence does not necessarily correlate with human qualities—and that the enormous competitive pressure under which researchers stand exacerbates this problem?” (Scheloske 2018: 3 f) However, there is movement in the science sector. The over 5,000 doctoral students of the Max Planck Institute, who are in thePhDnet Group have joined forces and published a position paper titled “Abuse of Power and Conflict Resolution” in August 2018. They see the abuse of power in science “as a structural problem of the current scientific system.” Jana Lasser, one of the heads and thinkers of PhDnet, adds: “The problem is the way we organize science in Germany and, in many cases, globally. The root of the problem is steep hierarchies and multiple dependencies of junior scientists on individual professors.” In their opinion, the problems result from steep hierarchies and dependencies, pressure to succeed (publications), and a lack of training in personnel management. From this, they derive a four-point solution approach: “1) The prevention of conflicts and abuse of power, 2) the protection of victims, 3) the resolution of conflicts by an external, independent committee, and 4) the definition of consequences for the perpetrators.” (Lasser 2018: 1) In particular, in the area of victim protection, the proposals are of the utmost relevance for other societal areas, such as cultural institutions. Victim protection in science should guarantee access to research data even in or after conflict cases, continuation of employment and payment, and even extension of contracts in the case of so-called “supervision conflicts.” In addition, assistance should be provided in finding new supervisors in the event of a falling out. Above all, the aspects of continued employment and payment, or even contract extension, will be of great interest for the theater sector and

3.6  Ethically Regulated and Controlled …

133

those employed in it. Referring to Scheloske’s question of how science deals with power and authority today and in the future, the question can be derived for the theater: How does the art and cultural sector, here the theater, deal with authority and power today, where does it set limits, and above all, how does the theater want to deal with it in the future? And further: How is the dilemma resolved that artistic excellence does not necessarily mean that scenic directors have leadership and management qualities and are suitable for management tasks? The first simple answer is: They don’t have to if the theaters are structurally set up differently. Perhaps directors or aspiring directors—who are obviously not suitable for management tasks—will not even be considered for these tasks in the future and can focus on their artistic work, their core area of expertise. This would require a radical rethinking but would be a manageable reform task. However, the situation is more complex and far more difficult. In the following chapter, I will revisit some of the aspects mentioned here— destructive leadership, structural dependency of employees, steep hierarchies, etc.—Nevertheless, there are also significant differences between the two areas, which have to do with the content that the organizations deal with: science is more a world of hard facts and a much stronger connection to real-world societal areas, for example in research areas that work directly with the economy or politics. Theater, on the other hand, is about soft facts, the realization of artistic projects—albeit also linked to material production flows, for example in the creation of stage sets. The theater is predominantly related to the world of senses, emotions, creativity and the world of dreams. Beyond employing about 50,000 employees in public, private, and independent theaters, festivals, and companies, and their not insignificant indirect profitability in municipalities and states, there is hardly any connection to the economy and politics through contracts, as is common in science and research. To conclude the discussion of the theoretical and scientific foundations on the subject of power, I would like to address two aspects in the last section of this chapter, the typology of the five essential power bases by French and Raven and the concept of influence as an alternative to power by Krause. The well-known management theorist Rosabeth Kanter noted that power is still the last dirty secret of organizations, which is discussed both within and outside organizations, but is avoided when scientifically inquired (Kanter 1977). Since then, behavioral and social psychological approaches have contributed to bringing the previously completely neglected topic in management literature more into the focus of research and gradually revealing the secret. Nevertheless, there are many white spots, as we can see in the as yet unexamined topic of power in theaters.

134

3  Power and Organization

In their essay on the measurement of power, Matiasek and Nienhüser take up Kanter’s thoughts and suggest some sub-areas, of which I would like to focus on the topic of power bases and leadership through power: Power Bases These include, above all, the works of French and Raven (1959), Pfeffer and Salancik (1974), Mintzberg (1983), Raven (1992), and Krause (2004). John R. P. French and Bertram Raven are the first to scientifically deal with the topic of power in social science literature. They succeed in 1959 with their study, a still valid typology essential power bases (French and Raven 1959; Raven 1992): • Reward • Punishment • Legitimation (formal position and power, legitimized power) • Identity • Expert knowledge and • Information. Based on this foundation, I have developed a model for the theater in Fig. 3.7. Diana E. Krause introduces 2004 a topos for further differentiation of the concept of power, which I also want to use for the examination of work in the theater. It is the concept of influence, which focuses on harmony and consent. Krause tries to operationalize this with an overview, which I also transfer to the theater operations in Fig. 3.8 (Krause 2004, p. 122). As the overview shows, a management can succeed in setting targeted positive contrasts compared to a pure power model by switching from power to influence instruments. It should be clear that even through influence, a form of subtle power is exerted. Influence leaves a door open for those situations and conditions in which it is not sufficient to achieve one’s own or the organization’s goals. Influence should be coupled with a renunciation of power in this case. Of course, this also depends very much on the degree and extent of congruence between one’s own goals and those of the organization, and to what extent the artistic director has succeeded in aligning the organization’s goals more and more with personal goals over the years. However, the balance must not tip, as in the cases of the Volkstheater Rostock (2015) and the Berliner Ensemble. What the models have in common is that the original intention of influencing turns into a desire for power, thus systematically distorting the leadership work of each individual. Theater directors also tend to ignore reality because they evalu-

3.6  Ethically Regulated and Controlled … Power bases

For the theater

Explanations

Reward

Fee increases, contract renewal Better casts Free time Permission f. Guest performances Financing of further training

Use also as a reward system for particularly obedient employees; sufficient incentive potential for the entire ensemble In future productions exemption from a rehearsal period guest performances, shooting days, etc. Speaking, body techniques, dancing, etc.

Punishment (Coercive Power)

Rejection, ignorance

In occupations, in conversations

Incapacitation

Withdrawal of areas of responsibility, of roles

Humiliation

Withdrawal of tasks, of roles

Threat of punishment

Mostly verbal: threats of non-renewal through

135

persistent humiliation, threats, blackmail; Legitimation

Abuse

Sexual abuse; violence

Position

Legitimacy of power depends on the legitimated Position

Reciprocity

Social norm of reciprocity; Giving back things, support, attention,

Compensation Identity

help Compensating (in)justice

Dependence

Legitimation takes place in balance with each other

Affiliation

To an organization or person whose values and views we (do not) share

Speaker Power

As positive and charismatic skills, convincing people to feel good about working together A sense of mental discomfort toward

Cognitive dissonance

people who share at least two or more views different from our own; not infrequently viewed by intenders as an insurmountable obstacle to collaboration (Bern)

Expert knowledge

Expertise =

Is the basis for recognition and trust or their

Knowledge, experience

withdrawal: it is an important prerequisite for

Talents

leadership.

Special skills

It can also only be based on a (controlled or constructed/staged) perception, as is so often the case in the artistic field, where leaders tend to uncritically self-stage their work.

Information

Information Power

(Added by Raven as recently as 1990)

Refers to information that third parties or subordinates need to establish themselves in the organization and within the production processes; The exclusion of information is a targeted

Integration/exclusion

Disempowerment; it serves to exclude a person from

of information

AG and information circles. Integration, in turn, can be informal or formal, signaling to the participants of the respective circles that anyone, regardless of their position in the organization, can be excluded at any time from the important information and be protected by Aspirant can be replaced.

Fig. 3.7   The six types of power in the theater. (Schmidt 2019; after French and Raven 1959)

136 Guided tour

3  Power and Organization Through influence

In the theater

Punishment/

Personal charisma

Charisma and artistic achievements of the artistic director;

reward

Expert knowledge/

reputation in the theater scene, Degree of networking and a thereby

(im/material)

information

possible assistance with the further career

Reward through

Expertenwissen/

Knowledge and mastery of the latest artistic styles and techniques to

extrinsic

Informationen

provide the ensemble with a wide range of development

Power

opportunities;

incentives

Access to the important and hot directors in the field of theater, which can be useful to the development and career of female artists at the house; which in turn results in learning effects for the individual. Granting degrees of

Degrees of freedom especially for the directors, dramaturges and

freedom and

assistants, who are enabled to pursue autonomous projects, to work

autonomy

independently on proposals for repertoire, their own productions, with the aim of their own development and visibility.

Innovation-

Support for avant-garde projects that develop artistic and technical

related

innovations, which is also reflected in the selection of innovative

support

directors.

Waiver of

Refrain from playing ensemble members off each other by

manipulation

favoritism/humiliation, Instead, transparency regarding pay, special conditions, time off and other incentive and development opportunities; creation of fair and transparent working conditions, dismantling of the Encroachment of power.

Fig. 3.8   Leadership through power and influence in the theater. (Schmidt 2018; after Krause 2004)

ate their power-based position as their own success, as the result of honest work and their own charisma. No one in the chain of command will tell them the truth. And all those who express criticism will either be ignored or even silenced, not renewed, defamed, or deranged. A number of subordinates help with this. Since theater directors master the keyboard of the theater well, they also know the means and ways to skillfully and purposefully use their tools in their interest.

References

137

Ways of Influence In her study, Krause comes to the logical conclusion that power in organizations changes and distorts the perceptions and emotions of subordinates, while good influence, in contrast, promotes innovation and can open up new options and paths for the development of an organization (Krause 2004). However, it should be ensured that the use of influence is ethically monitored to prevent transitions to an abuse of power. This is also a crucial argument for the dismantling of power from the perspective of an organizational type that, like no other, relies on artistic innovations to justify its own role, its identity, and the monthly subsidies that offset the huge deficit resulting from the small portion of self-generated revenue to cover costs. The key to modernization, therefore, lies in limiting and dismantling the power of theater directors through two measures: by reducing the management levels and the complexity of the organization. Where this is already legally possible, theaters should structurally switch to team and directorate solutions. Power is replaced by regulated influence. For cultural policy, this means having not just one, but several contact persons who significantly strengthen the theater’s external representation. The reduction is achieved through the organizational structure, which I have already explained in more detail in Chapter 2. To reduce complexity and paradoxes, the first management level is cut, and the work and task portfolio of the former “first” is redistributed to the new management team, thus—to use Henry Mintzberg’s words—the new map receives its structure, its most important sea and trade routes, and its new compass.

References Acton, L. J. E. (1955). Essays on freedom and power (G. Himmelfarb Hrsg.). New York: Meridian. Anter, A. (2012). Theorien der Macht zur Einführung. Hamburg: Junius Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (2002). Die lernende Organisation (2. Aufl.). Stuttgart: KlettCotta. Baberowski, J. (2017). Räume der Gewalt (4. Aufl.). Frankfurt a. M: Fischer. Baitsch, C. (2016). Führung an Hochschulen – Was bewegt die Akteure? PDF-Manuskript vom März 2016. Baumann, Z. (2002). Die Dialektik der Ordnung. Die Moderne und der Holocaust. Hamburg: Büchergilde Gutenberg. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1980). Die gesellschaftliche Konstruktion der Wirklichkeit. Frankfurt a. M: Fischer. Berner, W. (2018). Machtmissbrauch: Von destruktiver und konstruktiver Macht. https:// www.umsetzungsberatung.de/geschaeftsleitung/machtmissbrauch.php.

138

3  Power and Organization

Bourdieu, P. (1992). Die verborgenen Mechanismen der Macht. Frankfurt a. M: Suhrkamp. Bourdieu, P. (2001). Zur Soziologie der symbolischen Formen. Frankfurt a. M: Suhrkamp. Burawoy, M. (1985). The politics of production: Factory regimes under capitalism and socialism. London: Verso Books. Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2016). Why we keep hiring narcissistic CEOs. Harvard Business Review Crozier, M., & Friedberg, E. (1993). Macht und Organisation. Die Zwänge kollektiven Handelns. Königstein: Athenäum. Daniel, U. (1995). Hoftheater: Zur Geschichte des Theaters und der Höfe im 18. und 19. Jahrhundert. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta. Dargel, A., Kampp, B., Lamaj, N., et al. (2018). Offener Brief an den Präsidenten der Tiroler Festspiele Erl über Machtmissbrauch und sexuelle Übergriffe, vom 25.07.2018. DBV. (2018). Theaterstatistik. Köln: Deutscher Bühnenverein. de Montesquieu, C. (1994). In K. Von Weigand (Hrsg.), Vom Geist der Gesetze. Stuttgart: Philipp Reclam (Erstveröffentlichung 1748). Edelman, M. (1964). The symbolic use of politics. Urbana: The University of Illinois Press. Elias, N. (1989). Die höfische Gesellschaft. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp. Elias, N. (1997). Über den Prozess der Zivilisation. Soziogenetische und psychogenetische Untersuchungen (Bd. 2). Frankfurt a. M: Suhrkamp. ensemble-netzwerk. (2016). Newsletter 1. Oldenburg. ensemble-netzwerk. (2017). Newsletter 2. Oldenburg. ensemble-netzwerk. (2018). Newsletter Vorstandswahlen. Berlin. Faust, V. (2018). Macht und Machtmissbrauch aus psychologischer Sicht. PDF-Dok. Felgenhauer, K., & Bornmüller, F. (2018). Macht: Denken, Substantialistische und Relationalistische Theorien – Eine Kontroverse (Sozialphilosophische Studie, Bd. 12). Bielefeld: Transcript. Foucault, M. (1976a). Überwachen und Strafen. Die Geburt des Gefängnisses. Frankfurt a. M: Suhrkamp. Foucault, M. (1976b). Mikrophysik der Macht. Über Strafjustiz, Psychiatrie und Medizin. Berlin: Merve. Foucault, M. (1977). Der Wille zum Wissen. Sexualität und Wahrheit I. Frankfurt a. M: Suhrkamp. Foucault, M. (1978). Dispositive der Macht. Über Sexualität, Wissen und Wahrheit. Berlin: Merve. Foucault, M. (2005). Die Geburt der Biopolitik. In D. Defert & F. Ewald (Hrsg.), Analytik der Macht. Frankfurt a. M: Suhrkamp. French, J., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Hrsg.), Studies in social power (S. 150–167). Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research. Freud, S. (1920). Jenseits des Lustprinzips. In S. Freud (Hrsg.), Studienausgabe, Band III: Psychologie des Unbewussten (S. 217–272). Frankfurt a. M.: Fischer. Galtung, J. (1969). Violence, peace and peace research. Oslo: International Peace Research Institute. Giddens, A. (1988). Die Konstitution der Gesellschaft: Grundzüge einer Theorie der Strukturierung. Frankfurt a. M: Campus. Hennis, W. (2000). Politikwissenschaft und politisches Denken. Politikwissenschaftliche Abhandlungen 2. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

References

139

Herrmann, W. (1999). Hoftheater – Volkstheater – Nationaltheater. Die Wanderbühnen im Mannheim des 18. Jahrhunderts und ihr Beitrag zur Gründung des Nationaltheaters. Quellen und Studien zur Geschichte der Mannheimer Hofkapelle (Bd. 5). Frankfurt a. M.: Lang. Hirigoyen, M.-F. (2001). Die Masken der Niedertracht. Seelische Gewalt im Alltag und wie man sich dagegen wehren kann. München: dtv. Hobbes, T. (1651). Leviathan. Reclams Universalbibliothek (Bd. 8348). In einer Übersetzung von Jacob Peter Mayer und einem Nachwort von Malte Diesselhorst. 1986. Stuttgart: Philipp Reclam. Horkheimer, M., & Adorno T. W. (1944). Dialektik der Aufklärung. Philosophische Fragmente (erste deutsche Ausgabe 1969). Frankfurt a. M.: Fischer. Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Kantorowicz, E. (1957). The king’s two bodies: A study in mediaeval political theology. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Kernberg, O. (1978). Borderline-Störungen und pathologischer Narzissmus. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp. Kieser, A., & Walgenbach, P. (2003). Organisation. Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel. Kolle, G. (31. März 2019). Neue Akademie für Theater und Digitales nimmt Betrieb auf. Ruhrnachrichten. Kögler, H.-H. (2004). Foucaults Machtbegriff: Eine Definition in sieben Stichpunkten. In H.-H. Kögler (Hrsg.), Michel Foucault (2. Aufl.) Stuttgart: Metzler. Krause, D. E. (2004). Macht und Vertrauen in Innovationsprozessen. Ein empirischer Beitrag zu einer Theorie der Führung. Wiesbaden: Gabler. Lasser, J. (2018). Machtmissbrauch und Konfliktlösung, Max Planck PhDnet Positionspapier, August 2018. Machiavelli, N. (2014). Der Fürst. Reclams Universalbibliothek (Bd. 19258) (Übers. P. von Rippel). Reclam: Stuttgart (Erstveröffentlichung 1513). March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1975). Ambiguity and choice in organizations. Oslo: Universitetsverlaget. Matiasek, W., & Nienhüser, W. (2010). Machtmessung in Organisationen. In W. Mayrhofer, M. Meyer, & S. Titscher (Hrsg.), Praxis der Organisationsanalyse. Anwendungsfelder und Methoden (S. 155–181). Wien: Facultas wuv. UTB. Matys, T. (2014). Macht, Kontrolle und Entscheidungen in Organisationen. Eine Einführung in organisationale Mikro-, Meso- und Makropolitik (2. Aufl.). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Mintzberg, H. (1979). Structuring of organizations. New York: Pearson. Mintzberg, H. (1983). Power in and around organizations. The theory of management policy. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall Inc. Mintzberg, H. (1991). Mintzberg über Management. Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler. Möbius, S., & Peter, L. (2004). Französische Soziologie der Gegenwart. Konstanz: UVK/ UTB. Morris, C. W. (1949). Signs, language and behavior. New York: Prentice Hall. Münkler, H. (1995). Die Visibilität von Macht und die Strategien der Machtvisualisierung. In G. Göhler (Hrsg.), Macht der Öffentlichkeit – Öffentlichkeit der Macht (S. 213–230). Baden-Baden: Nomos.

140

3  Power and Organization

Nachtkritik. (2018). Tiefer Spalt. Streit an Bühnen Halle spitzt sich zu. Vom 07.12.18. https://www.nachtkritik.de/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=16178: streit-an-buehnen-halle-spitzt-sich-zu&catid=126:meldungen-k&Itemid=100089. Nietzsche, F. (1982). Aus dem Nachlaß der Achtzigerjahre. In F. Nietzsche & K. von Schlechta (Hrsg.), Werke in drei Bänden (Bd. 3, S. 415–927). München: Carl Hanser. Nietzsche, F. (1886). Jenseits von Gut und Böse. In F. Nietzsche (Hrsg.), Werke in drei Bänden (Bd. II, S. 601). Leipzig: C.G. Naumann. Nietzsche, F. (1904). Die neue Aufklärung. In F. Nietzsche (Hrsg.), Nachgelassene Werke. Unveröffentlichtes aus der Umwerthungszeit (1881/83–1888). Nietzsches Werke (Bd. XIV, S. 321–341, 327; Nr. 161). Leipzig: C.G. Naumann (Erstveröffentlichung 1884). Pfeffer, J. (1981). Power in organizations. Marshfield: Pitman. Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1974). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective (Stanford Business Classics, Auflage 2003). Stanford: Stanford University Press. Pocock, J. G. A. (2016). Machiavellian moment. Florentine political thought and the Atlantic tradition. Revised Edition (Princeton Classics, Bd. 25). Princeton: Princeton University Press (Erstveröffentlichung 1975). Pondy, L. R. (1978). Leadership is a language game. In M. W. McCall & M. M. Lombardo (Hrsg.), Leadership: Where else can we go? (S. 87–99). Durham: Duke University Press. Raven, B. H. (1992). A power interaction model on interpersonal influence: French and Raven thirty years later. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 7(2), 217–244. Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 224–253. Schein, E. (1984). Coming to a new awareness of organizational culture. Sloan Management Review, 25(2 & Winter), 3–16. Scheloske, M. (2018). Macht und Machtmissbrauch in der Wissenschaft. Spektrum – Die Woche, 44. Schmid, E. A., Verdorfer, A. P., & Peus, C. (2017). Shedding light on leaders’ self-interest: Theory and measurement of exploitative leadership. Journal of Management 45(4), 1401–1433. Schmidt, T. (2018). Elemente des deutschen Theatersystems, Essentials Praxis Kulturmanagement. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Schmidt, T. (2019). Die Regeln des Spiels. Programm und Spielplan-Gestaltung im Theater. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Schultz, M. (1994). On studying organizational cultures: Diagnosis and understanding (De Gruyter Studies in Organization, Bd. 58). London: De Gruyter. Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline. The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Broadway Business. Simon, H. A. (1959). Theories of decision making in economics and behavioural science. American Economic Review, 49(3), 253–283. Sofsky, W. (2002). Zeiten des Schreckens. Amok, Terror Krieg. Frankfurt a. M: Suhrkamp. Sternberger, D. (1958). Drei Wurzeln der Politik (Bd. 2, Ausgabe: 1984). Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp. Taylor, F. W. (1922). The principles of scientific management. New York: Harper.

References

141

Tepper, B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 178–190. Waldmann, P. (2004). Politik und Gewalt. In D. Nohlen (Hrsg.), Lexikon der Politik. Band 1: Politische Theorien. Berlin: Directmedia. Weber, M. (1922). Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Grundriß der verstehenden Soziologie. Hg. von Johannes Winckelmann (5. Rev. Aufl. 2002.). Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. Weick, K. E. (1979). Cognitive processes in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 1, 41–74. Wirth, H.-J. (2007). Narzissmus und Machtmissbrauch in der Psychotherapie. Psychoanalytische Familientherapie, 8(14), 85–98. Wittmann, E. (2017). Destruktive Führung – wenn der eigene Vorgesetzte zum Feind wird. In F. C. Brodbeck (Hrsg.), Evidenzbasierte Wirtschaftspsychologie (17). München: Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München.

4

Power and Abuse in Theater

I am NO LONGER in theatre because of the power structures, the arbitrariness, the bigotry, because of the lousy pay and the lousy pay ethics. Participant 1010

In the following section, I would like to present the essential results of the study. I precede each section with one or two selected quotes from participants of the study because they clearly and accurately address and represent the main problems of the respective research group. In doing so, I proceed systematically in the presentation of the results and follow the thematic settings. In addition to the content structure, the way the participants were addressed was also a crucial conceptual aspect. Studies of this kind can be conducted using various methodological approaches. In selecting the participants, I focused on a mix of random sampling and quota control so that each individual employee and artist from the entire population of German theater artists has the chance to participate in the study, with their participation ultimately being based on chance. The focus was on performers and artistic staff from the outset, who make up the largest subgroup with 71.5% of the participants. This group includes the least contractually protected and socially worst-off, least organized, and thus most vulnerable employees at the theater, who are most exposed to power and potential abuse of power. (Detailed explanations of the study’s methodology can be found in Chap. 5, in Sect. 5.1.) This study is not about subjecting theaters and their grievances to a general critique, although there are numerous occasions for this, as the initially identified number of crises in the past ten years clearly shows (Fig. 1.1). Instead, the aim is © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 T. Schmidt, Power and Structure in Theater, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-42280-6_4

143

144

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

to obtain reliable figures on the closely related areas of working conditions, abuse of power, and structural problems in theaters for the first time, as well as to highlight the dangers that can arise if the disproportionately strong structural asymmetry in theaters continues to intensify and is not rapidly reduced. I have already discussed the effects of this asymmetry in the theoretical part of this work, and I will continue to refer to it in this part of the work. For this reason, I will already make individual, obvious suggestions for changing and improving problematic aspects during the analysis of the results and their evaluation, which I will summarize again at the end of the chapter. The design of the study is aimed at theater employees, with a focus on the target group of performers and artistic staff. After sending the study via Facebook and email distribution lists, the study multiplied according to the random principle, so that technical and administrative staff, even theater management, participated to a lesser extent—who should not be explicitly excluded here. Nevertheless, for specific evaluations that required it, I set a filter to work out results for specific participant groups. The survey was designed using the classic survey software SPSS. The technical difficulty level in creating, completing, and evaluating is considered medium to high. The software allowed enough flexibility to adapt and evaluate the design of the complex study in several steps according to scientific standards, where I could filter for all sub-aspects, question groups, and even individual participant/ answers to track individual response patterns in the smallest detail and check their content consistency. To determine the validity and significance of the study, I checked the consistency of 100 (approx. 5%) of 1966 response patterns. The consistency result was 96% (according to Mayring 2016). The number of additional entries—mostly under the field “Other” in the question categories—was 3387. This is an average of 89 entries per question. With a participation of about 34% of the participants in this form of answering, the number of entries was 5 per participant. Particularly noteworthy is the very pleasing and grateful reaction of many participants in the response categories, that the study deals with the concerns of artists and employees and raises questions about power and abuse for the first time in the history of German and European theater. For many participants, this was associated with the feeling that there is a genuine interest in their situation and that something could change in the future regarding working conditions, which is a significant intention of the study. A total of 38 questions were posed in eight thematic groups. The guideline of this questionnaire follows a specific narrative from general to specific and personal. Similar questions are repeated with slight nuances in loops to verify

4.1  General Situation of Participants

145

or refine the results. The division of the questions into eight groups followed a specific methodological principle, which I tested in a beta test with twenty participants. After the survey of the general (complex 1) and the social and work situation (complex 2), which occupies a third of the question and answer space, I focused on the topic of general power abuse, to which I dedicated four extensive questions (complex 3). In complex 4, I move into the significantly more delicate area of physical and sexual power abuse, which has the highest question density with ten individual questions. Here, I have set the entry depth according to the current literature on this topic in the middle range. I start here with questions about the assessment of the importance of attractiveness for obtaining a position and questions about improprieties, continue to the topic of discrimination, up to potential sexual assaults in all shades and their effects. In complex 5, I return to the level of general power abuse, where I ask the participants about the success of involving committees of representation of interests. A focus of these complexes is the question of scene processes and their fragility and vulnerability to assaults, which often take place under the seal of the particularity of artistic processes and artistic freedom, and have so far rarely been openly addressed. This is not about condemning rehearsal processes, but about clarifying difficult situations with unwanted physical contacts that arise in the context of difficult working conditions. In complex 7, I address aspects of training, and in complex 8, I finally ask the structural question and ask for suggestions.

4.1 General Situation of Participants The starting point of my considerations for the design of the study was to determine the general situation of the participants with four simple and quickly answerable questions. With the initial question about the workplace (type of theater), a first classification of the participants should be made in order to specify in which segment of the theater landscape the respondents work. In the social constellation, I was particularly interested in how many of the participants, as an expression of an asymmetrical power constellation, are excessively involved in the work and at the same time are compensated with such low or insufficient financial means that they cannot establish a family or enter into other binding and permanent social ties. This may be a collateral damage of this work for young artists in the theater and society, which has not yet been identified in this form and scope, and which is accepted by theater management and politics.

146

4  Power and Abuse in Theater Artistic % employees 223 43.2

Non-Artistic % employees 50 51.5

Performers Municipal theater 313

%

Regional Theater

75

10.0

37

7.2

16

16.5

9

8,2

State Theater

126

16.8

111

21.5

15

15.5

19

17.3

STD Total

514

41.6

371

81

Management 59 53.6

others

n.a.

total

%

55

38

738

37.9

13

7

157

8.1

26

22

319

16.4

87

Don't know

6

0.8

4

0.8

4

4,1

4

3.6

6

7

31

1.5

Work freely

220

29.3

138

26.7

11

11.3

19

17.3

175

3

566

29.1

Training

12

1.6

3

0.6

1

1.0

7.0

k. A.

5

Total

757

3 38.5

519

1 26.4

98

0

87

0 5.0

110

5.6

362

33

136

0

10

120

1966

100

Fig. 4.1   Distribution of participants by type of theater and profession (2018) (Schmidt 2018)

Type of Theater Of the total number of participants, 1210 (64%) were employed at city, state, and regional theaters at the time of the survey, 566 worked freelance, and 135 were still in training; 19 did not answer the question and 31 could not make sense of the question (“Don’t know”). The distribution is shown in Fig. 4.1. The distribution of participants across 38% city theaters, 16% state theaters, and 8% regional theaters, which are collectively summarized as city theaters here, roughly reflects the reality of the relationships between the three theater groups, so there are no particular anomalies to report. Thus, the group of city theaters is well and adequately represented with a total of 1210 participants. The first surprise of the study was the high proportion of participants in freelance employment relationships, who either worked in projects of the independent scene, as guests in city theaters, or as colleagues temporarily not working due to so-called non-renewals. Since I had not specifically delimited the target group, I assumed a dispersion and that some of the answers would also be located in this segment of the theater landscape. However, I had not expected a share of almost 30% of all participants (29.1%). Nevertheless, this increases the significance of the study, which thus covers a larger part of the theater landscape. It has no influence on the quality of the study results for the area of public theaters. Many of the respondents’ working contracts are not renewed at short notice, usually in October of the season, which then runs until the end of June. The contractually fixed, so-called “showcase roles” for the last working year at a theater, in order to draw attention to oneself and apply elsewhere, often cannot

4.1  General Situation of Participants

147

be ­scheduled anymore due to the significantly earlier completed season planning processes. They are often only given by many directors if one insists on them, as the statements suggest. In addition, non-renewed performers often do not receive days off for preliminary rehearsals at new theaters, so their chances of moving to other theaters are significantly limited, especially compared to younger performers who come directly from the universities and are immediately available. Moreover, due to the generally higher salary after a few years of professional experience, there is a further competitive disadvantage for older performers compared to young performers, who almost all start with a minimum salary; the exception here is the five theaters that voluntarily pay a higher minimum salary. And finally, there is a strong preference among theater directors and directors for young talents and faces. Young talents are also trained at universities to a much greater extent than can be employed by theaters, which gradually pushes older, less flexible, and more expensive performers out of employment and out of the market. Anyone who is permanently out of the business will then find it very difficult to get an engagement again without making concessions. Family and Living Situation of Participants Only 25% live in a family situation, another 22.9% with a life partner—less than 50% of participants live in stable social structures. 32.4% of participants live alone, another 18.3% in a shared flat—which does not necessarily indicate a young age, as can be seen in the following answers, but rather the precarious income and living conditions of artists and artistic employees at theaters, who repeatedly postpone moving into their own apartment and starting a family, and relocate it to their late 30s and 40s because time, money, and the suitable partner are lacking. They can initially only afford a room in a shared flat or a one-room apartment, where they then live for many years, especially since their profession absorbs them too much to consciously and deliberately make a different life decision. Profession and Function of Participants 42.4% of participants are performers and 29.0% are artistic staff, with the proportion of artistic staff being even higher if one evaluates the proportion of those participants who opt for an alternative free answer because they mistakenly did not classify themselves as artistically employed (10.72%). Here, answers such as: director, stage and/or costume designer, dramaturge, theater educator, PR, employee of an artistic director—all of whom are artistic staff, with some of them referring to freelance work on a fee basis. Another 6.2% are students and 6.1% are management members. The proportion of administrative staff is low at 3.0%

148

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

and technical staff at 2.4%. The second focus of the study on artistic staff has thus been successful, considering that about 750 participants are performers and over 500 participants are artistic staff.

4.2 Social and Work Situation “For service over 10 h, additional hours go to a separate time account to comply with labor law.” (Participant 1625)

This section is primarily concerned with determining the social and working conditions under which theater employees work. For me, this was connected with the opportunity to create a first comprehensive database, which should also be a basis for the subsequent questions and investigations. But also to determine whether power plays a role in these areas, and if so, whether it already has noticeable effects here: Is power a factor in the distribution of fees, the design of contracts and side agreements, the initiation of overtime work and its compensation? In detail, this involves collecting information on the income situation, whether participants can actually live on their income, whether they have to take on a side job to compensate for a low income, how long the working days are, and whether overtime and weekend work are compensated. Average Monthly Income at the Theater To collect information on the income situation, I asked the participants to indicate their fees within a specific range, see Fig. 4.2. For this purpose, I made a classification: 2000 €, 2500 €, 3000 €, 4000 €, and 5000 €, to allow for a better structuring of the results. I oriented myself on the statistics of the German Stage Association and tried to specify them in order to create a realistic picture of the income situation, especially in the two fragile areas of performers and artistic staff (DBV 2018). Striking is the very high proportion of participants who, at the time of the survey (as of May 2018), i.e., before the next wage increases came into effect, still earned less than 2000 € gross, de facto the minimum fee. This accounts for almost 30% of the employees who participated in the study. In addition, there are another 10% who earn approximately 2000 € per month, which corresponds to the new minimum fee (as of 2019). From this, it can be concluded that at the time of the survey, between 30 and 40% of performers and artistic staff at theaters earned in the range of the minimum fee, with artistic staff tending to earn even

4.2  Social and Work Situation

149

Income in €

total

%

Performer %

2500

240

12.2

105

14

76

14.6

>3000

231

11.7

118

15.7

49

9.4

>4000

85

4.3

42

5.6

15

2.9

>5000

44

2.2

20

2.7

7

1.3

k. A.

248

12.5

26

2.7

15

2.9

Total

1966

100%

757

100

519

100

Fig. 4.2   Distribution of average income (Schmidt 2018)

less than performers. Another nearly 20% of participants fall within a range of 2000–2500 € monthly fee. This corresponds to a total of 55% of all participants who, with their fees, are below the average fee for performers and artistic staff at public theaters announced by the DBV (approximately 2750 €). Half of them are under precarious conditions. 

The analysis not only highlights the wage gap but also the growing asymmetry of wage distribution to the disadvantage of the groups that are worst off.

Although it is repeatedly emphasized that fees are paid and granted based on performance aspects, the crucial question arises as to why almost 57% of participants earn in the lowest range. These are exclusively freelance or NV-Bühneemployed participants. Currently, there are very few theater directors who have voluntarily raised the minimum fees for this area at their theaters (Oberhausen, Cologne, Heilbronn, Bonn, Dortmund, etc.). The other directors try to shift the problem to politics, which fails as a first, short-term step, because the directors are responsible for the wage structure in the NV-Bühne at their theater. They can redistribute funds at any time, cancel a production, or—as the Oberhausen artistic director Florian Fiedler has exemplarily demonstrated—waive part of their own fee to change the wage structure quickly (Nachtkritik 2017c). In a second step,

150

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

politics must be asked for structural increases; but this is usually a lengthy process that requires a lot of negotiation skills and patience and does not solve the most urgent problems quickly enough. Theater directors generally assert their power to control employees through the instrument of fees and income. The question arises as to why, in the last 50 years, there has never been an attempt to bring the wage level of the NV-Bühne— even just approximately—to the level of the remuneration systems of the public service (TVÖD). Instead, the gap between the personnel groups in the theater has widened with each wage increase. This structural problem, however, requires a systematic approach to politics. If one of the richest theater landscapes in the world accepts or even promotes such a strong asymmetry of payment between its employees, and if those who stand on stage night after night, and those who secure these performances through their work, are compensated significantly too low and only slightly above the minimum wage, this points to three essential aspects: • There is only a low financial and contractual appreciation of colleagues at the theaters, who are actually at the center of artistic work. • Other parts of the employees (management, technical, administration, musicians) earn significantly above the level at which artistic employees are paid and also have better contracts. • The NV-Bühne is one of the most employee-unfriendly collective bargaining system in the theater. It is telling that no reform has been planned in this area so far, especially since the directors and stage associations are not striving for an adjustment to the level of public service (TVÖD—for municipalities, TVL for federal states, mainly state theaters). 

A look at the wage levels in the various areas of the theater makes it clear that asymmetrical power relations are also woven into the theater organization through collective bargaining and remuneration/ wage systems.

It is not surprising that the most active and critical employee groups—ensembles and artistic employees—are equipped with the lowest wage levels and the weakest contract types, and are thus exposed to increased existential pressure. These conditions rarely give them the opportunity to settle securely in one place for more than two years, because as early as the following October, there is a risk of possible non-renewal if they no longer fit into the personnel and artistic concept, and/or express themselves too critically towards the management or working conditions.

4.2  Social and Work Situation

151

Special Agreements as Contract Additions in the NV-Bühne Some of the less well-off performers are lured with a provision that is referred to in the NV-Bühne collective agreement as a Special Agreement, which is intended to give artists the opportunity to earn additional income through special leave and additional free spaces for film, guest performances, or other activities. The theater system obviously relies on a sensitive part of its artists not being able to earn a living from their wages, let alone support a family—which in most artists’ life plans only starts at a later point than in other population groups. The first years with perfect health, charisma, voice (singers, actors) and body (dancers) must be used to embark on a professional path and establish oneself in such a way that non-renewal (termination) does not immediately threaten when the actress becomes pregnant and wants to start a family. It is not uncommon for actresses to report their pregnancies as late as possible in order not to be non-renewed, i.e., terminated, for “artistic” reasons. The balancing of priorities between career—wage—family—health is answered by most protagonists in exactly this order, without being able to accuse the young colleagues of excessive careerism. In a system in which—with a total of approximately 1865 permanent actor positions1 at public theaters—only about 40–50 positions become available each year due to age-related fluctuation, but far more than twice as many graduates from public and private acting schools enter the market, the question arises differently than to focus entirely on one’s career. In order to secure a permanent place in the ensembles, with the managing directors and artistic directors, during the years between 22 and 35, when the course is set after graduation. However, only about 15–20% of the female performers from today’s pool will be able to pursue a continuous career beyond the age of 50, according to a random sample study and calculation of the ensemble structure from 20 theaters. Most of them will have to expect multiple theater and thus changes of residence, in between always again gap years with unemployment, freelance projects, and side jobs to bridge missing engagements. On their way there, many of them will divert into other, occasionally even unrelated professions, start families and/or become unemployed. The view on the Special Agreements in the sample is already an indicator for this development: 47.3% of the participants state that they have contractually fixed free days to open up a second source of income and a potential second career path early on. 8.7% of the participants even decide to reduce the number of new productions per season, which can be considered an extended equivalent to the first

1 Not

included is the high number of guest actors at theaters (DBV 2018).

152

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

option. This is about being allowed to skip one to two of the usual four to five new productions per season in order to accept other projects during the rehearsal weeks—however, the evening performances in which one is cast must be played. An alternative is to use the phase of a freelance production for health, physical fitness, and regeneration, which is of particular relevance for performers in the age groups 40+ if they want to play until retirement age and beyond. After all, 44% of the participants give an alternative answer under Other. These are special arrangements, such as the rehearsal-free Saturday or the rehearsal-free Monday, or the reduction of the daily rehearsal length from eight to seven hours. Some participants note that transfer fees for double performances on the same day or for exceeding an agreed number of monthly performances are agreed upon—each additional performance is then remunerated at the rate of one or more daily fees. However, a rough calculation results in the following picture: With a monthly salary of, for example, 2700 € gross—which corresponds approximately to the average salary for performers according to DBV—this is only about 90 € for an additional performance, for which a guest would usually have to be purchased for ø 250–500 €. Here, too, it becomes clear how little the own performers are paid for additional services. The theater saves between 150 and 400 € for each transfer fee. But there are also answers that give food for thought about the state of a system that considers itself the best and densest theater system in the world and now has the status of a protected cultural monument. Participant 571 answers very precisely how the daily practiced contradiction between family and career at the theater presents itself: “Trying to work/be employed at the same time (my partner and I are both freelancers) we try to avoid, which is due to the working hours at the theater. Since we have a child together, it is practically impossible.” (571)

The following answers are also alarming because they make it clear that some directors—despite all the sensitization measures by Art but Fair and the ensemble-network—still do not comply with existing law at the expense of the artistically employed. Usually with a wink and a hint that artistic creation should not know regulated working hours and requires concessions of all kinds, as later statements show, which, mind you, belongs to the so-called Theaterfolklore2.

2 Theaterfolklore

includes old sayings and actions at the theater, which are based on a completely outdated organizational culture, and which are used primarily for the sake of internal cohesion and—not infrequently—the enforcement of the interests and power of the theater directors.

4.2  Social and Work Situation

153

“NV Bühne applies and there is a works agreement. Payment is made for service over 9 h, triple services, shortened rest periods.” (1207)

Shortened rest periods, i.e. the restriction of night rest periods to less than 11 h or the rest period between two services, are not allowed by law in the theater. Triple services, i.e. playing three performances in a row, are physical and mental extreme situations for performers. To honor only the third performance in addition is disgraceful for a publicly funded organization. It should be standard that every second performance on the same day is paid at least double the daily rate. A similar situation is this answer: “For service over 10 h, additional hours go to a separate time account to comply with labor law.” (1625)

This is an attempted cover-up and a violation of the Working Hours Act, as the daily working time is reduced to 10 h to regulate the daily workload. Here, the violation is even intensified by using an obviously “black” time account, making the employee a companion. This answer—very precise and plausible—will certainly not be exaggerated, but it says a lot about the feeling of powerlessness and the constant availability of employees who will remain on the agenda at theaters without smart personnel management and ethical organizational principles for a long time. This is also evidenced by the following answer to the question about special agreements in the contract: “None—in the KBB there is a 24/7 presence requirement, despite NV Bühne.” (766)

In the Artistic Operations Office (KBB), the workload increases with the growing overproduction. Regular working days of nine, ten, or more hours are not uncommon in the mostly understaffed offices, that are responsible for the planning of all artistic processes in the whole theater organization The situation of students in the performing arts (see Sect. 4.7) also seems to be not rosy, especially when they have to make themselves available for productions at the houses as part of so-called studio years or other forms of cooperation between universities and large public theaters: “We are advised to make sure we have one day off a week, but this rule is consistently ignored in the scheduling of the study program, so we often have 14–20 days without a day off.” (15)

154

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

Additional work services are also not compensated: “We students organize our venue ourselves, we do the technology, ticket sales, and advertising ourselves. Unpaid. On the side.” (1325)

Unfair payments in cooperations between universities and theaters have been a known problem for some time and are openly criticized by students: “Student status/cooperation with the university. Right to singing lessons. Extra salary per performance attended in the main house, not on the studio stage.” (1562)

But even on the studio stage of this very well-equipped city theater in a German financial metropolis, tickets are sold for the evening performances, and there, too, the students are required to deliver a highly professional performance night after night, which should be adequately compensated. However, the theaters often save on part of the fees, and the responsible parties at the universities have little will and/or negotiating skills and exert too little pressure on the theaters out of gratitude for the cooperation. These statements clearly show that precarious conditions already begin during the course of study. But also that the students learn to view the situation at the universities and in the theaters with very critical eyes and penetrate the real conditions of the “dream job of actor*in” (singer*in or dancer*in) not only after many years of professional life, when it may already be too late for an active change in life. It is therefore not surprising that many young alumni from acting schools are now looking for new ways of artistic realization outside of public theaters, insofar as the universities give students the opportunity to deal with these alternatives early enough. How well can an artist at the theater live on their salary today? For a better understanding of the results, I have divided the employee groups into performers, artistic staff, and employees according to TVöD (collective agreement for public service), see Fig. 4.3. 

More than half (51%) of all participants cannot, barely, or just manage to live on their income and exist under precarious conditions.

This primarily includes the performers and artistic staff, with 56.3% and 55% respectively, but also the students, who study under precarious conditions almost 100% of the time (not recorded in the overview). Considering that the salary

4.2  Social and Work Situation

155

I/ We can live on it

Performers

%

Staff

&

Admin; % Technicians

Total

In %

Not

32

4.3

20

3.9

4

4.1

115

5.8

Hardly

90

12.1

52

10.0

10

10.2

192

9.9

Just so

312

41.9

213

41.1

29

29.6

698

35.5

Sum precarious Sufficient

432 237

56.3 31.9

285 188

55.0 36.2

43 44

43.9 44.9

1005 571

51.1 29.0

Good

73

9.8

45

8.6

11

11.2

181

9.2

k. A.

13

–

1

–

209

10.6

Total

757

1966

100

519

98

Fig. 4.3   Living conditions of theater artists in D (Schmidt 2018)

structure of many artistic staff members often rises more slowly or less due to restrictive in-house collective agreements than the annual cost increase rate (inflation), it can be assumed that these results will worsen and the gap between the groups will widen even further in the coming years. Because even if the salary structures were to be adjusted in the future, income would still be missing in the household budgets of the affected employees until then, as well as real contributions to pension providers and pension funds, which have a direct impact on the later pension level. The loss of real income perpetuates itself into the future. In addition, the non-tariff salary increases for artistically employed persons usually turn out to be comparatively low because the theaters have little financial leeway and only make use of it with “applied handbrake”. The suspension of tariff increases in theaters where in-house collective agreements apply contributes to the fact that real salary increases are even below the annual inflation rate and the real income of artists thus decreases more and more from year to year. The increase of the minimum salary in 2019 from 1850 € to 2000 € gross per month for the area of NV Bühne is also vanishingly small. One-time payments do not help either. 29% of the participants can live sufficiently, but not well, and only 9% can live well on their salaries. The last, privileged group also includes theater directors, directors, and non-artistic employees in better-off collective bargaining models (TVöD). If only the artistically employed are taken into account—who are distributed among the three lower income groups, the shares in the precarious area even increase to up to 65%. If even 44% of employees in the TVöD contract area complain about not being adequately financially compensated, even though they have an average

156

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

monthly income of 500–600 € higher than artistically employed individuals, it reinforces the realization that employees and performers in the NV-Bühne living below the threshold of 2500 € monthly salary are definitely living precariously. An increase in the minimum salary to less than 2500 € does not solve the problem of salaries in the medium term. Can this serious problem be solved without forcing artistically employed individuals to resort to side jobs? There are initial considerations for this, which would gain even more with their mutual connection, and which I will come back to in the further course of the evaluation of the study results: • the reform of the NV-Bühne with a significant increase in the minimum salary, • the introduction of a binding salary grid for the NV-Bühne, • the legal transfer of wage increases to employees in the NV-Bühne, • the introduction of a uniform collective agreement, based on a uniform theater tariff for all employee groups. Prerequisites for this are a better financial endowment of theaters in the long term and regular discourse with politics and sponsors. Side jobs as an expression of a structural salary problem 

Almost 50% of all participants have to take on side jobs in order to earn a sufficient monthly income for living: from cleaning to guest appearances, from massage services to dubbing.

Artistically employed individuals are particularly affected, with three out of four having to take on a side job because their primary activities do not generate sufficient income. This high number is partly due to the nature of artistic professions, which, starting from a central place of activity, also open up additional income and impact opportunities. Nevertheless, this “urge for realization” should not obscure the fact that most of the artistically employed individuals at theaters are paid so low that they have to earn extra money in low-paying side jobs. This should be investigated separately once again. 

Not even the subsidies from shareholders and the cultural-political will are apparently sufficient today to adequately compensate artists in a UNESCO-protected theater system.

4.2  Social and Work Situation

157

The distribution is also alarming. Because salaries are often too low to fully secure the livelihood of artists, many theaters, especially young performers and assistant directors, are allowed to supplement their low wages through side jobs, by granting free days for film, dubbing, and independent projects. This results in a systemic redistribution, through which theaters relieve themselves and push their performers into additional, second and third employment relationships, even though they know and accept that their colleagues are already working too much. This is a fatal signal both to the artists, who hardly dare to ask for salary increases, and to politics, which in turn is conveyed that there is no structural salary problem at theaters. If the directors and the theater association had sensitized politics sufficiently years ago, the tariff commission would have long since negotiated different salary lower limits for the NV-Bühne—but this has so far been omitted and is still one of the safest indicators for the still too low willingness to reform of the German Theater Association. The issue of wages is significant. The individual staff groups are structurally imbalanced in relation to each other. The artist fees at theaters require an adjustment and disproportionate increase in the lower wage groups in the coming years to develop a fair structure. In the blue box, a proposal for a redistribution model: REDISTRIBUTION MODEL—Model calculation

How could one develop such a model and what could it look like? A very simple, yet effective model could consist of a progressive in-house collective agreement in which the management and the employees of the TVÖD (public services) waive wage increases for less than ten years, transfer these savings completely to the employees of the contract area NV-Bühne, and thus roughly double their wage increases. These are average values that would have to be calculated individually for each house according to the strength and average income of the respective wage groups. This could also be called a solidarity model. The salaries in the areas of management and TVöD will be frozen in year xx and will only participate in regular collective wage increases from year yy onwards. If the two areas of TVöD and NV-Bühne employees are approximately equal in strength, a period of about 10 years could be assumed. During this time, the fees in the NV-Bühne could grow from an average of 2500 € to 3500 € and reach the level of the TVöD—from that moment on, the tariffs for both groups would continue to grow equally. No single staff position would have to be sacrificed for this; it would only require the solidarity of the groups to create justice in the medium term.

158

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

This would be the fastest, cleanest, and most straightforward way to quickly bring the disadvantaged artists to a salary level that would be appropriate in relation to their education and their responsibility for the theater. It should be added that in the model, I am simplifying by assuming a stable annual inflation rate of 2% and its transfer to the employees by the shareholders. With this model, various other variants can also be developed that interfere less with the structure of the TVÖD by completely freezing and passing on the wage increases only for the management, while the wage increases for the TVÖD are split: e.g., 1% remains with the TVÖD, 1% is added to the natural wage increase of the NV-Bühne employees. This would roughly double the duration of the adjustment process. ◄ Time expenditure per working day The following results (Fig. 4.4) also provide social explosive material: 54%— more than half of the participants—work up to ten or more hours daily, 14.5% even more than 10 h daily (marked in orange in the overview), thus in a legal gray area. The main affected are women, especially assistants and young actresses, with a focus on the artistic area.

Daily Partin hours taker 10

223

144

156

125

110

45

88

70

51

145

%

14.5 85 1540 426 1966

65

70.3

56

49.5

20.3

39.4

31.4

22.9

65

890

1025

736

467

660

559

531

324

839

Other Sample None

Fig. 4.4   Participant groups staggered by daily working hours (Schmidt 2018)

4.2  Social and Work Situation

159

AVERAGE HOURLY WAGE OF A YOUNG ACTOR/ACTRESS

The average real hourly wage of a young actor/actress with a monthly salary of 2000 € gross for a daily workload of 10 h can be calculated very quickly. The monthly working time corresponds to 22 full working days of 10 h each, an average of four Saturday rehearsals of 4 h each, and 4 weekend performances of approximately 4 h = 252 h. This does not even include preparation time (learning lines), makeup time, dressing, fittings, or post-rehearsal criticism. On this basis, the real hourly wage of approximately 40% of the actors/ actresses at German city theaters is about 8 € (or less)—less than the minimum wage. Another 20% earn up to 10 €/h with a monthly gross salary of up to 2500 €. These are hourly wages that are hardly found even for unskilled auxiliary workers in the nursing, cleaning, security, delivery, or transport services. On the other hand, top salaries of over 20,000 € per month are paid to the artistic directors at larger theaters. However, an artistic director does not generate returns for the theater, for which a board member of a business company is comparatively well paid, who also bears much greater risks and liabilities. These returns ensure the company’s continued existence and future. Instead, the theater receives grants or subsidies from the public sector, with the risks being borne by the municipality or the state. Therefore, the role of an artistic director cannot be compared to that of a board member of a medium or large business company, even though artistic directors like to proclaim this in debates about their own salary increases, as the former Frankfurt and current Berlin artistic director did (FR 2012). The artistic director is an employee and cost bearer, even if they bear artistic responsibility. The artistic director’s salary is therefore disproportionately high, especially in comparison to the other, also employed staff members who also bear responsibility—sometimes more than ten times that of an artist, which harbors considerable conflict potential when the salary suddenly becomes public (ibid.).

Permanent working hours of more than 8 h per day already require approval by the staff representation or works council (§ 3 Working Hours Act). In addition, they must appear carefully and in advance in the duty schedules. According to the Working Hours Act, additional compensation in the form of free hours and days must be given for the extra work and recorded in the duty schedules, without the need for vacation slips or applications. In practice, this additional free time

160

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

is mostly not granted or not granted in full and falls by the wayside. Moreover, a balance must be established: over a period of 24 weeks = 6 months, the person concerned may not work more than an average of 48 h per week, including the Saturdays on which rehearsals are, of course, demanded. However, if the working hours of 54% of all participants are permanently more than 8 h, this legislation is also violated for the majority of artists, whose weekly average is permanently more than 48 h/week. Another paragraph regulates the already mentioned highly sensitive rest period, which must be 11 h after each working day. This is rarely observed, especially in the final rehearsal weeks when everything is demanded of the actors/actresses and assistants (§ 5 Working Hours Act). Although the rehearsal weeks have been significantly extended in the last 70 years, from two to four weeks around 1950 to six to eight weeks in 2019, this has not had a positive effect on daily working hours, which—instead of decreasing— have also increased. The high demands of artistic directors and directors have led to an extension of working hours. In the past, it was unthinkable that working hours laws would not be complied with; today, every theater manager and director firmly expects that the actors/actresses and assistants will be available around the clock and regularly give time to the theater and the director, with the assistants bearing a double burden: being present during rehearsals and organizing and planning during breaks, including weekends. The second tendency is the rapidly increased overproduction. This leads to a systematic increase in workload for all artistically employed individuals, without compensation, while the number of employees has been decreasing in recent years. An increasing number of productions is thus supported by a decreasing number of artists and staff, leading to systematic wear and tear and exploitation of the workforce (Schmidt 2016). TRENDS:

INCREASING WORKLOADS, LOW FEES, and LOSS OF SOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS and FAMILY TIES • The proportion of women increases as daily workloads increase: it is 65% for over 10 h of work time. While women are increasingly exploited, men—in relation—benefit from better working hours. • City theaters as a whole are particularly characterized by regular violations of working time regulations for artistic personnel, with participants reporting peak daily workloads of over 10 h without relevant compensation.

4.2  Social and Work Situation

161

• The independent scene is significantly less/less frequently affected, managing to better regulate working hours despite high workloads. • The main victims of high working hours in the gray area are primarily assistants, but also performers. • The longer the average working hours, the less the affected colleagues earn: There is a direct, paradoxical correlation between long working hours and low fees and salaries. Thus, there is a double exploitation, as the affected colleagues are not compensated—and therefore financially penalized—for their extra work. • Another paradox is that groups with high workloads and low fees must earn additional income externally to secure their own existence. • There is also a correlation between long working hours and social conditions: the longer the working hours, the less employees are involved in family relationships, able to meet a partner and start a family; many live alone, with their parents, or in shared accommodations. Only with decreasing working hours does the proportion of artists living in families increase, suggesting that social lifestyles can only thrive if sufficient free time is available. • Younger artists are subject to a triple burden: They earn poorly, have to work up to 10 h a day, and are forced to secure their existence through side jobs. Women are disproportionately affected by this.



The social sacrifices made by artists for their professions are in no way proportional to the low material and ideal recognition by the theaters, their directors, and society.

If politicians do not promptly propose measures to improve the social situation of artistically employed individuals, provide additional funds, and mandate that these funds are not used for extravagant artistic projects but for the appropriate payment of artists and staff and the compensation of extra work, the imbalance in theaters will continue to grow and lead to further internal corrosion of the theater landscape. Weekend Work and Compensation Directly related to the issue of daily workload is the question of weekend work. Since the theater generates most of its revenue on weekends, it is not surprising

162

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

Weekend Work

%

Compensation None

Not % sufficiently

Days off supplements

Other

Question not understood

k. A.

None

47

3.1

15

0

32

5

5

1

21

1 per month

217

14.2

120

18

63.6

37

19

12

11

Every Saturday

207

13.5

137

20

75.8

23

7

17

3

Every 2. WE

627

41.0

381

69

71.7

78

44

42

13

Every WE

430

28.1

259

65

75.3

43

25

30

8

917

173

71.3

186

106

102

48

1528

Fig. 4.5   Weekend work and compensation at German theaters (Schmidt 2018)

that regular work on weekends and holidays is part of the artists’ everyday life. However, the results must be put into context with other findings of the study, especially with the answers to the question about the forms of compensation for weekend work. Of the 430 artists who work every weekend, 278 work an average of up to ten or more hours per day, which is 64.6%, see Fig. 4.5. Only just under a quarter (68) of them receive relevant compensation (days off, surcharges, etc.). All other 372 artists in this group work virtually the entire season up to ten or more hours per week and every weekend, i.e., 10 months without rest periods. Violations of the law are part of everyday life: “After 13 days of continuous work, one day off.” (62)

The hope for compensation is usually commented on fatalistically: “The one legally free day per week is given within the next weeks.” (221)

And like this: “Days off by luck.” (1157); “Arbitrary bonuses.” (388); “Occasional expenses in laughable amounts.” (1188)

They are based on experiences made with the announcements of superiors: “If there is less going on, you can take time off.” (71)

4.2  Social and Work Situation

163

Some are not even aware of how much they are already being exploited: “As a rule, I only have to do 5 new productions per season.” (540)



The answers point to two facts:  The employees are strained, and they are only granted erratic small bonuses and compensation times for the extra work. In addition, the artists often lose sight of the magnitude of their own workload.

One sign of this is that with “only” five new productions per season—borderline enough, especially since one rehearsal phase follows the next without a break— one still feels rewarded (540), and this is considered compensation or is “sold” as such by the management. The announcement that one can “take time off” when there is less going on (71) can only be seen as pure sarcasm in view of the permanent overproduction. The point is to give the time off within a period of ten days to ensure regeneration, not to wait until there is less work. This speaks for poor management and erratic/failed planning, which is solely based on fulfilling the wishes of the director, not the biological needs of the performers and employees. 

Almost ¾ of all affected employees do not receive sufficient or any compensation for the extra work performed on weekends.

On Saturdays, regular rehearsals take place, and performances are held on weekend evenings; the next rehearsal begins on Monday morning. The hardest hit are the artists who work every Saturday and/or every/ every second weekend. Here, the values are even 75% on average. Only between 10 and 12% of the employees in these three groups receive fair compensation. Especially young artists cannot even properly classify the question of compensation because they have not been properly informed about it by art schools or theater management. By building on ignorance and not informing about what workload is permissible and what is no longer lawful, power structures are consolidated that focus on the permanent access to the workforce of employees and performers. The responsibility for this lies with managers and also schedulers, who write tight schedules in advance so that directors do not miss any rehearsal days when the artists are actually entitled to days off. 

Those who have the least power have to work the most. They receive the least compensation for this.

164

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

As creative and extraordinary as the professions in the theater are, they too must be subject to social standards and norms. In this context, theaters must enable artists to regenerate, further educate themselves, and maintain a social life without jeopardizing their careers when they ask for it. The theaters themselves must create the appropriate framework conditions, with the slowing down and streamlining of processes mentioned above, with the reduction of overproduction, with clear instructions for schedulers to generally pay attention to the artists’ regeneration phases in planning, to incorporate the legal rest days and times into the plans, combined with continuous records of actual working hours and their comparison with the duty schedules.

4.3 Abuse of Power “Job canceled after promise because the artistic director didn’t like his head director’s (lover) decision for a young man—me. A woman got the contract instead.” (Participant 260)

The third section of the question complex is dedicated to the very complex and diversified experiences that participants have had in dealing with power, abuse, and other power impositions in the theater itself. My primary concern here is to capture and analyze the participants’ own experiences and perceptions in order to gain an overview through the study of which forms of abuse of power are experienced in the theater, to what extent and in what way, how many employees are affected by this, and how they have mentally and verbally reacted to it. I compare the abuse of power experienced at the current workplace with the more extensive abuse of power throughout the theater career in order to check the results for plausibility, but also to find out the number and type of assaults that accumulate over the course of an artistic career or part of it. If one looks at the entire career or at least a larger part of it, certain negative experiences may be put into perspective if there were also alternative periods and engagements with well-trained, competent, and socially committed artistic directors and directors at the top of the theater, which may have rounded off and balanced the overall picture. Here, I am also interested in the extent to which memories of assaults and violence are still present and what weight they have in one’s own confrontation with these incidents today. In this section, I also deal with the seven subgroups of power impositions, ranging from psychological and verbal to sexual violence. I will pay special attention to the area of discrimination, assaults, and violence against women and analyze the results of this area in detail, as they are an essential core of this study.

4.3  Abuse of Power

165

Current Abuse of Power at Theaters I opened the core of the study with the question of whether there are forms of abuse of power at the house where the participants work, and how these manifest themselves concretely. The aim here is for the participants to precisely determine the forms of power they encounter and the experiences they have had with them. While the previous sections primarily analyzed various material and initial structural forms of the exercise of power (salaries, working hours, free spaces), this section explicitly deals with the crossing of boundaries and the abuse of power in the areas of verbal, psychological, and physical abuse, with the boundaries between the categories becoming fluid and blurring in cases of severe abuse, and psychological abuse in most cases also leading to physical damage and vice versa. I have depicted the forms of abuse in Fig. 4.6 and subdivided them— according to the question options—into verbal, psychological, physical, and other forms. In addition, I have applied three filters: respondents in public theaters, performers/artistic staff, and management members. 

Over 50% of all participants (56.4%) have encountered abuse at their current workplace, with the proportion of women even reaching almost 60% (59.1%). About every second one of them multiple times. Only 9.4% of all participants have explicitly not encountered it.

% Forms Assaults Verbal Psychic Physical Other Abuse Total None Abuse Responding k. A. Nominations Total

Respondents

Public theaters % Theater

% Performers/ Artistic staff

% Management

720 721 65 186 1109

36.6 36.6 3.3 9.4 56.4

488 491 40 123 763

40.2 40.4 3.3 10.1 62.8

364 368 25 100 590

41.1 41.6 2.8 11.3 66.6

30 33 6 7 46

34.5 37.9 6.9 8 52.9

184

9.4

133

10.9

102

11.5

15

17.2

1293 673 1876 1966

65.7 34.3

896 318 1275 1214

73.8

692 193 959 885

78.2 21.8

61 26 89 87

70.1 29.9

Fig. 4.6   Current presence of power abuse at German theaters (with the option of multiple mentions) (Schmidt 2018)

166

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

If the recorded 1108 cases are related to a period of about two years, then—excluding the summer breaks—over 500 assaults and about 1.7 assaults per day in the theater landscape have taken place each year, to make the number, the spread, and the latent threat vividly visible. It can be assumed that the actual number is significantly higher, especially since not all artists participated in the study. But these 1.7 assaults per day are verifiable, and they continue to occur.

Another result that was not expected to this extent: Based on the number of participants/respondents in public theaters, the target group of my study, the percentage increases to 62.8%; based on the group of artistic staff and performers, it increases once again, with exactly 2/3 (66.6%) having directly experienced abuse of power. This result must be classified as alarming in its clarity. A total of 87 management members (at all levels) from public theaters also participated in the study. These are primarily heads of departments, senior dramaturges, or department heads in an artistic staff function (operations director, chief scheduler, marketing, or PR director). Here too, the proportion is almost as high as that of the total sample (56.6%), confirming the thesis that abuse of power unfolds across all hierarchical levels and only those at the very top are immune. The struggle for recognition and reputation on the way to a leadership position is often accompanied by painful episodes in confrontation with artistic directors and other leaders, which extend into the executive suite. Numerous management meetings or discussions with directors during final rehearsals, in which artistic directors enforce their decisions through strong verbalization or threaten to terminate the collaboration if certain demands are not met and changes are not made, bear witness to this. Once the management aspirants have reached the top, this cycle repeats itself, and the acquired power is passed down from there through the various management levels of the hierarchy—area, department, and team leaders—to be secured and stabilized. It can be said that the executives of the theater experience power abuse as something normal and rehearse it daily, as something that at least every second person has consciously experienced, as the results of the study show. I will discuss this later in connection with the master-student relationships at the theater (Sect. 4.8). This means that the abuse of power has already penetrated very deeply into the organizational culture of the theater, into the management mentality, and thus into the self-understanding of the theater and its leaders. 

In future artistic directors, the self-understanding is conditioned to use power to assert their positions and interests.

4.3  Abuse of Power

167

However, this also leads to a conditioning of the few who make it to the top and who then bring the self-understanding into the management positions that the gray area between use and abuse is permeable enough to be able to play out the complete repertoire of pressure tools. The collective bargaining agreement NVBühne also belongs to this repertoire of power instruments, as it obscures the inadequate protection and the threat to the integrity of the artists at the theater. The solution here can only consist of actively disrupting this cycle, addressing toxic management behavior publicly, and initiating sanctions. The high proportion of over 50% affected testifies to an atmosphere of verbal and psychological attacks, intimidation, threats, humiliations, intrigues, mobbing, discrimination against women, and pushing people out of their jobs and existences, as the additional entries also prove. Against the background of this result, the number of artistic directors who had to resign their functions in recent years because they have exercised or tolerated power abuses and have been caught doing so (Fig. 1.1) is relatively low and testifies to the fact that this is only the tip of the iceberg, and significantly more power abuses by management personnel and directors are not discovered, not made public, and therefore never sanctioned. 

So it is no longer just about individual cases. It is about the fact that employees in theaters, especially performers and artistically employed people who are not protected by the NV-Bühne, work in an environment in which verbal and psychological attacks on the integrity of people regularly take place.

The insidious aspect of this circumstance is that the same leaders deal with artistic material and projects in which precisely these forms of power abuse are discussed and condemned: be it violence against women, foreigners, homosexuals, dissenters, and social minorities. At the theater, there is obviously a double standard. Some artistic directors and many directors rely on the belief that a lax management style and less controlled language best suit their creativity and image, in which a coarse word can occasionally occur when actors or assistants do not function as desired. A prime example of this is the former director of a large Austrian theater, who was dismissed due to mismanagement and abuse of power and is known for his verbal attacks, but is still well-connected and influential enough to be employed as a director at a large West German theater by a friendly artistic director in the 2019/20 season (Standard 2018). This example draws attention to the so-called “artistic director carousel.” Those who have once taken a seat on it move from station to station, from directorship to directorship, and in idle times,

168

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

they continue to work on the carousel with their friends as directors or in other activities to shorten the waiting time until the next directorship and financially survive. It is the principle of a barter trade, helping old “friends,” because it can happen just a few years later that one is vice versa dependent on these colleagues who may sit on an influential selection committee or jury and put in a good word, or also help out with a directing assignment to remain artistically visible and survive in the theater landscape. These leaders have never been properly and sufficiently trained to recognize that abuse already begins with uncontrolled language, which indicates potentially uncontrolled psychological and physical behavior. This early misconduct is an entry point for the abuse of power: the uncritical attitude and the self-evidence with which an arrogant, insulting jargon and a hurtful tone are the order of the day in the rehearsal rooms, corridors, and offices of the theater, and into which psychological and verbal violence fit well without standing out strongly. And when there are tears or angry counter-reactions, the supposedly immature personality of the artistic staff member or performer is talked about—but it is solely about the immature personality of the leader or director. This denounces, shames, and ultimately discourages the attacked and affected person from addressing this violation of the rules of interpersonal behavior. If it is not possible to shame someone, the threat register is opened, as the responses of the participants in the further sections will show. Then much remains hidden for many years until a group of courageous people finally verbalize the abuse of power (ibid.; Ómarsdóttir 2018; Tobler 2018a, b). It proves to be of little help that only a few artistic directors at German theaters have additional training in the basics of management and personnel leadership, a course in Human Resources Management, or at least an intensive, multi-week leadership training in which they learn how to communicate in teams and groups, in departments and companies, how to lead, motivate, and criticize—and what to avoid because it contradicts modern Codes of Conduct. How to develop guiding principles and strategies together, and distribute the operational work sensibly so that everyone experiences their share of reputation, with a decent salary and acceptable workload. The results of the study make it clear that many outcomes would have been significantly less pronounced with better training of the social and management competencies of the theater management concerned, and many an attack and some trauma could have been prevented. In the analysis, it is noticeable in this context that the cluster nepotism is mentioned as a visibly perceived transgression by 20% of the participants, making it the most frequently mentioned. The preferential treatment and the uncontrolled, often self-initiated awarding of contracts, engagements, and functions or special

4.3  Abuse of Power

169

roles to family members also falls into this category, as does the opaque decision-making by the management level, which is hardly comprehensible for later control instances—such as audits and revisions. The requirements of the audits to establish more transparency are usually not met, as they are often not even addressed in the supervisory boards and are therefore no longer taken seriously by the theater management. Some failures already begin there, in the supervisory boards, whose members are often not sufficiently trained to perform their control and advisory tasks seriously and professionally. Long-standing municipal political experience should not obscure the fact that management know-how is needed above all to be able to read guiding principles, strategies, and business plans and to assess business transactions so that the work of a theater management can be monitored and steered back in the right direction in case of problems. Nepotism, especially in the awarding of contracts or the preferential treatment and promotion of life partners, family members, and close friends, is prosecuted under criminal law and can lead to the responsible supervisory body or the sponsors or shareholders terminating or not renewing the contract. Often, such a case also follows the responsible artistic director throughout their further career, because these aspects of a vita must be clarified in every selection interview for a new position—insofar as it is used. The theaters in Switzerland do this very carefully, as the example of Bern shows, while German theaters often refrain from clarification and show little interest in nepotistic tendencies, even in the case of repeat offenders, as recently in Cologne or Cottbus (TLZ 2011; BZ 2018). Personally experienced forms of abuse throughout the career The memory of forms of power abuse is a historical category that requires constant updating and verification in order to create an accurate picture of the current status of power transgressions in theaters. This is about the experiences of the participants over a longer period of time. In comparison with the previous findings, this can provide very good insight into how current and historical results differ, what changes have taken place, and what conclusions can be drawn from them. In addition, I can check the results for plausibility and thus detect and minimize errors. The number of responses has naturally increased slightly, see Fig. 4.7, but far less significantly than would have been expected, which suggests that there has been no improvement in recent years, but rather that the abuse of power is taking place constantly. The responses confirm the high quotient of performers and employees in the total sample who were exposed to power abuse, most of them alarmingly over a long period of time and systematically.

170

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

Came in Contact with Assaults

1 Total

2 %

3 only Women

5 % v. 3

6 only Artistler*s

8 % v. 6

Verbal

738 840 122 136 49 289 1082

37.5 42.7 6.2 6.9 2.5 14.7 55.0

492 571 92 104 30 202 714

40.7 47.2 7.6 8.6 2.4 16.7 59.1

538 622 91 105 32 208 795

42.1 48.7 7.1 8.2 2.5 16.2 62.3

213

10.8

117

9.7

151

11.8

1295 671 2174 1966

65.8 34.2

831 378 1491 1209

68.7 31.2

946 331

74 25.9

Psychic Physical Sexual Other Other Total cases of abuse None Abuse Responding k. A. Nominations Total

1277

Fig. 4.7   Experienced forms of power abuse in the theater (Schmidt 2018)



8.6% of all female participants encountered sexual, 40.7% verbal, and 47.2% psychological abuse.

In the overall sample, 55% of the participants came into direct contact with abuse or were abused themselves. Among women, the number is four percentage points higher (59.1%) and affects 714 women, while among artists it increases by another 3 percentage points to 62.3% and affects 795 participants. This result structure is manifested in all individual categories. Thus, the results of the previous questions are confirmed with precision and emphasis. The result not only shows how widespread abuse is in German theaters, but also how massively women and artists—as the weakest groups in the theater—are affected by it. Above all, however, the high value of women who have come into contact with sexual abuse makes it clear in which gray area theater work is located and how vulnerable women are in rehearsal processes, behind the stage, in offices or other places. It is not only about the many women who have been exposed to sexual abuse and who must be compensated for this, but about the women who are currently and later exposed to a constant potential danger of abuse without being

4.3  Abuse of Power

171

adequately prepared or protected—if essential structural parameters of theater operations do not change soon. If a comprehensive concept for combating the abuse of power in theaters were to be developed, these two groups of people would have to be protected first and foremost, and their importance in the overall structure of the theater would have to be significantly increased. But the overall result is also overwhelming: that over 50% of the participants are affected by this goes beyond any imaginable measure and makes the urgency of the problem very clear. The frightening result in the area of psychological abuse, which, like sexual abuse, must finally be addressed, also speaks a very clear language. Based on the evaluation, I have derived the essential categories within which the abuse takes place. They range from psychological terror and bullying to instrumentalization and manipulation, to physical violence, discrimination against women, and sexual assaults. In each of these categories, I have analyzed the most significant examples from my point of view. In doing so, I arrive at 128 selected, very specific and complex cases (responses) with a high number of information to be considered here with great value content. The amount of feedback, the repetition of essential content, and the precise descriptions testify to the credibility of the statements, which go far beyond individual cases and therefore have a high relevance and underline the need for action. When looking at the individual categories, there are occasional overlaps in the classifications, especially when a response is very comprehensive and touches on various categories listed here. In this case, I decided on the classification of the strongest argument. In parentheses, the number of cases considered in my microanalysis: • • • • • • •

Psychological terror, defamation, bullying, threats (45) Mismanagement of the artistic director (12) Manipulation and instrumentalization (8) Perversion of justice and arbitrariness (19) Discrimination against women and minorities (12) Physical violence (4) Sexual assaults (23).

Verbal and psychological assaults Psychological terror, defamation, bullying, threats This category deals with a large repertoire of verbal and psychological pressure tactics that are apparently widespread in theaters. It serves to systematically humiliate performers and artistic staff by consciously selecting and applying vari-

172

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

ous verbal instruments of power in a graduated manner. The repertoire in this area is diverse and at the same time extremely intimidating when one puts oneself in the position of newcomers or those who are exposed to these assaults for various reasons, without a colleague, a staff representative, an ensemble spokesperson, or a management member subordinate to the artistic director intervening. Only the bravest would currently dare to interrupt and admonish an artistic director or a director who is psychologically terrorizing and insulting an artist, as any form of interference can lead to becoming the next target of verbal attacks. A person at the top of an organization or project that is important to someone for existential reasons will be courted rather than criticized, especially since there is an enormous structural dependency in the theater that is not easily risked. This is about a double existential dependency, on the theater as a desired or dream location and on the employment, the role, and the salary as material security. The factors of fear and opportunism also play a role. This is also evident in the analysis of the results of this study: 42% of participants suffer from psychological abuse, the number increases to 47% for women and to 49% for performers and artists, almost half of all those involved in this group. If one looks at this range of about 30 different methods and instruments of power exercise and assaults, then one must describe the theaters affected by this and reported by participants here in such a high density as currently toxic—poisonous and “unhealthy”—workspaces. 

Abuse of power is dependent on the organizational and management structure, the resulting power spaces, but also on the personal competencies of the artistic directors.

Manipulation and Instrumentalization Manipulation means exerting influence to gain an advantage or achieve a specific goal. This can also be done with the help of a manipulated person who is initially unaware of the broader goals and interests. The instrumentalization of people through deceitful and manipulative behavior for one’s own benefit is part of the disorder pattern of psychopathies and Toxic Leader (Chap. 3) and occurs in environments and organizations characterized by pronounced hierarchies and strong anxiety-ridden behavior. The fear of not being extended, noticed, occupied, praised, or loved makes people blind to manipulation and instrumentalization. Edmund Burke writes: “No emotion robs the mind so completely of its ability to act and think as fear.” (Burke 1757)

4.3  Abuse of Power

173

I have recorded these two categories of psychological violence—manipulation and fear—separately from the other forms of abuse of power in this section because they are part of a closed narrative of intrigue and corruption that we find in the theater when hierarchical positions are threatened and/or contested due to a lack of competence or aggressive competitors. At the fringes of these conflicts stand the ensemble and the employees, who must work in the midst of this mined terrain. They are virtually overrun when these instruments are suddenly directed against them. Although they have already had contact with some forms of abuse of power in acting and art schools (1028, 1235, among others), they are quickly impressed and overwhelmed by the density of psychological abuse without retreat spaces and the fierce competition among themselves for favor, praise, and opportunities. On the one hand, employees are instrumentalized against each other and sometimes even forced to eavesdrop on others (1077). This can be seen as a strategy of division and weakening of the ensemble. The frequently occurring shaming/humiliation of an employee in front of the ensemble can lead to two reactions: dissociation or strengthening of cohesion. However, since the concern for one’s own existence and career and the desire to please the artistic director as an artist remain pronounced, colleagues disassociate themselves without being aware of the consequences—that they themselves could be next. This also partially concerns the already mentioned threat to existence, which is repeatedly used as a backdrop for threats: exclusion from a core collective of “favorite” performers, non-renewal, or even the completely absurd—because legally hardly possible—immediate termination is threatened or even pronounced. It is astonishing how great the audacity of the leaders and how little the education of the performers in stage law matters, and how little they have apparently been trained or at least briefed in this at their schools, because otherwise they would be able to defend themselves much more skillfully. This can lead to forms of existence annihilation within the theater scene, which are actionable as defamation and slander. It also exists in many subtle preliminary forms: through phone calls between artistic directors, emails, conversations on the sidelines of meetings, theater gatherings, or important premieres (1858). Other manipulative means include the use of enticements and promises such as a higher salary, a contract extension, or a leading position, for which a quid pro quo is demanded (obedience, special commitment, etc.) (1882). Further forms of manipulation are the withdrawal or delay of leisure time and vacation, which constitutes a clear breach of the law, as such requests must be granted promptly so that the artist can plan (1890).

174

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

Mismanagement of the Theater Director (Intendant) Mismanagement refers to the neglect of entrepreneurial or management duties, which can be traced back to three different groups of causes, such as 1., inability, incompetence, and ignorance, or 2., dishonesty and criminal motivation, or 3., simple negligence, inattention, laziness, and/or ignorance. In this segment, the participants list more than 85 serious cases of mismanagement, which can be attributed to the inadequate training and lack of human maturity of the affected intendants, but also to the temptations of the leeway that arises from a special position of power. All have in common that the endowment with power has led to conscious or unconscious, accidental or arranged, or accepted mismanagement—the very close connection between mismanagement as an abuse of power becomes very clear in each of the examples listed. Examples of MISMANAGEMENT (INTENDANTS)

BY

THEATER

DIRECTORS

• Inability to manage staff (participant 525), to communicate with staff (47, 82, 91, 251, 730), to motivate employees and ensemble (e.g. 250, 262, 375) and to act as a role model (3, 45, 54, 82, 127, 1753), • Aggressive behavior and shouting at employees (e.g. 522, 191, 582, 559, 527, 1374), • Repeated disregard for the privacy of employees (e.g. 539, 609, 653, 747, 1010, 1077), • Indecencies towards employees (e.g. 80, 68, 1076, 1402, 1196, 1797), • Irrational behavior changes of the Theater Director (Intendant) (40, e.g.), • Defamation of employees (3, 191, 238, 660, 990, 1158), • public humiliation (e.g. 45, 54, 60, 262), • Intimidation (e.g. 119, 714, 725, 800, 831, 983, 1321, 1080, 1195, 1519), • Cynicism and manipulation of employees (676, 1141), • Setting traps (46), • Threatening termination, immediate dismissal, and penalties (e.g. 119, 714, 725, 800, 831, 983, 1321, 1080, 1195, 1519, 1897, 1912), • Pressuring to work despite sick leave (1188, e.g.), • Inability to deal with employees in a humane way (e.g. 742, 1666, 1753, 1890) and to create humane working and framework conditions (e.g. 502, 522, 559),

4.3  Abuse of Power

175

• Inability to deal with criticism (633, 647, 707, 676, 522) and to create a framework in which employees can be criticized in a humane way and can criticize themselves without fear or sanctions (46, 1912, 91, e.g.).



Theater Directors (Intendants) compensate for a lack of knowledge in management and personnel management with a “theater knowledge” that they have learned and inherited from their mentors, which, on the other hand, leads to a condescending attitude towards modern management knowledge.

Because many directors and managers still lack proper training in the areas of general management, organization, learning and motivation, personnel management, and labor law, they compensate for their lack of expertise with the specific theater-knowledge they have acquired, witnessed, and learned from their former mentor-directors. There is a misconception that a director can learn his or her trade solely in the theater, and that another director is the appropriate “teacher” for this purpose. The results of this study prove that this is not the case, and that the master-apprentice relationship model does not work for the top management level. This theater knowledge also originates from an era when people did not yet think of a modern theater in today’s categories, as human and women’s rights, forms of good conduct, ethical aspects, and codes of conduct become entrenched in society. This already reveals a lot about the suppression of a long overdue modernization process by cultural politics and the theater association. After halfhearted reform attempts in the early 1970s, the theater in Germany increasingly became a negative heterotopia in which abuses of power are tolerated, even by those who have to endure them if they want to work and succeed in the theater. Conflicts between employees and managers at the theater have existed for fifty years, with little change in density and intensity (Iden 1990). Only the forms have become more subtle. The theater also contributes little to a second enlightenment artistically. The aspects and information of a literary-dramatic art world, which the managers know from daily and intensive contact with texts and plays and transfer to the repertoire of their own life world, are predominantly shaped by the white, heterosexual, power-conscious artist/protagonist. Texts by mostly male authors with male protagonist roles are still being negotiated, dealing with power, struggle, domination, and enforcement. Women’s roles are kept small in these texts, with little sign of emancipation, neither in the texts nor in the theaters (DBV 2017).

176

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

Although there is a huge arsenal of currently over 50 female playwrights and theater literature from over 80 female playwrights of the recent past, especially from the time of Expressionism and the Weimar Republic, which have yet to be explored. This leads to a gradual loss of reality and control. Loss of reality because the signs of the times are not recognized in the slightest. Loss of control because many of the attacks described here are carried out by managers who repeatedly lose or have long since lost control; otherwise, attacks and violations of the law of this kind cannot be explained, as they are recorded and confirmed in this study. 

Therefore, it is the primary duty of selection committees for Theater directorships in the future to test candidates for management and personnel leadership skills as well as social competencies.

In many cases, the affected directors lack the important and indispensable social skills for leadership positions: humanity, zest for life, empathy, transparency, loyalty, ability to accept criticism, and integrity. Narcissistic and neurotic disorders should not be part of a theater director’s repertoire, who is responsible for the future of employees and a theater operation. Among female theater makers, discontent is growing over these conditions, as evidenced by the agenda of Pro Quote Women, an association dedicated to strengthening the role of women in directing, management, and text work, which advocates for women’s rights in theaters (Nachtkritik 2017b). Arbitrariness and arbitrary interpretation of rules Over 50% of the participants report very detailed and reflective accounts of how they themselves became victims of abuse of power. In particular, they list a wide range of forms of arbitrariness to which they have been exposed, sometimes in a traumatic way. Arbitrariness here means that decisions are made based on extraneous norms or that norms are deviated from altogether, which can be arbitrarily shifted as it pleases those who hold the power and determine the rules of the game. Arbitrariness extends to the abandonment of any rules and principles that apply to the organization or project, even to violations of law or constitution. In civil law, arbitrariness is referred to as “arbitrary decision-making freedom, as freedom for the development of personality” (Kulturkritik 2019). Arbitrariness always involves the power of the powerful, who face those without power, as is particularly pronounced in the theater. Here are the powerful artistic director— there are the powerless artists. The Theater Director has the power and sufficient

4.3  Abuse of Power

177

means so that others still follow and obey him even when his wishes and orders are arbitrary, i.e., beyond the needs of the theater or its employees. FORMS OF ARBITRARINESS

towards actors and artistically employed in the theater • Demands for unlimited temporal and spatial availability (747, 539) • Non-approval of lawful rest periods and days off (238) • Threat of termination if not performing despite illness (178, 564, 1158, 1188) • Wages below minimum wage (228, 1598) • Demand for unpaid work (355, 916, 1360) • Withholding of fees and contract signings (1343) • Unlawfully short contract durations (e.g., 10 months; 212) • Non-compliance with agreements and contracts (oral contracts; 766, 119) • Threat of termination for trivial reasons (44,119) • Termination without cause (1312), after criticism or unwanted questions, such as regarding compensation for overtime (312) • Blackmail (973, 1081) • Request to immediately seek psychological treatment (800, 262) • Sanctions for contacting the works council (1652) • Blackmail by demanding denunciation or otherwise threatened sanctions due to works council activities (1381) • Liaison between artistic director and department head leads to intrigues against the ensemble (576).

The tightrope walk between the various shades of arbitrariness becomes very clear in these examples. It is about enforcing physical availability, exploitation, threats, coercion and blackmail, and the threat of sanctions—viewed from another angle, one would read a purely criminal agenda from this list, at least with this range the power of the directors casts its long shadows and is skillfully used by them to enforce their own interests through arbitrariness. This involves the construction of threat scenarios and regular interference with the integrity of the participants. In addition, a great legal uncertainty is created for the employees, as they cannot even rely on contracts and contract components, as well as on oral agreements, because

178

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

agreements are arbitrarily interpreted or simply “forgotten” and swept under the rug when they no longer fit the current agenda. Any form of commitment is dissolved; in fact, non-commitment becomes a power-accompanying concept. This allows those in power to create a certain blurriness, for example, concerning their own competence and knowledge vacuum, which is fascinating and attractive to politicians and journalists who, for example, are responsible for the selection of a new directorship, and which is mistakenly confused with charisma and a light, casual artistic aura. Additional pressure is created through the threat of dismissals and non-renewals, which can cause uncertainty and severe psychological effects. Finally, the law is broken when contacting the works council is sanctioned, threats are made in this context, and denunciation is called for. Discrimination of Women and Minorities According to Markefka, discrimination is said to occur when individual or collective actions have recognizable negative consequences for individual individuals, which occur, “because actors have regarded other actors as unequal or inferior partners based on perceived social or ethnic characteristics and have treated them accordingly in a devaluing manner compared to members of their own collective.” (Markefka 1995 p. 43)

Due to #MeToo, attention to the violation of women’s rights through discrimination and sexual assault has rapidly increased. These issues are also relevant in the theater, especially since predominantly male directors and producers (approx. 75%) create a gender imbalance, leading to a lasting macho-paternalistic organizational culture, in which derogatory remarks and jokes about women are as much a part of everyday life as smaller and larger sexual assaults, which are often only considered “minor offenses.” Otherwise, these assaults would be pursued and sanctioned by the directors, which usually does not happen. Unfortunately, this only occurs when ensemble members turn to the press and find a hearing there, after they have already unsuccessfully lobbied the supervisory boards or cultural politics for many months. Common Forms of DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN in Theater

• General verbal and psychological violence (238, 539, 540, 959, 1564) • Jokes, sexual innuendos, suggestive remarks (68, 491, 492, 983, 1076, 1719)

4.3  Abuse of Power

179

• Touching, unwanted kisses, physical contact (39, 115, 172, 308, 1015, 1699) • Spreading negative rumors about female colleagues and belittling their achievements and person (238, 1719) • Development of a female ideal image, excluding all colleagues and applicants who do not fit this image (238, 1876) • Systematic humiliation (653, 647, 721) and attempts at control (238) • Open, choleric reactions against women (1527, 1846) • Systematic ignorance and arrogance (380, 750, 922).

After evaluating the responses, it becomes apparent that some theaters also enable and allow latent sexism and discrimination, especially against young women in their early professional years. These are women who depend on the kindness, praise, opportunities, and casting policies of the management before they can “break free” after a while—insofar as it is possible for women in theater to completely detach themselves from male attention. It is precisely in this phase of a young actress or artistic staff member’s early professional years that the risk of initially subtle discrimination arises. In this context, the boundaries between abuse of power, sexism, threatening atmosphere, physical, and sexual violence become blurred (see also box VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN in theater, see below). Physical Violence, Violence against Women, and Sexual Assault Physical violence is the continuation of verbal and psychological violence through physical means. In most cases, this is perpetrated by men against women. However, there is also a basic aggressiveness that can lead to same-sex or homophobic confrontations, which are more or less openly carried out. The aim of these confrontations is to maintain a power monopoly that cannot be defended with verbal and argumentative means alone, as the competencies, knowledge, and tools of modern communication are lacking. Johan Galtung describes violence as a moment of influencing one person by another or a group of people, so that their physical and mental realization is impaired: “Violence occurs when people are influenced in such a way that their current somatic and mental realization is less than their potential realization. […] Violence

180

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

is what increases the distance between the potential and the actual or makes it difficult to reduce this distance.” (Galtung 1975, p. 9)

Galtung thus describes the difference between our potentials and what we can actually achieve because we are impaired and held back—as children, students, young workers, and as people in society. Violence against women, which I have encountered several times in this study, carries particular weight and directly follows the previous sub-point of psychological violence against women. In a fundamental UN conference in 1995 (Beijing), a still-valid definition of violence was adopted, to which every female member of a theater can and should refer. VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN (United Nations 1995)

“The term ‘violence against women’ refers to any act of gender-based violence that causes or can cause physical, sexual, or psychological harm or suffering to women, including the threat of such acts, coercion, or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life. As a result, violence against women includes, among others, the following forms: 1. physical, sexual, and psychological violence within the family, including abuse of women, sexual abuse of girls in the household, violence related to dowry, marital rape, female genital mutilation, and other traditional practices harmful to women, violence outside of marriage, and violence related to exploitation; 2. physical, sexual, and psychological violence within the community, such as rape, abuse, sexual harassment, and intimidation at the workplace, educational institutions, and elsewhere, trafficking in women, and forced prostitution; 3. state-perpetrated or tolerated physical, sexual, and psychological violence, wherever it occurs.” (United Nations 1995)

Applying the UN definition, the number of proven acts of violence against women in this study increases, as it also includes sexual harassment and intimidation, which occur frequently in the previous subcategories and run like a red thread through the research results. In my view, these are the most serious and distressing findings of this category:

4.3  Abuse of Power

181

• Women are the main victims of violence in the affected theaters. • Women are not adequately protected by theater management, colleagues, or supervisory boards where violence prevails. • Rather, it appears that both management and colleagues and directors actively participate in it—and passively, by tolerating such incidents and not intervening to help. This also changes the tenor of the study, as I had previously assumed that power abuse was the main issue in theaters. In fact, this study shows that it is both power abuse and violence that occur in the affected theaters: • Power abuse towards actors and artistic staff, • Violence towards female employees and female artists. In the box below on VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN in theater, it is not exclusively about violence by management members towards subordinate colleagues. It also refers to tolerated or even demanded actions between players during rehearsal processes, backstage, in the cafeteria, or other places. However, it refers to a legal space in which the artistic director is the one who bears responsibility and liability and must intervene, whether in non-contextualized rehearsal and staging contexts or elsewhere. As the head of a theater, it requires a good sense of judgment, a keen eye, and an open ear to recognize these developments in time and to intervene accordingly. They require well-developed social skills, foresight, attention, and willingness to act from the management. Forms of VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN IN THEATER—INTIMIDATION and BULLYING

• Yelling, belittling, exposing, and refusing to cooperate with colleagues (191, 229, 375, 502, 559, and others) • Intimidation (1643) and threats (916) • Explicit bullying (620), slander (1858), and contempt (946) • Threats of termination and dismissal (256, 312, 599, 633, 714, 1858, and many others) • Wages below minimum wage (1120 and others) • Working with illegal, too short contracts (212 and many others)

182

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

Demand for UNLIMITED AVAILABILITY (747) • Sick performers are forced to rehearse and perform shows (178, 564, and others) • No granting of physical relief during pregnancy (80, 1519, 1565) or for young mothers (397) • Termination during or immediately after pregnancy (1519 and others) • Management’s ignorance of requests for relief (1666) SEXISM and SYSTEMATIC DEVALUATION of women in theater: • Derogatory comments about performance, appearance, and weight of female performers during rehearsals and in canteens (262 and others) • Sexist belittling of women (1908 and others) • Verbal appreciation of male colleagues’ work and devaluation of women’s work by management (83, 721, and others) • Indication of the replaceability of women (1380, and others) SEXUAL VIOLENCE against women in theater: • Verbal and sexist degradation towards women (983, among others) • Negative sexual descriptions of the female body (492, among others) • Sexual innuendos (443, 653, among others), sexual insinuations (199, 1010, 1797, among others), suggestive insults (453, 1564, 1719, among others) • General physical assaults (17, 62, 492, 242, among others) • Sexual advances and approaches within a power relationship (453, among others) • Touching and kissing without consent (39, 721, 852, 1527, among others) • Touching buttocks, breasts, genitals without consent (62, 172, 539, 1440, 1646, 1699) • Explicit sexual violence and assaults (146, 1015, 1846, among others) • Attempt to force sexual intercourse (308, 790, among others) • Assaults including sexual intercourse (1015, 1440, among others) • Job offer, role, part in exchange for sexual services (115, 187, 647, among others) • Demand for sexual availability for the artistic director (1705, among others).

183

4.3  Abuse of Power

Forms of experienced power abuse In this question, my aim was to more clearly define the forms of experienced power abuse—also in distinction to category 13—to cluster them according to new questions and to refine the results. At the same time, this is also a way to more precisely formulate the boundaries between power exercise and abuse. In this way, I seek confirmation for the previously determined magnitudes of current power abuse experienced by the participants, which has been collected with the previous questions. In Fig. 4.8 I have designed a scheme, at the center of which are existential threats that deal with exposure, increased workload, work pressure, threat of replaceability, and termination. The result is very clear: 2/3 of all participants regularly experience existential threats while working in the theater—and women are most affected in all areas. The most common form of this threat is a constant and very high work pressure, which must be maintained in order to remain visible and secure a safe place in the ensemble or as a guest. Between 52 and 58% of participants in the three groups are affected by this, which is accompanied by over 33% with many unpaid and often unrecorded overtime hours. Common forms are exerting pressure through constant references to replaceability and impending non-renewals, i.e., the game of artistic directors with existential threats.

Self-experienced abuse by

Number % 29.8

There of women 380

Public exposure

586

High working pressure

1021

Unpaid overtime

% 31.4

Of which female artists 414

51.9

667

32.4

55.1

745

658

33.4

58.3

459

38.0

480

37.5

Threats of replaceability

476

Threat of nonextension other

298

24.2

317

26.2

352

27.5

15.2

198

16.3

231

18.1

111

Affected

1286

5.6

70

5.8

80

6.3

65.5

827

68.4

939

Not affected

101

73.5

5.1

54

4.5

71

5.6

1387

70.6

881

72.9

1010

79.1

No answer

579

29.4

328

27.1

267

20.9

Total

1966

100

1209

100

1277

100

Fig. 4.8   Existential threats and power abuse (Schmidt 2018)

%

184



4  Power and Abuse in Theater

The high work pressure and the high number of unpaid overtime hours further increase the work performance that artistic staff and performers at the theater provide for low pay.

The other result concerns the psychological aspect of threats and blackmail. The number of affected participants is about 50% of the total sample. Here too, these are not isolated cases, but a significant proportion of colleagues and theaters affected by this. 

Only 5.1% of participants—that is, only 1/20th—are not aware of any existential threats.

At this point, the question must be allowed as to why theater management is unable to stop, minimize, and prevent this form of power exercise. In my view, there are two preliminary answers: • The structures and organizational culture of the theater do not allow this because the director model would otherwise not be permanently maintainable. • The directors and the sponsors of the theaters are unable—out of ignorance or unwillingness—to use appropriate personnel policy instruments, for example, through motivation, conversations, moderation, mission statements, strategies, goals, and career planning to develop a communication and decision-making culture in which abuse of power and psychological as well as physical exploitation and violence are neither possible, “necessary” nor meaningful.

4.4 Sexual Assaults “No sex, no further cooperation.” (Participant 1598) “This is our fresh meat. When you are introduced to financiers or Thalheimers.” (Participant 1222)

In order to more precisely capture and analyze the aspect of sexual assaults, I have developed a series of sub-aspects to be examined for this purpose: • Forms of experienced indecencies • Preference for specific attractiveness features in castings and/or in the selection of candidates for open positions (discrimination) • The offer of positions, engagements, and roles in exchange for sexual services.

4.4  Sexual Assaults

185

Forms of Indecencies in Theater Innuendos, see Fig. 4.9, are the entry point into the realm of sexual abuse and violence against women and minorities. In doing so, a person who is higher in the hierarchy or work processes, more influential, or physically stronger makes it clear that they have the power to express themselves—usually with impunity due to their position or strength—in a suggestive, derogatory, insulting, demanding, sexually charged manner. The evaluation of the questionnaires in this segment leads, among other things, to the following results: • Approximately 33% of the participants were affected by innuendos in various forms, with this figure being over 50% for artists.

Experienced Insinuations

Quantity

%

Women

Yes, could not resist it

144

7.3

117

Yes, have tried to do that and to cover it with a joke

450

22.9

364

Artist

%

9.7

117

9.2

30.1

348

27.2

Yes, I have forbidden myself

204

10.4

157

13.0

160

12.5

Yes, have received support from colleagues

100

5.1

81

6.7

71

5.5

Yes, NO support Received from colleagues

120

6.1

97

8.0

93

7.3

Do not find that so bad

167

8.5

93

7.7

120

9.4

My perception is changing

335

17.0

212

17.5

249

19.5

Other

81

4.1

39

3.2

55

4.3

Subtotal (Yes)

998

50.8

605

50.0

743

71.3

No

423

21.5

192

15.9

299

28.7

Subtotal

1421

72.3

797

66.0

1042

81.6

No answers

545

27.7

412

34.0

235

18.4

Total

1966

100

1209

100

1277

100

Fig. 4.9   Forms of innuendos in theater (Schmidt 2018)

186

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

• 7% of the participants (in total) and about 10% of the female participants could not defend themselves against these innuendos because they were either completely unprotected and exposed, received no help, or were cornered. • 6% of the participants (in total) and 8% of the women did not receive support from their colleagues in this context. In theater, innuendos unfortunately still belong to everyday life in rehearsal processes and canteen conversations. As an excuse, one hears the folkloristic argument: “It has always been like this in theater” when addressing colleagues about why they express themselves in a derogatory and suggestive manner, especially towards women. The paternalistic culture is inflated here—and in other contexts—into an untouchable grail that must not be questioned. It is confused with a good organizational culture of the theater. However, the folkloristic elements are nothing but ugly accessories. The fact that these innuendos continue to a relatively high degree and are tolerated today is due—where this occurs frequently— to the inability of the respective leaders to perceive or want to perceive this, to react to it or to refrain from it themselves, but also to the still insufficient perception among colleagues that such innuendos already cross boundaries and that urgent intervention is needed here. The fact that 17% of all participants admit that the perception of innuendos, assaults, and abuse is currently changing indicates a process of sensitization and change that is taking place. This change could lead to a profound transformation in the future handling of these issues, which could later also positively influence the other grievances recorded in the study and help to eliminate them one day. I would like to draw special attention to a grievance because it clearly illustrates the often unbearable situation for women or young colleagues. This is the still very high proportion of those affected who complain that they receive no help from their colleagues. This could be described as cowardice, fear, cronyism, or failure to provide assistance if the situation were not so complicated. If colleagues are not helped, there can be various reasons. One main reason is that the perpetrator is usually a person in a leadership position or a colleague in a prominent position, against whom one does not dare to take action for fear of sanctions. Group dynamics, which arise in the theater, especially in staging processes, quickly lead to pack formation with leading figures, false solidarity, and too rapid subordination under the Leading Agents, especially under the artistic actors who have power within these processes—directors, set designers, department heads, choreographers, musical and choir directors, and the “leading animals” of the ensemble. A new actor, not yet established in the group, will want to orient themselves first before they can even develop the strategy and strength to

4.4  Sexual Assaults

187

resist or escape an unknown, sometimes even dangerous group dynamic. Older performers can bring their status and experience into play more effectively. But they also know that career opportunities tend to decrease with each passing year. No one wants to jeopardize their own existence with reckless reactions, and therefore, unfortunately, one will have to carefully weigh the chances of success and the possible side effects of interventions of this kind. This shows how excessive and uncontrolled power under asymmetric structural conditions and the associated great dependency leads to unintended opportunism among those who do not want and cannot put their social and professional existence at stake. And it is precisely this lever that leaders use when they deploy their innuendos coram publico and continue undisturbed, as long as the power relations in the theaters are not restructured. 

An organization like the theater, characterized by power and potential arbitrariness on the one hand, and existential fear on the other, has negative effects on young actors, artistic achievements, and the internal cohesion of the entire organization if the theater directors do not act carefully and respectfully and base their decisions on a fair and ethical foundation, beyond all private particular interests.

A director or a staging artistic director still expects absolute loyalty and subordination in staging processes. This, too, is an outdated principle of the so-called theater folklore and the artistic director model. Innuendos with a psychological background not only serve to degrade the embarrassed person but also to fuel group dynamics and strengthen one’s own position by highlighting one’s own inviolability, alternatively one’s own masculinity, sexual potency, radicalism, etc. This is a big mistake because, of course, directors and artistic directors are always vulnerable and condemnable in the case of such derailments, which will certainly increase in the coming years, following the successful “disempowerment” of artistic directors in Gera, Cottbus, Erl, Schwerin, Vienna, and Bern, to give examples of the fearlessness of ensembles and supervisory bodies. In other places, such as Halle or Darmstadt, this has not yet been possible due to the protection of the leaders by politics. Here, the courage of the individual, but also of the group, was and is the only instrument to address and prevent these forms of power abuse at an early stage before they become entrenched and self-perpetuating. Attractiveness An important factor in evaluating people in performing professions is the attractiveness of the person. There are both universally valid and highly individual

188

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

attractiveness patterns that are preferred by decision-makers. These are normal processes that we are subject to in almost all areas of life. A distinction is made between physical attractiveness, which is meant in this survey, and interpersonal attractiveness, which arises in affective relationships. The background for the preference of attractive people on and behind the stage is the transfer of societal patterns. Attractive people are attributed positive characteristics and competencies that supposedly unattractive people should not have. This is exemplified by the “What is beautiful is good” effect identified by Dion et al. (1992), which people who do not have professional distance to the other person quickly adopt (Dion et al. 1992). The study aimed to find out whether appearance characteristics influenced the selection for an engagement, a role, a job, a promotion, or preferential treatment (salary increase, vacation, days off, contract extension, etc.). These are assessments based on the personal experience of the participants. From the perspective of some actors, the preference for attractiveness in the theater seems to be a matter of course that corresponds to common ideals and organizational culture. One hears sentences like, “An actress must be beautiful and feminine” and “An actor should meet the ideal of an attractive or interesting man”—whereby this differentiation is already discriminatory. However, beauty and attractiveness do not necessarily guarantee a good performer, and attractiveness does not equal attractiveness. Much is subject to the taste and subjective assessments of theater directors and important directors at a theater, which means that all people who do not meet these attractiveness patterns have much worse prerequisites for an engagement or employment from the outset. Any preference for a supposedly attractive or more attractive person is therefore discriminatory, unjustified, and not permissible because it only seemingly excludes less attractive people who could perform the tasks just as well or better. The need for action is evidenced by numerous statements in the sample: “Appearance definitely plays a role, and I have often had to observe how girls with many charms and a high voice and submissive gaze had more chances than women who look directly into your eyes and do not always put their sexuality and appearance in the foreground. I find this very unfair.” (Participant 926) The results can be summarized as follows: • • • •

26.6% of participants definitely assume so. 14.6% answer: “This is normal in the theater.” 16.7% give very differentiated but affirmative answers to the question. 39.3% deny that attractiveness plays a role here.

4.4  Sexual Assaults



189

60% of participants affirm that attractiveness is an important and often decisive factor in the selection for roles and engagements.

The fact that attractiveness obeys a subjectivity that has little to do with the criteria of artistic quality and professionalism is regrettable for modern theater. For the preferences associated with it have no place in professional life and in the theater. Even though the—extremely subjective—attractiveness of performers and singers seems to play a significant role in the image of the theater, it must never be the deciding factor in hiring or the distribution of roles (Six 2018). And above all, it must not lead to equally or better qualified applicants being disadvantaged. Competence, qualification, and ability should still be the most important factors in the selection of applicants in professional processes and contexts. In the theater, this is a tightrope walk that requires great sensitivity from the leaders to judge and select accurately. The numerous, very alarming individual responses from participants, who, for example, speak of a desired fuckable factor (840) of the actresses, testify to the need for action: THE WISHES AND FANTASIES OF THE THEATER DIRECTORS

Much of this comes from the wishes of the directors, who make little secret of their preferences and fantasies and do not skimp on forced compliments: • “The system is based on a kind of fuckable factor. It’s just a shame that everyone is into cheap sex and doesn’t want to go deeper.” (840) • “[…] I have often had to observe how girls with many charms and a high voice and submissive gaze had more chances than women who look directly into your eyes and do not always put their sexuality and appearance in the foreground. I find this very unfair.” (926) • “[…] Blondes preferred” (156) • “Boss loves redheads—often a hiring criterion for actresses” (496) and “boss’s prey scheme” (636) • “[I] was also replaced by a friend of the boss.” (794) • “The director once told me that I not only do great work but also look great.” (491) • “Costumes that show a lot of skin.” (1091) • “Young age important for women, that they have no body hair, long hair, breasts are squeezed up in costumes.” (1380)

190

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

Female directors are no different from their male colleagues: • “At auditions, I repeatedly observe how inappropriate discussions about external points also take place (also on the part of the female boss).” (1565) The Criterion of External Attractiveness in Theater The individual responses make it clear that in the affected theaters, not only is preference given to the private preferences of the management and directors, but a sexist and discriminatory view often comes into play when assessing abilities. These theaters are obviously moving precisely in the mainstream of youth and beauty obsession, which they would like to counteract with their verbal insults. One wonders how this can succeed if things are so unfair behind the scenes. This is also an indication that the management at these institutions does not properly understand their tasks and does not sufficiently know or take into account the usual instruments of working with personnel, but instead replaces them with dangerous misinterpretations. Because voice, portrayal, facial expressions, and style have nothing to do with appearance and primary attractiveness— as evidenced by outstanding singers with disabilities or performers who do not conform to a classic beauty ideal. There are many examples of such individuals who have prevailed against the sometimes simplistic mainstream thinking of some directors. EXTERNAL ATTRACTIVENESS and DISCRIMINATION OF OTHERS

In the theater, selection is also strongly based on external attractiveness, which must be accompanied by a pretty face and slim body: • That “slim, non-disabled competitors with little experience” are already preferred for internships (82) • “Offers increased with decreasing body circumference (42 → 40; 38 → 36)” (229) • “When it came to my successor, some applicants were already considered ‘too ugly for marketing’.” (298) • “I think I would have had far fewer career opportunities if I had been uglier.” (549)

4.4  Sexual Assaults

191

• “I often experience the distinction between the difficult types and the beautiful, slim actors* who can be cast for everything.” (1421) • “I didn’t get many jobs because I’m not ‘classically’ beautiful.” (1519) • “Just look at the ensembles. All beautiful people who mostly correspond to the ideal of this sick society… especially among us women. And if you play against it, you’re either brave or a freak…” (1484) • “The audience wants to see a certain attractiveness on stage.” (1083) • “We are all relatively young and good-looking.” (1599) The play with ATTRACTIVENESS is linked to subtle DISCRIMINATION against PoC or homosexuals: • For example, it is pointed out several times that “foreign-looking” applicants for vacancies in the acting ensemble “were already sorted out based on their application.” (39) • “I have experienced that, for example, a People-of Color colleague of the same age always only got the small roles.” (1719) • “I am small, delicate, and Western European, of course I had many more chances than my Persian, chubby fellow student, unfortunately.” (1451) • Bringing along a “supposedly heterosexual charisma [is] very desirable.” (49)

AGE DISCRIMINATION:  In the theaters, an army of young graduates and beginners faces a small number of older character actors, many of whom are only employed as guests. • “My age, my position, and my appearance determine whether I am invited to audition.” (658) • “Younger colleagues are regularly publicly praised for their appearance, not for their achievements.” (973) • “Too small ensemble, no room for character faces.” (987) Also a statement like: “This is our fresh meat. When you are introduced to donors or Thalheimers” (1222),

192

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

The fact that it comes from the ensemble of a former Frankfurt, now Berliner Ensemble Theater director shows how a director markets the skin of his young actresses to satisfy his sponsors and star directors. This alone speaks for the arrogance of the powerful, as it shows how young actresses in particular must feel when they are passed around and displayed by the artistic director, feeling like “fresh meat,” as described by participant 1222. In doing so, the director offers his actors and actresses at extra events for the acquisition of sponsors and thus demands services, appearances, and presences in private houses and villas that are not covered by the performance contracts. These are by no means small advertising measures that are allowed in the contract, but rather larger special appearances outside the contractually agreed locations (theater and theater spaces), which should also be financially compensated, especially since revenues are generated at these events. Fortunately, there are now more and more actresses who not only complain about the role schemes but also about the incompetence of their artistic directors. They demand more flexible thinking and not always casting the same women for the same female types, or. “for the sexy lady who, in every production, spreads her legs in front of the main actor in some way, which of course she doesn’t like either. Ergo: If you are hired for a female type, you won’t get rid of it for a while.” (238)

It is regrettable that, in addition to the discrimination of “non-classically” attractive people, there is also the discrimination of People of Color (PoC) (39, 1491, 1719, and others) and disabled people (82). The discrimination of people from other ethnic and cultural groups can also be proven here in isolated cases. Much deeper are the unconscious prejudices that lead to PoC being disadvantaged and, as the statements say, overlooked, sorted out, not invited, or only cast in small roles. I will discuss this in more detail in Sect. 4.8, with very clear examples. This also contradicts what is publicly demanded by the artistic directors in theaters and from the outside—that our society must open up to people of other cultures. This Janus-facedness, not ensuring openness and equality in one’s own institution but demanding it from society, is a dilemma that accompanies the evaluation of the entire study. Roles, Engagements, and Fee Increases in Exchange for Sexual Favors 121 participants report having provided a sexual favor for a role, directing work, engagement, or fee increase. In this context, 284 offers were made, as shown in

193

4.4  Sexual Assaults Number

%

Theater Director (Intendant)

85

30

Scenic Director

100

35.2

Musical Director, GMD

22

7.7

Chief Dramaturg

19

6.7

Administrative Director or similar.

13

4.6

Other line member

45

15.8

Total

284

100

Fig. 4.10   Initiators and Perpetrators of Assaults (Schmidt 2018)

Fig. 4.10, predominantly by artistic directors and directors. The proportion of men among those who made such offers or carried out assaults is 96.5%. It is alarming that 30% of sexual offers and assaults are made or carried out by artistic directors themselves. The number of 85 cases is very significant because it shows that this is not an isolated incident, but rather a widespread phenomenon at a good three to four dozen theaters. At theaters where such cases go unpunished, an automatically expanding lawless space will emerge, which is ethically indefensible. In addition, there is the high proportion of directors, but also musical directors, who systematically destroy the trust and integrity of the artists entrusted to them with their assaults. Strategic consideration should be given to systematically training directors and management members in this area. In the future, it should also be avoided to select exclusively directors for the position of artistic director, as they are highly likely to continue or tolerate such behavior at the management level, with even more power and an even greater sense of entitlement. Furthermore, ombuds- and counseling offices with psychologically trained colleagues should be set up for those affected, where they can turn to anonymously and receive advice on how to proceed and how their own self-healing process can take place in a protected environment. This can be external experts or specially trained, discreet employees of the human resources department, production managers who closely oversee the staging work, or members of the staff representation. This is possible when the pressure from management on these individuals is completely removed. The examples of the function of interest representation (Sect. 4.5) still to be analyzed, however, clearly show how high the pressure and how strong the interference of

194

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

artistic directors is when they feel threatened in their supposed “infallibility,” and how strongly the effectiveness of these representations is thus impaired. Sexual Assaults In recent times, 184 sexual assaults have been recorded at various locations both inside and outside the theater. According to the results of the study, 9.4% of all participants were affected. The ranking of locations is of particular importance: 57 assaults took place on stage or during rehearsals (31%), 50 in the canteen or a bar (27%), and 10 in the dressing room (5%). Even more problematic are these assaults when they occur in the office of the artistic director or other management members, with a total of 23 incidents (12.5%), in their apartments (19 incidents), or in a specially rented hotel room (9 incidents). The aforementioned locations are closely related to the artists’ work and thus serve as a kind of sanctuary; at the same time, these places are also manifestations of power. Canteen, pub, bar, and even the dressing room are classic locations for sexual advances. However, if an artistic director or a director assumes that a sexual advance in a pub or a bar has an off-duty character—as it repeatedly happens—, this is a misconception. Regardless of the spatial context in which a sexual advance in this constellation takes place, it refers to an interaction between people in a strict organizational and disciplinary relationship, which, for ethical reasons and above all for legal reasons, must not cross the boundary to sexual advances. Legally, assaults in hotel rooms and apartments are treated and sanctioned even more severely because they can be derived from facts that have demonstrably been planned, thus carrying an intentional character, and which can no longer be attributed to any kind of spontaneity in the situation. The stage and the office are the classic power spaces of the Theater director, the managing director, and other management members. From the stage or the office, the director controls and directs the house, and from here, the director— on their behalf—sets up a production over a period of 6 to 8 weeks. The office is a place for confidential conversations or negotiations. Even the slightest verbal assault is legally questionable here, as it not only interferes with the integrity of the other person but also disturbs the character of a protected space and tears down boundaries. What may no longer be considered a mere peccadillo (indiscretion) on the rehearsal stage, even in the heat of rehearsals and against the backdrop of the apparent equal footing between the artistic director and the performer, is already ethically and legally reprehensible in the office because the situation is hierarchical from the outset and the framework points to the special formal situation. These spaces must be protected for employees.

4.4  Sexual Assaults

195

Reactions of Employees and Managers The reactions of employees and performers affected by role offers and engagements in exchange for sexual favors are very diverse. In the case of 21 participants who consented to the offer, explicit sexual acts occurred (Appendix 5). The statement of 7 participants that they had no other choice because they needed the role or the job, and that of 10 participants that they could no longer influence the decision to have sex, are clear signs that at the moment of the offer, many obviously had no freedom of choice, especially since the psychological pressure was above average to weigh the existential security and improvement of their own situation associated with the offer against the constraints and consequences of a possible rejection. It must be said at this point that, above all, young actresses were sexually exploited in a dehumanizing way. The perpetrators were aware of the victims’ existential situation, and the assaults were thus well calculated by them. It can also be assumed that a further part of the participants refrained from describing their experiences here out of shame and fear. Some additional participants have elaborated on the aspect of very limited freedom of choice, which helps to better understand the situation. When employees reject the advances of their managers, the latter usually react harshly and unprofessionally—as a further expression of the structural power imbalance that prevails between them. Reactions range from breaking off contact (participant 658) and ending collaboration, to constant ignoring, withdrawal of offers (542, 1230, etc.), non-renewal (922), and constant bullying (1493), even to stalking and psychological terror (1885), an immature and inhumane reaction of wounded vanity that should be exposed immediately due to its high toxic potential—if only to protect subsequent generations of artists from advances and assaults. In some cases, they do not even shy away from putting an unwilling participant on a so-called blacklist (905), which usually goes hand in hand with an employment ban at the respective theater and active non-recommendation when other houses and directors ask for an assessment. Careers are destroyed simply because an individual, from his omnipotence, presumes he can vent his sexual desires on his employees and punish them at will for non-consent without being held accountable—which has been the case so far. In particular, the combination of sexual assault, bullying, and psychological terror demonstrates a weak sense of responsibility and reflection on the part of the affected managers regarding the consequences of their actions and the violation of trust and integrity of the employees entrusted to them. It also shows general irrationality, strong drive control, and low sovereignty, which is why it can be concluded that the perpetrators are hardly suitable for managing a theater and its staff.

196

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

But once again: this is by no means the majority of directors, but a small, yet dangerous group that causes great damage and knows how to hide well, and exposing and removing them from their positions should be a top priority for the Theater Association with the support of politics and ensembles. The Theater Association should actively encourage ensembles to be courageous and report any form of assault to the THEMIS trust center. Otherwise, the fact that these directors can continue to pursue their activities protected under the roof of the Theater Association leads to a lasting damage to the public German theater landscape and its legitimacy. Not only that: The path to a creative and trusting artistic collaboration, which enables artistic excellence, remains blocked. REACTIONS OF DIRECTORS after REJECTION of their ADVANCES:

• “Deterioration of the working atmosphere in the ongoing production./ No recommendation/no longer occupied.” (Participant 223) • “I left in front of my hotel, after auditioning, the artistic director accompanied me, I was supposed to join the ensemble, after that he never contacted me again…” (371) • “[…] did not accept the sexual offer, and did not get the guest engagement.” (542) • “I accepted another engagement at the same time, so the issue was off the table.” (539) • “Breaking off contact.” (658) • “With the consequence of not getting a role. Put on the blacklist.” (905) • “I was not extended as a set design assistant because I did not give in to the advances of the boss.” (922) • “Did not get a contract. Never heard anything again.” (1230) • “[…] declined, with the consequences of constant bullying during the rehearsal period.” (1493) • “Ignored during the rest of the rehearsal period.” (1530) • “No sex, no further collaboration.” (1598) • “Stalking, psychological terror.” (1885)

The reactions of the participants who accept such an offer are very different. They range from a certain vanity of being chosen, to self-evidence or disillusionment, to the sober realization of subsequent career damage, which can never be ruled

4.4  Sexual Assaults

197

out even when consenting to sexual acts. However, it can be assumed that artistic directors, who are often trained directors, know exactly which psychological means can be used to manipulate people and elicit feelings that facilitate a sexual encounter. In the present case, the participant develops a specific explanatory pattern to maintain their own integrity: “I accepted the offer because my professional qualities were also appreciated. I cannot remember ever getting a job offer from a man without sexual attraction playing a role. You have to be everything, right?” (1527)

In the second sentence of this statement, it becomes very clear what could be summarized under this section: The disillusionment that sexual attraction is as much a prerequisite for a job and role offer as professional artistic skills, and that the boundary violation resonates, whether it occurs or not, because the selection is subjective and can or does take place according to sexual criteria. For those affected by sexual assaults, there is often no choice. Completely disillusioned is a participant who consented to the sexual activity and now wonders what choice they actually had left: “How can one know how it would have gone if I had reacted differently?” (1349)

It is not certain whether giving in also ensures lasting success, as the following participant describes: “I got involved because the ‘person’ had courted me for a long time, and… oh, who knows? After the first sexual intercourse, he ended it and since then I have only had difficulties in the ensemble.” (1519)

In principle, this statement opens up the view to the great dilemma of female artists: to behave correctly towards offers and advances without jeopardizing their own integrity and mental well-being, while considering the possible negative consequences of consent. Many directors live in committed relationships and are not looking for a love affair, but solely for sexual validation. Of course, there are always examples of female employees who are “chosen” by their artistic directors, made partners, and excessively protected at their own theater, with some being promoted to lead actress, others to head of communications, and still others to curator, receiving the status of a partner—which then corresponds to a form of nepotism not allowed in theaters, usually discovered far too late or never by

198

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

supervisory boards, as in Bern (2018), which led to strong reactions from the chairpersons of the foundation board and the dismissal of the artistic director. The situation becomes problematic in the case of a breakup. As a rule, the affected artist becomes a burden after the affair has ended, as a constant reminder or even as a threat, which can lead to the situation deteriorating even more than it might have in the case of a clear or skillful rejection. Whatever the employee decides, there is a risk of being doubly damaged when the eye of the artistic director or the director has fallen on her. But there are also participants who—with the support of friendly colleagues— were able to successfully defend themselves, with clarity, cunning, or feigned naivety. The intrusive offers have taken place, that is a fact, but the defense strategy was so successful that the powerful artistic directors were momentarily irritated and let their victims go. This includes clear addressing (1215), excuses and humor (1207, 1198), and encouragement from a colleague to take action against blackmail: “When I heard about an unbelievable blackmail by an artistic director against a colleague, I strongly encouraged her to defend herself.” (712)

Reactions of artistic directors and directors to a rejection In a further question, I asked to assign within predefined categories which reactions the rejection of a sexual offer provokes. Here, the reactions shift to two levels: • the material action with the corresponding existential consequences for the colleague, which consists of the withdrawal of promised roles and engagements (28%) and non-renewals (8.9%), and • the immaterial level—in systematic damage to reputation, by publicly doubting the artistic excellence (16.5%) and loyalty (14.2%) of the colleague, which can have long-term existential effects because it is accompanied by aggressive communication and dissemination of these doubts in the manageable theater scene. Social rejection can lead to rash actions in less stable personalities because the affected individuals often associate the rejection with a reduction in their selfesteem and try to compensate for it. People who are very inflexible in their thinking can cope with this the worst and usually commit the most resentful actions (Dweck and Howe 2015).

4.4  Sexual Assaults

199

Although almost every artistic director in Germany has a certain reputation regarding their artistic work and collaboration with colleagues, and in the course of this communication the so-called “black sheep” are very clearly filtered out, whose theaters have no priority in the application phases, this attitude usually changes for existential reasons when there is a corresponding job and financial offer for an engagement or a role. However, very few employees have the opportunity to study the psychological profile of their future artistic director before starting an engagement, especially since they may be trained as a director or actor and possess the skills of disguise and charm. Usually, the first incidents occur during the course of the season anyway. It is recommended for the performers and employees to immediately disclose any incident within the team, discuss it together, and seek psychological advice in case of doubt when classifying specific behavioral patterns. Disclosure is a tool that can work well, even with directors who are new to the theater and start to act inappropriately, quickly grounding the dream of an equal artistic collaboration at eye level. Even if it is associated with shame, it helps oneself and others to protect themselves so that these events do not repeat and the work processes and the entire organization are not successively destroyed from within. In 41 cases listed by the study participants, a rejection led to the artistic director or management member making derogatory remarks about the respective artist outside the theater, which immediately resulted in engagements and role offers being canceled. Another 176 participants report that they have learned from their environment that artistic directors have made derogatory remarks about them following their rejection when there were inquiries from other theaters where the artists had applied. The additional answers from the participants in the field Other focus on three areas following a rejection: • Mobbing and sabotage of collaboration (6 entries) • Defamation, including insults (“Frigid”, “Bitch”, “Lesbian”, “Feminist”) (7 entries) • Destruction of career (7 entries). A statement by a woman who reports the following hair-raising reaction of the artistic director is characteristic: “A report of rape led to the non-renewal of the contract.” (1015)

200

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

The artist acted correctly and reported the perpetrator. The fact that there are labor law consequences for the person filing the report, by not renewing her contract as a reaction to her report, is completely absurd and incomprehensible, but it testifies to the power asymmetry and the cover-up by leaders, sponsors, or supervisory boards, who should actually have a great interest in ensuring that an artistic director works with clean means and justice prevails in the theater. Here, an artistic director emerges unscathed from a situation in which he has violated and trespassed the law to a considerable extent, but the consequences are borne by the one who has been injured, who points out this legal violation and is now retaliated against with a terminated contract. The power system of artistic directors should not lead to critics and accusers being singled out and silenced, as in an authoritarian system. If a woman who has been raped can no longer be protected by the theater system, if instead the system directs its weapons against this helpless woman, then it is not only deeply shaken in its foundations but also irreversibly diseased within. The Stage Association, which, with its new managing director and a new presidency, takes a much more progressive stance than a few years ago, should be involved and informed immediately. Its influence is not insignificant. Of course, the ensemble-network and Art but Fair as well. In these cases, the keyboard of all communication instruments must be played immediately, and the respective interest representation must be involved and activated again and again.

4.5 Representation of Employees’ Interests at the Theater “[…] Whoever contradicts, flies.” (1610) “Fear.” (72)

The preceding sections have clearly shown: The power of the artistic director stands in contrast to the limited possibilities of performers and artistic staff to represent their own interests and protect themselves from assaults. In this context, it is important to draw an accurate picture of the possibilities for personal protection of employees and performers at the theater and the possibilities for representing their interests. I have been guided by four questions: • Are the possibilities for interest representation seen and used? • What has been the impact in each case? • Are there sufficient possibilities for filing complaints?

4.5  Representation of Employees’ Interests at the Theater

201

• What alternatives would the participants suggest? It is also part of this complex of topics to determine to what extent artistic directors misuse communication in their networks. Some Artistic Directors Communicate Internally within Their Networks Many of the participants’ statements lead to the realization that communication within theaters is often inadequate. Direct, open, and transparent communication is often replaced in the affected theaters by displays of power and derogatory language towards women, young performers, the weak, and outsiders. Instead, some artistic directors seem to focus much more on communication within their networks, with their closest colleagues in their own management, with other artistic directors, and with the stage association. There, they realize an equal footing with their fellow artistic directors, and there are also the important “exchanges” where their own market value can be constantly checked. One participant describes it this way: “It seems like a sealed-off room to me. I, as an artist, have no access to it. It is a separate world of the management level.” (121)

That communication between artistic directors or between managing directors of different houses works very well is also shown by the participants’ responses. 544 participants confirm that management members also exchange information about internal matters and fees in their networks to the detriment of artists, so that artists can face extreme disadvantages when applying or negotiating fees. Another participant describes the following situation: “The head of the theater’s acting department knew about my previous fee at another theater (and not from me) during the fee negotiation.” (95)

Another participant also reports on this bad practice: “During negotiations for a guest engagement, I was told: I know what you earned before!” (690)

That there are fee lists that are exchanged between artistic directors is now an open secret.

202

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

“Fee tables are ‘passed on’, I know that for a fact, and personal internal matters regarding new engagements, such as physical and mental resilience, are discussed. (I am friends with former and current artistic directors and head directors).” (1174)

Another participant can confirm this: “There is a list […] with my evening fee.” (21) A manager among the participants confirms that there is an exchange of fees and other personnel-related internal matters: “It is simply mentioned en passant even in direct conversation.” (119) This severely violates the protection of trust and the duty of care. Whether there are blacklists, how they are used, or whether they are just a legend, could not and should not be clarified with this study. However, the question remains why this term and the fear of it keep coming up, and why players and employees who fall out of favor hardly have a chance at other houses: “there is and has been talk about ‘blacklists’. nobody knows how they work and maybe they are just a legend, and maybe they simply work through their legendary status, but artistic directors talk to each other, as do directors etc.” (1619)

This, of course, also has negative effects on the artists regarding guest engagements at other houses: “I was offered a guest engagement at another house for a ridiculous fee. When I asked a friend at that house, he said: They know how much you earn, so you won’t get more here.” (647)

If such a guest engagement is not already thwarted from the outset, especially if one has belonged to the “naughty” and “unpopular” employees, on whom artistic directors like to take petty revenge: “Actors who step out of line and do not belong to the first rank of the house are badmouthed at other artistic directors/houses, making it very difficult to get an audition (there).” (594)

When changing to another house, the information is not only used as a means of pressure. A negotiated and concluded guest contract suddenly loses its validity after the artistic directors have exchanged information about the artist. The stage association should have been called in here, as theaters are not “pirate ships” on which contracts can simply be invalidated and thrown overboard for base reasons:

4.5  Representation of Employees’ Interests at the Theater

203

“I changed theaters and made a guest contract at my previous theater. All contracts had already been negotiated. I received a call from my old artistic director. After consultation with my new house, I would not take over one of the performances at the old house. […] Not the only time a negotiated contract loses its validity!” (897)

In this area, however, there are further discriminatory activities by artistic directors to be recorded, with which performers are pressured or even pushed out of the contract—hardly exemplary for an industry that wants to appear socially acceptable on the outside: “After 10 years of the same fee and ever new productions, I was given to understand that I was too expensive…” (1014)

One can only hope that the participant was not impressed. Because an artistic director will not get through the non-renewal conversation if he actually brings up the costs as an argument. The quintessence: As an artist, one should never agree to termination contracts or be voluntarily pushed out of contracts. The hearing for non-renewal is a real chance because artistic directors occasionally make serious legal mistakes and only get away with it if the artist’s side is not well advised or intimidated and waives the hearing, which is a big mistake. The purpose of a wage cartel is quite clear: to recognize the existential need of artists and to depress wages so that no competition arises in which a fairer wage for artistic performance can be formed. Therefore, it is not surprising that the fees for guest contracts have not risen adequately in recent years, while fixed salaries at least participate in the tariff increases. The systematic destruction of the wage market, where payment is made according to artistic performance, as artistic directors also demand in negotiations for their own wages, is another collateral damage: “I myself witnessed conversations in which it was about the fact that he or she is currently in a financial predicament and would therefore be satisfied with anything. Or it was said: she is so keen to be cast that we go low in the negotiations.” (1858)

These agreements are also an own goal for the entire theater system. With them, the regional and national salary levels are pushed below the performance level of the artists, which in the long run leads to dissatisfaction and erosion of the ensembles. Many artists, with whom one would like to work permanently, could be brought back to the houses in this way, because at the moment the levels of freelance fees for well-employed freelance artists are relatively higher than the

204

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

much too low monthly salaries of the permanently employed artists at the public houses. It would be much smarter if the directors allowed free competition, forbade agreements, and developed new calculations for artist fees in theaters on this basis. These could serve as a basis and leverage for negotiations and improvements in politics regarding financing contracts. Pretending that it is only about wage increases and the improvement of production budgets is extremely shortsighted. This aspect alone shows how important it is to employ a trained theater manager in the management team who deals with realistic forecasts and future scenarios and who, as a trained negotiator and connoisseur of clever lobbying strategies, excludes any anticipatory obedience in financing negotiations in the interest of the theater. Equally serious is the fact that employees are abused as informants to collect information about their colleagues. “Here, the personal situation of employees is constantly being discussed and judged. Whoever collects and passes on information is clearly at an advantage in the favor of the artistic director!!!” (766)

The collected knowledge is used to exert pressure: “Theater director says in a personal conversation: ‘You must know, I find out everything!’” (1205) as well as: “I regularly experience how the artistic director as well as the managing director openly tell internal information and even openly blackmail and pressure employees with it.” (455)

The pattern of this exchange takes place in all divisions: “I was explicitly told by the opera director of the XX Opera about such regular exchange. Inquiries are also made about singers and their resilience, and the artistic directors and directors ensure the absence of further engagements through targeted defamation. This is known and is used more or less openly as a permanent means of pressure.” (1310)

No secret is made of this exchange, which suggests a great hubris on the part of the affected artistic directors. (723, 298) Intrasparency, on the other hand, takes place on another level and is virulent at some theaters:

4.5  Representation of Employees’ Interests at the Theater

205

“The problem is that it is completely intransparent for the actor. He has no possibilities for comparison and usually no feedback on his development.” (186)

It goes so far that artistic directors cancel the application of good candidates under a pretext because the good, neighborly relations between artistic directors are more important than the development opportunities of an artist who wants to apply to another house—with the argument that one artistic director does not “poach” the artists from the other. The term poaching is completely misleading here. However, this is probably the only consolation, the player in the described case can be glad not to have changed to the new, less self-determined house. The theater and the freedom of art live from the fact that above all performers change from one house to the next. Most of the time, an artist wants to develop further, needs a change, or there are private reasons. At least she does not yet suspect that the artistic directors form a cartel (see also 897): “When I applied for another permanent position from a permanent position, the artistic director sent me a rejection with the words: ‘We have the internal agreement not to poach any actors from each other.’” (571)

Unfortunately, this process of unauthorized information dissemination continues within the theaters themselves, in which a lot of personal and supposedly protected personal data about artists is distributed and disseminated internally. (49) In doing so, artistic directors also comment on highly confidential aspects to the outside world, about which strict silence should actually be maintained: “Theater directors have exchanged speculations about my current mental state.” (329) UNAUTHORIZED EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION AND PERSONAL DATA

This can also affect members of the theater management, as I have learned from “participatory observation”: In a promising application for an artistic director position at another theater in 2005, in which a colleague and management member was in the final selection, the stage association representative of the respective federal state in the selection committee sent a fax to our artistic director and denounced the then unknown application, although he was a participant in a confidential process— whereupon the application failed. 20 min after the fax had also arrived on his desk, because the already “informed” works council chairman was so kind as to hand it over to him, my colleague received a call from a “journalist” of the Thüringische Landeszei-

206

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

tung, one of the hardly read local newspapers today, who wanted to confront him about why he intended to leave the theater. The information came from the director’s office or the director himself, the two biggest leaks in the theater, as could be seen from the formatting of the fax, which was without a number but with a recognizable longitudinal pattern in the print image. The example illustrates that the apparent transparency within the stage association, between theater directors, media, and politics, can very quickly become a sinister alliance, in which denunciation and pressure are used alternately to exert influence, and if necessary, to expose, manipulate existences, or in worse cases even destroy careers. The colleague was no longer interested in accepting the invitation to the other theater and participating in discussions that were obviously manipulated. Shortly afterwards, he also left our theater. He would have had every reason to force the artistic director to resign because of this indiscretion. But he took care of this himself a few years later through many more serious mistakes, such as awarding the catering contract in the front building with a strong nepotistic character, which clearly shows that ethical boundary violations are never isolated cases, but usually accumulate. ◄ There are views and considerations by managers who hope for more transparency from a salary overview: “Of course, salaries are a topic in the stage association, and artistic directors hopefully talk to each other there. I am in favor of talking about salaries so that the immoral practices are exposed!” (712, 1100, and others)

An independent commission at the stage association could check the anonymized salary lists of the theaters for harmlessness, but for the time being, keep them under lock and key—except for the salaries of the artistic directors. The artistic directors’ salaries should be published in the interest of a transparent theater system. Among actors, salary transparency is approved if it leads to grids where salaries can no longer be arbitrarily lowered: “Yes, and that’s a good thing. We are fighting for salaries to be standardized and increased.” (1308, 115, and others). The only correct step is the—politically and through the stage association to be initiated—increase of the artists’ salaries to a level that is equal to the level of academically trained colleagues in technology, administration, and—also—the orchestras.

4.5  Representation of Employees’ Interests at the Theater

207

Involvement and Success of Interest Representation While just under ¾ of the participants regularly access interest representation (70.4%), not even 1/4 of the participants are convinced that it makes sense to involve the representations because they have too little to counter or have already been too heavily corrupted to work successfully and in the interest of their proteges. The result is sobering: • Only 22.7% of the participants estimate that measures were successful, • 36.6% had hoped for more and 13.6% are downright frustrated, • 9.2% reported that the colleagues of the interest representation “caved in.” SHAME, MISTRUST, and FEAR

Just under a third of the participants refrained from seeking help in cases of assault, mostly out of shame, ignorance, or fear of the consequences. The experiences vary greatly and range from small and medium successes (29) to opposite effects: • “Shame, complexes.” (mentioned several times, e.g., 77) • “I was ashamed and looked for the mistake in myself.” (multiple times, e.g., 99) • “Thought I had to deal with it alone.” (982) Trust in personnel representation and committees is limited, with a general mistrust of the personnel/works council (96, 113, 265, etc.), which is also classified as “useless” (485, etc.). One participant explains this as follows: • “…little promising. With the concentration of power (of the directors), personnel councils are powerless extras.” (1331) There are also courageous ensemble speakers who stand up for their ensemble, even at the risk of having to confront and set boundaries for directors or producers in order to protect their colleagues. But they are in the minority. The long way still to be covered to find suitable and solution-oriented contact persons testifies to a fundamental dilemma of the entire theater system: the low willingness to change:

208

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

“I was an ensemble speaker. I addressed the whole hierarchy from the director of drama to the ‘perpetrator’-director, to the cultural department heads, and the mayor (spoken to). At the same time with the GDBA, their legal advice, and an acquaintance at the Stage Association.” (68)

In many comments, it becomes clear that one’s own rights are misinterpreted or perceived as limited, which is due to the patchy training, the specific theater culture, and the announcements of the directors. Naive or manipulated comments like: enduring something without criticizing or questioning it is part of the actor’s everyday life, are therefore not uncommon: “No. From all sides, it is signaled that art is just like that. If you can’t cope with it, you’re not artist enough.” (818, 722, etc.)



Fear becomes the central paradigm of relationships in the theater when an employee has to weigh whether it is worth fighting for their own interests or those of their colleagues. Regarding the involvement of interest representations, the majority of participants react with disillusionment and fear of a too strong power imbalance, a too powerful director, and the fact that any form of criticism is negatively interpreted and ultimately sanctioned.

FEAR AS A CENTRAL PARADIGM

Fear of consequences delays the impulse to act: • “Fear of the consequences, fear of … not being able to become an actress.” (39) • “Not dared, consequences?” (52) • “Because there would have been inconveniences.” (697) • “Fear of losing engagement.” (Multiple, e.g. 998) • “Fear of not getting further engagements, being considered ‘difficult’ or moody.” (942) • “Because only men are in the management and I suspected that it would not be taken seriously.” (1203)

4.5  Representation of Employees’ Interests at the Theater

209

Fear is the central reflection on the involvement of interest groups: • “The ensemble is afraid or disinterested. No one speaks because everyone is afraid for their jobs. Since I’ve been at the theater (1991), it has gotten worse.” (17) • “The NV Bühne was called NV Solo not too long ago and has existed in its basic features since 1932. Any questions?” (67) • “It took some time until the Theater director and the City Head of culture were dismissed. By then, the working environment and theater were already a disaster.” (68) • “Fear.” (72) • “Not successful, as power imbalance/fear of loss of authority/fear of consequences for expressions of solidarity is too great.” (196) • “The artistic director always had/has the upper hand, with more power.” (119) • “The artistic director is too powerful and has too much influence.” (127) • “[…] at department meetings or open discussions, suddenly no colleague had a voice anymore. All silent. Everyone was afraid.” (238) • “As long as an artistic director can decide on existences like an absolutist ruler without any controlling body, nothing will change.” (1030) • “[…] Whoever contradicts, flies.” (1610)

Denunciation is a dark side of power and fear in power relationships. Fear is used by the powerful to stage threat scenarios and promote denunciation; those who resist are defamed and accused of denunciation themselves: “I went to the equal opportunities officer, the result was that I was accused of denunciation.” (251)

The causes of fear and denunciation are mainly due to the lack of leadership qualities of the responsible leaders, as repeatedly identified and criticized by the participants: “Because the artistic director has no leadership qualities.” (154) “If the perpetrator shows no insight, a conversation is pointless.” (181)

210

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

When the ensembles themselves try to approach the artistic directors and make constructive suggestions, the leaders often feel only harassed and attacked (202), and nothing changes: “It’s all cosmetics and anesthesia.” (518). A participant points out the pronounced narcissism of the artistic directors, which I have already described in detail in the third chapter and which, among other things, also refers to insufficient social and competencies in the area of personnel management, which can lead to significant disruptions in the theater operations, corporate communication, and decision-making processes in the medium to long term, and which very often block all attempts at change and reform: “Narcissism at the management level; everyone constantly feels hurt, mixing private matters with the theater, as if it were the family.” (576)

At another level, the camaraderie of the management with the important directors is reflected, who are often or even fundamentally always protected because, on the goal levels of the theater directors, an artistically outstanding production, which could possibly be associated with an award or an invitation to a high-ranking guest performance or the Berlin Theatertreffen, is placed very high, while the tasks of personnel and ensemble development, as well as audience care and development and the embedding of the theater in the social and educational contexts of the municipality or the region, are only ranked on secondary levels. The background here is primarily that the artistic attention of a theater is much more important for the future of a theater director than the perception of social tasks, which play hardly any role in the awarding of future artistic directorships and are much less frequently rewarded: “Although the artistic director says that they are doing something—in reality, it is more important to be able to print the big names in the next season’s program.” (1738)

The personnel or works council is not able or willing to help and intervene because, in some cases listed by the participants, it is actively hindered by the artistic director and obviously also allows itself to be hindered, because if the works council were to ensure its rights and competencies, were adequately trained and staffed with the appropriate, assertive and less fearful colleagues, then an artistic director should not get any chance to hinder or weaken the works council in any way. The works council would legally sanction each of these attempts and enforce its rights, at the latest through legal action. A future-oriented theater requires a strong personnel representation; if this is not guaranteed, the represen-

4.5  Representation of Employees’ Interests at the Theater

211

tation of interests cannot help or intervene in cases of abuse of power by the management: “The works council is torpedoed by the management, even public contact is interpreted negatively.” (133)

Paradoxically, there are also personnel or works councils that more or less openly side with the artistic directors. If this happens, as in some cases documented in the study, then the legally anchored balance of power between employees and employers becomes an imbalance of power that allows the management to enforce their interests without resistance and to rule almost authoritatively: “Works council did not want to help, even with the intervention of my lawyer. […] toothless tiger of the works council, or absolutely uninterested, because it did not affect any of them.” (648)

And here: “Chairman of the personnel council parrots the management’s words.” (660). And in this case: “The personnel council at my former house is subservient to the artistic director. Numerous terminations without notice are issued, and there is no proper hearing.” (800)

If the person concerned rightly takes it a step further and, for example, involves a supervisory board to point out the lack of leadership skills and the imbalance of power, this is quickly punished by the artistic director in cases where there is already a fraternization between artistic directors and supervisory boards and politics. Then the artistic directors are usually informed about the contact and the complaint without maintaining the anonymity of the complainant, which ultimately punishes them accordingly. The following case also shows once again how the NV-Bühne collective agreement for theater artists is repeatedly misused to dismiss, silence, and remove unwanted critics from the theater. This not only breaks the law and spreads fear but also creates an atmosphere among the employees, the central essence of which is that the artistic director is untouchable and any attempt to oppose their actions is futile: “After the works council could hardly help, I informed representatives of the supervisory board. The result was my non-extension and no changes to the house.” (749)

212



4  Power and Abuse in Theater

Those who supervise must serve the interests of the theater and its employees and primarily control the management in their work, must not ally with them and “overlook” their mistakes.

The denunciation of an employee described above, who complains about the behavior and abuse of the management, testifies to the inability or ignorance of the supervisory boards to treat complaints confidentially and protect employees. Letting employees “walk into the knife” is a punishable offense. It leads to no one trusting the work of these committees anymore. It is all the more important in the future that the ensembles and employees also have a place on the supervisory board as employee representatives of the theater in order to maintain the influence of the employees on strategic work and control of the theater management. Because these examples make it obvious that with a strongly hierarchical and artistic director-centered organizational structure of the theaters and the associated powers of the artistic directors, as is still the case in 98% of all German theaters, there is always a fundamental risk that these committees will only function very limitedly and one-sidedly. Without the alternative involvement of ensemble representatives in the supervisory committees, the balance of power remains significantly disturbed, as the function of personnel representation is left to chance—an end to the abuse of power will then be just as little to be expected as in the case of the ongoing continuation of the artistic director model. To achieve this, regular meetings of employees and the ensemble are necessary. The number of positive feedback is unfortunately still limited. However, successful models are possible and can be implemented without much effort: “Positive: Every 6 weeks, the ensemble meets and discusses everything that is not going well, what is going well, what could be improved. Everyone has room to make comments here. Later, a few management members join in […]. Since we have had this, a lot has happened. On all possible levels. However, we are a very small ensemble of 14 people.” (1737)

Negative feedback predominates: disillusionment with one’s own limited possibilities and, above all, fear are two psychological factors in this context that determine the work in the affected theaters alongside the structural problems and at the same time significantly hinder their internal democratization. This includes both the immediate fear of the artistic director and the directors as well as the fear of negative consequences when filing complaints and criticism, as mentioned here several times.

4.5  Representation of Employees’ Interests at the Theater

213

The reasons are diverse, they also lie in the psychology of the leading actors: artists who suddenly find themselves in a leadership position undergo a change. In doing so, they must try to strike a balance between their claim to continue to be a successful artist and the new, own responsibility for creating the framework conditions and resources and leading the staff—tasks that are significantly more complex today than they were 20 years ago. There are artistic directors who, in their claim to omnipotence, assume that they can master these management skills well and even virtuosically. I have described the collateral damage that this supposed virtuosity can cause with insufficient training further above. Another, more reflective group of executives suspects that they lack the prerequisites for this and tries to rely on the appropriate specialists or to conceal the missing skills. Both are not possible in the long term, leading to significant conflicts and disrupting the balance between being an artist and a manager, with the consequence that the artistic results demonstrably become increasingly mediocre. It also leads to artistic directors making only halfhearted decisions and shying away from reforms and questions of future viability because they do not want to reveal that they either need profound training or help in fulfilling their tasks or simply have no interest in these tasks. This raises the question of whether it makes sense to assign this range of contradictory tasks to one person at all, or whether it would be better to distribute these tasks among a handful of specialists so that the artistic head can focus on what they do best, as well as the manager, the planner, the producer, and the program creator. To the extent that these four or five—the cut should correspond to the respective theater type—specialists are experts in their field, they must nevertheless bring important social skills that need to be tested. Because associated with the tasks is also the management and development of personnel, the actual source of a theater’s work. 

Psychological assessment and training of leaders are indispensable, but they do not replace the division of labor at the top of a modern theater.

If artistic directors feel attacked for the reasons mentioned above, this leads to classic defensive reactions. They do not want to restrict or give up the hard-won position and the associated freedoms and view criticism as an intervention in a position that is considered inviolable, “finally achieved” and “deserved”—according to the model by which they themselves were once educated in the theater to be uncritical. This leads to self-righteousness, narcissism, and disturbances in which criticism is perceived as a personal injury and leads to inappropriate reactions.

214

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

Possibilities for complaint and their effects To complete the arc and thus analyze all possibilities of active intervention in cases of abuse of power, I have also included the question of whether there are sufficient possibilities and places in the theater to file complaints, which only 27.3% of participants affirm. In contrast, 23.2% of participants state that complaints have a boomerang effect. 21.9% note that complaint offices and perpetrators are under one roof, and complaints are therefore pointless. 27.5% describe, in turn, that there is not enough protection from the abuse of power by management and/or directors. If you combine these answers, only a quarter of the participants feel adequately protected. The vast majority of participants answer this question very clearly negatively, ranging from absolute hopelessness to the point that complaints lead to negative effects: non-renewal, denunciation to potential new employers, and the destruction of one’s career. Countermeasures “The dictatorial principle of the theater with these unusual power structures for today’s time must be abolished.” (1331)

Countermeasures are the only logical consequence to remedy the described problems and improve the initial situation for the artists at the theaters, which is why I asked the participants to propose, develop, and implement appropriate measures. This section provides a glimpse into an area of ideas and visions of the employees about a fairer theater operation, which should be taken very seriously and considered in reform efforts. A clear statement comes from 2/3 of the participants (69.3%), who wish for contact points that can act independently and unchallenged. Although the results of the previous questions regarding the effectiveness of traditional interest representations do not suggest this, still half of the participants (52.5%) consider reporting to ensemble spokespersons and the works/personnel council as a suitable first measure, even if expectations are not set very high here. The discussion within the ensemble is considered the most promising individual measure (44.8%). A quarter of the participants (24.5%) suggest officially counting or reporting repeat offenders, a large part of them (13.3%) wish that the complaints are made public and, for example, posted on the bulletin board, that there are protest measures or open discussions with the perpetrators. These are measures of retaliation that seek satisfaction and, above all, make it possible for those severely affected to save face, but above all to protect younger, upcoming generations of artists. With these measures of retributive justice, the injustice that has occurred is to be annulled (Miller and Vidmar 1981). Rather

4.5  Representation of Employees’ Interests at the Theater

215

protective suggestions are those that there should be no more 1:1 situations in conflict situations with superiors. (14.1%) Among the verbalized measures, there are comments that reveal the problems of the theater business. Some references relate to the hopelessness of criticism and countermeasures. (81, 113) Throughout the entire study, the NV-Bühne, the collective agreement for performers and artistic staff, is consistently criticized as a “tool that gives the theater management almost unlimited possibilities to put employees under pressure. It must finally go, otherwise not much will change!!!!” (502)

The participants finally propose measures ranging from external assistance and counseling services to public communication platforms to make criticism visible: FOR BETTER REPRESENTATION OF INTERESTS

• “A place outside the theater, or something where you can go anonymously. Shame and fears are too great to expose oneself openly in the power operation, or to risk anything.” (187) • “A kind of blog where a review can and should be given after each production. Something like IMDb for working relationships.” (201) • “[…] find platforms where everyone can exchange ideas; maybe even anonymously at first—a simple, outdated internet forum?” (238) • “[E]xternal contact points […].” (543) • “I have experienced that both the staff council and the ensemble spokesperson side with the management… Out of fear for their own position in the house. There needs to be another contact point that is also financially independent.” (595) • “Cross-company complaint office for the German-speaking area.” (1015) • “Become a union member, join the ensemble network.” (1174) • “Collection of anonymized reports (internal and external), […], in order to gain an overall picture of the perpetrator structure.” (1257) • “The clarification of these days helps […].” (1519) • “Counseling centers […]”(1533) • “Intendant control committee.” (1635) • “1. Independent counseling that does not belong to the institution and has the power to […] / 2. Anti-violence/discrimination training […]

216

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

clear statement against any kind of assault […] / 3. Dismantling hierarchical power structures, more power for employees, collective decisions.” (1719) Nevertheless, a main focus is on the responsibility of the Theater directors (intendants), who must take appropriate precautions themselves: • “Formulating a joint declaration that it is important for a house to be free of discrimination and that the line of the house is respectful interaction. Demanding this attitude at every opportunity.” (249) • “The management must make it clear that assaults of any kind will not be tolerated in the house.” (250) • “Initiate legal steps and remove perpetrators from theaters.” (342) • “At the state theater where I had my first engagement, there was no longer even a works council. The workload was so high that no one could be found to run for it anymore.” (690)

The criticism of the Theater director model is now being expressed very openly and clearly and corresponds with the criticism of the structures of the theater. The demands are far-sighted and far-reaching, from the abolition of Theater directorships to—alternatively—the establishment of Theater director control committees. They almost unanimously assume that reforms within this currently predominant, Theater director-centered structure model are no longer possible. The main point of criticism is therefore the almost uncontrolled, by some also called “damned sole rule” (800) of the directors, which is equated with the power of kings. This sole rule allows the Theater directors to govern completely, thereby establishing an authoritarian—some participants also speak of a “dictatorial” (1331)—principle of theater, which has nothing in common with the original ensemble and company principle. While all proposals thus focus on “radical structural changes” (1184), they fluctuate between the means of change: from flat hierarchies (1244) to radical softening (1184), deposition (755), and abolition of artistic directorships (1331). Alternatively, leadership in committee form (1839), open structures, transparency, and splitting of power and decisions (1365), as well as the election of leaders by the ensemble and staff, as is customary with orchestras (1310), are proposed.

4.5  Representation of Employees’ Interests at the Theater

217

CRITICISM OF THE THEATER DIRECTOR MODEL (INTENDANTEN-MODELL)

• “Depose the Theater director.” (755) • “[…] that the problem is exclusively the fear-ridden lonely boss who lashes out […].” (766) • “The damned sole rule must be abolished. There must be no more queens and kings who can do whatever they want without consequences, according to their thirst for power.” (800) • “[…] The power of the artistic director must be softened, which requires a radical structural change.” (1184) • “Flatter hierarchies.” (1244) • “The basic structure that the ensemble does not, like the choir or orchestra, elect its leadership is wrong. This leaves the artists dependent on a content-wise and professionally often unqualified direction.” (1310) • “The dictatorial principle of the theater with these unusual power structures for today’s times must be abolished.” (1331) • “Open structures, transparency in castings, salaries, quotas in leadership or responsibility and decision splitting, open accountability.” (1365) • “A (new) management system where (personnel) decisions do not depend on a single person, but on a committee.” (1839) • “The self-understanding of abuse of power must be broken. In the industry, this behavior is sometimes even glorified.” (1858) • “This is a structural problem, there is no solution within the structures.” (1860)

The suggestions of the participants are distributed in the overall view across six major areas and thus describe the reform potential and the great need for reform of the theaters, which should be taken very seriously because it is unanimously described here by many artists and staff members. This is a need for reform that is not unrealistic in any of its points. Many of these suggestions have long been discussed in texts and publications, in the action spaces of the ensemble network, but also in its conversations with the Stage Association. Some of these aspects are already being realized by younger artistic directors or management teams, and they could serve as role models for a gentle but rapid transformation of the theater system:

218

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

• First, the participants call for greater sensitivity and better assumption of responsibility by the Theater directors. (249, 250, and others) This aspect refers to both the existing directors and future management systems in which three, four, or more leaders form a committee from which responsibility and decisions are shared. • Second, the reform and curtailment of the power of the Theater director, the structure of the theater, flat hierarchies, the participation of the ensemble in the election of the management, and the establishment of control committees for Theater directors are demanded. (755, 800, 1331, and others) This aspect of the reform of the power of the Theater director refers to the points I have discussed in detail in the previous paragraph. The removal and abolition of Theater directorships in their current form are the essential cornerstones within this reform point. Existing Theater directorships should expire, new directorships should primarily be awarded to management teams, into which the reform-minded among the current 140 Theater directors can integrate if they are interested in relinquishing and sharing power and responsibility, while at the same time gaining and focusing on their fields of specialization through teamwork. • Third, additional committees and instruments are demanded, which ensure anonymity and security for the complainants, possibly located at a supraregional level. New communication instruments are proposed, independent blogs and internet forums that are intended to secure the democratic passage of information and the anonymity of the complainants. (1533, 1635) The anonymity and security of the complainants was a key point derived from the previous analyses and evaluations of the study results for maintaining a balance of power in the theater and for curbing the power and power abuses of theater management. If it is possible to secure the actually self-evident anonymity of the complainants and to create appropriate committees and instruments for addressing them, it will also gradually succeed in eliminating the gray areas of power and filling interest representations more strongly with life and success. At the same time, it has also become clear that the traditional interest representations do not work in a contemporary manner in the age of digitalization. The filing of complaints via the internet and the establishment of independent blogs could become important control and prevention instruments here. • Fourth, as has already been put forward by the participants in many parts of the study, better training and preparation of Theater directors/theater management in matters of management and personnel management and a training and further education obligation in matters of general and personnel management are demanded. (870, 1439, 1560, and others) I have addressed this aspect several times during the last years and the evaluation of this study. Here, too, it

4.6  Protection of the Personal Rights of Theater Employees

219

becomes clear what importance is attached to the training of the management in order to ensure a future-proof theater operation. • Fifth, the participants urgently propose a reform of the contractual and tariff system (NV-Bühne), which is considered an instrument of the interests of the Theatr directors and serves the interests of the artists too little. (502, and others) This point is also a standard of this study, which makes the reform of the contractual system (NV-Bühne) and, more broadly, the establishment of a general theater contract (Theater-Einheitsvertrag) for all kinds of artists, staff, technicians and administration all the more urgent. • Sixth, it is about the implementation of so-called Codes of Conduct, which establish and enforce power-free behavior and power-free interaction of management and employees in the ethical guidelines of the theater (1877 et al.). The introduction of ethical guidelines is intended primarily to correct and guide the personal behavior of the affected theater directors and producers. Certain manners, sexism, vocabulary, as well as physical assaults, especially against women, which can also be attributed to an old, veiled corporate culture and folklore of the theater, should be abolished without replacement. The guidelines thus provide the entire theater staff with a new behavioral framework that does not hinder artistic freedom or artistic processes, but rather aims to give young artists and employees the opportunity to work without fear and innovatively.

4.6 Protection of the Personal Rights of Theater Employees “The head of the costume department made it clear to me that my costumes should always be very short and provocative because the Theater director (Intendant) personally likes it that way.” (1210)

The area of personal rights protection concerns all measures that should be taken at theaters and by management to protect employees personally from verbal, psychological, and physical attacks and assaults of any kind and to preserve their integrity. To analyze how this protection of personal rights is guaranteed in theater reality and reflected by the participants, I have focused on four areas with a large potential for attack: • • • •

Auditions and tryouts, general assaults, assaults by colleagues, and sexual exposure.

220

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

Auditions This area is characterized by a high vulnerability of the auditionees, who are exposed to a stress test in a double sense: due to their desire for employment in the artistic field and their stress during the audition. These situations can be marked by abuse of power, often only in a subtle way, which many applicants for vacancies must accept, as their chances of employment would otherwise be greatly reduced, as the responses of the participants clearly show. Referring to the question of whether there are fair conditions at the singing or acting auditions, 61% of the participants deny this and describe that acquaintances and friends of the artistic director/management are preferred. Also preferred are their own students (26%) and candidates from selected agencies (21%). In addition, 22% of the participants report that selected candidates were allowed to attend private presentation appointments in advance, from which the engagements then resulted, without there being a real contest—a “rotten” competition from the outset. Similarly drastic are the circumstances during the acting and singing auditions, with the main criticism directed at the selection commission and the conditions. Over a third of the participants (36.6%) report on their experiences with commission members who do not behave properly during the audition—those who do not introduce themselves, who arrive noticeably and unapologetically late or leave early, who eat, drink and use their mobile phones during the audition, shout, groan, scold and vent their displeasure. The premises often leave much to be desired, with no proper facilities for changing or preparing (corridor, toilet), where one encounters fellow competitors, and the rooms are often dark and equipped with dazzling backlighting (22%). Travel expenses are not reimbursed (68%), general information is lacking, and waiting times are often excessively long (16.3%). Only 8% of the participants report good conditions at acting and singing auditions, with the majority of them being management members, embarrassingly enough, so it can be assumed that the vast majority of artists feel very uncomfortable at the currently held acting or singing auditions at German theaters. At the same time, it can be assumed that a large part of these auditions do not proceed fairly and that already known and befriended applicants are clearly preferred.

4.6  Protection of the Personal Rights of Theater Employees

221

UNFAIR CONDITIONS AT AUDITIONS

Among the participants’ comments, the following stand out, in which the theater does not create adequate and humane conditions for a fair audition/ singing audition and does not treat the candidates advantageously. Power is demonstrated by the respective theater in various, subtle ways, by creating conditions that resemble “mass processing” (1775) or that are arranged as a large “meat market” (1244), where young actors* have to compete for the role of their lives or their entry into the profession as lightly dressed as possible and will certainly hardly refuse any request in order to get this role or an engagement, as the survey results have already clearly shown above—a circumstance that artistic directors and directors obviously take advantage of in this context. Theaters where auditioners still feel like a piece of cattle that has to change on the open stage and whose travel costs are simply ignored and not covered, “because that’s how it’s always been done in the theater,” will have to adapt in the future as soon as initial reform measures take effect in a higher-level context and the integrity of the actors* is finally respected again: • “Sometimes unspeakable, 2–3 times travel for auditions with different decision-makers without any reimbursement of expenses.” (196) • “Rarely, often no and if so, only very brief feedback […].” (256) • “Often the atmosphere is the problem. […] How can a player show themselves freely and as versatile as possible? They should rather watch productions.” (516) • “Once traveled 7 h. Upon arrival, I was told not to audition anymore because I didn’t fit the role profile after all: Often: the feeling of being a piece of cattle.” (694) • “No possibility to change clothes, disregard even though one is in the room.” (926) • “Sometimes no warming up possibilities (toilet was offered), no consultation with pianist*in (first meeting at the singing audition itself), no possibility to show something […], hardly any constructive feedback.” (995) • “[…]massive meat market.” (1244) • “No conversation, just auditioning, strangely anonymous and impersonal.” (1261)

222

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

• “Often mass processing, where you get the feeling that the ‘type’ alone is decisive.” (1775) • “This is an endless topic, […] from too high expenses that exceed the net salary, through flights, gasoline, and accommodation, to no warming up possibilities. In addition, the expenses for pianists without receipts, as the agents pocket the pianist’s money and don’t even pay the pianist a tenth of it. I wanted to pay the money directly to the pianist, but the agent immediately intervened.” (1551) DISADVANTAGING APPLICANTS of other ethnicities, cultures, and with “untypical” attractiveness features: • “Disadvantage of graduates […], who do not fulfill the typical German acting type (white, slim, angular face, pretty).” (1308) In contrast to the fact that a so-called “typical European (Caucasian) actor type” is still perceived as a “leading type,” as described by participant 1308, the artistic directors and the German Stage Association should work together until even the last theater director has understood that society and theater mean diversity, and that theater must not be equated with the uniformity of authoritarian systems, because otherwise it loses its connection to society in a very drastic way. The fact that this paradoxical “type” is still primarily trained at German theater and music colleges is the regrettable supply side, but the artistic side of demand is created by the theater directors themselves, their and the hitherto very onedimensional imagination of their directors should enable the most diverse types of young actors and singers to gain a foothold on the stages, in order to reflect the variance of society, especially the society of the future, in which all ethnicities, cultures, genders, and nationalities find themselves equally represented. The following examples also illustrate the arrogance with which theater directors still dare to play fate and not accept any potential “limitations” and “special features” of artists—be it children, a disability, a darker skin color, a deviation from the television ideal weight or other irrelevant aspects for a selection—because they chase an inner eye with which they may wish for a type of actor that has emerged pictorially on old mattresses, and is supposed to secure them success with the audience, more importantly with the media and juries. In this context, for example—contrary to the General Equal Treatment Act (AGG)—candidates with children are often classified as not deployable and literally “sorted out”:

4.6  Protection of the Personal Rights of Theater Employees

223

“If the commission finds out that you have children, you have no chance of getting a job.” (848)

Some original quotes from the participants make it clear how condescendingly the applicants are treated. Folkloristic prejudices are still used, as the arrogance expressed here towards musicals clearly shows: “Stop. No, girl. You can’t play it like that. It shows that you’ve done musicals.” (610)

The condescension towards so-called small and provincial theaters is just as embarrassing as comments about a person’s figure, which testify to a very low level of intelligence: “An incredible amount of indulgent condescension and arrogance. ‘Go ahead, yes, I have to make a phone call first.’ ‘Oh, that’s where you come from, I thought there was no theater there…’ ‘If that’s theater, what you’re doing, then I quit.’ ‘What do you want to play, with your figure? You’re very hard to cast, as fat as you are!’” (641)

There are few positive feedbacks (653, 811). One participant finally summarizes that the theater world is obviously divided when it comes to creating a friendly, well-disposed, and collegial atmosphere for applicants: “It varies greatly from house to house, sometimes very fair, friendly-personal and well organized, sometimes unfriendly and disinterested.” (1172)

The testimonials provide a good insight into what actors and actresses have to experience in audition or singing situations, and how they perceive the behavior of the committees. In summary, the following points should be highlighted: • the theater landscape is obviously divided when it comes to the conditions for auditions and singing auditions (1172, 1380), • there are some, albeit very few, positive experiences of the participants (653, 811), • on the other hand, there are theaters that are very poorly prepared: here, candidates sometimes have to travel several times before it is determined that their documents have not even been read or checked, because otherwise they could have saved themselves the long journeys if a specific type of actor is not being sought, but is blindly invited instead,

224

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

• with an atmosphere of arrogance, humiliation, and objectification (toilet as a warm-up room, changing on stage), and • a continued discrimination (mothers, actors with a migration background). From the multitude of impressions, objective values emerge when evaluating the high percentage of identical or similar experiences. In contrast, only 14.4% of the participants have no comments or are satisfied with the procedure. In my view, this is a very clear result, showing that the opaque and humiliating processes are in urgent need of reform. Assaults by colleagues Assaults during rehearsals and on stage also occur in the affected theaters by— mostly male—colleagues who approach their female colleagues without consultation. The majority of participants have experienced this once or several times (59%). One-third report verbal assaults (32%). Physical assaults take various forms, starting with unexpected and unagreed expansion of kissing scenes (11.7%), unauthorized touching of genitals and other body parts (12.6%), and touching on the open stage without being able to defend oneself (12.5%)—with some of the assaults being linked. A not insignificant portion of the participants cannot properly classify the experiences and the intention of the actions, and are currently in a process of reevaluating and assessing the actions—and their own reflection on them—which were previously considered “normal” and “usual” in the theater, but in fact correspond to an unwanted intrusion into one’s own intimate sphere (15.2%). As soon as the management takes its supervisory duties more seriously, these assaults could be significantly reduced. It is primarily the responsibility of the artistic directors to ensure this. However, the artists must also demand their rights more strongly and clearly, and declare and connect in solidarity with each other in order to develop an enforcement power that significantly increases the chances of being heard. Sexually Compromising Situations Regarding the question of whether the participants have ever been pushed by the direction into scene processes that have put them in sexually compromising situations and/or situations in which they felt physically displayed, there were also clear results. More than a third of the participants (38.2%) have experienced similar situations once or several times. Some participants are unsure—analogous to the section on assaults by colleagues—how to classify the processes (10%), and another part would prefer to answer this question more cautiously and differenti-

4.6  Protection of the Personal Rights of Theater Employees

225

ated. There are statements that should be appreciated and analyzed in the course of a closer examination to find a basis for where to start in the future to exclude and prevent these situations: “Dancing sexily in the background of a scene, scantily clad, while the male colleagues practice acting on the front stage.” (15)

Another colleague is insulted and humiliated in this context: “I was supposed to use my hip to appear sexually active. When I asked why, the director said, because you have concrete in your hip right now, be sexy.” (45)

In these and other statements of this kind, it is repeatedly about reducing women in their roles to sexy “accompanying material” that, depending on the requirements of the artistic director and/or director, have to take their place in the background or foreground of the stage events. The request to portray sexual attractiveness and lustfulness is also questioned by the participants if there is no playful reason or dramaturgical background for it beyond the director’s request. In the course of his statements/instructions? he may expose himself as a voyeur trying to weave his fantasies into the staging process even when they have no place in the content and concept and are out of context.

Borderline Situations and Sexual Assaults

NUDITY: In this context, undressing and playing naked—without any conceptual justification, preparation, and without protection—during rehearsals and performances seems to become a systematic danger for young actors who would like to avoid or at least not let it get out of hand, and who urgently need to be advised to only engage in it if there is a clear staging context from which the urgency of a nude scene can be derived, and later to include a corresponding note in the special agreements of the employment or guest performance contract that regulates this in their favor: • “I was asked by a director to play a scene naked. I did it, it was my first role at that theater. The director was gay and it was clear he wanted to stimulate himself erotically. He talked to the assistant about my genitals while I was playing. It was very humiliating. At the next rehearsal, I was allowed to play dressed again.” (50)

226

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

• “Rehearsing naked without an apparent reason for nudity.” (76) • “When is nudity necessary on stage? In any case, one is not adequately protected in rehearsals and performance situations. […] But also for display in trailers by the theater itself.” (186) • “‘Take off your clothes,’ is a director’s instruction, and of course several comments are made about my physical peculiarities.” (196) • “Extremely revealing, suggestive costumes that were never discussed.” (242) The PERFORMANCE OF SEX SCENES AND SEXUAL ACTS without a conceptual background, so that directors/managers can indulge in them, directly follows the two aforementioned aspects. Here too, numerous unwanted, unagreed, surprising, and unpleasant nude scenes and touches can be found, as well as the performance of rape and sex scenes that are embedded in a context from which their urgency cannot be derived scenically or dramaturgically, but from the desires of the directors and professors: • “Unagreed announcement by the director: ‘Now everyone have sex! No, not so tender, really hard!’ After the rehearsal, when asked to contextualize such things beforehand, the attack came that one was unprofessional.” (60) • “Rape scenes, nudity, kissing scenes.” (251) • “Man, now grab her breasts.” (259) • “Physically forced to kiss in a scene.” (316) • “The aforementioned directing professor demanded that I let a fellow student take me from behind in a silent play.” (379) • “I was supposed to play a rape scene as if I enjoyed it.” (982) • “I had to expose my breasts during a scene presentation. It was on the rehearsal stage and only in front of colleagues and fellow students.” (1039) • “I was supposed to play a role with an exposed lower body.” (1158) PARTICIPATING IN SEX SCENES: In the following situations, the borderline takeover of the sexual “play” on stage by the director himself becomes apparent.

4.6  Protection of the Personal Rights of Theater Employees

227

• “I was supposed to approach a partner with blindfolded eyes in an SM scene without prior agreement using various materials, and when I refused, the director took over.” (881) • “There are directors who indulge in rehearsing scenes with sexual acts. Male directors also like to come on stage during rehearsals to take the place of the male partner to demonstrate love scenes because the partner ‘doesn’t understand’ ‘what the director wants.’” (1207) • “This is acting… and there are misanthropes in directing.” (1119) In another situation described here, the actress has already become so detached from her role that she can only call herself “the character,” expressing great psychological discomfort and suffering that is not perceived at all by the director or artistic director because their social and empathic competencies are completely underdeveloped in this and the examples mentioned above. This occurs very often in people who are so strongly guided and controlled by their sexual and/or power fantasies that they must implement them with all their might, as is often the case with paraphilic sexual disorders, not infrequently in combination with narcissistic or other personality disorders. Each of the examples listed here bears witness to this. If these paraphilic disorders are accompanied by violent fantasies, sadism, or even sexual sadism, then sexual fulfillment is sought in living out corresponding fantasies and putting others in distressing sexual situations to which they have not consented, as is the case with many of the examples in this segment. This can involve cynical misanthropes (1119) or pathologically ill people who have found a niche in the theater, which will hopefully close forever in the coming years so that inhumane actions towards actors, as well as reenacted sex scenes without context, consent, and agreements, will no longer occur and no longer burden colleagues and theaters: • “My character lay dead on the ground, […] the director decided over my head that my buttocks had to be exposed to tell a story of corpse desecration.” (1183). These are extremely delicate, serious situations that have taken on a life of their own and are already taking place outside the rehearsal context, so to speak. The director assumes a new role in which he not only directs but also lives out his

228

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

sexual fantasy coram publico as a voyeur, participant, and game master of a separated sexual installation within the production, with which he demonstrates his power. Actors who do not “comply” with his demands serve as triggers for him to set up the scene according to his desires and fantasies and to participate in it, thus making himself a part of his installation. This is an extraordinary process per se because it contradicts the professional standing of the director or artistic director. It is also surprising that neither the usually frequently present production dramaturge nor one of the older actors present brings such an incident to the attention of the artistic director as a warning; perhaps this has already happened, and the artistic director is already aware of it or ignores any warning signs, in which case he violates his responsibility as an employer and his special duty of care as an artistic director each time he does not act, does not intervene, and does not relieve the affected actors of their suffering, thus already operating in a gray area where he—of course, just like the director—could be held criminally liable and should actually be removed from office. And a director who repeatedly loses himself in such scenarios and triggers, perpetrates, or stages such assaults within them should—if at all—be allowed to direct only under strict conditions and supervision. The theater must not—in the cases discussed here and others—become a gathering place and refuge for more or less disturbed personalities, but rather it is about the release of artistic creativity, which may, of course, also have an erotic character if the context provides for and recommends it, but which must not be endangered and disturbed by any form of cynicism, sadism, and paraphilia. The director is responsible for the personnel and their development, for the creative processes and the smooth running of the production, and ultimately for the artistic success of the stage work and the overall performance within the context of the production. However, if they start to “participate” and physically separate a part of the production in their own, psychologically motivated installation, their colleagues lose trust, to the point that young colleagues become psychologically disturbed by these events and the integrity of the artists, not to mention the production, becomes extremely endangered. It is completely unclear to me why this danger is not seen and recognized by artistic directors, especially since artistic directors are the best-informed employees of a theater, with their internal networks from which they can obtain and skim off sufficient information at any time, and why people still deal with such incidents with such great carelessness and arrogance, as if they were indeed just “minor offenses” or a kind of “theater folklore” that one shrugs off.

4.6  Protection of the Personal Rights of Theater Employees

229

In some cases, the artistic director’s wish significantly determines how actresses are cast, what their costumes should look like, and whether they have to undress during rehearsals and on stage. Here, the question rightly arises as to how an artistic director who acts in this way and who usually knows how to sufficiently check the work of their directors, but is not confronted with any checking authority themselves, should be alerted in time to the impending crossing of boundaries. The dilemma here is that there is no one left for artistic directors who draws their attention to noticeable and harmful deviations from the standards in dealing with artists. This is not an excuse for the self-inflicted behavior of the affected artistic directors, but it is intended to show that the standard structure of public theaters has a serious design flaw that can lead to considerable damage. In this case, the head of the costume department becomes more of an accomplice to the artistic director than a critic of their wishes: “The head of the costume department made it clear to me that my costumes should always be very short and provocative because the artistic director personally likes it.” (1210) And here: “Nude scene, which the artistic director demanded of me.” (1631)

Paraphilic disorders in directors also manifest themselves when they confuse rehearsing or performing on stage with their own imagination or a fantasized reality, as in this case, in which a director sexually encourages their actors: “Repeating kissing scenes unnecessarily often, costumes that are too tight and short, ‘turned on’ comments from the director’s desk during kissing and sex scenes.” (262)

Or, as in this example, in which the director asks the actress to undress completely without context: “Complete nudity for a role was described by the director as indispensable. I saw no sense in it scenically […].” (1411)

Actresses feel psychologically raped when their objections are ignored: “I always feel ‘raped’ when I have to play something that is absolutely inconsistent for me and I am ignored anyway (with my clearly verbally expressed objection).” (1252)

230

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

Another participant describes how directors transfer their own relationship to sexuality and power to the production and thus desecrate and destroy the formerly protected space of the theater: “Yes. Especially when it comes to sex scenes or love scenes, the director sometimes cannot create a protected space, but their own relationship to eroticism, sex, and power unconsciously influences the direction of the scene too strongly. Directors and, unfortunately, also female directors rarely recognize how quickly ‘depicted’ physical violence can become intrusive.” (1380)

When analyzing the statements of the participants, one must also deal with the psychological short- and long-term reactions of the artists who are exposed to these attacks. In particular, when one is still young, it is about the danger of violating one’s own integrity, which is a vital prerequisite for participation in social life and for any profession in the theater and therefore must be protected and secured. With it, the artists create and develop their own value system and compare it daily with their experiences and their own actions. Integrity is violated when the value system and one’s own actions according to this value system receive a crack. This can happen by being forced into actions that are actually incompatible with one’s own dignity, even on stage, regardless of whether one has to act actively or passively. How does one feel when the artistic director wants a nude scene that may be completely nonsensical in terms of staging, but against which one can do nothing because the experience, strength, and support are lacking? How does one react when the costume department makes the dresses and skirts worn on stage two hand widths shorter than necessary? How does trust in the director and artistic director develop after situations in which one felt increasingly sexualized, as a character, as a performer, and as a person? And how does one’s own artistic personality develop, which in moments of greatest concentration on the development of a role becomes entangled in unwelcome, undesired inner and outer struggles that it cannot win and cannot psychologically endure? Similar ordeals that we experience as children when we are treated poorly or inadequately also lead to lasting damage in young and not yet firmly established people. However, this can also affect mature, established artists whose value base can be lost under permanent psychological terror. The damage that artistic directors and directors can cause is not only related to the loss of trust in their work and their bad image, as the many statements, especially regarding the role and impact of artistic directors, precisely describe. It is also serious for the development of a young or mature artist, who in the rar-

4.6  Protection of the Personal Rights of Theater Employees

231

est cases emerges from this situation with a smile. Most of the time, there are emotional and mental after-effects that can resonate for many years or even lead to serious impairments and disturbances in sensitive personalities, as can be expected in stage artists. However, there are also actors who manage to defend themselves, with men having a clear advantage for two reasons; on the one hand, they are physically stronger and superior to women, which makes the presentation of resistance against instructions much more often successful, and on the other hand, men are also, but much less sexualized on stage and staged than women, who cannot or hardly defend themselves against predominantly male artistic directors or directors, while a man simply says stop or does not perform the corresponding action: “Often you don’t know whether it serves the process or not. Then you just do things that are not so pleasant. It’s still part of exposing yourself to something unpleasant. Most of the time, however, I could clearly say and was listened to when something seemed strange to me. But as a man, I experienced this much, much, much less than my female colleagues.” (338)

Other participants still defend that the physical display and uninhibitedness are part of the profession. (797) This is an individual decision in each case. But it affects a rapidly decreasing minority, and it certainly cannot be generalized, otherwise, an increasing number of female performers would not have a contractual reservation for the right to object to the portrayal or non-portrayal of nudity and sex scenes, of which, in my opinion, far too few actresses make use. In this case, however, a young actress benefits from her resourcefulness and the empathy of her acting teacher: “A director announced in a conceptual rehearsal at a new theater where I was a guest and did not know anyone, in front of all colleagues, that my play partner and I would be naked at the end. I became very scared and called my teacher (I was still in training), who luckily told me that I could not be forced to undress. The nude scene did not happen.” (1195)

Whether the physical display is actually part of the performer’s profession, as participant 979 describes, is doubtful, even though the argument is repeatedly cited. In my opinion, the performer’s profession is primarily about portrayal, not display. Perhaps the definitional distinction can provide more clarity in the future when young actresses wonder whether a nude or sex scene is really necessary, whether it belongs to the character, the scene, and the narration, and must become

232

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

part of the portrayal, or whether it is intended for display. If this is the case, no performer needs to consent. Summing up the results and comments, one comes to the realization that today, in some theaters, there are still serious incidents in which artistic directors and directors not only exploit their function but also massively impair the integrity of the artists entrusted to them and sexually abuse them: • Performers are occasionally forced by directors and staging artistic directors into degrading and humiliating sex scenes, sometimes with strangers/new partners, and/or nudity, without these scenes being conceptually justified or prepared in advance. • Artistic directors express their preferences for nudity or skimpy costumes of actresses in front of other members of the house (tailoring department, etc.) and even manipulate the trades for this purpose. • Directors (and staging artistic directors) stimulate and manipulate actors to sexually “approach” or even humiliate other actors/acting partners in rehearsal or on stage. • Directors (and staging artistic directors) sexually humiliate performers by publicly and loudly discussing their bodies and sexual characteristics in rehearsals and displaying them accordingly. • Directors (and staging artistic directors) temporarily take on the role of the male partner themselves, exploit the power situation, and compromise the actresses. In doing so, they change and violate the protective context of a rehearsal and the integrity of their performers considerably, realizing their paraphilic fantasies in the process. Here, a clear set of rules is needed that precisely defines boundaries, imposes sanctions for their violation, and records all measures to ensure the integrity and inviolability of the artists in all phases and processes both within and outside a production. Furthermore, there needs to be a clear assumption of responsibility by the respective artistic directors as soon as deviations and/or complaints regarding the staging of nudity and/or sex scenes occur, which should at the very latest trigger an emergency brake when the performers resist and cause psychological pain and suffering, and should suspend or cancel the respective work. They should then hold numerous discussions with the director and those involved, consult psychologically trained experts, and inform the trust office and the stage association, which in the future will accompany directors and artistic directors with corresponding deviations and paraphilic disorders in their exit from the profession and ensure that these colleagues no longer work with sensitive artists in the theaters.

4.7  Education Context

233

If artistic directors themselves are affected by these disorders and they are discovered in a production, the ensemble spokespersons, personnel representatives, and/or independent ombudspersons in the houses should react accordingly, ensure the termination of rehearsals, and possibly even initiate the first steps towards the artistic director’s exit from their function and activity in cooperation with the stage association—which will not be very easy. But it is about the protection of the employees and the legitimacy of the theater. In conclusion of this section, however, it should be noted that the serious deviations recorded here only concern a small percentage of directors and artistic directors. Furthermore, it should also be noted that eroticism and desire should continue to be part of artistic productions, where it fits the context and has been discussed with all parties involved. It is important to draw boundaries between pathological deviations that have crept into the theater and staging work and whose manifestations cause the artists severe discomfort and psychological suffering on the one hand, and a pleasurehostile puritanism on the other hand, which should by no means find its way into the theater and productions that are particularly about feelings, love, pain, and desire today and in the future.

4.7 Education Context “Psychological rape has happened to me very, very often, especially during my studies. Until now, I had the feeling that it was normal and that one had to go through it. But the recent public outcry has opened my eyes.” (99)

The education context is the professional prelude. Not only are the foundations laid here, but the culture of the theater also regularly enters the universities with many lecturers from theater practice. Many directors from the theaters work there, behavioral patterns are transferred and often even intensified because they want to show the students how it works in the theater reality. This is undoubtedly important. But they should also be made aware and trained in what needs to be done to improve the conditions and to counteract any form of assault. This includes the development of resilience and resistance. However, it is not always sufficiently reflected that these are very young people who often start their studies at the age of 18, 19, or 20. Because even during their studies, the situations that the students will face after completing their studies and entering a theater or guest performance engagements are mirrored: power games and assaults, psychological pressure, subtle or visible sexualization of conversations, actions, and rehearsal processes.

234

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

15.8% of the participants report that lecturers have exploited their position of power and exerted considerable psychological pressure, 13.4% tell of unwanted and humiliating exposures to third parties in the education context. However, the assaults go even further: 11.7% of the participants report that they have been sexually harassed by lecturers in the education context. In 3.3% of the participants, explicit sexual acts and abuse have even occurred. The pressure and cynicism with which lecturers and professors use their position of power to exert psychological pressure and/or verbal or physical sexual acts is the worst school and education that can be offered to young artists. Unfortunately, in colleges, the extremely resilient trump card is still used, that good art must have something to do with crossing boundaries, which translated means something like: “Come on, don’t be like that. We’ve always done it this way.” Instead of equipping them with instruments of inner strength, argumentative power, and resistance, future graduates are thus prepared for the professional world of theater in a very twisted way, where these processes may continue. The willingness of young professionals to possibly engage in forms of abuse again in the theater is unfortunately increased by the training (Hartling and Luchetta 1999). This, in turn, consolidates the old, dusty organizational culture of the theater, instead of reforming and renewing it, and it may be another reason why assaults of this kind on young actors and employees are often still considered normal, tolerated, and not reported. Only recently has there been a gradual change in attitude towards these processes, culminating in the support of the ensemble-network, in which young artists engage, so that the new generation of theater artists receives greater argumentative backing and no longer has to be threatened or affected by assaults. A significant means of pressure used by lecturers against their students today is primarily exposure, which is associated with relief mechanisms of their own work. In doing so, lecturers regularly cross their ethical boundaries, which also speaks of a very low social education and role model effect, as can unfortunately be observed. This makes it clear what I have warned against, the theater must not become a breeding ground for sociopaths who take away the places of the actual, talented, and sensitive artists and block the paths to renewal: “Statement of the lecturer: ‘If she weighed five kilos less, she would be really hot, then I would also go for it.’”(229)

Psychological pressure is a second variant to make students compliant who have tried to legitimately rebel against the behavior of their lecturers. It can be

4.7  Education Context

235

described as an outrageous audacity, a lack of awareness of wrongdoing, and a pronounced form of sociopathy when a lecturer obviously repeatedly sleeps with female students and then applies an intimidation strategy to the critic, with which they are psychologically pressured, as in the following example. This not only changes their moral conception but also their ability to trust and safely distinguish between what is allowed and not allowed in the theater context and to apply this to their own work and experience horizon. The lecturer leads the student, who dares to criticize his legal breach here, back to a stage where she no longer classifies the legal breach as such but will describe it as an obviously normal process in the future. At the same time, the student’s original values and moral conceptions are actively changed, and she is also actively prepared for a possible liberal theater life—be it on or behind the stage—about which neither complaints nor any other criticism are made. This could be described as a simple, subtle, but very effective form of overwriting. These forms of overwriting are often accompanied by criticism of loyalty and talent, two very sensitive areas especially for young artists, for whom loyalty is a very important value, which, if denied, must be perceived as a deep insult, which is what the lecturer is aiming for as a defense strategy. The overwriting takes place together with a deep insult and another very deep offense, denying the student her talent, i.e., the most sacred thing, the vessel around which the student wants to build her future artistic work and her entire life. Imagine the subtle strategy of the lecturer to save himself and get out of the affair by virtually denying the student her right to live and thus punishing her twice. Only he will later enable her to rebuild this talent. A process that is very common in drama schools in the context of “breaking” personalities, which has nothing to do with the much lower hanging breaking of will. The breaking of psyches and personalities is a very complex and dangerous concept, still preferred and practiced at public drama schools, in which the aim is to largely erase and reprogram the “inappropriate” characteristics of a personality that, from the layman’s point of view of the lecturer, stand in the way of future work as a performer—to generate oneself as God-like and create a new artist with one’s own hands. Paradoxically, it is mainly lecturers who have no psychological training who apply this complex instrument with preference and special dilettantism. A completely absurd, amateurish, and contemptuous concept, but at the same time harmful and dangerous for those affected, with which younger, psychologically immature students can lose their center and drive for life for years. Often, it is precisely the students who have trusted the most and have engaged the most in this approach and who have the lecturers on their conscience because they literally break under it, who are thrown back onto the street after one or two years of study. (see also box below: The Breaking of Students)

236

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

“Lecturer doubted my loyalty, my talent, and empathy because I criticized him for sleeping with female students.” (251)

And here, the threat of expulsion is used: “Unwanted criticism was met with the threat of expulsion.” (1321)

In doing so, the image of the powerful lecturer is invoked, whose instructions are not to be questioned, combined with the request to practice sex in order to be able to play the love scenes convincingly: “If you stop by xy today, then maybe he can finally play the love scenes convincingly tomorrow.” (242)

Sometimes the pressure exerted becomes so high that it leads to borderline injuries to the physical and psychological integrity of a player: “most memorable: I was supposed to play that I wanted to hang myself (sun in the good person of Sezuan) and because it wasn’t believable and the feeling of death wasn’t there, I was slowly lifted up by the lecturer with a noose around my neck— always with the thought that this will take me further, use it, you have failed, until […] I saved myself with a pull-up…” (416)

Unfortunately, this also includes the ever-present threat of revealing private inclinations and a latent homophobia that one would not expect at art colleges. This is an expression of the far too strong closeness between lecturers and students on the one hand, and an artificial distance on the other hand, which is created by the lecturers through psychological pressure: “A lecturer told the other lecturers in a conference that I was a lesbian, even though that’s not true. She just assumed it and spread the rumor.” (1890)

And in this case, the homophobia even becomes an act of public humiliation of the student by a lecturer, obviously without sanctions for the lecturer: “public evaluation/humiliation of the game in the form of jokes, sexual orientation was often mentioned as a filler, to lighten the rehearsal atmosphere.” (1411)

4.7  Education Context

237

Verbal and physical SEXUAL ABUSE IN EDUCATION

• “Performing a scene, getting too close to the bodies of the acting students. Repeatedly talking about the breasts of the students…” (492) • “Teacher physically and psychologically intrusive. Almost cult-like structure.” (635) • “Head of the acting school made suggestive remarks to all young attractive girls.” (1203) • “Both unnecessary nudity and harassment, as well as the request to dare to hit or grab between the legs on stage, as a tool.” (1488) • Statements like: “Your ass is just so hot.” (1664) • “Often touched, often comments like: I’ll turn you around, lesbian.” (1696) SEXUAL ASSAULTS are strategically prepared and do not arise in affect, as in the case of a lecturer who arranges a night of love against the express will of the student. • “In the rehearsal of a rape scene, the directing professor played with me, thought heavily, and then bent down to me and said that he could live out his fantasies like this.” (379) • “A professor booked a double room with me for a guest performance instead of a single room for me. Allegedly all rooms were booked out. He wanted to have sex with me. I was able to fend him off. It was terrible and affected the next few years.” (1846) And here a lecturer coerces and blackmailssexually, without keeping his promise. “To pass the trial semester, I had to sleep with a lecturer, but still didn’t pass the semester. However, I was then accepted at another acting school.” (1914)

Students apparently experience this multiple times during their studies: they are sexually and psychologically harassed, exposed, laughed at, and psychologically violated, as one vocal student describes it. At the same time, she points out that the rebellion and current discourse open eyes and give courage:

238

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

“I was sexually harassed by a répétiteur. I was put under psychological pressure by many lecturers. That was practically normal! A department head later subtly destroyed me and made it clear at every opportunity that I was incapable, until eventually I had no voice left. During a university production, I was exposed and publicly laughed at in front of all my colleagues. Psychological violation has happened to me very, very often, especially during my studies. I had the feeling until now that it was normal and that one had to go through it. But the public uprising recently has opened my eyes.” (99)

From this, it can be concluded that the perpetrators operating in the environment of theaters and universities do not act impulsively, but systematically prepare their actions and deliberately use their power and influence, including various forms of blackmail. It takes a great deal of strength and courage to break out of such a vicious circle, as the student who manages to refuse the professor’s offer to spend the night in a double bed, but who has to struggle with severe emotional aftereffects. (1846) And it is precisely this courage that should be protected and rewarded more than before in universities and theaters where these assaults occur. In this respect, it is forward-looking when participant 99 reports that her eyes have been opened by the current uprising. Until further notice, we must assume that sexual offenses are isolated cases. However, each of these cases must be examined and judged legally so that young people can study at universities without fear and intimidation, solely for the sake of art. The Breaking of Students In addition to the described assaults and overpowering, there is a form of power abuse that has a systematic character and has crept into the training culture of some German universities and has become widespread: the breaking of students. A large number of participants describe how the popular breaking and rebuilding of students works for some lecturers: “The lecturer/year mentor interrupted the scene after every sentence and corrected me: You’re doing/saying/emphasizing/playing this wrong. I (the lecturer) can play this much better./You’re taking away my (the lecturer’s) role, actually this role belongs to me. After five rehearsals, I was asked to talk … If I didn’t want to do the duo scene, I just had to go to the school management and cancel the work, […] and my acting partner would then suffer from my refusal to work. When I cried (out of overwhelm/ despair/fear of failure), she said: Finally, you open up to me. You’re feeling bad, but I’ll help you.” (1873)

4.8  The Internal Lockdown of Theaters

239

The breaking of students and young actors is a typical form of power exercise, reported by generations of performers, with the unanimous tenor that it is completely unnecessary, sick, and devoid of meaning, in addition to the associated boundary crossing and violent intrusion into the integrity of a young person. Could it be that this method primarily serves to concentrate power with the teacher, who wants to penetrate the psychological core of a young person through this method in order to shape them in their image? Could it be that none of these lecturers have a psychological education for this sensitive profession and do not understand in the slightest what they are causing in the psyche of the students, who will be negatively shaped for their lives, up to traumatic stress disorders that can arise from severe or prolonged abuse and lead to permanent anxiety disorders. One semester with an abuse-prone lecturer is already enough for this. Fischer and Riedesser write about the development of traumas: “A vital discrepancy experience between threatening situational factors and individual coping possibilities, which is accompanied by feelings of helplessness and defenseless exposure and thus causes a lasting shaking of self- and world-understanding.” (Fischer and Riedesser 1998, p. 79)

Often associated with this is an enormous arrogance and hubris of the perpetrators, as with almost every incident reported here. One can only hope that with the ensemble-network and #MeToo, a generational change among lecturers and directors will soon take place, which is associated with greater humanity, more empathy, better and newer methods of training, and a social human image, as is becoming increasingly important for the stages of this country. Those who have been broken, who have experienced power and psychological terror, as we have known since Brecht, will by no means be able to portray power and terror better than the unharmed actor.

4.8 The Internal Locking of Theaters “[…], what used to be a free space in our society has now become a battle zone.” (91) “The theaters should urgently, before they tell and play on stage about the great topics of being human, human conflicts, human fear, and so on, review their own structures and interpersonal dealings with each other.” (1252)

240

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

In the preceding parts of the study, aspects of hierarchical and power-promoting structures have repeatedly emerged in the statements of the participants and have been analyzed by me. The topic of structures runs like a red thread through all mentions in the areas of power abuse discussed so far, without me having directly addressed the topic beforehand. Against this background, I was particularly interested in the response behavior to a direct question on this topic in order to deepen and systematize the insights gained so far. On the other hand, I wanted to assess how directly and in what nuances the current theater structures are perceived and assessed by the participants. In doing so, the members of the theater, especially the performers and artistic staff, encounter a phenomenon that can be described as internal locking. This refers on the one hand to the hierarchical structural structure of the theater (see also Chap. 2), which can be represented in organizational charts in a sketchy and two-dimensional, i.e., highly simplified, manner. In addition, this also refers to the locking of decision-making, communication, and production flows by barriers of various kinds and by diversions. Decision-making flows that are highly hierarchically centralized not only prevent a democratic flow of information, but also increasingly give rise to a multitude of non-controllable, mostly informal secondary flows of information, which consist of rumors, secret messages, messages within certain circles, and non-controllable groups and clog, hinder, slow down, change the information contained in the primary flow of information, or even cancel it. Decision-making flows, on the other hand, are regularly passed down from top to bottom and feed-backed from bottom to top. The multitude of associated formal and informal instructions and commands clogs and sticks the decisionmaking paths because the structure converges pyramidally towards the top function of the artistic director, and because there are no decentralized-networked decision-making clusters within which communication takes place and decisions are made quickly. Here is an example of today’s, i.e., old school, which very simplistically outlines along which conflict lines communication takes place in the theater and how decisions are made even when real power and regular decisionmaking paths are diametrically opposed. It exemplifies how regulations can be overridden by power at any time, at least as long as the person in power can still act and decide untouchably for structural reasons: EXAMPLE: DECISION-MAKING AND COMMUNICATION PATHS

A theater director requests a contract for a new actress he discovered at a premiere at another theater, without sufficiently informing his colleagues. The

4.8  The Internal Lockdown of Theaters

241

director’s office forwards the request to the operations office and the managing director, with the instruction to issue the contract as soon as possible and to integrate the actress. The operations office obediently and immediately begins negotiations with the actress, who has not yet decided on the theater, instead of coordinating with the more sensitive managing director and the head of the department, who has not yet been informed. Both would have been better interlocutors for the actress in this case, but they had not been sufficiently informed up to that point. The managing director, on the other hand, reviews the budgets and gives negative feedback on the planned salary level. In addition, a funded position is missing. The theater director, who has already agreed contrary to the rule of the four-eyes principle between the leaders and with the words “this is the artistic area, you have no business interfering here,” is not willing to back down because he believes that his ability to satisfy depends on his toughness and assertiveness in the theater, asks for cuts elsewhere to represent the salary. This, in turn, has repercussions on other areas that would need to be deeply analyzed and communicated. The operations director, in turn, has questions about the actress’s blocking dates, which shorten rehearsal processes, reduce the number of stage rehearsals, and have an impact on the construction rehearsal and technical setup, which is why the technical director should be involved. However, he is currently discussing the cuts in maintenance costs with the managing director, from which, to his dismay and against his objection, the additional actress is now to be financed. The unprepared instruction of the theater director has thus triggered a dilemma in which information, decision-making, and analysis flows now run uncoordinated through an organizational structure whose outdated design fuels confusion rather than catching and clarifying it. If the first level were staffed with several interconnected people and the networking extended to all other levels, such a dilemma could be sustainably prevented, and team-oriented communication, as well as progressive decision-making in the theater, could be enforced. ◄ The production flows, which are also hindered by the divisional structure of the theater, as I have already mentioned in Chap. 2. The hindrance essentially refers to the fact that the production flow runs horizontally through the various, artificially separated, and vertically working divisions and departments of the theater and is therefore slowed down, delayed, and hindered at each division boundary by unnecessary coordination and communication processes. Since there are also no

242

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

cross-departmental work teams that exist permanently independent of hierarchies, each decision in each department must be re-examined and controlled before the process can continue. This leads to miscommunications, significant delays, and ultimately considerable impairments of the staging and post-production processes. The internal locking has other aspects as well: • The lack of supervision and control of the artistic directors leads to their omnipotence and strengthens their uncoordinated decision-making power, but also the nepotism mentioned above. This results in significant delays and wrong decisions, which can have serious consequences for the future of a theater, as important reforms are missed. • The manner of discretionary Theater director selection, which takes place within the framework of non-objective criteria, uncontrolled procedures and processes, and non-standardized compositions of selection committees, which still include colleagues from the theater association instead of external experts, resulting in mutual obligations; selection criteria and psychological assessments are lacking. • The missing mission statements and codes of conduct, which means that neither a conceptual nor normative orientation of the theater towards modern requirements such as diversity, inclusion, gender parity, etc. is given. For the employees, a regulatory vacuum arises, ambiguities and errors accumulate, which can lead to wrong decisions and dilemmas. • The nepotism, through which—in the theater sector working—relatives and acquaintances of the artistic director or other senior directors can receive engagements and contracts under preferential conditions. Too strong internal and external networks are preferably served by the artistic director, which often influences communication and decision-making to the detriment of parts of the employees/ensemble and the theater. • The contractual system of the theater (NV-Bühne contract) as an outdated, management-friendly instrument that no longer meets the requirements of a modern collective agreement in the twenty-first century. Power and Structures—There is no alternative to changing existing structures 41.6% of the participants critically note that power accumulates disproportionately among artistic directors, who engage partners and life companions and integrate them into the power structure.

4.8  The Internal Lockdown of Theaters

243

In response to the questions of whether, in addition to general social, societal, and cultural norms and patterns of behavior, the susceptibility to abuse of power is possibly promoted by the particular structures of the theater, the participants have essentially expressed themselves on hierarchical structures, uncontrolled power of artistic directors, and the lack of ethical standards, which condition and reinforce each other, as the results confirm: HIERARCHICAL STRUCTURES and THEATER DIRECTOR (INTENDANT)

THE

POWER

OF

THE

The effects of hierarchical structures: • 85.6% of participants state that the hierarchical system promotes dependencies. • 59.8% note that the structures and culture at the theater promote injustice and abuse of power. The power of the Theater directors (Intendant) and its effects: • 59.6% find that the power of the Theater directors is too great and uncontrolled. • 50.8% say that power accumulates with the Theater directors who banish dissenters and critical minds from the ensemble/theater. • 49.8% say that power accumulates with the Theater directors who direct at their own theater. • 41.6% say that power accumulates with the Theater directors who engage partners and life companions and integrate them into the power structure. • 16.5% say that the connection between the Theater directors and politicians/media is too close. The disregard or lack of ethical standards and rules: • 43.1% find that ethical standards and rules are hardly observed. • 3.4% note: That’s just the way it is, art requires power, control, and boundary crossing, • 0.4% state that this is not the case and that everything is fair in the theater.

244



4  Power and Abuse in Theater

Only 0.4% of participants trust theaters in their current structural condition and believe that the structures of the theater do not favor abuse of power and that everything is fair. That is only eight out of 1966 participants. A result could not be clearer.

That the existing structures of the theater promote abuse of power is one of the essential conclusions of this study, in such a surprising clarity, that a conclusion must be drawn from it: 

There is no alternative to changing the existing structures—they are the pivot point for reducing or eliminating toxic power relations, the associated assaults, and fear.

The majority response behavior is linked to a clear criticism and rejection of hierarchies and the intendant system. Even the majority of the management members, technical and administrative staff involved in the survey have stated this. There are numerous remarks, additions, and comments from participants that confirm this: Working conditions include the—often self-generated—economic pressure of the theaters, the overburdening of the intendants, the overload of the employees, and the loss of real communication: “[…] The feeling arises that power is concentrating because, due to the permanent overload and overstimulation in all sectors, there is no longer enough time for communication and transparency. Information that is missing is then usually interpreted as deliberately omitted. But that is not necessarily the case.” (191)

The main focus of the criticism lies on the artistic directors, who are classified as overwhelmed and overworked, and who want to involve the theaters with the often self-imposed, too high work expectations, without the slightest knowledge of personnel management: “Overwhelmed, overworked artistic directors and directors expect the same workload from all employees, which is wrong.” (190)

The economic pressure regarding audience numbers and economic results leads to high production pressure, which is passed on to the employees.

4.8  The Internal Lockdown of Theaters

245

The former free space of theater transforms into a so-called battle zone “In addition, the economic pressure on theaters increases the pressure among each other. A colleague recently said that the [theater], which used to be a free space in our society, has now become a battle zone.” (91)

Here, the irritating and unsettling term battle zone stands out, which has replaced the former heterotopia of theater in the affected houses, which for many of the younger people who have gone through a tough path in and through education to become an artist or work in theater, becomes a bitter realization. The theater is in danger of losing its reputation as one of the most interesting and creative art spaces in our society. The remark about the overburdening of artistic directors with artistic and managerial tasks they are not up to is also very serious. This results in an increasing number of productions and working hours, but also the self-perception that an employee must work at least as much and as long as an artistic director or director—which is completely wrong. The artistic director must protect himself and at the same time ensure that the working hours of the employees remain within limits—this corresponds to his job description. The same applies—for the duration of a production—to the director. Again and again, the argument arises that art and artistic achievements cannot be objectively assessed, which is why management members succeed in denying talent and manipulating artists: “Art is so little objectifiable, performance a matter of taste, which makes artists so vulnerable, which is why their talent can be so easily denied. In addition, strong competition and financial exploitation, one cannot afford to refuse engagements financially.” (694)

One participant recognizes the Janus-faced nature in the theaters, where on the one hand tolerance and humanity are preached, and on the other hand inhumane working conditions are created, which can also be based on the very selfish goals of the artistic directors: “Our house preaches tolerance and human friendliness again and again. […] However, our schedule is so packed that it can no longer be managed without temporary help and unreasonable working hours. And then the Theater director writes communist on his cap. Double standards.” (799)

246

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

Correctives are missing here. Another participant therefore suggests adjusting the structures of the theater and the interaction between management and colleagues before the big issues are dealt with on stage: “The theaters should urgently, before they tell and play on stage about the big issues of being human, human conflicts, human fear, and so on, check their own structures and interpersonal dealings with each other.” (1252)

This also includes that an artistic director takes responsibility for every production in the house and for the work and behavior of the directors, and primarily stands up for his colleagues: “Directors have too much power. They can do exactly what they want. Rarely or even never do management personnel (director or artistic director) stand up for the actors.” (1562)

The cult of artistic director worship in local and regional politics supports the structural deadlock and leads to artistic directors experiencing hardly any control and supervision, allowing them to behave recklessly. Only adequately trained personalities will be able to resist this danger: “The cult of genius allows people to behave like pigs.” (922)

The double standards of the affected theaters become clear in the examples shown here, which position themselves as progressive in society but use rigid hierarchical structures in their house, crowned by unbearable working conditions and bosses who “do what they want” and behave “like pigs” in the process. The exorbitant power of artistic directors and the structures derived from it are therefore at the absolute center of criticism of the structural conditions of the theater: “The time of good or bad kings and queens (explicitly applies to women too!) must be over. We live in a democratic country in 2018. This must also be reflected in the structures of publicly funded institutions.” (1332)

One participant speaks very clearly about the mechanisms of artistic director power, which is based on the fear of artists who do not express themselves or criticize. At the same time, some artistic directors manage to manipulate artists and pressure them, taking away their support and belief in themselves until they submit a non-renewal themselves.

4.8  The Internal Lockdown of Theaters

247

“I think it takes a long time for a colleague to really speak up against an artistic director, i.e., represent a completely different point of view, as they risk being fired or no longer being well cast. At my theater, I have the impression that the artistic director does not want to be the evil uncle. He does not issue non-renewals himself, with one exception, but rather the actors are pushed to do so through overwork, lack of recognition for more commitment, mostly negative artistic criticism, and creating insecurity and chaos shortly before the premiere. Almost every production. Employee turnover has been happening at my theater for quite some time.” (1579)

The gender images in the theater and on stage also reflect outdated thinking and thus not only specific behavior towards women but also the consolidation of responsible paternalistic structures: “The gender images we reproduce on stage are completely outdated.” (249)

This leads to forms of oppression and devaluation of women, which have been repeatedly mentioned in the previous sections: “Men can oppress, devalue, and discriminate against women in this system.” (54)

The cause of this is again the structures of the theater. They promote an art that is unfree and uncritical: “How can art be free and critical in such structures that date back to the penultimate century […].” (502)

Surprisingly clear, open, and precise, the participants see and analyze the individual problems. The educational work of the ensemble-network and a few critical authors on the subject of theater structures and artistic director power has led to participants now being able to recognize and classify the connections between structure and power well. This can be seen as an important emancipation process for artists in German theater. What used to be a vague general dissatisfaction and critical mix in theaters is now a clear and focused criticism, with both the problem and the responsible parties being addressed. The defensive behavior of artistic directors has retreated to a few arguments. “By invoking an ‘artistic freedom’—naive, outdated …” (52) In doing so, the argument of artistic freedom, which serves to secure power, is interpreted, used, and overstretched by the directors according to their own discretion. “The argument of art is far too much of a killer argument, e.g., in relation to workload.” (1699)

248

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

To counter this, the participants find much smarter patterns and conditions for a new, future paradigm of fair art production: “Art requires the extraordinary. That’s okay if everyone is willing to stand together for this extraordinary and mutually support each other in doing so. However, if this is not the case, it must be pointed out that art in this case is also a business. A business that should be ordinary, i.e., legally not extraordinary, i.e., an employee should have the same rights as employees of a business that is not art. Art is no excuse. Art is no justification.” (1360)

But there are also arguments for the old structure of the theater, with which the abuse of power is even justified as normality because it supposedly exists everywhere: “No. Abuse of power occurs everywhere. Not just in the theater.” (838) But can one seriously want to justify the abuse of power with this statement, for a theater that has actually set out to take on a societal role model function? The next statement also seems more like a cliché than the reality of theater, as good artistic work does not necessarily have to be associated with disinhibition: “Physical exhibition is part of our profession. I hardly know any stage people who are inhibited about showing themselves.” (979)

However, the so-called “uninhibitedness of stage people” is not discussed in the study at all; there is a misinterpretation here. What is at issue is the abuse of performers both inside and outside the theater, and especially in rehearsals or on stage, which they often consent to out of fear or shame, but which does not correspond to their self-image, which is why it leads to the psychological injuries and traumas mentioned above, which often have a lasting effect throughout their lives. Disinhibition and power are diametrically opposed. 

The dream of uninhibited acting life shatters against the reality of the working conditions and power relations described in this study.

Another argument for the old structure refers to theater and democracy: “Theater is not a democracy, no matter how much one might want it to be. If everyone has to decide together, nothing gets decided.” (261)

This argumentation corresponds to a simplified and strongly condensed logic. Not everyone, but a management team should decide, not the voice “of the people”, but the knowledge and conscience of a group of the best, who take responsibility,

4.8  The Internal Lockdown of Theaters

249

unlock structures and allow new things—but also listen to the representatives of the employees. And this is based on the principles of professionalism and competence. It is not about pseudo-democratic, but participatory and team-oriented organizational principles. The performers and employees are of course involved in important decisions, which does not make this organizational form a parliamentary democracy. And finally, a folkloric argument is used, that of the boundary crossing desired by young actors themselves: “Yes, there is power, there is control in a staging process. Because otherwise, even under the fairest conditions, no evening would come about. And boundary crossing is a matter of definition. Ask a young actor if he wants to do without boundary crossing…” (67)

This statement testifies to a reproachful defensive attitude against the question of participation. The question was very clearly about the exercise of power, which is situated and defined differently than control. Hundreds of artists and employees have clearly shown in the previous answers that they see this differentiation, and that they would gladly do without a power-infused theater and staging system. The option—and there are some outstanding examples of this—that a young, well-trained actor*actress finds their way and develops artistically with the help of their colleagues and a good director, without being treated extra hard and sexist, is completely ignored by individual critics here. There is nothing to say against crossing boundaries if it is agreed upon and based on a code word that allows the exercise and scene to be stopped at any time without any complications. However, the prerequisite for this is that the theater has already gathered all the actors around a large table, the artists, the employees, the trades and the technology, the management and the staging teams, and in this constellation or with the representatives of the individual groups, a precise Code of Conduct has been agreed upon—an ethical code to which everyone is bound to behave in order to exclude the endangerment of even a single person at any time. The independent theater scene shows that working in collectives and teams— without artistic directors, paternalistic structures, threats and blackmail, without self-authorized actions of a few—can now emerge under better working conditions than in the tight corset of the city theater. This is evidenced by many artistically outstanding, festival-touring, and widely cited signature works of the independent scene. However, the first examples of power abuse are also appearing here, which say a lot about the hubris and narcissism of the artistic genius who

250

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

very obviously and unabashedly combines his sexuality with his artistic work and the work with the female artists of his company (Ómarsdóttir 2018). The decision of many actors*actresses to no longer expose themselves to the pressure of city and state theaters and to work independently is also a sign that the “old” ensemble theater is increasingly at risk of becoming a Potemkin village if it does not change course quickly. This must be tackled by new, well-trained, competent, artistically skilled, and empathetic teams. 

The results of this study clearly show that a large group of performers/ employees want to forego externally and power-initiated boundary crossings and instead work in protected spaces.

To summarize once again, the essential arguments within this question relate to four thematic areas: • that the invocation of art and artistic freedom as an alibi for the violation of good and fair working conditions, for the existence of hierarchies and the application of power instruments is used and regularly abused; • the criticism of the internal locking and the paternalistic structures and hierarchies of the theater, which are classified as anti-art and anti-women, including the no longer appropriate function of the artistic director; • that gender parity is not established at the theater and the injustice between the genders on and behind the stage is reproduced; • the strong criticism of the Double Standards of theater directors, who position the theater externally as democratic and just, fighting for social progress, but do not represent this internally and are only actively interested in realizing justice within the structures when it serves their own interests and their own artistic realization. Participants’ Suggestions: Unlocking Structures and Disempowering Directors With the last questions of the study, I wanted to give the participants another opportunity to actively suggest improvements to the situation at theaters and to curb the abuse of power, in addition to the numerous progressive suggestions that had already been made in the previous answers. 

Only 1%—19 out of 1966 participants—suggest that “everything should stay exactly as it is”.

4.8  The Internal Lockdown of Theaters

251

Two-thirds of the participants (64.8%) demand that anonymous complaint and arbitration offices be established, which act independently. They have thus taken up an essential point that supports the intention of this study, so that theater management will act less uncontrolled in the future and instead there will be opportunities for every employee to criticize without risking their position, career, or mental well-being. Once the complaint and arbitration offices are implemented and staffed with competent employees who are networked between theaters and can exchange anonymized case examples, colleagues at the houses will soon feel much more protected. For there will then be trusted persons who can openly and uncomplicatedly advocate for those affected. In this context, another aspect is of interest. The consulting firm PwC conducted a study among medium-sized and large German companies on the factors of employee satisfaction, finding that with increasing satisfaction, the quality of work increases. In this context, five employee types were developed, three of which directly identify with their respective superiors, colleagues, and the organization, which in turn correlates with the aspects raised by this study: “Type 3—derives their satisfaction from how they are treated by their superior, Type 4—the key to satisfaction lies in the relationship with colleagues, Type 5—these employees want to be proud of their company.” (PwC 2010)

In addition to many other instruments, such as modern personnel management and mission statement development, complaint and arbitration offices can significantly contribute to these three frequently occurring employee types becoming more satisfied and their work quality, which is crucial for the theater, increasing. Here, there is a direct correlation. “Today’s young professionals choose their employer based on whether their individual needs are met. An important insight for companies. Because motivation and commitment of employees have a decisive influence on the success of a company. And only those who know the individual needs of their employees and measure them regularly can tailor their HR instruments accordingly—and specifically address the employee and their wishes.” (ibid.)

The results of the study should lead to the development of monitoring systems for theaters in the future, with the help of which results can be determined and published at regular intervals, and graduates of universities will be given a constantly updated guidance system, based on which they can align their choice of theater, where they want to work in the future, not only according to the classicfolkloric “reputation” of a theater, but according to aspects of real working condi-

252

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

tions and the satisfaction of the respective colleagues. Then the suggestions and factors to be considered demanded by the participants will play an increasingly important role. At the same time, theaters will make every effort to eliminate the error points and focus on the topic of job satisfaction as the key to the future. It will quickly become apparent that the use and abuse of power by the leaders and the satisfaction of the employees are diametrically opposed, i.e., mutually exclusive. If a theater seriously pursues the paradigm of increasing employee satisfaction, this can only be achieved by renouncing power abuses, authoritarian hierarchies, and a folkloric and sexist, misogynistic, and xenophobic organizational culture, as described very explicitly by the participants in the sections above. Two more closely related complexes directly address the internal unlocking of structures: This includes the demand for flat hierarchies and clear, transparent communication and decision-making processes (58.8%) as well as for management that no longer consists of individual artistic directors, but rather of a directorate or teams (40%). The second complex of unlocking envisions strong co-determination of ensembles and employees in normative and strategic decisions (56%) and the implementation and guarantee of democratic decision-making processes (39%). The NV-Bühne (stage tariff agreement) is also an essential barrier that urgently needs to be reformed, as many participants suggest in each section. The labor law associated with the NV-Bühne dates back to 1905 and should be urgently overhauled. Although there was an attempt by Jan Hegemann in 2008 to condense and standardize the collective agreement more strongly, this was not associated with a fundamental conceptual reform (Hegemann and Nix 2008): “Labor law at the theater should […] be transferred. The abuse of power is made possible primarily by the limited-term contracts.” (557)

This participant also makes specific suggestions for the NV-Bühne: “The bad habit of granting ‘artistic freedom’ to the artistic director by not renewing contracts annually should be abolished. A self-commitment, e.g., to consider the family situation of members in case of non-renewal would […] help. Actually, this should be in the NV-Bühne (avoid social hardship).” (1261)

The call for a new collective agreement runs through the entire study: “A new collective agreement must be negotiated that deserves the name.” (502)

4.8  The Internal Lockdown of Theaters

253

And: “We need a better contract form.” (579, 907, and others)

One participant links the overhaul of working conditions at the theater with the desire for an improvement in the structural situation at the theaters. “Completely revamp theater operations, nationwide. No evening rehearsals. No Saturday rehearsals, regulated weekend services and overtime, and compensation. System for recording working hours. Fewer premieres. Predictable working hours and breaks. Lower expectations of everyone regarding working hours and constant availability and accessibility.” (1652)

Further suggestions relate to the modernization of appointment procedures for artistic directors, the improvement of artistic directors’ attitudes towards employees, the evaluation and control of management. This also includes demands for a contemporary understanding of art and art production: “Finally, a contemporary understanding (expanded, more democratic) of art.” (52)

The modernization of appointment procedures for Theater directors is an essential prerequisite for all unlocking processes in this context until individual Theater directorships have been largely replaced by directorates and management teams. The individual directorship is currently—as confirmed by the results of this study—the largest structural barrier of the theater, with effects on the internal structure as well as on the external relations to stakeholders, which are of utmost importance for the continued existence and future viability of the theater: “[…] the appointment of Theater directors must change. Local politicians, together with long-established theater people, appoint too many narcissists to management positions. Self-presentation works far too well for applicants.” (146)

In this context, the main findings of the study are confirmed once again by the suggestions expressed in the last section. What is demanded is a different, more humane and empathetic attitude of artistic directors towards their employees. This concerns “artistic directors who care about their employees—if they only see us as puppets, we are of course worthless to them and are treated accordingly.” (194). But also control instances for the work of artistic directors and directors are demanded multiple times, with which direct influence can be exerted on the leadership behavior and possible violations of agreed principles:

254

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

“Effective, independent control instances for artistic directors.” (402, 478, 509, 593)

In this context, one participant addresses the opaque termination processes of working contracts by Theater directors and the concealment as current leadership behavior that needs to be countered: “We need control over the termination processes of our working contracts. Sometimes almost everything is concealed from the ensemble. […] We no longer need Theater directors.” (800)

In this context, one factor repeatedly plays a particularly significant role—fear. FOR FEAR-FREE SPACES

For fear-free spaces, ethical standards, and stronger cohesion: • “Desirable is an open and fear-free space […].” (833) • “We need leadership personnel that meets contemporary and modern work-ethical standards.” (1080) • “Anonymous evaluations in the theater for the quality of leadership activity […]. Internal feedback opportunity without fear.” (766) • “Strong cohesion in the ensembles.” (Multiple: 1145, 1193, 1313, etc.) • “We need secure jobs for ensembles. The power of ensembles is broken, weakened, and castrated by the non-renewal rule, which Theater directors are not subject to. Five-year contracts on both sides. Why shouldn’t an actor who is engaged for an artistic period receive a contract of equal length as the one who engages him?” (1173)

The cause of these violations is seen in the too poorly defined moral codes for the work of the management: “We need higher ethical demands on management.” (196)

However, the effectiveness of higher ethical demands is only guaranteed in concert with a changed selection system for Theater directors. As long as they are chosen relatively freely due to good networking and good performance as directors and without the participation of the ensembles, the internal locking of theater structures will persist.

4.8  The Internal Lockdown of Theaters

255

Remarkable are the now very enlightened demands for determining one’s own position as an artist in relation to the director, even down to contractual aspects. “Five-year contracts on both sides. Why shouldn’t an actor who is engaged for an artistic period receive a contract of equal length as the one who engages him? (1173)”, is a completely justified question and implicitly associated demand in this context.

In no conversation with a Theater director, department head, director, or dramaturge have I ever encountered a meaningful, sustainable answer to the frequent rotation of artists in ensemble positions. The artists are currently completely dependent: • on the changing artistic and personnel views of the leaders, • on their insecurity and fear in the course of artistic work, and • on their low tolerance threshold for mistakes by the artists. Much speaks for accepting the fear and insecurity of individual leaders—for the option of artistic development of an entire ensemble over a self-contained period and artistic cycle (artistic directorship period), entirely in the interest of the theater and the audience. The guiding principles and Codes of Conduct already mentioned further above are not only frequently demanded in this context and in different conceptual approaches. One participant calls for a Manifesto of interaction based on Scandinavian and English theater: “Guiding principles and rules of conduct, possibly also a kind of Manifesto for dealing with each other, as is partly the case in Scandinavian/English theaters […]. Awareness in interaction.” (1406)

And where Manifestos do not unfold their effectiveness, anti-violence and antidiscrimination trainings for management and all employees are necessary: “Anti-violence and anti-discrimination trainings for everyone. In a system like this, all forms of discrimination flourish under the guise of art.” (1719)

Also demanded are professional supervisions (1444), the use of psychologists, mediators, and discussion groups (1482), as well as a more open culture in casting, contracts, and problem situations (1562).

256

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

Here, the understanding of what Codes of Conduct are and what they can achieve still varies greatly, with each of the parameters brought in here being very useful for an overall concept. Aspects that should be included in a model code of conduct also appear repeatedly in the other response complexes. It has also become very clear that Anti-Nepotism—the abolition of cronyism and favoritism of friends and relatives—will be an important test in the future for Theater directors who want to work and act credibly and with integrity. 

The frequently occurring inner circles of boss, partners, and friends in various nepotistic constellations—in one example very nicely referred to as intimate teams (1738), with which over 40% of the participants have come into contact, must no longer exist in the future.

They disturb the balance within the theaters and the trust between the artistic and economic partners severely: “Management teams could help—as long as the director’s girlfriend and her ex-boyfriend do not form this team. These intimate teams, however, are the closest together and are hardly controllable. […] Restart, please!” (1738)

Non-Discrimination and Anti-Racism In the concluding remarks, there were very important suggestions from the participants who deal with the issue of non-discrimination and anti-racism. The topic of racism in theater has so far been little addressed in German literature and often ignored in theater, especially since the theoretical background or foundation was lacking to engage in a genuine confrontation. The aim is to create an awareness of the subtle and ever-present racism, not to deny one’s own identity, the associated racisms and privileges, and yet or therefore to base the justification of one’s own convictions on the values and cornerstones of a progressive anti-racism. This is the essential and only possible way to deal with it. The Maxim-Gorki-Theater has an outstanding position in the work of multiethnic and post-migrant ensembles. The concept of the migrant is further developed into the concept of the post-migrant in order to express and positively connote “the already achieved stage of immigration” (Sharifi 2011, p. 44) of a part of society—a successful terminology that has now become established. Karin Beier and her chief dramaturge Rita Thiele had already begun some preliminary work in 2007 and developed the concept of “urban hybrid culture” (Thiele 2007) using the example of Cologne—Beier was then artistic director at the Cologne

4.8  The Internal Lockdown of Theaters

257

Schauspiel. On this basis, Beier had put together a very successful intercultural ensemble in Cologne. One can only wish for other theaters to learn from this, to engage and above all to integrate many new actors and employees of different cultures and ethnicities. However, the two very serious indications from the participants (1719, 1858) clearly show how problematic the situation for People of Color actresses in theaters still is and what hostilities they are exposed to. This must be addressed. ABUSE OF POWER AND RACISM

“[…] I have already tried to make it clear in the questions: I find it very, very important not to treat the topic of sexism separately from other power issues such as racism. They are similar power mechanisms that come into play, and if one approaches this process intersectionally, one could really change something. A black actress must always ask herself whether she constantly has to play sexualized characters because she is a woman, or because she is black, or because she is a black woman. If it is really about solidarity between women, or between those who suffer from abuse of power, then we need more than just the category of sexism from the beginning. This is not something that can simply be added later, it must be actively considered. I would be actively involved in all these movements in recent times if there were an intersectional perspective. But I don’t see that and find it too little. The mistake has been made too often in feminist work to only care about one group of women (white) and to think that this is enough for everyone else. So: more intersectionality! Good luck in the future.” (1719) “Unfortunately, the point of racist attacks and racist discrimination was not addressed. In fact, I can name more verbal attacks with racist insults than with sexist terms. Racist insults and jokes, as well as the claim that they are only there for the quota or the claim that they have no idea about German classics because they have a migration background, are experienced by me and all colleagues of color that I know. Also, for racist reasons, more is demanded of me than of white colleagues (more unpaid additional services for the theater such as text, lectures, and participation in discussions, with the justification that it would also be good for me and my community if I were represented as a colleague with a migration background). I was also told that I should accept poor pay because my theater

258

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

project would also be doing something against racism. In addition, one is limited to certain ‘migrant issues’. Please include this area in a next questionnaire!” (1858)

Overall, the main lines of argument of the entire study are condensed in the answers. There was also occasional criticism: Four participants would have liked more multiple mentions in some answer areas, three participants (management members) considered some of the questions to be too suggestive, and once (accidentally?) even subversive was mentioned. To counter this: The questions allowed for a wide variety of differentiated answer options, which could also be omitted at any time, and this option was used. It was also possible to express oneself predominantly in additional categories. Each participant had the opportunity to explain themselves verbally in detail for each important question, which was used about 3400 times. This alone shows that the participants were woman and man enough to handle the questionnaire without suggestion. Most of the time, the entry into the answers was affirmative and confirming, regarding the current structures and functions in the theater. Only in the further course of reflecting on one’s own experiences and expectations of a modern and progressive theater were alternative answer options made possible. A suggestive chain of questions would have run exactly the other way around. I designed the questionnaire according to scientific standards by Mayring and Döring et al. (Mayring 2016; Döring et al. 2015). In doing so, I distinguished between questions that were about focus answers (single answer possible) or multiple mentions, in order to create a broad but very accurate picture. It is not always possible to be in line with the wishes and ideas of all participants. However, I was able to collect and present an extremely comprehensive and accurate result based on over 58,000 evaluated data sets—the largest study in this area. The answers and comments in the course of the answers are largely confirmed by the result. These are strong indications that the questionnaire was easy to penetrate and handle in terms of content. The irony of the overall result is captured by a participant in the following statement, which testifies to the arrogance and ignorance of some artistic directors, who are increasingly confronted with more knowledgeable people: “A frequently quoted sentence from my current director: ‘I don’t think you realize how good you have it here. But if your discipline continues like this, I’ll turn to other options. I’m telling you that.’” (406)

4.9  Summary Assessment and Classification

259

4.9 Summary Assessment and Classification “We don’t need Theater directors anymore.” (800) “The dictatorial principle of the theater with these unusual power structures for today’s times should be abolished.” (1331)

THE MOST IMPORTANT RESULTS IN NUMBERS

Participants: 1966 Dataset: 58,364 responses • More than half (51%) of all participants cannot, barely, or just manage to live on their income and exist under precarious conditions. • 50% of all participants have to take on additional jobs for this reason in order to achieve a sufficient monthly income: from cleaning to guest appearances, from massage services to voice acting. • Only 5.1% of participants are not familiar with existential threats. • Over 50% of all participants (56.4%) have encountered abuse at their current workplace, with the proportion of women even reaching almost 60% (59.1%). About half of them have experienced it multiple times. Only 10.8% of all participants have not encountered it. • 8.6% of all female participants were victims of sexual abuse and 47.2% encountered psychological abuse. • Only 0.4% of participants still trust theaters in their current structural constitution and believe that the structures of the theater do not favor power abuse and that everything is fair: this is only eight out of 1966 participants. • Only 1% of participants suggest that “everything should stay exactly as it is.” The majority of participants propose an imminent, structural, and reform-oriented transformation of the theater.

The dataset with 58,364 responses and the high number of participants (1966) provide a very broad and deep overview of the personal assessment and perception of participants regarding the topics of power, abuse, and structure in the theater. To prevent suggestion or steering of participants, I have generally also opened up the possibility of confirming and affirming the current conditions and open answer options for alternative or extended responses. In addition, I have

260

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

repeatedly integrated similar control questions, which allowed the orders of magnitude of the results to be confirmed. “Outliers” as well as trends could be identified early on. It is important to note the great continuity of participants in their response behavior and a strong concordance of the explanations when supplementary explanations were provided. Without a doubt, the questioning behavior was influenced by the reform debate that has been taking place in the German theater scene for three years (Schmidt 2016, 2017a; Nachtkritik 2017a et al.), the activities of the ensemblenetwork, and the #MeToo discussion. This has already led to a strong clarification and reflection of the employees and performers, who focus on their rights and options and on the future of the theater landscape. For this reason, the answers are very clear, precise, sharply outlined, and/or very reflective, and in most cases, very well to the point. Nobody felt compelled to give compromising, vengeful, or hateful answers. The answers were rather characterized by a struggle for content clarity, structure, and a perspective on possible improvements. In this form, it was the first survey and study of its kind on the German or any other European theater system. With it, a scientific basis is laid in this field of research, which must be verified and deepened with further studies. In this respect, this study does not claim to provide a complete explanation or exclusive validity in assessing the issues of power and abuse in the theater. But it does provide a first insight into a previously unexplored topic, which has been obscured by an outdated organizational culture, “theater folklore”, and sayings, and which was considered too hot an issue for many theater employees to openly express their opinions on. This study attempts to contribute to an initial formation of opinion, experience and perception of German theater employees. At the same time, a realistic first picture of this topic can be drawn and outlined, which was not expected in this clarity and distinctness. With 38 questions, the study has become extensive. In particular, the thematic question sequences and the associated similarities of questions have led to answer repetitions, which confirm how precisely the participants approached the answering process and how concordant the answering behavior was in each case. Overall, I was able to analyze an extensive dataset, which allowed me access to more response material than expected and thus further increased the validity and relevance of the study. Analysis—Assessment—Recommendations I have divided the questions into eight complexes, which, starting from the general and social situation of the participants, address the issues of abuse and sexual

4.9  Summary Assessment and Classification

261

assault before moving on to the related topics of interest representation, personal protection, the context of education, and structures. In the analysis, I have referred to the findings and conclusions elaborated in the chapters: • Working conditions and fees • Power culture and abuse • Asymmetry of power • Role and function of the Theater director (Intendant) • Structure • New management models • Committees • Educational conditions. One of the positive results of this study is the excellent data basis it provides, which forms a foundation for numerous further investigations, for deepening, but also as a starting point for future measurements of development in these areas. The primary focus is on basic data in the area of the use and abuse of power and the closely related function of theater structures and their locking. The outstanding quality of the data in the area of working conditions, which allows a new, precise look at the situation of artists in theaters and goes far beyond what has been assumed and suspected so far, was not to be expected. Many of these theses and assumptions can now be substantiated. 

Overall, it seems likely that the reality of working conditions in the theater and the often resulting precarious social situation, especially for young actresses and staff members, has been misjudged so far, as well as the fact that a large proportion of employees, particularly artists, and women among them, suffered or still suffer from significant abuse of power and even violence in the theater.

These working conditions play a crucial role in the reflection of the employees, as they are tantamount to exploitation in the affected theaters. These facts can be seamlessly proven based on the results of the study. Working Conditions and Salaries: A Culture of Exploitation 

City theaters do not make sufficient efforts to provide good and adequate working conditions for their artistic staff and ensembles.

262

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

Until now, it was assumed that the working conditions for young artists, although characterized by barely adequate pay, were compensated by a fair, supportive, and inspiring work environment, and that occasional media statements about working conditions at some theaters (Trier, Halle, Ingolstadt, Darmstadt, Erfurt, Cottbus, Schwerin, Schauspielhaus Frankfurt, Berliner Ensemble, Volksbühne Berlin, Staatsoper Berlin, Berliner Festspiele etc.) should be considered exceptions. The results of the study, which now provide a detailed view of both working conditions and salaries, deepen and change this picture. The affected city theaters hardly make any effort to create adequate and pleasant working conditions for their artistic staff and performers that meet their education, professional responsibility, and field of work. Instead, the vertical and horizontal asymmetry of these relationships and incomes is not only continued but even deepened over time. In detail: Above all, public theaters (city, state, and regional theaters) and their directors do not pay enough attention to ensuring that the working hours of artists remain within the legal framework, but rather seek ways to employ their staff beyond the reasonable and legally permitted level—mostly against the background of personnel shortages and the urgent finalization of productions and related artistic goals. The working hours of artistic personnel are characterized by regular gross violations of working time regulations, with participants reporting peak working hours of over 10 h without relevant compensation. Particularly affected by high working hours in the gray area are assistants, but also performers. 

The higher the daily workload, the higher the proportion of women.

The proportion of women is 65% for working days over 10 h and only drops below the 50% mark for working hours of less than 8 h: While women are increasingly exploited, men in many theaters benefit from better working hours and salaries. Despite occasional accusations that the deregulation of working conditions in the independent scene has led to a neoliberalization of employment relationships, the independent scene—according to the findings of the study—is significantly less affected by increased working hours and violations of boundaries than a large number of public institutions. Despite similarly high workloads as in public theaters, independent groups manage to better regulate working hours and, above all, provide better working conditions. 

The longer the average working hours, the less the affected colleagues earn.

4.9  Summary Assessment and Classification

263

There is a paradoxical correlation between long working hours and low wages and salaries, so there is a double exploitation, because the affected colleagues are not even remotely compensated for their overtime. The less the colleagues work, the greater their nominal wage is, based on an hourly rate. Some of the employees with high workloads and low wages also have to earn extra money externally to secure their own existence. This means that their workload is in an unacceptably high range, which is actively tolerated by the directors through signed vacation slips with corresponding notes, e.g., for Muggen etc. This is irresponsible behavior. The question must be allowed here, how can it be possible under humane conditions to work externally with a weekly 50 h working time and more without permanently endangering the work quality at the theater and one’s own health? 

Long working hours have negative effects on the social situation of employees.

There is a correlation between long working hours and solitary social conditions: The longer the working hours, the less the employees are involved in their own family situations, were able to meet a partner and start their own family; they mostly live alone, with their parents or in shared apartments. Only with decreasing working hours does the proportion of artists living in their own families, or permanent relationships, increase, from which the not new, but here again substantiated hint is derived that social ways of life can only thrive if there is sufficient free time and money available. It can be assumed that in the twenty-first century, public theaters should also be able to intervene in a regulatory manner, for example by raising the wage levels, more strictly controlling and reducing daily working hours, and reducing the number of productions and daily rehearsal times. 

The Theater directors accept the collateral damage of poor working conditions, especially for their female employees.

The poor working conditions, low wages, and high workloads are collateral damage consciously accepted by the affected theaters—by theater management and politics—especially for young artists and women in the theater, as the results of the study show. These conditions lead in the medium term to a lack of social integration of these employees, but also to an emotional rift between directors and employees, which is hardly or only perceived by the directors in hard conflict cases, so that there is not even an attempt at healing and change.

264

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

Closely related to the poor working conditions is the poor pay of employees in the lower income groups, with women being even worse off in terms of average wages than men. In Fig. 4.2 I have compiled the various wage levels and thus clearly demonstrated the imbalance of employee groups and the structural asymmetry in this area as well. 

Anti-competitive cartel agreements by directors harm the performers and prevent the formation of real market values of artists’ wages.

In addition, cartel agreements between a large number of directors on the wages of guests and artists willing to change prevent the development of appropriate market values for the artists, which could help them achieve more wage justice— which they will never achieve as long as the cartel is not broken up. Furthermore, personal information about the artists is collected and unlawfully exchanged between the directors. A director would possibly immediately involve his lawyer and sue if his wage level and other contractual conditions were disclosed and exchanged. An actor or employee lacks the means for this. They might then possibly be put on a so-called “blacklist”, which would defame them as a difficult artist if they defended themselves against it. 

Those who earn the least and have the least power have to work the most and to secure their existence through side jobs.

The results in this first category of working conditions already point to the high structural asymmetry and injustice at the affected public theaters: Those who earn the least and are at the very bottom of the theater hierarchies have to work the most and are forced to secure their existence through side jobs. Most of them are women, who predominantly live alone, with relatives, or in shared apartments and do not have their own families because there are too many time and financial obstacles. The social sacrifices made for artistic professions often bear no relation to the recognition by the theaters, their directors, and society, let alone being associated with secure careers. 

The artists are only gradually becoming aware that they are in an exploitative relationship at the affected theaters.

In the future, more respect and recognition should be given to the employees at the theater. Their activities should be subject to general social standards and norms. In this context, it would be highly recommended for the affected theaters

4.9  Summary Assessment and Classification

265

to enable the artists to regenerate, further their education, and maintain a social life without jeopardizing their careers and health. The fact that it has come to this can be attributed to the artistic directors who have continuously tightened these working conditions instead of honestly informing politics and persuading them to provide the means to resolve the problem area with budget increases and/or a slight reduction in production. Instead, a large part of the artistic directors has considered this dilemma as a field that should be ignored or on which their own power can be better expanded. If the artistic directors refuse these important and necessary reform steps, cultural policy and supervisory bodies must develop and initiate changes together with the employees: • by slowing down and streamlining processes, • by reducing overproduction, reducing daily workloads, and granting regular days off, • by giving clear instructions to schedulers and directors to pay attention to compliance with working time laws already in the planning stage, • by incorporating rest periods into the plans, and • by ensuring continuous records of actual working hours and their comparison with the duty rosters. 

Politics is only incompletely informed by the artistic directors about the working conditions and the consequences of the much too compact program and too dense schedule, and the closely related, much too high production pressure.

However, to stop the asymmetry and imbalance at the affected theaters and the further corrosion of the houses and the theater landscape, politics must above all take on greater responsibility. It is not the task of the theaters to find new means, as is often mistakenly suggested, but of the responsible cultural and budget politicians, as long as the theaters are in public dependence on them. Just as it is also their task to pay more attention to the working conditions of the artists and the dangers of asymmetric power relations when grievances, as in the extent raised here, are so clearly recognizable. First measures in this area must therefore address the following topics: • Exposing misconduct and educating employees, • Rules for good working conditions, as part of a Code of Conduct,

266

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

• • • •

Creating new positions or reducing the number of productions, Reducing the daily workload of performers/employees, Establishing monitoring systems and regular evaluations, Introducing a binding salary grid, with a significant increase for the lower salary groups, • Guaranteeing the legal transfer of wage increases to all employees, • Reforming the contractual system (NV-Bühne) with a significant increase in the minimum wage, • Introducing a unified working contract based on a uniform theater tariff for all employee groups. The goal should be to bring the lower wage groups in the NV-Bühne closer to the salaries of administrative and technical staff (TVöD, TvL) in order to implement and enforce a fair wage structure. The demands of the ensemble-network for significantly higher minimum wages and a corresponding wage grid, restrictions on working hours and free working days are more than justified in light of the results of this study. However, a prerequisite is better financial support for theaters from politics. How can politicians be made more aware of this issue? With data and facts, which have a much higher value in politics than verbal or written statements—which is why I have summarized the most important results of the study at a glance at the end of this section. Without facts, it will not be possible to initiate reforms and changes, to interest politics, to release funds and to implement agendas for the future of theaters and their employees. 

In the future, an electronic logbook should be used to record violations of working conditions and contractual working hours.

Furthermore, employees in theaters should be strengthened to openly address and accurately and transparently record misconduct. In principle, an independent monitoring system should be set up in each theater, with which any violation of working conditions, any exceeding of legally defined and reasonable working hours will be recorded in an electronic logbook managed by an independent committee. The committee, together with management and employees, develops a Code of Conduct, which also explicitly sets out the rules for good working conditions.

4.9  Summary Assessment and Classification

267

Power culture at the theater 

At German theaters, the majority of artistically employed people have been directly exposed to the abuse of power and do not agree with the power culture triggered by the directorial model.

Over 50% of employees at German theaters have been and are currently exposed to abuses of power and forms of power abuse at their current or last workplace. Other results of the study also confirm this, so that this status, cautiously expressed, can be described as regular abuse of power at public theaters. It’s not about individual cases  The high proportion testifies to a self-evident, everyday atmosphere of small and larger verbal and psychological attacks, a culture of intimidation, threat, humiliation, intrigue, bullying, the disadvantaging of women, and the systematic pushing out of critical employees from their jobs and livelihoods, as evidenced by the many entries. It is about the fact that employees in theaters, especially performers and artistically employed individuals, who are already insufficiently protected by the imperfect collective bargaining agreement NV-Bühne, work in an environment in which systematic verbal and psychological, and occasionally physical, attacks on the integrity of people take place. The forms of abuse of power experienced by participants both currently and historically do not differ significantly from one another, which testifies to a certain and regrettable stability of power relations and their effects, see Fig. 4.11. 

Power culture, and especially a toxic culture, is increasingly becoming a management method and a component of the organizational culture of many theaters.

The number of affected participants is approximately 1100 out of 1966 participants, which corresponds to a high proportion of about 55%. The significance of a roughly constant high percentage of participants overall (55%), women (59%), and artists (62%) confirms that the vast majority of theater employees come into contact with abuse of power in various forms. It testifies to a quite pronounced toxic power culture in the theater, with power emerging as a key management method and as a component of an archaic organizational culture, from which subforms of power exercise and abuse of power emanate.

268

4  Power and Abuse in Theater Current forms of assault

participants %

Younger Past participants %

Verbal Psychic Physical Other Abuse Total None Abuse Responding Cases not specified total

720 721 65 186 1109

36.6 36.6 3.3 9.4 56.4

738 840 258 338 1082

37.5 42.7 13.1 17.2 55.0

184

9.4

213

10.8

1293 1876 673 1966

65.7

1295 2174 671 1966

65.8

34.3

34.2

Fig. 4.11   Currently and historically experienced forms of abuse of power. (Source: own representation)



Power culture means that the use of power has become self-evident, and is no longer questioned by those exercising it and later also by those affected.

Although there is now an increasing percentage of participants who are beginning to question these forms of power, it is still below 50% when including all relevant comments and mentions in the Other category. The sensitization and work of various groups, especially the ensemble-network, will lead to a further increase in attention, and one day, possibly, a culture of attention will compete with a culture of power in the theater for conceptual supremacy.  The culture of attention must be supported, especially through scientific and content-related enlightenment, as well as through the development and implementation of new concepts of organizational culture and structure.

4.9  Summary Assessment and Classification

269

Following the results of the study in this category and the explanations in the numerous written statements, the reasons for the high abuse of power at public German theaters become apparent. They have a similar context as the working conditions of the artists listed above. They lie in the internal locking of structures. These are: • • • • • 

the inflexible structures, the steep, non-transparent hierarchies, the associated single director model (Intendanten-Modell), and the power of the Theater director and the directors who represent him on stage, as well as the contractual structures of the NV-Bühne. There is a close connection between abuse of power and poor working conditions, which is based on the internal locking of structures.

The numbers and statements of the participants clearly prove this, as it is predominantly the less well-paid artists who are exposed to the various forms of abuse of power. The power triangle can therefore be outlined as shown in Fig. 4.12: 

The Theater director model is closely linked to locked structures, poor working conditions, and abuse of power in theater.

The power triangle suggests that working conditions can be considered a first form of abuse of power, and that these, as well as psychological, verbal, and physical abuse of power, have their origin in the artistic director model and the closely related theater structure. At the same time, power and working conditions strengthen the structure and the Theater director model. All three factors are interdependent. Power is exercised in various situations and places. The obvious place is the stage, the rehearsals, where access is hardest and the vulnerability of the artists is greatest: Here, situations arise that risk becoming detached from the rehearsal context and leaving this context. Directors/artistic directors take on a new role in which they—in the affected cases—no longer only direct or supervise, but live out sexual fantasies coram publico, as a voyeur and/or participant, and thus demonstrate their power. They use performers who do not comply with their wishes (or do not want to), or who—supposedly—do not yet meet the “requirements” of the director, so that they can “demonstrate” it themselves and practice it on the per-

270

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

Intendant model and structure

Poor working condions and exploitaon

Abuse of power and violence

Fig. 4.12   The power triangle in theater (Schmidt 2018)

formers. This involves: touches, kisses, sexual positions and actions, assaults— one thing leads to another, the various, graduated forms of sexual power abuse cannot be separated from each other. However, they intensify with each time a director or artistic director is not stopped, until they cross another boundary. This is a per se extraordinary process because it completely contradicts the task profile and status of the director or the artistic director. According to the job description, they are actually responsible for the personnel, for their safety and development, for the processes and the smooth running of the production, and finally also for its artistic success. However, when the director starts to “participate”—whether in their fantasies or in reality—they increasingly lose their professional distance, and colleagues lose trust, to the point where young colleagues are disturbed and possibly even traumatized by these events. This puts the integrity of artists, especially female artists, at extreme risk—and, of course, the artistic success as well. At first glance, it is hardly understandable why this danger is not seen and recognized by the artistic directors, and why they still arrogantly ignore these incidents as if they were indeed just so-called “gentleman’s offenses,” as has been repeatedly claimed—a contradictory term that has no place in a modern cultural organization today.

4.9  Summary Assessment and Classification



271

Some Theater directors not only pay attention to how actresses are cast—they cross boundaries and focus, for example, on what the costumes should look like, when the actresses should undress, and that they should interact in a highly sexualized manner on stage.

Summing up the comments, the following areas emerge3: • Some directors and artistic directors who are staging productions force performers into sex scenes and/or nudity without these scenes being conceptually justified or prepared in advance. • Some Theater directors express their preferences for nudity or skimpy costumes of actresses in front of other members of the house. • Some directors (and artistic directors who are staging productions) stimulate and manipulate actors to interact sexually with other actresses/scene partners on stage and/or to humiliate them during rehearsal or on stage. • Some directors (and artistic directors staging productions) sexually humiliate performers by publicly and loudly talking about their bodies and sexual characteristics during rehearsals and displaying them accordingly. • Some directors (and artistic directors staging productions) temporarily take on the role of the male partner themselves and physically exploit the situation by performing sexual and humiliating actions on the actresses, which are disguised as a playful context. With these actions, they change and violate the protective context of a rehearsal and significantly affect the psychological integrity of their performers. At this point, the question must be allowed why theater management itself is unable to prevent this form of power exercise: • The structure and the organizational culture of the theater facilitate this, because they primarily strengthen the director-centered model, in which the

3 Now

that the foundations have been laid with this study, the forms of abuse should be examined more pointedly in a subsequent study and addressed anew from the perspective of the questions, as this is about abuse, legal violations, and the promotion of exploitation that must be detailed. It should also be examined more closely what psychological and health effects this abuse of power has on colleagues in the theaters, and what economic, social, and artistic damage is caused temporarily or permanently. Work absences, burnout, depression, long-term inability to practice the profession, trauma, and grief, permanent unemployment, and precarious living situations can be the result.

272

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

artistic director is usually also a director, thus having an understanding of the concerns and desires of directors, and at the same time also finds himself in the situation of no longer being able to separate necessary stage directions and his own sexual fantasies. In addition, a sole artistic director concentrates so many tasks and decisions on himself that he often pushes the important concerns of his artists and employees into the background in order to advance his own artistic self-realization interests. This can lead to an artistic director not reacting or reacting very late to corresponding incidents and hints. • They give the Theater director so much power that he even directs himself— although this contradicts his full program as a theater manager. Often, this is even desired and appreciated by politics when selecting directors. It is often forgotten that the majority of artistic directors, during the phases of their own productions at their own theater or the theaters of friendly directors, are usually only very selectively approachable for the general topics of the house for 6–8 weeks per production, during which they usually immerse themselves very deeply. The focus is then on the production, their own artistic ideas, and their realization. A theater experiences a kind of conceptual standstill during these two months, and the house continues to work during this time with its own automatism, with which the most important, regular things are done, but no attention is paid to problems and assaults. Often, during these periods, artistic directors are not expected to engage too deeply with the day-today operations of the theater by their staff. They are protected in order not to endanger the particularly fragile artistic director production processes, which become the absolute center of the theater and unfortunately successfully suppress all other topics and problems for a period of up to two months each— with two or three artistic director productions per year, this mode is extended accordingly. • However, the highly burdened employees and directors do not dare to oppose this model and its effects, because they fear non-renewals, career obstacles, and the freezing of salaries—or simply the wrath of the artistic director, which leads to humiliations, demoralizations, and embarrassments. • Many artistic directors, due to ignorance or unwillingness, are unable to use and utilize appropriate personnel policy instruments. This systematically prevents the development of a new communication and decision-making culture through motivation, joint discussions, and the development of goals and careers, with which forms of power abuse and psychological and physical exploitation of employees can be addressed and eliminated.

4.9  Summary Assessment and Classification



273

The primary task is to develop a new communication and decisionmaking culture in the theaters.

Currently, there is still a significant structural asymmetry • between income and power relations, • regarding access to information, • regarding the steep hierarchies and the organizational structure focused on the decision-making power of an “imperfect” person. In this context, the term imperfect refers to the fact that a person cannot be sufficient per se to physically and intellectually cope with the task portfolio, and that the directors—or more rarely dramaturges—who have risen to the position of Theater director do not fulfill the content-related, social, and conceptual prerequisites for this task profile, yet are entrusted with this task by an overwhelming majority of selection committees, as the appointments of artistic directors in the last five years have clearly shown. In the analysis of the study results, it is also noticeable that 20% of the participants specifically point out nepotism by their Theater directors. The preferential treatment and awarding of contracts, engagements, functions, and special roles to partners and family members is just as much a part of this area in the affected theaters as is the opaque decision-making and communication by the management level. 

In principle, the structural asymmetry continues to spread, reaching the finest branches of a theater operation, which thereby loses its balance, its inner stability, and its ability to face the future.

One result of the information-asymmetry is: The weighing of opportunities between career, salary, family, and health is answered and ranked by most actors far too often in exactly this order, because especially in their early professional years, they lack the knowledge and the associated prerequisites to make more balanced decisions. The reason for this also lies in the patchy, sometimes outdated education in matters of law and organization, which is why education, seminars, and master’s programs, as well as vocational training and further education, must be counted among the cornerstones of a reform program. As is evident in almost all responses from the participants and my analyses and explanations already made above, abuse and power excesses are each linked

274

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

to the locking of the organizational structure of the theaters and the inadequate personal prerequisites of the respective director. 

The power aspirations of the artistic directors and their abuse of power on the one hand, and the theater’s desire for social participation and recognition on the other, are diametrically opposed.

If the theater permanently allows this abuse of power, it not only discredits itself as a responsible employer but also as a cultural and political actor in a society in which it actually wants to actively participate in reflection and positive change. However, it should first fulfill the prerequisites for this in its own house, abolish all forms of power abuse, regulate, sanction, and create appropriate instruments and committees so that such processes no longer repeat themselves. Conceptual solutions to the structural and management problems include, among others, all measures of unlocking that have already been mentioned above (Sect. 4.8): • Team management, here for example the directorate, and • the anchored participation of the ensembles in the decision-making process in the theater, • the change of selection mechanisms for future leaders, • the change of contract structures at the theater (NV-Bühne → unified contract) as well as • the establishment of complaint offices, among others. Function and Training of the Artistic Director 

Not all artistic directors master their profession to the required extent.

This is indicated by the results of this study, the uncovered and mostly politically sanctioned abuses of power in the past ten years at the theaters I have listed in the introduction (Figs. 1.1, 1.2), and this is already indicated by the analyses and results within the framework of my study Theater, Crisis, and Reform (Schmidt 2016). The mistaken principle: “Whoever can direct can also manage a theater,” according to which most artistic directorships in this country are still appointed by the German Stage Association and the public shareholders, has proven to be incorrect and not sustainable. Those who want to become artistic directors need an adequate artistic and managerial education. Even more forward-looking: For

4.9  Summary Assessment and Classification

275

this position, one needs an excellent education, experience as a manager in NPOs, artistic knowledge, and very good social and communicative skills (see below). Already at the beginning of the 1980s, there was a principle among the 165 Resident Theatres in the USA, which had permanent staff, that the Artistic Director should not be involved in the management of the theater. He or she, therefore, has no decisions to make, such as personnel engagements and the use of resources, where he or she naturally lacks many skills—which in Germany every artistic director considers his or her inviolable domain (DiMaggio 1987). With the separation of offices, US theaters have not only become highly professionalized since then, but they also stand out positively from German theaters due to their artistic variety and structural diversity, their positively radiating organizational culture, and the much fewer problems with abuse of power and poor working conditions. In contrast, German theaters, where management aspects are obviously chaotic, as the results of this study show, among other things. The significant advantage of German public theaters over American ones is indeed the generous, multi-year secured financial support from the public sector, amounting to an average of about 80% of the total costs. In my opinion—and this is also supported by the results of this study—no structural or artistic capital is derived from this comparative advantage. Instead, the theater landscape is lost in a standstill, disturbed by numerous, increasingly uncovered and discussed abuses of power, which should now serve as a catalyst for the next structural development step of the German theater landscape. The results of this study are proof that the old theater traditions and rituals no longer work today. They stem from a tradition that has resisted modernity and modernization. This thinking is part of today’s organizational culture of the theater, which further complicates any attempt to renew the theater system. Because artistic directors and other leaders lack proper training in general management, organization, learning and motivation, and personnel management, they compensate for this lack of expertise with specific theater knowledge, which they have once seen demonstrated by their artistic director mentors and masters. This not only miniaturizes/marginalizes the required theater knowledge but also misrepresents and bequeaths it completely wrongly for generations. This is done with a determination and irresponsibility that can only be explained by the interest in continuing this model and the associated maintenance of power. There is still the misconception that an artistic director can actually learn his or her trade solely in the theater, preferably from an older artistic director who—following medieval traditions—takes on the role of patron and “master” of the aspirant.

276



4  Power and Abuse in Theater

Disillusionment and fear prevail among the staff in the face of the power and working methods of the artistic directors and management.

The negative feedback about the working methods of the management and the artistic director predominates in the study. Disillusionment about one’s own limited possibilities at the employee level and, above all, fear are two factors that determine the work in some theaters and at the same time hinder the internal participation of the employees. This includes both the immediate fear of the performers and artistic staff towards the artistic director, the directors, and other superiors, as well as the fear of negative consequences when filing complaints, criticism, or simply not being liked, as has been mentioned several times here. 

As an artistic director, the focus in the future will no longer be on one’s own career, but on promoting the work of the entrusted artists and employees.

The reasons are diverse and also lie in the psychology of the leading actors: artists who suddenly find themselves in a leadership position do not fully perceive the complexity and diversity of the upcoming tasks, nor the need to change themselves in order to be able to meet these tasks. They must try to maintain a balance between their claim to continue being an artist, but now taking responsibility for creating the conditions and resources for the careers of many other artists. These tasks are—as described above—significantly more complex today than they were 20 or 30 years ago. There are individual artistic directors who, in their claim to omnipotence, assume that they also master these management skills well, even virtuously. The damage that this misjudgment can cause has been described with the results of the study. In this respect, cases of uncovering these scandals are to be welcomed as long as it leads to a conceptual reversal in the thinking of the theater association, the artistic directors, and the shareholders of the theaters. The other group of management members suspects that they lack the prerequisites for this and tries to fall back on the corresponding specialists or to cover up and play down weaknesses. Both are impossible in the long run and lead to significant conflicts, not to mention the disturbance of the balance between being an artist and a manager, the artistic results will consequently become increasingly mediocre. 

In the future, artistic directors should be able to demonstrate and apply profound knowledge of personnel management and management, as well as excellent social skills and trained communication skills.

4.9  Summary Assessment and Classification

277

As can be seen from the results of the study, there are many critical points in the area of individual personnel management. They have their causes, on the one hand, in the lack of training, in the inadequate employment of methods of personnel management and personnel development, simple instruments of modern management, and simply missing competencies. It is precisely these aspects that must already be examined in the selection phase of new artistic directors and be proven by independent personnel consultants who have significantly better knowledge in this area than the members of the German Theater Association, who are themselves only artistic directors and therefore not very objective. Therefore, it is the first duty of the application commissions at German theaters to examine the candidates for these skills and knowledge of personnel management, as well as the mentioned social competencies. Because in all the problem cases shown in the study, it is above all these social competencies that are lacking, which one works on throughout one’s life and which cannot be learned even in the best management seminars alone, because a predisposition that has already been developed and developed early on must be present for this: humanity, empathy, zest for life, loyalty, ability to accept criticism, and integrity. 

Psychological assessments by personnel consultants should be used to test the competencies of future applicants for management tasks.

Every serious candidate for a directorship should also undergo a psychological assessment, as is common in Switzerland, for example. This is a standard procedure and has nothing to do with an infringement of personal rights. Anyone who wants to be responsible for a large budget, hundreds of employees, and a large artistic program must have professional and mental stability and strength, as well as proven social skills. That is why these assessments should serve as a kind of reassurance for the shareholders, the employees, and the future of the theater. Change of the management model 

Complexity in demand requires complexity in execution.

The measures proposed here are to be considered as part of an overall model of structural unlocking, with which the management model of the theater also takes on a different form and meaning. Theater only works in teamwork. The director, through his individual application, his contract, and the associated power for sole leadership, usually has

278

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

not explicitly expressed the desire to work in a team, even if he may repeatedly emphasize this publicly. By concentrating all decisions on his function, he decides against the team or teamwork, and he must fail in the medium term, because complexity in demand requires complexity in execution, which an individual can no longer possess today. And it is precisely into this gap that the directorate model goes, which abolishes the function of the director, divides the tasks located with him, and employs various heads who work together on an equal footing with the managers of the administrative areas, for the benefit of the theater and its employees. This will contribute to a balanced and sustainable development of the theaters, which in the future will be based on the skills and knowledge of several specialists and, in the best case, also on the employees and artists, rather than just on the interests of a single, generalist-oriented, but predominantly artistically active person. 

The transition from interest-driven to expertise-driven management.

So it is about a break, which must be represented not only as a model but also paradigmatically through: • a new organizational culture, • a new management model (team management or directorate), on which new structures are based, • a new form of transparency and open communication, • the transition from an interest-driven to an expertise-driven management, • a new composition of committees, including • new forms of collaboration between employees, management, and committees. 

Representatives of the staff and the ensembles should have a place in the supervisory bodies of the theaters in the future.

It is all the more important that representatives of the ensembles and the artistic staff also receive a place in the supervisory body in order to jointly lead and control the work of the theater management and the general orientation of the theater into the future with the other committee members, and to be able to suggest course changes or object to faulty concepts and development directions from the perspective of the employees in the—in the future predominantly staffed with experts—supervisory body.

4.9  Summary Assessment and Classification

279

Education Context and Sexual Assault 

Sexual assaults in the theater occur impulsively or are strategically prepared.

Sexual assaults occur impulsively, for example, when they are caused by paraphilic disorders. If they are strategically prepared, then as in the example where a professor on a guest performance trip arranges a night of love against the will of a student as a matter of course. Likewise, the artistic director who has his own hotel room for meetings with his artists prepares his series of assaults strategically, even if he should act out of a sexual impulse when selecting and addressing his victims. Here, impulse and strategic preparation can also overlap. From this and many other examples, it can be concluded that individual perpetrators operating in the theater environment often systematically prepare their activities and deliberately use their power and influence, including various forms of manipulation. It takes a great deal of strength and courage to break out of such a circulos vitiosos when one has already been targeted as a victim, like the student who manages to refuse the professor’s night in the double bed. And it is precisely this courage that should be encouraged and protected more in the future in colleges and theaters. These examples of courage should also be integrated into communication and systematic educational work so that young artists can learn about the pitfalls of power and sexual violence early enough and know how to recognize them, and derive appropriate actions and measures to weaken the exercised power and prevent assaults. These standard actions should include disclosure, calling and requesting help, public addressing and discussing in assemblies and committees, and informing supervisory bodies. 

Breaking acting students and young performers is, unfortunately, still a popular form of exercising power.

Generations of actors report on this, with the unanimous tenor that “breaking” is destructive, burdensome, unnecessary, and rarely successful, apart from the associated boundary crossing and violent intrusion into the integrity and inviolability of a young person. It serves as a method primarily to concentrate power in the teacher/director, who thus succeeds in penetrating the psychological core in order to better shape a young player. This is associated with great arrogance and contempt for humanity, but also with self-overestimation, which finds little agreement with the actual knowledge about suitable concepts and methods of teaching and

280

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

dealing with students that is present in the respective lecturers, from psychology to pedagogy, from mastering body and language to working on roles and scenes. One can only hope that with the ensemble-network and #MeToo, a change of mindset or generational change among lecturers and directors will soon take place, which is associated with greater humanity, more empathy, better training methods, and a social image of humanity. Internal Locking and Structural Asymmetry The internal locking, structural asymmetry, and regular abuse of power not only lead to a violation of the rights of artists and employees where they are encountered, but also have lasting effects on the organizational culture and the future of theaters (Schmidt 2017b). In addition, doubts are increasingly developing in the discourses and also in the networks and ensembles: On the one hand, the power of artistic directors is growing contrary to trends and discussions. At the same time, their instruments of power and intimidation are increasingly at the center of criticism of the structural conditions of the theater. 

The results of this study clearly show that the majority of artists want to do without externally and power-initiated boundary crossings and work in protected spaces where the injustice between genders and hierarchies, which is reproduced on and behind the stage, is abolished.

Some artistic directors use the argument of artistic freedom in critical situations, which primarily serves to maintain their power and is often interpreted and applied according to their own discretion. Artistic freedom is repeatedly actively used and abused as an argument to strain the working conditions of artists, maintain hierarchies, apply instruments of power, and justify transgressions. In fact, it is the outdated, paternalistic structures and hierarchies of the theater, the working conditions, instruments of power, and transgressions that must be classified as systematically hostile to art. Also outdated and problematic are the double standards, with which theaters position themselves externally as democratic, fair, and progressive, but are unable to represent this internally. The participants find more intelligent and well-thought-out patterns, models, and conditions for a new, future paradigm of fair art production, based on non-power structures and management models, participation, and good working conditions. The decision of many actors to no longer expose themselves to the pressure of city and state theaters and to work independently is also a sign that ensemble theater, the core of the German theater landscape, can quickly become a Potemkin village if reforms are not initiated very soon.

4.9  Summary Assessment and Classification

281

FURTHER MEASURES and SUGGESTIONS

The study provides a glimpse of the urgency with which theater employees demand changes to establish a fair and sustainable theater operation: • Participants suggest very specific measures, ranging from ombudsman offices, external assistance and counseling services, to public communication platforms to make criticism visible. • Nevertheless, the focus is on the responsibility of the artistic director, who must take appropriate precautions themselves. • A better education of artistic directors/theater managers in personnel management and general management is demanded, as well as a requirement for theater managers to undergo training and further education in general and personnel management. • The power of the artistic director and the internal structure of the theater should be gradually rebuilt by implementing a structural unlocking. This includes flat hierarchies, team solutions, an organizational structure that aligns with the natural course of production processes, greater participation of employees in decision-making, the involvement of ensembles in the election and contract extension of artistic directors/ management, a change in the selection process for new theater managers, and the establishment of ombudsman offices, evaluations, and control bodies. • The participants urge a rapid and comprehensive modernization of the NV-Bühne, which has so far been regarded as an instrument for enforcing the wishes of artistic directors and serves the interests of artists too little, or alternatively: • The development and implementation of a uniform collective agreement that applies to all areas of the theater. • The implementation of so-called codes of conduct, which, among other things, prescribe a non-power-based interaction of management with their employees within the ethical guidelines of the theater and urge compliance. • The establishment of a performer-friendly theater system, with significantly less time and production pressure, but with more time for artistic work on individual productions and for communication with the audience.

282

4  Power and Abuse in Theater

References Burke, E. (1989). Philosophische Untersuchungen über den Ursprung unserer Ideen vom Erhabenen und Schönen. In der klassischen Übersetzung von Friedrich Bassenge, neu hrsg. von Werner Strube. In Philosophische Bibliothek (Vol. 324). Hamburg: Meiner. (First published 1757). BZ. (May 29, 2018). Machtmissbrauch im Schauspiel Köln. Seidler, U., Berliner Zeitung. DBV. (2017). Werkstatistik 2015/16. Statistik der aufgeführten Stücke, Opern und Musikwerke an deutschen Theatern. Köln: Deutscher Bühnenverein. DBV. (2018). Theaterstatistik. Köln: Deutscher Bühnenverein. DiMaggio, P. (1987). Managers of the arts. Careers and opinions of senior administrators of U.S. art museums, symphony orchestras, resident theaters, and Local Arts Agencies. Research Division Report No. 20. National Endowment of the Arts. Washington D.C.: Seven Locks Press. Dion, K., Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1992). What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 285–290. Döring, N., et al. (2015). Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation in den Sozial- und Humanwissenschaften. Berlin: Springer (Springer Lehrbuch). Dweck, C., & Howe, L. (2015). Changes in self-definition impede recovery from rejection. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42(1), 54–71. Fischer, G., & Riedesser, P. (2009). Lehrbuch der Psychotraumatologie (4th ed.). Stuttgart: Reinhard. (First published 1998). FR. (2012). Reeses Gehalt wächst kräftig. Göpfert, C.-J., Frankfurter Rundschau vom 18.06.2012. https://www.fr.de/frankfurt/spd-org26325/reeses-gehalt-waechstkraeftig-11356098.html. Galtung, J. (1975). Strukturelle Gewalt. Beiträge zur Friedens- und Konfliktforschung. Reinbek: Rowohlt. Graber, R., Stuiber, P., & Weis, S. (Feb 2, 2018). Aufschrei auf offener Bühne: BurgtheaterMitarbeiter stehen gegen Machtmissbrauch auf. Der Standard. Hartling, L. M., & Luchetta, T. (1999). Humiliation: Assessing the impact of derition, degradation, and debasement. Journal of Primary Prevention, 19(5), 259–278. Hegemann, J., & Nix, C. (2008). Normalvertrag Bühne: Handkommentar. Baden-Baden: Nomos. Iden, P. (1990). Die Schaubühne am Halleschen Ufer, 1970–1979. München: Hanser. Kulturkritik. (2019). Begriffe: Willkür. Kulturkritik.net: Pfreundschuh, W., https://kulturkritik.net/begriffe/begr_txt.php?lex=willkuer. Markefka, M. (1995). Vorurteile – Minderheiten – Diskriminierung. München: Luchterhand. Mayring, P. (2016). Einführung in die qualitative Sozialforschung. Weinheim: Beltz. Miller, D. T., & Vidmar, N. (1992). The social psychology of punishment reactions. In M. J. Lerner & S. C. Lerner (Eds.), The justice motive in social behavior (pp. 145–172). New York: Plenum. Nachtkritik. (2017a). Debatte um die Zukunft des Stadttheaters XXVIII – Stephanie Gräve und Jonas Zipf zu Leitungsstrukturen an Theatern. Arbeit und Struktur. Von Stephanie Gräve und Jonas Zipf. 18.11.17. https://www.nachtkritik.de/index.php?option=com_

References

283

content&view=article&id=13506:debatte-um-die-zukunft-des-stadttheaters-xxviiistephanie-graeve-und-jonas-zipf-zu-leitungsstrukturen-an-theatern&catid=101:debatte &Itemid=84. Nachtkritik. (2017b). Der Verein Pro Quote Bühne fordert eine Frauen-Quote für das Theater. Es braucht Vitamin V. Interview: Sophie Diesselhorst und Anne Peter. 16.10.17. Nachtkritik. (2017c). Angstfreier Arbeiten. 27.11.17. https://www.nachtkritik.de/index. php?option=com_content&view=article&id=14693:presseschau-vom-27-november-2017-interview-mit-dem-neuen-oberhausener-intendanten-florian-fiedler-der-einedehierarchisierung-anstrebt-und-sich-zugunsten-seiner-mitarbeiter-das-eigene-intendantengehalt-gekuerzt-hat&catid=242&Itemid=62. Ómarsdóttir, E., et al. (2018). Open letter: #metoo and Trobleyn/Jan Fabre, Sep. 2018. https://www.rektoverso.be/auteurs/former-employees-and-apprentices-at-troubleyn. PwC. (2010). Sind die Mitarbeiter zufrieden, steigt die Qualität der Arbeitsergebnisse. Ergebnisse einer Umfrage von Price Waterhouse Coopers, vom 16.09.2010. https:// www.pwc.de/de/prozessoptimierung/sind-die-mitarbeiter-zufrieden-steigt-die-qualitaetihrer-arbeitsergebnisse.html. Schmidt, T. (2016). Theater, Krise und Reform. Eine Kritik des deutschen Theatersystems. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Schmidt, T. (2017a). Der informierte Künstler. Debatte um die Zukunft des Stadttheaters XXXI – Schmidt modelliert das neue Mitbestimmungstheater. 03. April 2017. Schmidt, T. (2017b). Qualitative Performance des Theaters – ein Modell für die Untersuchung der deutschen Stadt-, Landes- und Staatstheater. Zeitschrift für Kulturmanagement, 3, 137–164. Schmidt, T. (2018). Elemente des deutschen Theatersystems, Essentials Praxis Kulturmanagement. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Sharifi, A. (2011). Theater für Alle? Partizipation von Postmigranten am Beispiel der Bühnen der Stadt Köln (Studien zur Kulturpolitik) (Vol. 13). Frankfurt a. M.: Lang. Six, B. (2018). Attraktivität. In M. A. Wirtz (Ed.), Dorsch – Lexikon der Psychologie. https://portal.hogrefe.com/dorsch/attraktivitaet/. Accessed 4 Oct 2018. Thiele, R. (2007). Programmheft des Schauspiels Köln in der Saison 2007/08. Köln. TLZ. (December 12, 2011). Märkis Catering-Affäre schwappt über nach Bern. Büker, T., Thüringische Landeszeitung. Tobler, A. (July 6, 2018a). Berner Stadttheater: Intendant Märki tritt zurück. Der Berner Intendant Stephan Märki hat seine Liebesbeziehung zu Sophie Krempl aus der Geschäftsleitung bekannt gegeben. Beide treten zurück. Der Bund. Tobler, A. (July 14, 2018b). Der letzte Akt ist noch nicht geschrieben. Der Bund. United Nations. (1995). The Beijing declaration and the platform for action, Fourth world conference on women Beijing, China, 4–15 Sept. 1995. New York.

5

Results of the Study in Overview

5.1 The Results of the Study in Numbers and Overviews 5.1.1 Social Situation and Working Conditions As part of the dissemination through the media channels of the ensemble- network and the Master’s program in Theater and Orchestra Management at the University of Music and Performing Arts in Frankfurt/Main (HFMDK), but above all through the high number of participants, a high representativeness of the results could be ensured. To ensure this, I have defined an expectation range (confidence interval) with which the accuracy of determining average values, so-called parameters, is delimited. I followed the relevant literature of similar studies and set a confidence interval (t) of 95.5%, i.e., approximately ±4.5% for the individual response groups. With about 2000 participants (n), the following fluctuation ranges (a) result for the results (in % = p): As can be seen from Fig. 5.1, the fluctuation ranges for the high total population of 1966 (approx. 2000) participants are in a very reliable range, so that representative results can be determined and clear judgments can be made based on the results. Distribution of Participants The study has 1966 participants, which ensures a very high representativeness considering the total number of employees at the theaters. With regard to the two areas of performers (predominantly actors) and artistic staff, 1276 participants

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 T. Schmidt, Power and Structure in Theater, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-42280-6_5

285

286

5  Results of the Study in Overview

Respondents/Result

10:90%

20:80%

30:70%

40:60%

50:50%

100 participants

6

8

9.2

9.8

10

300 participants

3.5

4.6

5.3

5.7

5.8

500 participants

2.7

3.6

4.1

4.4

4.5

1000 participants

1.9

2.5

2.9

3.1

3.2

2000 participants

1.3

1.8

2

2.2

2.2

Fig. 5.1   Fluctuation ranges and representativeness of the study (Schmidt 2018)

took part in the study. In Fig. 5.2, I would like to compare this number with the current numbers of performers and artistic staff at German theaters. I have taken the number of currently employed performers and staff at theaters from the latest statistics of the DBV (DBV 2018). I have not included choir singers, who are subject to a special contract and did not participate in the study. Since the focus was on actors and staff, and singers and dancers participated only in small numbers, I have developed separate ratios without the latter two groups. Based on the total population, the study reaches 15% of the target group. This makes the study and its results not only representative but also highly relevant in this unexpected magnitude. It can be assumed that the results for actors have equally high relevance for their colleagues in other divisions (DBV 2018). Distribution of Participants by Type of Theater and Profession The percentage distribution of participants according to the three types of theaters—city, state, and national theaters—roughly corresponds to the distribution of all employees in the entire German theater landscape across the individual theaters. The results also refer to a distribution of participants into actors, artistic staff, non-artistic staff, and management members, in order to obtain an overall view

Divisions

Population

Performers* total

4350

Participants study

%

Of which: Actors

1835

757

Artistic staff Total

41,2

4220 8570

519 1276

12,3 14,9

Fig. 5.2   Number of performers and artistic staff (DBV 2018; Schmidt 2018)

287

5.1  The Results of the Study in Numbers …

of the professional classification of the participants and to be able to classify the results of the subgroups accordingly (See Fig. 5.3). Gender of Participants A total of 1948 participants responded to the question about gender, with 1206 female participants making up just under two-thirds (61.9%) of those who felt addressed as women. 36.8% of participants were men (716). 26 participants identified as another gender, and 18 participants were not willing to answer this question. The reason for the high proportion of female theater employees among the respondents is the greater willingness of women to participate in studies aimed at creating a basis for improving social conditions and promoting greater justice. In addition, there is the higher participation rate of women in new media and the theater forums taking place therein, as well as the high level of injustice and the strong abuse of power exercised against women themselves. Women are significantly more often victims of psychological, physical, and sexual assaults—as the results of this study also show. Men participate less in new media and are less affected by the exercise of power in the work context because they can physically defend themselves better. Nevertheless, care must be taken to ensure that young, inexperienced male artists, in particular, can also become victims. A further asymmetry arises in the internal relationship between women and men within work processes, in which women are largely dependent on the favor of men in management positions, which in turn can lead to abuse of power, assaults, and cronyism.

41.6

Artistic % staff 223 43.2

Other Staff 50

%

Municipal theater 313

Performer %

Regional theater

75

10.0

37

7.2

16

16.5

16.8

111

21.5

15

15.5

51.5

Management 59 53.6

Other

not total specified 38 738

%

55

37.9

9

8.2

13

7

157

8.1

19

17.3

26

22

319

16.4

1.5

State Theater

126

STD Total

514

Don't know

6

0.8

4

0.8

4

4.1

4

3.6

6

7

31

Work Free

220

29.3

138

26.7

11

11.3

19

17.3

175

3

566

29.1

Training

12

1.6

3

0.6

1

1.0

0

87

33

136

7.0

not specified

5

10

19

Total

757

120

1966

371

81

3 38.7

519

87

0

1 26.5

98

5.0

110

5.6

362

100

Fig. 5.3   Distribution of Participants by Type of Theater and Profession (Schmidt 2018)

288

5  Results of the Study in Overview

Distribution of Average Incomes of Participants Figure 5.4 shows the distribution of average incomes among the participants of the study, broken down by fee groups. I have narrowed down the sample to actors and artistic staff after analyzing the overall picture to examine possible changes in the distribution. In the following Fig. 5.5, I calculate the actual amounts of fees paid to the participants, based on the average values of the respective range, to show how the percentage distribution of the total amount of all fees increasingly changes to the disadvantage of the lowest fee groups, thus creating an asymmetry of incomes. The calculation based on the results in Fig. 5.5 yields the following result: • The total sum of monthly gross payments to the participants amounts to 4.4 million € per month, which is distributed among the various fee groups, • the average salary of a participant is therefore 2512.24 €, which is roughly equivalent to the average salary of 2550 € collected in Theater, Crisis and Reform (Schmidt 2016); • 56.8% of all participants, who are engaged in the lowest fee group below 2500 €, receive a total of only 50.6% of the overall sum, already creating a difference of −6.2% on the total sum,

Income in €

total

%

Performer

%

%

29.2

artistic staff 136

2500

240

18.0

151

19.9

130

25.0

12.2

105

13.8

76

14.6

>3000

231

11.7

118

15.6

49

9.4

>4000

85

4.3

42

5.6

15

2.9

>5000

44

2.2

20

2.6

7

1.3

not specified

248

12.5

26

3.4

15

2.9

Total

1966

100

757

100

519

100

Fig. 5.4   Distribution of average incomes (Schmidt 2018)

26.2

5.1  The Results of the Study in Numbers …

Income in € (2018) Precarious 2500 (ø 2750)

240

12.2

660.0

14.8

1.09

>3000 (ø 3500)

231

11.8

808.5

18.1

1.39

32.9

1.24

24.0 Good-Very Good >4000 (ø 4500)

85

4.3

382.5

8.6

1.79

>5000 (ø 8000)

44

2.2

352.0

7.9

3.16 2.26

248

6.5 12.6

16.5

not specified Total

1966

100%

4471.8

Fig. 5.5   Asymmetry of incomes—Average fees of participants (Schmidt 2018)

• 23.9% of participants in the middle segment, on the other hand, already receive 32.9%, • 6.5% of participants in the upper segment of earners with fees over 4000 € even receive 16.5%, a range of +10% on the average salary of the sample. How well can an artist at the theater live on their salary today? For a better understanding of the results, I have divided the employee groups into performers, artistic staff, and employees according to TVöD, see Fig. 5.6. Side jobs 925 out of 1966 participants have side jobs, which corresponds to an average of 47% of the total and 72.8% of the performers and artistically employed. This number is divided as follows: • 202 colleagues earn money at smaller private performances, song recitals, etc., • 167 colleagues regularly accept guest contracts at other theaters,

290 I/ We can from it

5  Results of the Study in Overview Artists

%

Artistic staff

&

Techni- % cians, Admin.

Total

In %

Not

32

4.2

20

3.9

4

4.1

115

5.8

Hardly

90

11.9

52

10.0

10

10.2

192

9.9

Just so

312

41.2

213

41.1

29

29.6

698

35.5

Sum precarious Sufficient

434 237

57.3 31.3

285 188

55.0 36.2

43 44

43.9 44.9

1005 571

51.1 29.0

9.6

11

11.2

181

9.2

209

10.6

1966

100

Live well

73

45

8.6

not specified

13

1

-

Total

757

519

98

Fig. 5.6   Living conditions of artists at theaters in Germany (Schmidt 2018)

• 393 colleagues also work in independent projects, • 183 colleagues work in low-paid, non-artistic side jobs, • 441 colleagues work in other areas (film, dubbing voice actors, guest lecturers, teaching, family support, massages, cleaning, babysitting, etc.). Example calculation for a house collective agreement with redistribution model Model Calculation How could one develop a model that creates wage justice in the medium term, and what could it look like? A very simple, yet effective model could consist of a progressive in-house wage agreement, in which the management and the employees of the TVÖD for less than ten years waive wage increases and transfer them completely to the employees of the contract area NV-Bühne (see Fig. 5.7). These are average values that must be calculated individually for each house according to the strength and average incomes of the respective wage groups. This is an example of a medium-sized house with 308 employees, where the increases of groups 1 and 2 are frozen. One could also call this a solidarity model. However, one must be aware that there will be a lack of understanding among colleagues in the technical department or among colleagues in the administration, who often consider themselves underpaid, for such a procedure. This requires great persuasive work

5.1  The Results of the Study in Numbers …

291

Monthly income per salary group in € thousand Number Tariff group

ø

Ø

2019

2019

2020

2022

2024

2026

2026

2027

Management

8

6000

48

48

48

48

48

6000

6120

TVöD

160

3500

560

560

560

560

560

3500

3570

NV

140

2500

350

386

426

467

489

3493

3570

Total + 2% p.a.

308

958

996

1036

1077

1098

Fig. 5.7   Sample calculation for an in-house wage agreement with a redistribution model (Schmidt 2018)

on the part of the manager, his motivational skills, and a good explanation aimed at the fact that the future of the theater in an unjust world can only be established through internal justice. It is only a matter of waiving marginal shares of a wage increase and, after a certain period, benefiting from wage increases as usual, while the formerly deferred employees are brought up to a fair level. The trade unions must be involved here. As can be seen from Fig. 5.7, the salaries in the areas of management and TVöD are frozen in the above model in 2019 and only participate in regular wage increases again from 2027 onwards. In the meantime, the fees in NV-Bühne can grow from an average of 2500 € to 3500 € and reach the level of TVöD. Not a single staff position would have to be sacrificed for this; it would only require the solidarity of the first two groups mentioned to create justice in the medium term. This would be the fastest and most straightforward way to quickly bring the disadvantaged artists and artistic staff to a salary level that would be appropriate for their university education and their responsibility for the theater. It must be added that I have greatly simplified here by assuming a stable annual inflation rate of 2% and its transfer to the theater employees by the shareholders. There may be deviations here, which would then have to be fine-tuned in the model. With this model, other variants can also be developed that interfere less with the structure of the TVÖD, by completely freezing and passing on the wage increases for the management, but splitting the wage increases for the TVÖD, e.g., 1% remains with the TVÖD, 1% is added as a sum to the natural wage increase of the NVBühne employees. This would double the process of adjustment and be achieved in about 14 years.

292 Daily hours

5  Results of the Study in Overview

10 % Other Sample None

Mon. 2000 approx. 2000 3000

About

Ancillaryjob

3000

100

56

46

129

59.4

49.5

27.7

22.8

63.8

96

237

151

168

87

207

49.6

22.9

56.6

36.0

40.1

20.7

49.4

460

328

215

258

220

237

140

358

65.0

75.3

53.7

35.2

42.2

36,0

38.8

22.9

58.6

223

144

156

125

110

45

88

70

51

145

14.5 85 1540 426

64.6

70.0

56.0

49.3

20.2

39.4

31.4

22.9

65

890

1025

736

467

660

559

531

324

839

Fig. 5.8   Participant groups staggered by daily working hours (Schmidt 2018) Weekend work

%

Compensation None

Not % sufficiently

Days off supplements

Other

Question not understood

not specified

None

47

3.1

15

0

31.9

5

5

1

21

1 per month

217

14.2

120

18

63.6

37

19

12

11

Every Saturday

207

13.5

137

20

75.8

23

7

17

3

Every 2. WE

627

41.0

381

69

71.7

78

44

42

13

430

28.1

Every WE

1528

259

65

75.3

43

25

30

8

917

172

71.3

186

100

102

56

Fig. 5.9   Weekend Work and Compensation at German Theaters (Schmidt 2018)

Time Expenditure per Workday see Fig. 5.8. Weekend Work and Compensation at German Theaters See Fig. 5.9.

5.1  The Results of the Study in Numbers …

293

5.1.2 Current Presence of Power Abuse at German Theaters In conclusion: Each participant used the option of multiple nominations and voted on average just under 1.5 times, which means that about every second participant has encountered the issue of power abuse multiple times, see Fig. 5.10. Due to the high sensitivity of the data and the statements, I have taken various forms of security measures: The fact that the results show no visible outliers upwards or downwards and move within relatively stable percentage ranges in the individual categories is an indication of the representativeness of the results, which also show results in a specific, yet comparable framework through a cross-comparison between the individual professional groups. This is also confirmed by the results of previous and subsequent questions of the study, which indicate consistent overall pictures. In addition, I have checked the additional possible written supplements in this and the following sections for exaggerations, possible verbal acts of revenge, etc., in order not to distort the overall result. I have only allowed the statements that correspond to the consistent overall picture of the respective participant.

% Forms of the Assaults Verbal Psychic Physical Other Abuse Total None Abuse Responding not specified Nominations Total

Public theaters Theater %

Participant* inside 720 721 65 186 1109

36.6 36.6 3.3 9.4 56.4

488 491 40 123 763

184

9.4

1.293 673 1876 1966

65.7 34.3

%

40.2 40.4 3.3 10.1 62.8

Performer Artistic staff 364 368 25 100 590

133

10.9

896 318 1275 1214

73.8

%

41.1 41.6 2.8 11.3 66.6

Management 30 33 6 7 46

34.5 37.9 6.9 8 52.9

102

11.5

15

17.2

692 193 959 885

78.2 21.8

61 26 89 87

70.1 29.9

Fig. 5.10   Current Presence of Power Abuse at German Theaters (Schmidt 2018)

294

5  Results of the Study in Overview

Personally Experienced Forms of Abuse in Career In Fig. 5.11, I have filtered the answers to question 13 according to their overall representation (column 1), the proportion of women (3), and artistic staff and performers (6). Forms of Experienced Power Abuse In Fig. 5.12, I have set up a general list and filters for female participants as well as performers/artistic staff. As a result, it can be observed that the values for women increase by several percentage points. Here, too, very clear statements can be made: • Approximately 65.5% of all participants regularly experience existential threats while working in the theater, • the most common form of this threat is a permanent and very high workload, which affects between 52 and 58% of participants in the three groups; • between 33 and 38% of participants in the respective groups consistently perform a large number of unpaid and often unrecorded overtime hours. • Between 30 and 32% are regularly exposed;

Came into contact with assaults

1 Total

2%

3 women

5 % v. 3

6 artists

8 % v. 6

Verbal Psychic Physical Sexual Other Other Abuse Total

738 840 122 136 49 289 1082

37.5 42.7 6.2 6.9 2.5 14.7 55.0

492 571 92 104 30 202 714

40.7 47.2 7.6 8.6 2.4 16.7 59.1

538 622 91 105 32 208 795

42.1 48.7 7.1 8.2 2.5 16.2 62.3

None Abuse Responding not specified Nominations Total

213

10.8

117

9.7

151

11.8

1295 671 2.174 1966

65.8 34.2

831 378 1.491 1209

68.7 31.2

946 331

74 25.9

Fig. 5.11   Experienced Forms of Power Abuse (Schmidt 2018)

1277

5.1  The Results of the Study in Numbers … Self experienced Number % Abuse by Public 586 29.8 Exposure Permanent high 1021 51.9 work pressure Many unpaid 658 33.4 overtime hours Subtle threats of 476 24.2 replaceability Threat of non-renewal 298 15.2

295

Women

%

Female artists

%

380

31.4

414

32.4

667

55.1

745

58.3

459

38.0

480

37.5

317

26.2

352

27.5

198

16.3

231

18.1

Other

111

5.6

70

5.8

80

6.3

Affected

1286

65.5

827

68.4

939

73.5

Not

101

5.1

54

4.5

71

5.6

No answer Total

1387 579 1966

70.6 29.4 100

881 328 1209

72.9 27.1 100

1010 267 1277

79.1 20.9 100

Fig. 5.12   Existential Threats and Power Abuse (Schmidt 2018)

• between 24 and 28% of participants are pressured and threatened by the fact that they can be replaced by advancing colleagues at any time; • between 15 and 18% of participants are very frequently threatened with nonrenewals or terminations. • In all mentioned categories, women or female artists are threatened even more than the average participant. Example

Assuming that the number of weekly overtime hours is between 5 and 20 hours, and the workload is permanently at a very high level or even increasing, one can imagine the extent of the burden on colleagues who are not adequately paid for their extra work. If the work intensity increases by 20% due to systematic overproduction (e.g., 27 instead of 22 productions per season = 5 instead of 4 to play/care for) compared to an original normal workload and the number of overtime hours (ø approx. 10 hours/week) is on average 20%, the input of labor today is 140%.

296

5  Results of the Study in Overview

An assistant or young actor who receives a salary of 2000 € for a contractual 100% work performance now only receives an equivalent of 1428 € for the normal workload (100%) and would have to receive 2800 € in the future to be paid according to the contract. ◄ Forms of Indecency in Theater See Fig. 5.13. Roles, Engagements, Salary Increases in Exchange for Sexual Favors See Fig. 5.14.

Experienced Insinuations

Quantity

%

Women

Artists

%

Yes, Could not resist it

144

7.3

117

9.7

117

9.2

Yes, have tried to do that with to cover up a joke

450

22.9

364

30.1

348

27.2

Yes, I have forbidden myself

204

10.4

157

13.0

160

12.5

Yes, with support from my collegues

100

5.1

81

6.7

71

5.5

Yes, NO support Received from colleagues

120

6.1

97

8.0

93

7.3

Do not find that so bad

167

8.5

93

7.7

120

9.4

My perception is changing

335

17.0

212

17.5

249

19.5

Other

81

4.1

39

3.2

55

4.3

Subtotal (Yes)

998

50.8

605

50.0

743

58.2

No

423

21.5

192

15.9

299

23.4

Subtotal

1421

72.3

797

66.0

1042

81.6

No answers

545

27.7

412

34.0

235

18.4

Total

1966

100

1209

100

1277

100

Fig. 5.13   Forms of Indecency in Theater (Schmidt 2018)

297

5.1  The Results of the Study in Numbers … Number

%

Theater Director

85

30

Scenic Director

100

35.2

Musical Director, GMD

22

7.7

Chief Dramaturg

19

6.7

Administrative Director or similar.

13

4.6

Other line member

45

15.8

Total

284

100

Fig. 5.14   Offers and assaults (Schmidt 2018)

5.1.3 Sexual Assaults In recent times, 184 sexual assaults have been recorded at various locations both inside and outside the theater, affecting 9.4% of all participants, according to the study results. The ranking of locations is of particular importance: 57 assaults took place on stage or during rehearsals (31%), 50 in the canteen or at a bar (27%), 10 in the dressing room (5%). Even more problematic are the assaults in the director’s office or other management members’ offices, with a total of 23 incidents (12.5%), in their respective apartments (19 incidents), or in a specially rented hotel room (9 incidents). The aforementioned locations are closely related to the artists’ work and thus represent a kind of sanctuary; at the same time, these places are also manifestations of power. Reactions of Directors and Producers to a Rejection In a further question, I asked for a more precise assignment of the reactions triggered by the rejection of a sexual offer. It should be noted that multiple answers were possible: • 16.5% of respondents refer to doubts about artistic excellence when rejected, and • 14.2% to doubts about loyalty, • 14.4% that the originally promised engagement no longer takes place, • 8.9% that non-renewals were triggered, • 8% point to recasting with negative consequences, and

298

5  Results of the Study in Overview

• 5.6% to the rejection of one/several roles. • 18.5% report no consequences.

5.1.4 Involvement of Representatives of the Works Council The affected participants made attempts to address and involve the representatives in cases of abuse of power: • • • • • • • • •

14.7% of the affected employees involved the works council, 10.6% involved an ensemble spokesperson, 14% turned to individual colleagues, 5.5% turned to the entire ensemble (the whole group of performers and artists), 3.8% turned to the management, 3.2% turned to the trade union, 0.5% turned to the cultural politicians or the supervisory board, 18.1% sought other forms, 29.6% refrained from seeking help.

Success of Involving the Works Council While just under three-quarters of the participants regularly rely on interest representatives (see above), however, not even a quarter of the participants (22.7%) are convinced for various reasons that involving these representatives is successful. Although ¾ of all participants come to the conclusion that there are possibilities for filing complaints, these bodies and persons have too little to counter or have already been too heavily corrupted to work successfully and in the interest of the complainants. The result is sobering: • • • •

only 22.7% of the participants estimated that these measures were successful, 36.6% had hoped for more, and 13.6% are downright frustrated, 9.2% reported that the colleagues of the interest representation “caved in”, 17.8% of the participants classified the success of these measures differently.

Possibilities for Complaint and their Effects The similarly structured question of whether there are sufficient possibilities and places in the theater to file complaints is affirmed by only 27.3% of the participants:

5.1  The Results of the Study in Numbers …

299

• 20.5% of the participants describe that there are protected spaces and possibilities for this, • 6.8% even notice that complaints lead to positive changes. • However, 23.2% describe that complaints have a boomerang effect. • 21.9% note that complaint offices and perpetrators are under one roof and complaints are therefore pointless. • 27.5% describe that there is not enough protection. Countermeasures Countermeasures are the only logical consequence to solve or at least improve the described situations and problems, which is why I asked the participants to share corresponding suggestions. This category provides a glimpse into the wishes and ideas of the employees about a fairer theater operation, which should be taken very seriously and considered in reform efforts. The results on this issue are very diverse, with multiple answers possible: • 69.3% want contact points that can act unchallenged. • 52.5% still consider reporting to ensemble spokespersons and works/personnel council as an appropriate measure, which on the other hand means that • 47.5% of the participants have lost faith in these committees. • 44.8% favor discussions within the ensemble, • 24.5% suggest making repeat offenders public, • 14.2% suggest that there should be no more 1:1 situations in conflict situations with superiors, • 13.3% suggest complaints and publications, for example on a bulletin board, as well as protests and open discussions. • 13.3% would suggest other measures, • only 0.5% would not suggest any countermeasures at all.

5.1.5 Protection of Employees’ Personal Rights at the Theater Auditions Regarding possible preferences and disadvantages: • 61.4% describe a preference for acquaintances of the artistic director/management of the respective theater,

300

5  Results of the Study in Overview

• 26.6% describe a preference for their own students (conductor/management), particularly in the field of singing and acting, • 21.5% describe the preference for candidates from a specific agency even with comparatively poorer performances. • 22.5% report on—for selected candidates—preliminary presentation appointments with professors, directors, and artistic directors before the actual entrance exams, auditions, singing auditions, and acting auditions, in which the preferred candidates can gain further advantages and knowledge. About the circumstances of the acting and singing auditions themselves: • 36.6% of participants report their experiences with commission members who do not behave properly during auditions—arriving late or leaving early, eating, drinking, using their cell phones during the audition, • 32.7% report that the commission members did not introduce themselves, • 22.1% report black rooms with blinding backlighting, • 16.3% report long waiting times and lack of information, • 68% report that there was no reimbursement for travel expenses, • 14.8% have other comments, • only 8.9% answer that there are fair conditions for acting and singing auditions, with a majority of them being management members. Sexually Compromising Situations When asked whether the participants have ever been pushed by the direction into scene processes that put them in sexually compromising situations and/or situations in which they felt physically displayed, there was also a very clear result: • • • •

61.8% answer the question with a No, 15.7% with a Yes, 10.4% are not sure how to classify the scene processes. 12.1% suggest a more differentiated answer/question, but basically affirm that there were numerous compromising situations.

5.1.6 Education Context The education context is the professional environment. Not only are the foundations laid here, but the culture of the theater also regularly enters the universities with many lecturers from theater practice. Many directors from the theaters work

5.1  The Results of the Study in Numbers …

301

there, behavioral patterns are transferred and often even intensified because they want to show the students how it works in the theater reality, instead of gently and continuously preparing them for it and at the same time pointing out and training them in what needs to be done to improve the conditions and counteract any forms of assault. It is not reflected that these are very young people who often start their studies at the age of 18, 19, or 20. Also, in the cross-sectional questions, there were repeatedly answers from students referring to the milieu of the universities. Here is the overall result: • 15.8% of participants report that lecturers exploited their position of power and exerted significant psychological pressure, • 13.4% report that they were exposed to third parties, • 11.7% that they were harassed by lecturers, and • 3.3% of participants that they were explicitly sexually harassed and abused.

5.1.7 The Internal Locking of Structures Hierarchical structures, the power of the theater director, and ethical standards

The effects of hierarchical structures: • 85.6% of participants state that the hierarchical system promotes dependencies, • 59.8% note that the structures and culture in the theater promote injustice and abuse of power. The power of the theater director and its effects: • 59.6% find that the power of the theater director is too great and uncontrolled. • 50.8% find that power accumulates with theater directors who banish dissenters and critical minds from the ensemble/theater. • 41.6% find that power accumulates with theater directors who engage spouses, partners and/or relatives and integrate them into the power structure. • 16.5% find that the connection between theater directors and politics/media is too strong.

302

5  Results of the Study in Overview

The disregard or lack of ethical standards and rules: • 43.1% find that ethical standards and rules are hardly observed. • 6.8% list other characteristics, • 3.4% note: That’s just the way it is, art requires power, control, and boundary crossing, • 0.4% state that this is not the case and everything is fair in the theater. ◄ Suggestions from participants The participants have made the following suggestions, which I would like to present in percentages to show that there are significant clusters in certain areas that need to be taken very seriously: • 64.8% of participants suggest that complaint and arbitration offices should be established that operate independently. They have thus taken up a key point that ran through the entire response area; • 61.2% demand more time and less work performance, contrary to the pressure of overproduction, • 58.8% demand flatter hierarchies, • 56% desire more co-determination, • 39.3% suggest a non-hierarchical and team-oriented management structure without a single theater director on top of it, • 38.9% demand democratic decision-making processes, • 11.3% submit other suggestions, • only 1%, i.e., less than 20 of the participants suggest that “everything should stay exactly as it is.”

5.2 Currently Experienced Forms of Power Abuse in Theater The current forms of abuse of power in the theater range from psychological terror and emotional violence, to bullying and threats of termination and destruction of livelihood, to shouting, insults, choleric outbursts, and telephone harassment. In the process, individuals are belittled and kept down, shamed and excluded, intimidated and defamed. In the following, I provide an overview of the approximately 30 most frequently mentioned forms of experienced abuse, to which I

5.2  Currently Experienced Forms of Power …

303

assign a selection of the numbers of the affected participants in brackets, who have been confronted with it. CURRENT FORMS OF ABUSE IN THE THEATER

Overview of the responses (with a selection of the serial research numbers of the participants): • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Psychological terror (among others 3, 45, 54, 82, 127, 1752) Slander (3, 191, 238, 660, 990, 1158) Emotional blackmail (among others 397, 564, 1129, 1158, 1826) Overemphasis of hierarchy (among others 178, 262, 706, 922, 983, 1076, 1360, 1575, 453) Withholding of information (among others 47, 82, 91, 251, 730) Refusal of cooperation by superiors (among others 40, 46, 82, 119, 676, 749, 765, 1109, 1207, 1411, 1497, 1519, 1719) Not listening (380, 397, 353) Prohibition of speech (among others 1051) Over-controlling (among others 1076, 1010) Bullying (among others 445, 969, 1010, 1027, 620, 1721) Threats of termination and destruction of livelihood (among others 119, 714, 725, 800, 831, 983, 1321, 1080, 1195, 1519, 1912) Exclusion (among others 137, 205, 648, 676, 885, 1010, 1081, 1014, 1289, 1290) Intimidation (among others 453, 1412, 1080) Public negative comments on performance (among others 191, 229, 262, 522) Derogatory comments about the person, appearance, figure, etc. (among others 262, 1195) Belittling and keeping down (among others 576, 1142, 1129) Defamation (262, 378, 1158, 1077, 1362) Dishonesty (among others 262, 660, 667, 376) Misrepresentation of facts (among others 191, 522, 660, 667, 990, 1158) Exposure (among others 45, 54, 60, 223, 229, 262) Blaming (375, 483, 522, 660, 1753) Shaming (among others 1846) Breaking the will of humans, the psyche (e.g. 229, 196, 191, 242, 599, 377, 375, 1753, 1028)

304

5  Results of the Study in Overview

• Disproportionate expressions (80, 68, 492, 1076, 1402, 1196, 1719, 1797) • Screaming, insults, outbursts towards employees, choleric outbursts (e.g. 522, 191, 582, 559, 527, 725, 1374, 1142) • Insults (e.g. 1188, 1564) • Belittling (e.g. 262, 238, 397, 262, 1321) • No respect for privacy (e.g. 539, 609, 653, 747, 1010, 1077) • Phone harassment (e.g. 1010). ◄

5.2.1 Percentage Distribution of Power Abuse In the following overview, I have grouped the various forms of power abuse that currently occur in clusters to be able to represent their percentage distribution. The main focuses are on nepotism and intrigue, the disadvantage of women, the general degradation in work processes, open attempts at intimidation, and psychological violence. Double nominations were possible for the experienced forms of abuse and lead to a summary result over 100%, see Fig. 5.15.

5.2.2 Experienced Forms of Power Abuse—Explanations In this section, I would like to analyze, in addition to the previous evaluations, about 130 more important statements from the participants that are relevant for the description of the topos and further illuminate the results and findings from Chap. 4. The compilation is particularly important for scientists and students who want to continue working on the topic based on these results. This is intended to accurately trace the variety of statements and the gradation of the various power abuses. When looking at the individual categories, there are occasional overlaps in the classifications into the subcategories of power abuses, especially when an answer is very comprehensive and touches on several of the categories listed here. In this case, I decided on the classification of the strongest argument (in brackets the number of participants): • • • •

Psychological terror, slander, mobbing, threat (36) Mismanagement of the artistic director (20) Manipulation and instrumentalization (9) Violation of the law (19)

305

5.2  Currently Experienced Forms of Power …

Forms of abuse of power

%

Things are going well for us.

3.75

Not yet experienced myself.

41.25

Subtotal

45

Nepotism and intrigue ... mainly by members of the management level: preferential treatment of family members, no transparent communication, Backroom decisions, playing off departments, exposing individual employees, Playing out power at the contractual level Discrimination against women Sexism, sexual harassment, discrimination on the basis of gender, "not being taken seriously" in comparison to male colleagues, gender-specific problems (maternity protection) Disparagement of members of staff councils, trade unions, etc. ... by directors ... among colleagues/between performers Open attempts at intimidation Threats, exposure, threats of dismissal, "climate of fear" at rehearsals, bullying Psychological violence – due to much too high work pressure, etc. "Friendly violence" at the theater It's in the nature of theater: generally a strong sense of authority, a permanent argument: it's always been this way! Self-exploitation, "friendly violence" is normal in the theater Discrimination Unequal pay, exoticism, a kind of "white cultural hegemony"/ "unconscious leading culture thoughts" Other Answers not sufficiently specified or duplications with the information already provided in the other headings

12.8

Subtotal

9.6

9.6 2.4% 4.8% 2.4% 8.8 8.0% 3.2%

0.8% 7.2% 60

Fig. 5.15   Experienced forms of power abuse in German theaters (Schmidt 2018)

306

5  Results of the Study in Overview

• Discrimination of women and minorities (12) • Physical violence (4) • Sexual assaults (29). Forms of verbal and psychological violence: Psychological terror, defamation, bullying, threats Power is abused in theaters by directors and other leaders of the theater hierarchy in various ways. The most frequently mentioned are: “Psychological terror, defamation.” (3) “Withholding information, bullying, constant psychological pressure due to the threat of non-renewal.” (47) “Bullying, exclusion.” (205) “Pressure, exclusion.” (251) “Threatening to have performances played by the understudy because one arrives only a short time late.” (316) “Intimidation.” (338) “Exposure, humiliation, withholding information.” (431) “Bullying, a very common form in the theater, but not called that there…” (445) “Wanting to break the actor.” (824) “Yelling, choleric outbursts, insults.” (863, 867, 879) “Demeaning, choleric fits of the management, verbal abuse.” (873) “Belittling, emotional blackmail.” (1129) “Passing on pressure, exploiting hierarchical position…” (1146) “Bullying, non-casting, withholding information.” (1154) “Demonstrating/making fun of failure/failing during rehearsal. Establishing absurd rules of conduct.” (1187) “Disproportionate verbal expressions by various directors.” (1313)

The list of quotes testifies to the frequency and self-evidence of bullying by superiors in theaters. Bullying is a classic form of power abuse, which is actually more often found at the same level of work, so the results shed a different light on the selection of power instruments used by directors and other management members to intimidate and humiliate, manipulate and insult actors and employees. A manager in the economy would usually use these methods much less directly and extensively than is the case in the theater, which is also a sign of the prevailing incompetence of those in the theater who resort to it to assert their interests and power, especially before the ensemble and employees. In this theater, for example, the management uses a combination of bullying, blame, psychological stress, and negative commentary on the performance and person of an actress to exert pressure:

5.2  Currently Experienced Forms of Power …

307

“Verbal: Negative statements about the person and acting performance. / Assigning blame / Enormous psychological stress / Negative comments from the audience (director’s desk and management) during the final rehearsals…” (1753)



These measures are accompanied by extreme insults, humiliations, and degradations that are not lawful and testify to the loss of control and composure of the leader or director:

“Insults for once smallest mistakes, e.g., prop not rebuilt in time (’Did your mother smoke crack when she was pregnant with you?’); antidepressant fell out of pocket, director picked it up and read aloud what I take (’[…] poor you, is it already that bad? Wimp!’); phone harassment despite sick leave (’Oh, you can come for a few hours!’)” (1188)

In other cases, these transgressions extend to sexual abuse, which can arise from the non-punishment of power abuses and the associated constant expansion of the legal framework: “A director told me when I wanted to quit: ‘Why do you want to quit? You won’t find a new job anyway.’ / ‘You will never be loved as much as you are here.’ After my resignation, he didn’t speak a word to me for several months. // I was insulted by directors and touched for stage actions, even though I expressed that I didn’t want that./ I was verbally and physically sexually harassed. / I was asked by a theater director if I work for free when I was supposed to play an additional performance as a guest.” (1195)



The suffering inflicted on a performer at this theater must be classified as severe psychological terror. It is also an example of gross mismanagement—a management that looks away, lets things happen, instead of intervening and protecting—as well as a legal violation by the director.

In the following example, the director grossly violates the integrity of a performer, by commenting on and questioning her mental health. Here too, there is a lack of good education, basic labor and personnel law knowledge, and social skills among the management members, which must be better examined with a psychological selection in the application phases for directorships or management positions than before: “Derogatory comments about performance, appearance, weight in front of the assembled rehearsal ensemble, non-compliance with oral agreements, questioning

308

5  Results of the Study in Overview

of mental health (by the directorate), looking away, not intervening, letting things happen or even confirming, laughing by the rest of the management (dramaturgy).” (262)

Also in this case, there is shouting during rehearsals: “Yelling during rehearsals, false claims of not working properly, of working too little…” (404)

And in this case, shamefully, even in front of the audience: “Choleric outbursts, especially in front of the audience; insinuations that are so ‘fantastic’ that they can hardly be refuted; e.g., one has done a job DELIBERATELY wrong—i.e., differently than required—with the accusation of refusing service.” (522)

It is often the young performers and employees who have to experience psychological and verbal violence in their first years of work, combined with humiliations that still seem to be part of the repertoire of some directors and theater managers in dealing with their employees: “In the first 9 years of my career, I have mainly experienced verbal and psychological violence on a regular basis. My current theater is more advanced in this regard— but above all, I am braver and intervene earlier and clearly mark my boundaries. (Which I can do now, since I am at peace with myself and also know what I can do, where my limits lie, and where I am challenged and where I am humiliated—against which I then take action!)” (416)

Also, discrediting an artist’s achievements with other director colleagues can quickly end a career if one does not follow the instructions of the directorate: “Threats to negatively influence the future through discrediting.” (1080)

Differences with the management usually have negative consequences for the artists, who cannot defend themselves against them. Neither is there a mediating instance nor a kind of internal mediation and jurisdiction for artists who are systematically oppressed and bullied: “After differences with the theater management, cast in small roles for years.” (1207)

5.2  Currently Experienced Forms of Power …

309

And here, the threat scenarios of exclusion… “Woe if you don’t agree to participate in everything, then you’re immediately out of favor. Resulting in fewer roles.” (1109)

… and built on termination: “Whoever doesn’t toe the line, asks questions, wants to discuss methods, gets kicked out.” (1098)

And also here: “Subtle threat of termination in the recent past/in the past: homophobic statements.” (1321)

And here—beyond the scope of applicable law, a form of systematic psychological terror: “October conversation: You have one more year, but next year I won’t renew you, you can count on that.—One year later: everything is great! I’m renewing you! I never said anything different, did I?” (1261)

In doing so, phrases are repeatedly recited that testify to an archaic, self-righteous, and not very modern theater world, whose organizational culture also urgently needs renewal: “Emotional blackmail, ‘It has always been like this’, art must suffer.” (1560)

Psychological terror is also commonplace at drama schools and usually stems from the inability of some lecturers: “I have often experienced acting teachers who, when they didn’t know what else to do, attacked and insulted me in a very personal way. So they completely blamed the failure of the scene work on me and my personality. Today I see that they were simply helpless, but back then I almost killed myself because of it.” (1235)

And here: “Severe verbal oppression at the drama school (xx).” (1028)

310

5  Results of the Study in Overview

Mismanagement of the Theater Director Inexperience and incompetence of theater directors as managers 

Often, the abuse of power is due to the inexperience of theater directors and their lack of knowledge in dealing with good leadership behavior and classic management methods. Many of the mentioned assaults also testify to a mental immaturity and the fact that the leading position is wrongly occupied.

This leads to completely irrational behavior on the part of the leaders, as in the case of this participant who has to experience a sudden change in the theater director’s behavior to her disadvantage without any prior warning or explanation: “First, a super collegial, open relationship with the theater director—sudden break on his part without any explanation, smaller roles, no information, etc.” (40)

Also in this case, in which an artist merely tries to address some important issues to her and is terminated for it, the theater director not only fails to fulfill his duties as a leader lawfully, he oversteps the boundaries of applicable law and his responsibility as a leader and personnel manager, as in those cases where he manipulates directors and slanders employees in order to significantly reduce the chances of a critical actor to voice her criticism and at the same time fulfill her contract. The leader thus oversteps his boundaries by bending the law and breaking the customs of good interaction, and thereby unlawfully brings his power into play: “Since I tried to address certain issues, I am no longer cast, the contract was obviously not renewed for non-artistic reasons, I was lied to several times, including putting negative statements about me in the mouths of directors I worked with, the theater management tries to set traps for me to have reasons for immediate termination.” (Participant 46)

In this case, the abuse is accompanied by ignorance and humiliation, which should not be part of the personnel management tools of a good leader: “Treated like air, only negative comments when making mistakes.” (353)

Here, a former intern complains about the general tone of the management towards assistants and performers at the house. One wonders what kind of

5.2  Currently Experienced Forms of Power …

311

atmosphere, enthusiasm for playing, and organizational culture can develop in a theater where shouting is part of the way people communicate, and what impression this makes on a young person who might want to choose a career in theater. In addition, this example highlights the bad habit of theaters to use interns in many areas as fully-fledged workers and not to pay them for this work. This is not only a fraud against the interns, but also a violation of existing labor law, which clearly states that interns—as the name suggests—are to observe, not to work operationally: “As a free, but daily working intern from morning to evening, I was often shouted at and worn down, just like the assistants and actors.” (355)

In this case, an assistant reports very clearly and explicitly about the behavior of their artistic director: “Shouting, belittling in front of others, withholding important information and making me responsible for not passing it on, exposing, refusing to cooperate.” (375)

In both cases, it becomes clear that the theater director fails to motivate their employees and lay the foundations for a good organizational culture. 

The forms of power abuse by theater directors are becoming increasingly diverse and complex, with the added factor that the affected directors attribute their incompetence and errors in fulfilling their own tasks to their employees—an absolute taboo in modern management and personnel management:

An increasingly common form of power abuse is the refusal of directors to share information and cooperate with their employees: “Shouting, withholding information, refusing to cooperate, misrepresenting facts, […], attributing management incompetence to employees …” (502)

In doing so, artistic directors also use their subordinate management members to put pressure on unpopular performers, instead of protectively taking them under their wing: “[…] Mobbing by the head dramaturge, on behalf of the theater director.” (620)

312

5  Results of the Study in Overview

Or they exert the pressure themselves: “By the theater director and dramaturgy: Freaking out and publicly exposing colleagues, threatening termination.” (714)

As well as here: “Belittling, not listening, forbidding to speak even when it concerns my own work area.” (946)

And here, by a theater director unlawfully making public and derogatory comments about a sick leave, which is against the law: “[…] Recasting of my main role just a few days after sick leave + ++ Sick leave was presented by the theater director to the ensemble as a ‘fake’ in my absence […]” (1158)

Also in this case, the theater director does not know his rights and obligations. The threat of dismissal, even a warning, would be baseless for religious reasons. On the contrary, the actress could have sued for coercion: “Threat of immediate dismissal for refusing to play a sexist Pope sketch at a theater festival.” (633)

In this case, the incompetence of the theater director leads to a serious mistake, interfering with the personal and health integrity of a performer: “Pressured by management to perform the shows despite illness.”- (178)

Coaching the directors is also part of the duties of the artistic director. In some theaters, incidents go beyond the rules of normal interpersonal behavior, but they also show how little control an theater director has over their theater and how little they are present and intervene in important situations: “I worked with a director who was highly choleric. His rehearsal style was problematic for me and other colleagues, his instructions were sometimes unclear, and when we couldn’t implement them, he built up verbal pressure. Over the course of the rehearsals, my condition and the working relationship deteriorated until he used every private piece of information I had given him when the relationship was still normal, in front of the entire team, including press photographers, to expose me.

5.2  Currently Experienced Forms of Power …

313

His line of argument was also described as absurd by my colleagues. He vented his anger on me. He verbally attacked me in a highly aggressive manner and described my temporary inability to play the role, again in front of everyone, as a lack of talent, insufficient training, or a victim role that I would like to indulge in.” (191)

In this case, too, the theater director should have reacted and ordered a discussion to heal the problem, instead of deepening it by taking sides with the stronger party: “++++++++++++Rehearsal break. Insult. Was thrown off the stage—without justification, confirmed by the artistic director.” (229)

In other cases, the management fails to influence directors who are contractually dependent on them—a poor reflection on the theater director who is unable to enforce their rights and house rules in their own theater and instead tolerates a breach of the law: “Pedagogically untrained scenic directors. Smoking during rehearsals despite an absolute ban (the management says: we can’t do anything about it). They always single out one actor per production who is treated badly.” (250)

The slogans of the “healthy theater world”, often conjured up by theater directors in their speeches or season prefaces—with team orientation and without hierarchy—are quickly discarded when it comes to examining the reality of theater: “Pressure that is exerted with a clear idea of an upper-lower order.” (706)

Here is an example of how a theater director systematically puts pressure on an artistic collaborator, coupled with insinuations that show he has never dealt with instruments and methods of modern employee management: “No respect for privacy: Calls to the private cell phone at all hours of the day and night, weekdays and weekends, on days off, on vacation, on sick leave // Innuendos // Being yelled at // […] Arbitrariness, non-binding agreements, lack of transparency, from which a ‘noose is twisted’ for oneself // Opening my office door and entering my office uninvited, without knocking first and even when I have sought retreat in my office in a conflict situation and closed the door from the inside just a minute before …!” (1010)

And here, mobbing and humiliation are used as systematic control instruments that make modern management completely impossible:

314

5  Results of the Study in Overview

“Choleric, white, male, heterosexual superior around the age of 50. Exposure, humiliation. Strong emphasis on hierarchy. A feeling of being heavily controlled. No trust and honesty possible.” (1142)

The consequences for the individual artist are clear: opportunities are lost, because they are not allowed, and there is so much manipulation, that the artist eventually becomes grateful for every little chance and role—and must be grateful in the eyes of the boss; beyond the requirement that the artistic director should employ an artist sufficiently, well, and appropriately, and also promote them— which is systematically undermined: “Decisions about leave for another engagement are constantly delayed for false reasons until the offer from the other house understandably has to be withdrawn. The feeling of being made to be grateful for every tiny—and underpaid—role, as if it were a leading part.” (1610)

This is also repeatedly accompanied by the abuse of legal possibilities: “Also legal forms of intimidation and abuse.” (1634).

Manipulation and Instrumentalization of Employees and Performers Even more serious are the cases in which performers are manipulated and instrumentalized by their directors: “Instrumentalization to enforce one’s own interests against the ensemble, spreading rumors, spreading lies, threats regarding unemployment, targeted unequal treatment, ignoring employees.” (Participant 49)

As in this case, where shouting continues until the director has enforced his interests. In addition, there is poor employee management: “Impossible employee management, enforcement of one’s own interests by shouting at employees and threatening.” (525)

In this case, the management employs a whole spectrum of manipulation and bullying instruments, which should have been stopped by the directorate long ago: “Attempts at manipulation, attempts at isolation […], blackmail, threats of canceling events if the directorate’s announcements are not followed, loud shouting attacks, devaluations (also as a woman).” (676)

5.2  Currently Experienced Forms of Power …

315

And here, systematic eavesdropping and spying is used, a means by which the management tries to unlawfully obtain information about employees. This should also be urgently defended against: “Deliberate eavesdropping through colleagues, checking Facebook content and possibly drawing consequences. Not being staffed.” (1077)

In this theater, promises are made and performers are kept waiting with future roles and contracts: “Playing off against each other, hints of possible contracts, roles—holding off— ignoring, not answering specific questions.” (1365)

And here: “My opinion was tried to be suppressed. Conclusion: no good roles up to termination.” (1512)

In this case, the management goes so far as to manipulate and prevent careers and artistic projects in order to obviously harm artistic employees and repeatedly threaten them with termination: “Defamation, obstruction of career by theater management (secret non-submission of funding applications, prevention of festival participation), threats of non-renewal of employment.” (1858)

Manipulation also involves constantly making promises, not keeping them, and justifying this with very thin, legally hardly tenable arguments: “Permanent employment promised, but postponed from play to play because talent had not yet been sufficiently proven.” (1882)

Access to the lives of employees and performers, tying them to the theater, not granting leisure time and vacation are also not allowed forms of manipulation and the associated exercise of power: “Vacation slips are sometimes not looked at for weeks, so you can’t plan your life at all. Stand-ins at other theaters are often not approved, even though they would be possible in terms of time.” (1890)

316

5  Results of the Study in Overview

Legal Violations and Mismanagement Abuse of power also includes accepting or committing legal violations. A popular form in the theater is extending working hours beyond the legally prescribed daily maximum working time of 10 hours. I have already documented this in the previous chapter and take it up again here because it is repeatedly found as an argument and statement in the participants’ responses: “Demand for limitless temporal and spatial availability.” (747)

But the adventurous freedom that some theater directors take in drafting contracts is also a clear breach of law and an abuse of power that no one should submit to. In these cases, the works council should be involved, and if that does not help, one should contact the board of the German Stage Association and the ensemble-network, who can solve this together. This contract is immoral, the theater and its leaders would face high lawsuits: “Contract extensions always only for two months (despite having a family).” (212)

This contract conclusion is also not legal. In this case, only reporting to the staff representation, the ensemble-network, and the board of the Stage Association will help: “A salary below the minimum wage or termination of negotiations is offered.” (1120)

The verbal agreement between a theater director and his employee is also a contract. If this is not adhered to, it constitutes a breach of law combined with the systematically exercised arbitrariness of the theater director: “Verbal pressure, unobjective argumentation, speaking with two tongues, agreed arrangements are overridden, always satisfying the most current need. Arbitrariness!” (766)

A non-casting in an originally planned production should be communicated in advance to a performer by a well-functioning management. However, the legal breach is even greater in the case of a baseless termination, as shown here. The NV-Bühne contractual system allows the theater director to not extend the contracts of artistic members of the house in October of the respective year until the

5.2  Currently Experienced Forms of Power …

317

end of a season only if he can provide very precise artistic reasons that allow him to do so. However, this must be justified. In most cases, these justifications do not take place, as here: “Non-casting, baseless termination.” (256)

This participant is terminated after addressing his overtime. He did not even speak of a payment or conversion into free time, but merely mentioned the overtime: “Upon addressing the overtime, termination and insults followed.” (312)

The threat of contract termination during a rehearsal is also not legal. If it occurs afterwards in a regular hearing procedure, the non-extension is invalid because it has already been pronounced beforehand, during the rehearsal period. In addition, there is the climate of fear—a nightmare state for an artistic operation in which employees should and must actually work creatively without worries in order to achieve artistic excellence. Creating these worry-free and creative working conditions is the main task of an artistic director. This example also shows the great need for improvement of the leader in terms of personnel management, law, and management: “There is a climate of fear in the ensemble, fear and a lot of pressure, during rehearsals dismissal etc. was threatened.” (599)

Here, too, a theater director actively commits a breach of law by demanding unpaid auxiliary work to secure the success of his own productions. In addition, there are his immature methods of verbal suppression, which are also against the law. “Desperation was lived out until others voluntarily performed unpaid enormous auxiliary work // Verbal suppression ‘to check the strength of will’ // among others.” (377)

And here: “Threat after early cancellation of an unpaid ‘internship’ that turned out to be a set design assistance with a 50-hour/week workload.” (916)

318

5  Results of the Study in Overview

And by withholding the contract, retaining the fee as leverage, and intimidating: “Withholding fees (ghosting), applying pressure (time pressure, flood of tasks), means of pressure: contract signing & fee payment.” (1343)

Another legal violation occurs in this theater, which does not grant an actress any rest periods or days off: “Shouting without reason, withholding information regarding the timing of the rehearsal process and thus negating my private life = actually a breach of contract.” (559)

And in this case, scheduling errors are carried out on the backs of employees, and requests for relief are simply ignored: “Ignoring the urgent request to reduce the workload due to overload and overwhelm (scheduling errors led to impractical parallel assignments).” (1666)

Here, the legal violation by the management goes so far that employees are blackmailed, not to insist on their rest periods: “Hints that others could also do the job. Accusations of uncollegiality when pointing out the legal working hours or their compliance.” (1897)

When sick performers are forced to rehearse and perform, this is also a form of unlawful exercise of power and pressure, as every employee has the right to their health without their job being threatened: “Emotional blackmail, reduction of self-esteem, […] rehearsals with fever and injuries, otherwise dismissal.” (564)

And the ultimatum to seek psychological counseling is not legal either. In addition, the involvement of the staff representation is missing here, in order to even consider measures of this kind: “An ultimatum was given to me and others: I should seek psychological treatment or I would be fired. There were so many public humiliations of seriously ill older colleagues as well.” (800) Another example is work assignments from the theater director, which are knowingly not executable within the legal time frame:

5.2  Currently Experienced Forms of Power …

319

“Mobbing, defamation, shouting, being assigned tasks that do not belong to the field of work / are not legally executable.” (969)

In this theater, a supervisor punishes the legally protected contact with the works council—certainly not without the backing or instruction of the artistic director: “Refusal of information, outrage of a supervisor, breaking of the good relationship due to contacting the works council.” (1652)

Here, both the theater director and the staff council chairman, who is loyal to him and not to his colleagues, commit a coordinated breach of law and abuse of power, which is significant because it damages the work of a staff council member and systematically impairs and destroys the work of the staff council, combined with the agreement to break the law. All of this is accepted by a theater director just to avoid disclosing his salary, which in turn leads to the conclusion that the fear and guilt of making it public are very great, especially since it would also reveal the enormous disparity and the great privileges of the artistic director compared to his employees, which would undoubtedly cause lasting damage to his reputation and credibility, as well as the credibility of the sponsors, supervisory bodies, and the theater association. How can one seriously still discuss the future of a theater system with the function of a theater director when its serious structural problems begin precisely with these directorial contracts and privileges and the injustices and pyramidal power relations they reveal: “In my additional role as a staff council member, at my insistence, the staff council requested a salary review from the artistic director. Unfortunately, our chairman is not loyal and mentioned my name. As a result, the theater director systematically destroyed me. I resigned from my staff council position, and the salary review was never conducted.” (1362)

In this case, the staff council member should have turned to the union, the supervisory body, and the theater association for help. In my opinion, this breach of law goes so far that both the theater director and the staff council chairman should have immediately resigned from their positions. In the following case, the private relationship between a theater director and a co-worker leads to an unpleasant reinforcement of power and the possibilities of its abuse. The fact that a theater director appoints his life partner to the artistic management is also a form of nepotism and modern favoritism, which, for example, led to the dismissal of the theater director in the case of the Bern Theater and has no place in the theater, especially since the theater itself is very keen to

320

5  Results of the Study in Overview

p­ ublicly denounce any form of favoritism in politics (Trump) or business, but should first take care of its own problems: “Narcissistic artistic manager, who is unfortunately privately involved with the theater director, unfavorable balance of power, intrigues, the feeling that nothing will ever change, but always all the ‘good’ ones leave and give up.” (576)

Systematic Demeaning and Discrimination of Women and Minorities In the affected cases—following the results of the study and the participants—the theater is a haven for sexism and discrimination, especially against young beginners who depend on the kindness, praise, and casting policy of the management before they can finally break free after a while. In precisely this phase of the first 8–12 professional years of a young actress or artistic staff member, as in the following example, initially subtle and later also coercive discrimination sets in. The boundaries between abuse of power, sexism, physical violence, and the establishment of a threatening atmosphere become blurred: “Taking out moods on me, insults, putting pressure (verbal, psychological violence), witnessing abuse of power, constantly enforcing availability/presence (control over me), especially in the early years also sexual assaults: unasked touching, unasked kiss on the neck, (if you don’t laugh at my jokes, I don’t want to see you at rehearsals anymore), more subtle forms of devaluation based on gender.” (721)

In the theater, there is a systematic demeaning of women, as the following examples also show: “Demeaning of my work due to the fact that I am a woman and therefore chaotic, too emotional. Rumors about me (being spread).” (83)

And here: “Not being taken seriously because you are a woman.” (380)

Maternity protection is often not taken seriously or willingly circumvented, in the “interest of art.” In this case, it even goes so far that a manager pretends to know the laws and manipulates and blackmails the artist accordingly: “‘No, that’s definitely not in the Maternity Protection Act.’ ‘No artist really looks at that closely.’” (1196)

5.2  Currently Experienced Forms of Power …

321

And minorities are also oppressed, for example by repeatedly making sexist, xenophobic, or homophobic statements, usually disguised as jokes, to which the artists have not yet dared to respond restrictively, for fear of dismissals, noncasting, outbursts of anger, threats, blackmail, and manipulations. As soon as the artists are given more freedom and better opportunities to express their concerns and complaints anonymously, for example, the central complaint office Themis or decentralized ombudsman offices set up at the houses will be able to initiate improvements, which will also issue binding recommendations to train destructive directors and managers or to dismiss them in severe cases of abuse of power: “Homophobic statements.” (169)

A harrowing experience awaits actresses in this theater, where a senior director is unwilling to accommodate his actresses and their health issues. Instead, they are lied to about casting because they do not fit his personal image of women. The artistic director either seems to be uninformed about these incidents or tolerates and covers them up because, like the senior director, he puts his power interests first—both of which, however, testify to his inability to run a house. From a psychological and human perspective, the senior director can also be considered incapable of ever running a house, as he does not meet the basic requirements for good personnel management and lacks the fundamental qualifications and social skills required for this function. He can be classified as a so-called “negative” or “destructive leader,” and it is to be hoped that his applications and competencies will be carefully scrutinized in the future and in other contexts. “Upon repeated requests for relief from the senior director (due to a total of 12 productions, including 4 school plays, which took place during the week, causing me to miss rehearsals/stress reactions such as stomach ulcers, etc., on the urgent advice of the doctor), after waiting 9 weeks for an answer, I was simply told ‘No.’ Desired castings were not only denied to me but also to colleagues with obvious lies, as we later talked to the respective directors who explicitly wanted, for example, me or other colleagues. All this only with female (!) colleagues who do not correspond to the senior director’s image of women but contradict it. Also choleric reactions, which did not happen to me personally, but to colleagues who broke down in tears. […] At the request of all female colleagues in the ensemble for plays with female lead roles (now the third year), the next season comes—no female lead roles, except: Sleeping Beauty—and she sleeps.” (238)

At this theater, no consideration is given to guests who have to balance their commitment with a child. The casual remark: We cannot concern ourselves with per-

322

5  Results of the Study in Overview

sonal sensitivities, shows how little the management of this theater has dealt with issues of friendly interaction with women and with methods of modern personnel management, through which women should systematically be given the opportunity to work—and above all without arbitrary excuses. In this case, as in many others listed here, extensive training and psychological assessments or a change of management would be urgently recommended so that the artists can work under fair conditions and assert their rights: “The circumstances and conditions are often so hair-raising that good work is impossible. ‘Eat or die!’ / I also usually fight against windmills when it comes to living and rehearsal conditions that can be managed with a child. I hit a brick wall in the male-dominated world. ‘We cannot concern ourselves with personal sensitivities,’ etc.” (397)

Sexism is commonplace in the theater and can be classified as an abuse of power and a precursor to sexual violence. This is primarily about a form of sexual blackmail and the visibly better treatment given to the actress if she complies with the wishes of the theater director. Sexual compliance is declared a virtue that the employees must submit to in order to be treated kindly, tolerated, noticed, and to have a chance to use the opportunities of the theater for their own personal development. Sexual compliance thus unfortunately also becomes part of a contract and a price that the artistic director makes those women pay who want to be noticed and participate in this development: “Friendly treatment when I am dressed in a body-focused manner.” (572)

And here too, power abuses par excellence occur by a male theater and scenic director, which are accompanied by sexism and very far-reaching insinuations, but above all by a strong discrimination against women who, for this director, should resemble or equal a porn actress in order to be valid and noticed. And again, the question arises as to how it is possible that these remarks are tolerated by all those involved, and why the employees involved fail to show solidarity and act accordingly. Because these are already very far-reaching sexist power abuses that may be practiced over and over again until the boundaries blur and are crossed further and further from time to time, and the ingrained misogyny can increase uncontrollably and unhindered: “Remarks like ‘Your cat eyes remind me of my favorite porn actress… your cat eyes can look very arrogant during auditions, you have to be careful… no, actually men like it, it’s hot.’ have often been encountered by me.” (983)

5.2  Currently Experienced Forms of Power …

323

And here, a theater director goes too far by speaking about his artistic employee in a sexist and demeaning manner in front of third parties, thus revealing his entire way of thinking and acting and his conservative moral horizon. But it is also a very clear sexist power abuse that shows that the artistic director regards the employee as his personal, sexualized property, with which and about which he can talk as he pleases. In doing so, he demonstrates his power over this colleague to third parties, as well as his general power (= sexual potency) in the theater. A new employee will remember this scene very well—after all, this is also the goal of the theater director—and will conclude from it how the theater works and that the female colleagues in the theater are within the sexual sphere of influence of the theater director, who has the power here, i.e., the rooster in the yard. The power constellation is thus already vividly, i.e., very memorably, presented and communicated to the new colleague in the first conversation, and thus becomes an informal part of the application, negotiations, and a potential contract. If he agrees, he also agrees to the power relations in the theater and is already corrupted with this conversation for the first time: “Referring to me as ‘my treasure’ by the boss during a joint job interview that we both conducted with a potential new employee.” (1908)

Ultimately, discrimination also includes the belittling and degradation of artists from other ethnic and cultural contexts. In this regard, theater directors must ensure that offensive remarks, jokes, and suggestive comments are avoided if the theater wants to properly and respectfully fulfill its duties as an employer and its responsibilities as part of society, and if it wants to be taken seriously in the future. By doing so, the theater jeopardizes its credibility and legitimacy with stakeholders, audiences, and in politics, on which it will continue to depend in the future. However, it also highlights the importance of the upcoming structural transformation in order to address many of the issues presented in this study: “psychologically subtle: even though I mainly produce my texts and works in a German or French-speaking context and the topics vary greatly, my Muslim background keeps playing a role over and over again. Even when I write or have something to say about social inequality, feminism, or poverty in schools. For many colleagues, it is simply impossible not to associate the black hair and the ‘darker’ skin colors with some kind of ‘fantasies’ and conclusions. And there are always two jokes: ‘the one with the bomb’ and ‘the one with the desert’ (and sometimes even people who might come from a small village themselves make this second joke, and when I tell them my parents come from a huge modern metropolis… they just think of the desert). The desert and the bomb. And then just have a beer, a glass of wine. It’s just a joke.

324

5  Results of the Study in Overview

And when they have seen the works: ‘wow, you are so liberal’. In general, many think they have to say something about ‘Africa’ and ‘Islam’.” (1402)

Physical Violence Verbal attacks can quickly escalate into physical violence: “Yelled at. Bullied. Mentally broken down. Bitten in the ear.” (127)

Here too, the boundary between verbal and physical violence blurs when the leader adopts a threatening posture, intimidating and threatening the employees under their supervision. Yelling and verbal threats are not trivial matters, not minor offenses, but abuses of power that clearly show that the leaders who employ these methods are not suitable for their tasks, and that the affected theater is obviously a toxic organization in which these forms of power application are still, still unpunished, uncommented, and unpublished: “Shouting with physically threatening gestures, getting too close.” (712)

In this theater, a director slaps an actress without being sanctioned—a physical assault that also represents a severe discrimination against her. This too is a destructive leader in a toxic organization, neither capable of fulfilling their tasks and uncovering, punishing, and protecting their actors and actresses from these assaults, nor does the theater provide the appropriate framework to enable safe and protected work without abuses of power. The theater director fails by allowing these abuses of power and by not protecting his actresses and actors. In the future, theater directors must be measured by their ability to expose and punish perpetrators, provide protection, and ensure adequate framework conditions: “As a beginner, I was slapped by a director because I criticized him for actually tolerating and protecting violent play or rather not play, but behavior of his main actor towards other colleagues. To the slap, he said: ‘I won’t take any criticism from you, beginner!’” (242)

Even more extensive is the repertoire of power abuse that a participant at another theater has to endure, where psychological terror and physical assaults are mixed. Apparently, this theater director has developed and implemented a perfect, insidious system of dependencies for his employees, equated with his slaveholder mentality. In addition, psychological and physical pressure is exerted alternately to threaten power, make it clear and exercise it, annul co-determination rights,

5.2  Currently Experienced Forms of Power …

325

withhold information, and establish a multi-class system in which a distinction is made between the good and the bad, the “loved and unloved,” and corresponding privileges are granted or withdrawn within a reward system. The fact that not a single ensemble member or employee dares to break out of this system and expose and denounce it testifies to the authoritarian system of fear and psychological and physical pressure exerted on each individual to permanently press them into the system shaped by the slaveholder mentality of the artistic director; but it also testifies to the high degree of conformity, careerism, and opportunism in art operations that make such a system permanently possible: “Withholding information, two-class ensemble (loved and unloved actors), pressure exerted by the management, no say in anything, physical assaults by the artistic director,slaveholder mentality of the management.” (Prob. 17)

Sexual Assault Sexual assaults cover a wide spectrum. They range from remarks and insults to indecent touching and pressuring for sexual acts and “services.” Sexual abuse begins with jokes and, of course, also affects men as victims; however, the abuse always has a background, it is based on a concern, and it is structurally anchored: “Touches by male colleagues offstage, which were seen as fun (touching buttocks/ breasts).” (172)

Often, colleagues do not dare to take action against these advances because they fear negative reactions and sanctions, which is why a system of regular sexual assaults can become entrenched and thus become part of the lived theater structure. A participant reports in this context: “Inappropriate remarks, which I did not dare to counter due to hierarchical structures, verbal and psychological pressure by directors.” (199)

Here, too, the offense is even verbally minimized and thus supposedly made socially acceptable, which is not the case in fact: “Sexual innuendos, but without physical contact.” (443)

And here, the power of being a leader is sexually exploited. It is speculated that the employee will give in, fearing not wanting to evade, or hoping that the radiated power will lead to sexual attraction:

326

5  Results of the Study in Overview

“Hitting on by male management.” (790)

Here: “Sexually suggestive remarks from male colleagues.” (1797)

And here: “Everyday sexism, remarks about the body, realization of how replaceable one is, recasting, […].” (1380)

Even sexual assaults are commonplace, affecting 6.9% of all participants, which is a significant proportion. However, pay attention to the combined use of power instruments here. Sexual assaults are linked with discrimination, bullying, humiliation, and slander, so that the female employee at this theater is caught in a web of power instruments to force her into sexual concessions and increasingly subjugate her as a woman: “Indecent touching by boss, being portrayed as weak because one is a woman, questioning credibility and spreading slander during illness …” (39)

And in these examples as well, sexual violence ranges from simple harassment to physical assaults in the office and backstage, combined with other power instruments, in the form of blame, shouting, ridicule, ghosting, and more: “Sexual assaults in the office: backstage.” (852) “Sexual violence.” (1015) “Sexual harassment.” (1440) “Buttocks grabbing, being ridiculed from above and cut off.” (1646) “Venting frustration in the form of blame and shouting, sexually suggestive comments; sexually: caressing, touching the buttocks.” (1699)

Sexual violence can also be associated with vile and suggestive swear words in psychologically very simply structured individuals. Nevertheless, of course, these personalities can repeatedly manage to get into leadership positions or become directors under the radar of the theater, which has one main cause: Most theater directors are not sufficiently psychologically trained and socially competent to recognize the structure of personalities early enough and/or to react adequately to them. On the other hand, on the structural side, they often have sole decisionmaking power over hiring and promotions, so that those who support the power

5.2  Currently Experienced Forms of Power …

327

structure rather than endanger it are more likely to benefit. Education, knowledge, and skills are power—individuals with a very good education can significantly more easily endanger and expose the power of leaders who lack training segments and personality skills and tend to abuse power than those whose training profile is secondary. The consequence of this should actually be that a theater director never has sole power in personnel decisions, especially not when it comes to areas that directly affect their own work area. Furthermore, a director must have sufficient psychological training and training in personnel management to be able to fulfill their very demanding tasks today; otherwise, the power balance will also be endangered. A healthy organization must have balanced power balances; otherwise, there is a risk that the theater will become a toxic organization: “Yelling that I couldn’t do anything. Swear words up to the level of cunt. Groping.” (1564)

Repeatedly in combination with the exploitation of a power relationship: “Insults, exploitation of the power position, sexual approach within a power relationship.” (453)

Often these assaults happen unasked in rehearsal processes, in which artistic directors and directors demonstrate sexual acts on the actress’s body. Such a sensitive scene should have been prepared in great detail and provided with a code of conduct, by defining signs in advance that must be observed by all those involved in the scene. In addition, scenes of this kind must be monitored by third parties who are not close to the interests of the director or artistic director. This can be a spokesperson from the ensemble, a colleague from the staff representation, or an external, psychologically trained person if complications have already arisen here: “Directors who suddenly act out sensitive physical processes on you, e.g., rape scene.” (62)

Sexist comments combined with assaults in rehearsals. Given the large number of complaints about assaults in rehearsals by directors acting out, general action guidelines must also be developed for this:

328

5  Results of the Study in Overview

“Comments about my too-small breasts, which don’t fit into certain clothes. Unsolicited comments about my appearance, even positive ones. Director ‘acts out’ and touches my body during a love scene, without asking beforehand.” (492)

It is mostly the youngest and those at the bottom of the hierarchy—assistants, beginners on stage, young artistic staff members—who are repeatedly exposed to humiliations and sexual advances, and no assault should be excused, even if it has failed due to a good and clever defense. The mere fact of an attempted assault—i.e., an attempted rape—normally disqualifies such a person from all tasks and positions in the theater that involve personnel, i.e., management tasks. In the future, these processes and facts should be monitored and investigated more closely and comprehensively to protect colleagues and restore a healthy, power- and violence-free working atmosphere in theaters, and with the aim of removing or neutralizing perpetrator personalities from the system: “As a directing assistant, I was exposed to everything possible: humiliations, outbursts of anger, ambiguous offers, sexual/erotic assaults (which I was able to fend off).” (1846)

Many of these forms of abuse originate from the theater directors. “At my previous theater, I was yelled at, burdened with overwork, punished with poor casting, paid less than younger men, and sexually harassed by a colleague and my theater director.” (146)

Or here, combined with verbal obscenities: “Bursting into the dressing room—without knocking—even though it is clear that the actress is changing and saying ’too bad you’re not naked anymore‘ or replying ‘all the better’ to ‘I’m taking a shower right now.’” (653)

Here: “Flirting / giving kisses / slapping on the butt / comments about appearance, manipulation, withholding information, racist and sexist comments and statements in general.” (1527)

And here, it comes to a case of sexual coercion and blackmail with the aim of rape. Here, the own power situation and the existential need of an employee are exploited to the extreme:

5.2  Currently Experienced Forms of Power …

329

“Job withdrawal during pregnancy, […], ‘boss’ said if I don’t start something with him, it would be very difficult for him to continue working with me.” (1519)

Very often, attempts at sexual power abuse are linked to career promises: “Pressure, devaluation, comparisons with others, promises for career advancement in exchange for sexual openness, shifting blame to others when problems arise, instead of admitting one’s own mistakes.” (187)

And here, too, a theater director systematically uses his position of power to obtain sexual favors. This example clearly shows that it is a theater director who is not a one-time offender but who notoriously stages power assaults and rapes and has developed and internalized a—over years tested and refined—system through which the individual victims run in a chain of assaults, from individual rehearsals, private dinners, hotel rooms, and finally the theater director’s residence, the absolute climax of the sexual and power intrigue against a defenseless actress who must decide each time whether and how far she submits to these assaults to secure her existence or resists them, only to be thrown out the door, as many other examples show: “I was called to an individual rehearsal and then hit on. Another time I was invited to dinner and to a hotel room. Another time I was directly invited to a so-called theater director’s residence and asked in the end if I would stay overnight.” (1705)

This participant describes what outsiders suspect about the theater and what one does not want to admit when trying to develop a modern theater operation in which principles other than those of the stronger should apply: “Trivialization, one attempted blowjob, flirting often, casting based on sex appeal or not, as rejecting advances.” (308)



Sex is seen as a service in exchange for personal promotion and good casting, demanded and exploited:

And here—as in a number of other examples—sex is demanded for a leading role. How far must the psyche of a theater director, who is himself an employed theater manager, have drifted to assign roles as if they—and the theater—were his personal property, for which he must still achieve an additional price, a sexual service, quite naturally according to his wishes. Here, apart from the pathology of the perpetrator, which I have already dealt with in chapter 4, there is an interplay

330

5  Results of the Study in Overview

of three factors: corruption, application and threat of violence, and coercion into prostitution, as the actress is forced by the director to buy a good role sexually: “In my early years, I was offered a leading role, but only in exchange for sex (male director) / exposure, humiliation, breaking down during a public rehearsal (female director).” (540)

And here the previous example is almost identical: “Targeted breaking down of ‘unwilling’ performers, exclusion, good role in exchange for sexual favors.” (647)

Denunciation, psychological terror, and sexual advances are already part of the education at the university, where it is considered good form to break the students before providing them with an education: “You are denounced, acting lessons from the lecturer exploited for physical closeness in inappropriate body areas, regular attacks ‘you are nothing’, psychological terror, calls at any time, without limits…” (539)

However, it becomes apparent that the abuse continues due to the poor role model effect of the management and directors and their tolerance or promotion, down to the level of the actors and employees, who continue the hierarchy at the lowest level, between men and women, between Germans and foreigners, between strong and weak, between older and beginners. For this reason, one participant reports that the role model effect and the supposed and bitter success of the intercourse-forcing directors and theater managers eventually and unfortunately continue down to the level of colleagues who copy the behavior and power posturing of their bosses. She describes: The physical abuse. “It definitely came from colleagues! Studying the text together with subsequent obligation to have intercourse! In case of refusal, mobbing.” (P 115)

The explicit representation of a participant shows how sexual assaults occur by colleagues, but also by directors, in a way that creates the feeling that the theater is a protected space for such activities, in which the perpetrators go unpunished because it is part of the organizational culture to harass, touch, humiliate, and force women into sexual acts and performances:

5.3  Brief Overview of the Study Results

331

“1. City theater: Male, 15 years older colleague pointed out to me verbally ‘flirty’ during a performance in the middle of a scene that he has an erection. I was not interested in him at all, but assumed that we were playing a couple purely professionally. I couldn’t get out of the scene … 2. Also city theater: Director has always deliberately unsettled and annoyed me as a completely new, young colleague, like bullying in school, micro-aggressive. For example, made remarks that I am prudish because I didn’t want to wear a bikini from which everything would have fallen out during the scene, and insisted on keeping my bra underneath, etc. He then staged me all the way to the background and ignored me on the scene.” (1719)

5.3 Brief Overview of the Study Results In the following section, I have summarized the main results of the study and my investigations in eleven different topic groups. Working Hours, Pay, and General Working Conditions • 54%—more than half of all participants work up to ten or more hours daily, 14.5% even daily more than 10h of work, which is prohibited by law, but obviously takes place regularly. • The higher the daily workload, the greater the proportion of women: this is 65% for over ten hours of work. While women are increasingly exploited, men benefit from comparatively better working hours. • The real hourly wage of about 40% of performers and artistic staff at German city theaters—all with completed university education—is less than 9€. Another 20% earn up to 11€ per hour with a monthly gross income of up to 2,500 €. • Almost ¾ of all theater employees (71.3%) do not receive any or sufficient compensation for the extra work performed on weekends. • The artists who also have to work every Saturday and/or every/second weekend are hardest hit. Here, the values are even 75% on average. • Only 10–12% of employees in these groups receive fair financial or time compensation for the extra work performed. • Over half (51%) of all participants cannot, barely, or just manage to live on their income and exist under precarious conditions. • 50% of all participants must therefore take on additional jobs to achieve a sufficient monthly income to live on: from cleaning to guest appearances, from massage services to dubbing.

332

5  Results of the Study in Overview

Existential Threats • Approximately 65.5% of all participants regularly experience existential threats while working in the theater. • The most common form of this threat is a permanent and very high work pressure, affecting 52–58% of participants. • Between 33 and 38% of participants consistently work a large number of unpaid and often unrecorded overtime hours. • Between 24 and 28% of participants are pressured by the fact that they can be replaced by upcoming colleagues in their profession at any time. • Between 15 and 18% of participants are constantly threatened with verbal non-renewals or imminent terminations. • Only 5.1% of participants are not familiar with existential threats in the theater. Abuse of Power • The number of people who have encountered abuse at their theaters is 56.4%, significantly more than half of all participants. • Referring to the number of participants in public theaters, the target group of the study, the percentage increases to 62.8%; it increases once again in relation to the group of artistic staff and performers, of whom exactly 2/3 (66.6%) have directly experienced abuse of power. Sexual Abuse • Approximately 33% of the total participants have been or are being affected by indecencies in various forms, with this value being over 50% for artists. • 7% of the total participants and about 10% of the female participants could not defend themselves against these indecencies because they were either completely unprotected and exposed, received no help, or were cornered. • 6% of the participants (in total) and 8% of the women did not receive support from their colleagues in this context. • 121 participants—mostly women—report having had to provide/having provided a sexual favor for a role, a directing job, an engagement, or a fee increase. The participants reported a total of 284 offers made, mostly by artistic directors and directors. • The proportion of men among those who made such offers and/or carried out assaults is 96.5%, with about 30% of them being artistic directors. • There are 184 sexual assaults in recent history at various locations both inside and outside the theater, affecting 9.4% of all participants. • 27% of these assaults took place in the canteen, in a pub or bar (50),

5.3  Brief Overview of the Study Results

333

• 23% took place on the rehearsal stage (42), 8% on the backstage (15), • 12.5% in the office of the theater director or another management member (23), • 10% in the apartment of the theater director/the management member (19). • 5% each took place in a hotel (9) or in the dressing room (10). Assaults by Colleagues • 41.1% of the participants report that there are no assaults by colleagues. • 32.4% report verbal assaults, • 12.6% report touching of genitals and/or other body parts, • 12.5% report intrusive touches on the open stage, without the possibility of defending themselves, • 11.7% report unagreed expansion of kissing scenes, • 15.2% are unsure whether it was an impulse or intentional behavior. Sexually Compromising Situations in Scenic Processes • 61.8% answer the question of having experienced such situations with a No, • 15.7% with a definitive Yes, • 10.4% are unsure how to classify the scenic processes. • 12.1% suggest another answer, mostly affirming, however, that there were numerous compromising situations. Abuse at Universities and Educational Institutions • 15.8% of participants report that lecturers have exploited their position of power and exerted significant psychological pressure, • 13.4% of participants report being exposed to third parties in an educational context, • 11.7% of participants report being harassed by lecturers in an educational context, and • 3.3% of participants report being explicitly sexually abused. Representation of employees and Work Council • Only 22.7% of participants believe it is promising to turn to the personnel/ works council or trade union in such situations, • 28.7% had hoped for more from seeking help there. • 9.2% report that the colleagues of the personnel representation eventually “gave in” to the director and did not provide support and help. • 13.6% report, among other reasons, that such measures are pointless and • 7.9%, that such measures are not successful at all.

334

5  Results of the Study in Overview

Auditions • 61.4% of participants report a preference for acquaintances of the director/ management of the respective theater in auditions or singing auditions. • 26.6% report a preference for their own students, particularly in the fields of singing and acting. • 21.5% report a preference for candidates from a specific agency, despite comparatively poorer performances than those of other candidates. • 22.5% report on—for selected, aforementioned candidates—preliminary presentation appointments with professors, directors, and artistic directors before the actual entrance exams, singing auditions, and auditions, in which the favored candidates can gain further advantages and knowledge. • 36.6% of participants report on their experiences with commission members who do not behave properly during auditions—arriving late or leaving early, eating, drinking, using their mobile phones during the process. • 32.7% report that the commission members did not introduce themselves. • 22.1% report black rooms with blinding backlight, • 16.3% report excessively long waiting times and a lack of information about the process, • 68% report that there was no reimbursement for travel expenses. • 14.8% have other comments. • Only 8.9% respond that auditions and singing auditions have fair conditions. Structures and Power • 85.6% state that the hierarchical system promotes dependencies. • 59.8% note that the structures and culture at the theater promote injustice and abuse of power. • 59.6% observe that the power of the theater director is too great and too uncontrolled. • 50.8% observe that power accumulates with theater directors who banish dissenters and critical minds from the ensemble/theater. • 49.8% observe that power accumulates with theater directors who direct at their own theater, • 41.6% observe that power accumulates with theater directors who engage spouses, life partners, relatives and friends and integrate them into the power structure, • 16.5% observe that the connection between theater directors and cultural politicians and media is too strong,

References

335

• 43.1% observe that common ethical standards and rules are not sufficiently respected. • 3.4% note: “That’s just the way it is, art requires power, control, and boundary crossing,” • 0.4% state that everything is fair in the theater. • Only 1% of the 1966 participants suggest that “everything should stay exactly as it is.” Suggestions and Measures • 64.8% suggest that complaint and arbitration offices should be established that operate independently. • 61.2% demand more time, time compensation, and less production pressure. • 58.8% demand flat hierarchies and 56% desire more participation. • 39.3% demand the abolition of single theater directors, resp. the abolition of the “one-theater-director-model” (Intendanten-Modell). • 38.9% desire democratic decision-making processes. • 11.3% submit other suggestions, • 1% suggest that “everything should stay exactly as it is.” • 24.5% wish to publish the names of repeat offenders at the public black board of the theater. • 14.2% suggest that there should be no more 1:1 situations in conflicts with superiors, • 13.3% suggest publishing incidents, for example, on a bulletin board, as well as organizing protests and open discussions. • 13.3% would suggest other measures, and • 0.5% would not suggest any countermeasures at all.

References DBV. (2018). Theaterstatistik. Köln: Deutscher Bühnenverein. Schmidt, T. (2016). Theater, Krise und Reform. Eine Kritik des deutschen Theatersystems Wiesbaden. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Schmidt, T. (2018). Elemente des deutschen Theatersystems, Essentials Praxis Kulturmanagement. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

6

Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

Look closely at any company in trouble, and you’ll probably find the problem is management. Teal (1997, p. 1)

Theater is an ensemble art that relies on creativity, artistic ideas, and attempts to implement them. The artists who rehearse day by day and perform for the audience night by night, and the artistic staff who support them, are usually very sensitive, very perceptive people who have dedicated their lives to art and theater, and have sacrificed much for it. They must be protected from power and abuse of any kind, and this protection begins within the ensemble, among the closest colleagues, with the principle that even in delicate and fragile situations, consideration must be given to the weakest. Only when one learns to grow together as a true ensemble extraordinary artistic achievements can be accomplished. Then one will understand that theater directors and scenic directors should also be instruments and servants of their theater on the way to an artistic result, whose artistic ideas are important for the productions and the theater, but whose personal interests must not be the focus—these interests have no place within the theater, no matter how much an artistic director or a director may claim at every opportunity that one cannot separate work and private life in the theater in order to be successful. This is an absurd argument that speaks of the degree of self-deception to which theater leaders sometimes succumb. The courage of the ensembles will grow, and the ensembles will increasingly and more successfully defend themselves against what I have tried to meticulously list, analyze, and evaluate in this book, that artists are threatened, humiliated, and made victims by individual perpetrators who use their power to achieve their personal goals and interests at any cost and at the expense of the employees entrusted to them. Of course, the artists © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 T. Schmidt, Power and Structure in Theater, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-42280-6_6

337

338

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

and ensembles also need the support of all stakeholders, the ensemble network and the audience, the shareholders and sponsors, the stage association and cultural policy, and also the media, in order to prevent in each individual case that individual theaters become toxic companies in which employees are exposed to arbitrary or strategic power abuses—only because the wrong leaders were chosen too hastily, based on the recommendations of the wrong advisors and without thorough examination of knowledge, references, and competencies, and because they clung to the wrong structures that promote power and power abuses in all forms and shades, and if necessary, also provide cover. Strengthening the ensemble and calling on stakeholders to cooperate is, however, only part of the repair work to be done at theaters affected by abuse. In addition, there are the necessary structural changes that—as a possible model—are to be implemented within the framework of a team- and process-oriented structural reform in theaters, as the thesis that structures are power-triggering and -supporting has been confirmed in the course of the evaluation of the study results. In order to stabilize the healed internal structures and relationships between employees in the affected— but also in the other, fundamentally always power-asymmetric—theaters and to link them together in a future-proof theater model, suitable management models and instruments are also needed to facilitate and secure the management work in theaters. In this context, it is recommended, especially against the background of the facts of power abuse and mismanagement, to choose an ethical management model in the future, so that any form of abuse and mismanagement can be instrumentally excluded. I would like to present this ethical management model (Sect. 6.2.1) and the model of team- and process-oriented structural reform for theaters (Sect. 6.2.2) in the following chapter, after I have once again systematically dealt with the basic forms and elements of structural power (Sect. 6.1) in order to illuminate the results of the study with regard to the structural questions raised from a theoretical perspective.

6.1 The Basic Forms of Structural Power in Theater Power is ubiquitous, even in institutions of the arts, such as the theater, as the results of the study clearly show. Although power also has a very amorphous, intangible side, as Max Weber states, the results of this study are nevertheless very clear and meaningful: They show that power in theaters takes on very special forms because the structural prerequisites for a modern power-dampening structure—similar to those in scientific institutions—are not yet in place, unlike in business enterprises or administrative organizations. These have, for example,

6.1  The Basic Forms of Structural Power in Theater

339

modernized and advanced in the area of ethical management to such an extent that asymmetries and transgressions, as in theaters, are hardly possible anymore. A significant difference compared to professionally organized companies and organizations in the economy and NPOs, and at the same time another reason for the steep hierarchy and structural power in theaters, lies in the limited specific educational background of theater directors in management and personnel matters, as well as in the area of social and psychological competencies. Another reason can be found in the self-evidence of the use of power, which is passed on unquestioned from generation to generation by the theater directors. This is not to question the artistic training and high creativity of many theater directors. This qualifies them for artistic direction with appropriate training, but not for the overall management of highly complex organizations characterized by strong content, personnel, and professional fragmentation, which should already speak as common sense against a single leadership. The demands of the theater directors and their professional association, the German Stage Association (DBV), and the still prevailing, paradoxical, and convenient focus of political executives, such as city administrations or ministries, on a single leader as the sole contact person and responsible party, lead to the current shadow existence of theaters in a society where structural unlocking has long been taking place and team solutions are becoming far-sighted and self-evident in many innovative areas. This is exactly where theaters should be structurally located today in order to properly unleash their creative and personnel potentials, as is necessary in a time when many cultural techniques and media are competing for every percentage of people’s attention. In this book, I have tried to combine the results of a study—the largest of its kind in a cultural landscape—with an analysis of the structural conditions of the theater organization in order to better isolate and describe the phenomenon of power present and active within it. Thus, this publication has not only become a book about power and structure in the theater but also about the theater itself, with which I was able to analyze and describe completely new aspects of the theater that have been left out of the specialist literature so far, such as the organizational culture of the theater, the real working and living conditions of the artists, specific power rituals and relationships, or the power potential and the exercise of power by their leaders and directors. For all students in theater, cultural, and literary studies, theater and cultural management areas, as well as newcomers to the theater topic or theater life—be it as a young committed actor, singer, dramaturge, assistant, or staff member, or as an intern—and for all other curious people, this book will hopefully be a valuable addition to the still very scarce literature on theater operations in Germany.

340

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

Power is a phenomenon that permeates and significantly shapes the theater organization, with almost 80% of all artists being structurally affected, some of them in a humiliating way, in situations where power is combined with abuse and violence in various degrees. Of little help for a thorough investigation and paradoxical in these situations is, above all, a repeatedly brought up killer argument, with which the theater directors insist on the autonomy of art and advance artistic freedom and quality on many occasions when it comes to examining processes and structures of the theater more closely or analyzing and at the same time dusting off the completely outdated organizational culture with its rituals. The argument is still put forward even when it becomes clear that boundaries have been crossed that have more to do with one’s own inability, for example personnel problems or the correct assessment of the load limits of performers, than with artistic processes in the narrower sense. In doing so, instruments of power are used to conceal one’s own inability. Or, for example, where a sexual inclination is lived out in rehearsal processes under the command of artistic freedom. It is primarily the theater directors and the scenic directors themselves who, with too strong an exercise of power, curtail those artistic processes that they actually want to promote, develop, and bring to fruition. With the result that artists feel uncomfortable, unfree, or ill and—usually for a longer time or even permanently—can no longer work at the highest level. In this way, the self-chosen principle of the autonomy of artistic creation is perpetuated. Autonomy, power, and artistic quality develop in a very contradictory way. 

In short, it can be said that the egoisms and power transgressions of theater directors lead to permanent burdens on the staff. They have negative effects on the artistic quality of productions and cause lasting damage to the theaters and their staff.

It is now clear that they exist in the theater: abuses of power, and in a large number, variety, and density that go far beyond the assumptions with which I had set out to conduct this study. Too many people in the theater are affected, as the results of the study show. It can no longer be considered isolated cases. Yet despite all the debates and #MeToo, there is still no voice, no institution, no force that would put an end to this power behavior in theaters. Neither at the normative level through politics and the stage association nor in the procedural implementation. Although THEMIS was created as the first trust center, it is completely underfunded and serves the film and television sectors in addition to the theater.

6.1  The Basic Forms of Structural Power in Theater

341

In business enterprises, many NPOs, and progressive administrations, the focus is now on introducing ethical regulations and regulatory measures at all levels with great success. It is about a dialogue that is conducted impartially, without sanctions and appeals, but with high expertise and empathy, to ensure fairness and avoid and permanently prevent abuses of power of any kind (Brink and Tiberius 2005, p. 57). The question remains as to how these power violations occur. What goes on in a person who stoops to hurting, humiliating, and ultimately even traumatizing their counterpart—and thus always themselves? Is this all explained solely by narcissism, peripheral mental disorders, or an insufficient social and managerial education of the perpetrators, or is it also due to the peculiarity of the—once called heterotopia—magical place of the theater and the people who strive for recognition, fame, and power in it? And those who, as “helpers,” have to work from early to late to be hurt at the end of the day? Could the abuse of power perhaps be a compensation for the fact that recognition and fame, once the lubricant, have diminished over the course of a career? Can abuse and lack of talent therefore be related to each other? For how else can it be explained that performers have to “pay” for good roles with sex again and again, have to give themselves up, be humiliated and degraded, mostly by men who are psychopaths, as if the affected theater belonged to the artistic director who may demand an additional service as payment for every favor. Do the sponsors and shareholders know about these normative and psychological deviations at the top of the theaters discussed here? Are they aware of them and covering up these incidents? Do they tolerate them because the theater is dismissed as a special case, where things are different and “more liberal” than in the rest of society? But freedom, even sexual freedom, has nothing to do with sexual assaults generated by power; where violence prevails, freedom ends, it is suffocated by those who can apparently only exist and work with power, as powerful individuals. It would be appropriate to prescribe a multi-year, power-free sabbatical for theater directors after five, at the latest eight years in office, through the Stage Association (DBV), which is already concerned with the careers of theater directors and monitors them in commissions. Wouldn’t its actual task be to remove artistic directors who deviate from an ethical norm for a few years—or forever—from circulation, to retrain them, to make them do social work? A fall from heaven has never harmed a prince. Assaults, first the lighter ones, later—occasionally—the heavier ones, may feel more and more like privileges that one seems to have earned, otherwise someone would have said something and intervened long ago, right?

342

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

In my many years of working in the theater, I have seen how some colleagues’ sense of injustice gradually shifted with their appointment to leadership positions, or how directors’ desire for sexual assaults during rehearsals grew more and more. One of the directors soon tolerated no objections during rehearsals. “Do you want to play?” was a popular question directed at the actors. “Otherwise, you’re out.” And of course, this well-respected director in the theater scene was a stepping stone and thus also a seducer who calculated his power precisely and pushed it further with each rehearsal. When I asked, the theater director responsible for the production and the actors shrugged and said that the directorial concept was designed that way, and he had—possibly—prevented worse. However, if the claim is merely to prevent the worst, nothing is gained. There should be no place in the theater for the worst and the slightly less bad, and certainly not for directors who stage it and artistic directors who tolerate and ultimately bear responsibility for it. In this respect, the theater director and the scenic director are always a team. Either the scenic director is himself a theater director, or he is the superior and has the task of artistically supervising the work of all productions, which also means protecting the artists involved. If he does this, he is doing his job. If he does not, his claim to a place at the top of a theater should have expired. There is no alternative to this if, in return, one considers the many artists exposed to power and sexual exploitation in theaters who should be employed safely and happily in the future. I have gradually revealed and repeatedly listed the reasons for this power in the course of the study. They lie in a mix of four different mechanisms that interlock and mesh into a robust apparatus, against which only the combined resistance of the ensembles and the supporting institutions (unions, ensemble- network etc.) can achieve anything. 1. The Human Factor Firstly, it is often the still immature personalities and/or those who have not or insufficiently undergone psychological testing for complex tasks that, alongside others, gain more experienced positions in theater management. The reasons for this can be diverse and may be rooted in the individual’s life story. Most often, there is a pattern: The actors have primarily worked towards the goal of artistic self-realization since their early years as theater assistants, often without ever taking on service or community-based social tasks outside of the theater and thus being able to develop corresponding social skills. If one works in the theater year after year, social atrophy sets in, as in almost all self-contained areas, and cognitive and motivational aspects of the human psyche are not developed to the same extent as in people who have had a diverse

6.1  The Basic Forms of Structural Power in Theater

343

education, work, and development experience. For personalities with mono-characteristics, it is significantly more difficult to penetrate and solve complex issues and problems such as crises or structural interrelationships (Achtenhagen 1992). Constant engagement with creative processes does not help much if they only take place in a kind of heterotopia, where fundamentally different conditions prevail than in societal reality. The management of a theater operation, especially when it is a sole management, is the most demanding and multifaceted task that the cultural sector has to offer. Even for mature and universally highly educated personalities, this involves a great deal and sometimes even too much responsibility and power, which can only be mastered with adequate preparation and training and a perfectly coordinated and transparent delegation system. People who have never been prepared differently than through tasks and activities in a section of the theater that does not even remotely reflect the entire operation will sooner or later fail, as the crisis tableau (Fig. 1.1) clearly shows. This can work well for a few years, during which the operation runs almost on its own, but the first problems and crises require a high level of professionalism to ensure that the theater is not endangered—and not all theater directors have this professionalism to offer, often lacking a complex view of the operation and the needs of the staff. Over the years, the demands on the work of the theater director have also increased massively, so that the partial casualness of the 70s and 80s is no longer sufficient to adequately meet the range of tasks. In summary, one can say: Without the person concerned • continuing their education, comprehensively, and without him or her • constantly updating this knowledge, skills, and competencies • and adapting them to the political, economic, and social framework conditions of the theater operation and its employees, • but also to the environment surrounding the theater, which develops faster than the theater itself, the tasks of a theater director can no longer be fulfilled today. This is the reason for the dissociative development of theaters. For management, this means leading theaters out of heterotopia and reconnecting them to general societal conditions, as has already partially happened in terms of content in recent years. 2. The Insufficient Qualification of Candidates for the Director’s Position The reasons for the dissociative development of the theater also lie in an insufficient consideration of the absolutely necessary knowledge of management,

344

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

organization, and personnel management: Because the German Stage Association and its representatives sitting in the selection committees primarily focus on qualifications such as artistic profile, networking, and artistic relationships—which are indeed important for the classical requirement profile of a director, but by no means sufficient. In the last 30 years alone, complexity in society and organizations was increasing, and management has developed to an almost unheard-of extent and gained a whole new quality. This includes areas such as organizational culture and organizational development, the development of guiding principles and new communicative formats, the field of stakeholder management, modern leadership theories and personnel development, inclusion and diversity, digitalization, lifelong learning, emotional intelligence, and new forms of personnel management, ethical management, and good corporate governance. Theater directors must master all of this today, conceptually, instrumentally, and in practical implementation. And this knowledge is constantly being updated. Because public theaters depend on public funding and their existence is not secured by customers and returns, but by a political commitment in the truest sense of the word, precise knowledge of the mechanisms of politics at the state and local level, as well as political communication and lobbying, is also required. In addition, knowledge and experience with modern copyright, grant, corporate, and/or foundation law are necessary, even if the theater has a legal counsel. Because this legal counsel cannot be consulted at every conversation and decision of the director, especially since certain routines are established in which directors decide without consultation anyway. These decisions require a legally secure background. In summary, it can be said about this point: The theater operation with its employees, who work in more than 100 different professions and functions, requires not only a particularly large know-how in the most diverse, constantly evolving fields of expertise, in which the directors must be partners for their employees. It also requires particularly effective and structured communication, division of labor, team-building, and delegation. 3. Structural Locking (Insufficient structural conditions of theater operations) At the core of the structural locking of theaters, as described earlier, is the division of theater operations into administrative, technical, artistic, planning, organizational, and managerial areas and competencies, which are informally linked through the production flow. However, this is neither formally reflected by the existing management structures and organization charts nor does it lead to consid-

6.1  The Basic Forms of Structural Power in Theater

345

erations for reforming the structures. So far, a single artistic director (Intendant) is responsible for all areas of the theater, including the four to five categories, such as modern internal and external communication, management and personnel management, stakeholder management, and organizational development, for which he is usually not trained and which he naturally cannot master sufficiently. For this, there are then experts—in the steep hierarchy of the theater, usually second or third rank, to whom the structure of the theater does not assign the importance they should have in order to bring their expertise into the operation in everyday life as well as in problem and crisis situations. If the theater director remains the sole ruler of the theater for the next 10–20 years, hardly any innovations will come from the other areas; the theater will miss many developments because innovation and critical feedback not only do not pay off but are sanctioned. When thinking about the future of theaters, at least a large part of the leading actors (concept, planning, organization, management) must be closely interconnected on the first management level, without there being a hierarchical gradation between the areas that leads to frictions, losses of knowledge and resources, and crises. A theater today requires a specialist at the helm in each of these areas mentioned here, who work together on an equal footing to link the work areas—in analogy to the production flow—with each other. In a directorate or a management team. There is no general best solution, each theater must find its own form that is fitting best to the mission and the code of conduct of the theater. The new leaders should see themselves as a team, consult and decide together, learn from each other and be able to represent each other. This could be a huge opportunity because a management of this format would not only reflect the complexity of the theater but also because the house, with experts at the helm, would receive a completely different, professional external representation that moves away from the genius of the individual artist, towards a team-oriented community art, thus back to the origins and the division of labor, which was and is the basis of the theater and its productions. This would also mean a certain pacification of the theater, its departments, and employees from within. For about 90 years, the large and smaller departments of the theater have been drifting apart for various reasons. It is to be feared that in a few years they will have moved so far apart that no connections can be recognized anymore and communication and cooperation will hardly be possible. In the long run, the theaters would no longer be able to work. They would disintegrate, as representatives of the stage association already modeled in the 90s and 00s at the suggestion of the then managing director of the DBV, Rolf Bolwin, and the various presidents, by separating workshops, orchestras, and administrations of various theaters from the theater bodies and merging them at other locations, as happened with the Berlin Opera Founda-

346

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

tion, which served as a basic model for the numerous, over 40 mergers, especially of the East theaters (Gera/Altenburg; Zwickau/Plauen; Meiningen/Eisenach; Saalfeld/Rudolstadt, Dresden; Döbeln/Freiberg; Düsseldorf/Duisburg; Flensburg/ Schleswig, Görlitz/Zittau; Greifswald/Stralsund/Putbus; Halberstadt/Quedlinburg; Halle/Saale and many others). The lack of imagination of the stage association princes ultimately led to a impoverishment of options in the theater landscape: One theater or a unimaginatively merged theater association is structurally and organizationally similar to the other today. Now, for the first time in Halle, Essen, Marburg, Wiesbaden (in 2024)management teams of two women have been appointed to atheater directorship. All other so-called directorates or team managements are not real1: They are intermediate stages, no one has bothered to further develop these models. In the structural and organizational area, in management and personnel management, in the areas of technology and administration, as well as in planning, communication, and marketing, the departments are still in their infancy, they receive too little money to develop innovative forms, in some cases, they have even—from an organizational point of view—lost touch with the artistic departments and processes. The flood of meetings in the theater business should not deceive about this, which takes away almost half of the working time on the middle and higher management levels—an incredible indicator of a lack of efficiency and poor communication, which is not collected, not measured, and not published because the supervisory bodies would otherwise sound the alarm. 4. Structural Imbalance of Theater Organization (and its areas) The reasons for the insufficient development of theaters ultimately lie in the skewed balance of the individual areas in relation to each other: within the theater, where the ensemble and employees are nothing, and the theater director is everything. The theater association is also partly to blame for this. It does not hold back the heads of theaters and theater conglomerates, as recently in Halle, from enforcing their power games at the expense of the employees. This does a

1 All

other so-called directorates/team managements are not real: neither Mannheim (four separate artistic directorships with a shared administration) nor Frankfurt (two separate theaters, with a shared administrative apparatus) or Stuttgart (two theaters, four separate artistic directors with one administration, central workshops), nor Dresden (a managing director with subordinate artistic directors, one administration, and central workshops) are real team managements.

6.1  The Basic Forms of Structural Power in Theater

347

disservice to the theater in the long term, especially in cities where there is competition between funding for education, environment, and culture, and where it is no longer certain that the theater will continue to be financed in the future. Not only because there are so many other important projects and organizations to finance, such as kindergartens, sports fields, swimming pools, refugee organizations, green spaces, public transport, or wastewater supply. But also because there are doubts from all directions and factions about the significance, legitimacy, and effectiveness of the theater, where it has increasingly alienated itself from the audience and the urban society, because the experiments for the artistic self-realization of the artistic director and his core team were suddenly at the center. The skewed value within the theater is also reflected in the organizational culture, in which the artistic part leads its own life and increasingly alienates itself from the service-providing parts of the theater, such as the technology, workshops, and administration. Instead of pulling together, the divided theater structure is continued and confirmed. Instead of finally developing and implementing a unified collective agreement, the diversity of tariffs is maintained because the Divide et Impera, the divide and rule as an old Machiavellian power principle from above works even better and further cements the “above” against the “below” with all its might. The Eight Basic Elements of Structural Power in Theater Structural power manifests itself in various ways, as the results of the study show. Here is a synoptic overview of the eight basic elements of structural power in theater: • The sole directorates as the center of the theater director-centered theater model (Intendanten-Modell). • The structural locking caused by steep hierarchies, lack of communication and transparency, and disparate organizational structures. • The strong differentiation of the remuneration and tariff system between artistic, technical, and administrative staff at the theater. This leads to a latent disintegration among the groups; while administrative and technical staff receive on average 1/3 more salary, even though their level of education is usually non-academic, artists have to make do with a fee negotiated under difficult conditions, which has only insignificant possibilities for increase. → There are two considerations here: One → fee grid for artists with an adjusted and increased basic salary, and, more broadly, a → unitary theater tariff, which covers all areas of the theater based on a uniform theater contract with the same fee levels for all employees and negotiable surcharges.

348

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

• The low fee level for artists. It leads to precarious living conditions in the first eight to ten years of engagements, in which it is hardly possible for artists to eat healthily, regenerate, travel, train, take vacations, participate in leisure activities, rent a good apartment, establish sustainable partnerships, and start families. The differences to the top fees paid in the major metropolitan theaters are also striking, especially since these fees are often known and—in comparison with one’s own fee—must have a disturbing and oppressive effect on young artists. • Social and family planning is only possible with difficulty, as the artistic career takes precedence in the first years, which can only be made up for with difficulty, especially for women from the mid-30s onwards. In addition, there is the idealization of young actresses by the incumbent theater directors and directors. • Moreover, artists can be terminated every year and therefore live in a great existential uncertainty, which is completely contrary to the demanding, physically and mentally stressful activity. Only very few of them achieve a 15-year membership in a theater, with which an non-terminable permanent contract is obtained, since the ensembles are fundamentally replaced with every change of director (every 5–10 years) and frequent waves of termination also occur within the directorship periods. • A new trend shows that the core ensembles, as a gathering of permanently employed actors, are becoming smaller and smaller because free positions are “filled” with guest contracts. Theater directors are increasingly following the trend of working with split ensembles in order to create greater flexibility in casting questions and greater scope for the commitment of directors, who increasingly and more frequently insist on their specific favorite guest actors. This increases the pressure on the actors of the ensembles and their willingness to make even serious compromises in order to obtain an engagement or consolidate an existing engagement. • Real participation in the development of the organization and essential decisions by the artists is hardly or not at all possible, except for the possible involvement of staff councils. The work of the ensemble boards has so far often only related to the essential aspects of the ensemble and the acute problem situations, instead of extending the rights to questions of engagements, non-renewals, castings, fees, invitations of directing teams, important personnel and structural decisions, participation in management meetings and meetings of the supervisory body, i.e., to real participation.

6.1  The Basic Forms of Structural Power in Theater

349

structural locking missing parcipaon

Sole Intendancy

Low fee level

Split ensembles

Existenal insecurity

Tariff diversity Prevenon of social planning

Fig. 6.1   The eight basic elements of structural power in the theater (Schmidt 2018)

Power in the theater manifests itself in these eight basic elements, see Fig. 6.1. However, as the results of the study have shown, it goes far beyond that and extends to physical assaults and forms of physical and sexual violence that are tolerated out of fear of career-ending consequences and from the inherited organizational-cultural understanding that successful artistic processes involve the expansion of power as a means, without this constituting an ethical dilemma for those involved and the supervisory bodies. Young professionals who are caught in the mills of power through the mentioned initiation rituals and cannot defend themselves should not be blamed for not speaking up out of fear and shame, as they know that they would otherwise be cut off by the artistic directors and excluded by the other directors and producers. But above all, the directors of the second management level, who have knowledge of these assaults, who participate in rehearsals in which artistic directors regularly lose their temper or become intrusive, must be admonished. Although their exist-

350

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

ence is also at stake, their leverage in meetings and their access to external multipliers is much greater than that of a performer or a simple employee. Supervisory bodies must also be admonished to take their tasks and responsibilities more seriously. They bear responsibility for the actions of the artistic director, for the well-being of each individual employee, and for the future of the theater. In a situation where cuts are being made in all areas subsidized by the public sector, the theater should be untouchable and not be robbed of its future by scandals and crises caused by individual perpetrators for the sake of their own personal career and future. This egoism is merciless. It is the litmus test that proves the inability to lead a theater. Transgressions are thus accepted as collateral damage instead of being contained, which is due to the autonomous artistic production processes that take place detached from the other processes in the theater, without, for example, operating offices, management, or works councils becoming aware of and intervening in them. The inexperience, high enthusiasm, and far too high tolerance threshold of performers and young employees promote this. 

It becomes clear that abuses of power can be traced back to structural problems in the theater that enable and encourage the use of power in all its shades.

It will therefore be important to take a multi-track approach to solving the problem by openly addressing, addressing, publishing, publicly evaluating the assaults, forcing political bodies to deal with and act on them. This will resolve the assaults in the short and medium term. 

Abuse of power must be tackled at its roots: these are the prevailing structures with their peculiarities. Only when these are changed and reformed will the relationship between managers and employees change significantly.

6.2 Power-Reducing and -Containing Measures Based on the results of the present study as well as other studies on topics of the structural crisis of the theater (Schmidt 2016) and necessary reforms (Schneider, Schmidt 2012 et al.), I would like to propose some selected models and measures here that go beyond or meaningfully complement the proposals formulated so far.

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

351

At the center of this is the establishment of a so-called Ethical Management as a future management model and, in particular, the development of a binding Code of Conduct (Code of Conduct) for all theaters, which goes beyond curbing sexual assaults and creates a sustainable regulatory framework to balance and contain abuse of power of all kinds in the long term. I have already mentioned some aspects in the previous chapters. At this point, they will be presented again, structured according to the two central areas of Ethical Management and Team and Process-Oriented Structural Reform (TPSR). It must be emphasized again and again that one cannot be sustainably implemented without the other, because the elements relate to each other and only become sustainably effective through their synergies. In the following, I would like to briefly introduce the essential elements of these two reform cores. Ethical Theater Management • Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Moral Management • Core topics of ethical management • Model of a Leadership Compass’ • Emotional Competence and Leadership (EKF) • Emotional Leadership Styles • The Concept of the Learning Organization • Leadership: Fair and Power-Free Personnel Management (GMPM) • Code of Conduct and Good Corporate Governance as a model • Organizational mission statements as a modern management tool Team and Process-Oriented Structural Reform (TPSR) • New structures, flat hierarchies, teams, and decentralization • Balance of power as the basis for a new organizational model • Separation of Powers by replacing the old artistic director model • Separation of person and office • Balance of power and limitation of the pursuit of power consolidation • Control, regulation, and psychological reflection • Role of politics, the stage association, and other actors • The psychology of the director • Suitability, profiles, selection methods, and criteria for management members • Model of a psychological assessment (PA) • Catalog of criteria

352

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

6.2.1 Ethical Theater Management In light of the results and analyses of this study, it becomes clear that the theater operation must be reformed in the future on two levels, through a new ethical management model and through a team- and process-oriented structural reform of the theater operation. In my view, both the current classical management model and the artistic director-centered organizational structure of the theater are no longer able to solve the accumulating internal problems in the theaters and at the same time enable the theaters to reposition themselves in the face of changing environmental conditions and to solve the immense social and power problems that have emerged as existential and reform-inhibiting. In the following section, I would therefore like to define elements of a new ethical management model in which these issues and problems are addressed. The starting point of my considerations is the model of a Corporate Social Responsibility for public theaters in Germany. The DIN ISO 26000 issued by the Federal Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs in 2011 could be an approach for how organizations should act responsibly towards society. The standard refers to the following principles: • Accountability, • Transparency and ethical behavior, • Respect for the interests of stakeholders, • Respect for the rule of law and international standards of conduct (BMAS 2011). At the center of this model is the development and implementation of a so-called Corporate Social Responsibility of companies and company management towards society, employees, and the respective urban community. Corporate Social Responsibility and Moral Management The foundations for a Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) were laid in the 1950s in the specialist literature and increasingly found their application in corporate practice during this time (Wren 2005). Howard Bowen defined CSR or SR (Social Responsibilities), as it was still called at the time, as the first scientist as follows: It (SR) refers to the obligations of businessmen to pursue those policies, to make those decisions, or to follow those lines of action which are desirable in terms of the objectives and values of our society. (Bowen 1953, p. 6)

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

353

CSR in this very early definition of this concept refers to a company’s consideration of the values and goals of society; at that time, they were primarily understood as philanthropy. Ten years later, William C. Frederick refined this definition: Social responsibility in the final analysis implies a public posture toward society’s economic and human resources and a willingness to see that those resources are utilized for broad social ends and not simply for the narrowly circumscribed interests of private persons and firms. (Frederick 1960, p. 60)

During this period, the concept changed from pure philanthropy to more responsibility towards one’s own employees and to an improvement in the relationship with customers and stakeholders (shareholders). Edwin M. Epstein was the first in 1987 to link CSR with an ethical responsibility of the company or company management and so-called Business Ethics. He coined the term normative correctness, which should be the starting point for the actions of every company and manager: Corporate social responsibility relates primarily to achieving outcomes from organizational decisions concerning specific issues or problems which (by some normative standard) have beneficial rather than adverse effects upon pertinent corporate stakeholders. The normative correctness of the products of corporate action have been the main focus of corporate social responsibility. (Epstein 1987, p. 104)

In 2000, Bryan Hustedt linked the concept of CSR with the concept of a socalled Corporate Social Performance (CSP), which measures and evaluates the actual implementation of CSR measures as part of a company’s strategy and policy, as well as the actions and activities of each company (Hustedt 2000). Increasingly, considerations of legal and ethical compliance were incorporated into the concept, which were due to new management standards and new practices in auditing and consulting, as well as reflections on the results of the major financial crisis and better protection of investors and employees. Many of the more recent research findings emphasize an increasing importance of CSR for a redefinition and societal control of the role of companies, such as in Steven B. Lydenberg’s publication: Corporations and the Public Interest: Guiding the Invisible Hand. (Carroll 2008, p. 42). Corporate Social Responsibility thus means that a company takes full societal responsibility for its actions and products, for its actions, its relationships with stakeholders, and especially with its employees. In doing so, only ethical standards based on a moral conduct are applied.

354

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

Applying these considerations to public theaters in Germany, it must be stated that CSR or a corresponding ethical compliance of theaters in theater operations is currently not applied as a concept and, regrettably, not even seriously discussed. However, the concept of Corporate Social Performance (CSP) could, for example, serve as a fundamental concept for measuring corresponding ethical management strategies and measures in the theater, which could be developed, implemented, regularly discussed, and evaluated in the future by the Bühnenverein together with the theaters and their sponsors. In this way, theaters could receive a conscientious reflection on their social positioning in society and towards their employees. A comparison between theaters would be possible and common, with corresponding feedback and best-practice examples, from which learning and synergy effects can emerge. The positive effects of such a corporate orientation were once again very precisely summarized by Carroll and Shabana in 2010: • Reduction of costs and risks through improved working conditions for employees, through ecological sustainability of all production processes, and community relations management; • Achievement of competitive advantages through strengthening customer relationships; • Development and maintenance of legitimacy and reputation (reputational capital), through transparency and openness towards employees and the community; • and synergies in the area of value creation, through investments in education and training, and stakeholder engagement (Carroll and Shabana 2010, p. 1). From another perspective, Thomas Teal argued in 1997 in the Harvard Business Review, presenting outstanding managers and companies that were economically very successful with new, employee-friendly, and innovative concepts and were able to shape corresponding chance-management processes. The starting point of his analyses was the observation that almost all problems that arise in companies can be traced back to management errors: Look closely at any company in trouble, and you’ll probably find the problem is management. (Teal 1997, p. 1)

In his article, Teal defines the important characteristics that distinguish good management and focuses primarily on the area of social and emotional competencies,

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

355

which at that time crystallized as essential in the conceptual thinking of some management pioneers, such as Goleman, et al. (see below): • strategic thinking • persuasive power • negotiation skills • The ability to communicate well (writing, speaking, and listening) • integrity and character • vision and passion • sensitivity and imagination • commitment • charisma and courage • ethical standards (ibid., p. 2). Teal concludes that the biggest mistakes in management arise from placing too much emphasis on technical and economic expertise and too little on personality and social skills. One reason for this, he observed, is that the importance of personal qualities is still downplayed too much. In contrast to these previously universally valid assessments, the analysis of the case studies clearly shows that “only those who understand management not only as a series of mechanical tasks but as a set of human interactions have become good managers.” (Teal, p. 3). In some of the case studies, Teal explains how the initial inadequate consideration of employees’ needs negatively impacted the development of the companies and how a corresponding change in awareness and a management course change based on this led to great successes. Teal considers it essential here that successful managers have always fundamentally shown responsibility for their employees and clearly and consistently formulated and communicated their strategies and concepts to them—as honest brokers who keep their promises and exclude so-called hidden agendas from their considerations and strategies. In almost every successful case study, Teal states that managers not only disclosed their strategies but also their economic results to their employees and the public, thus creating a shared responsibility and participation in the development of the company (Teal, pp. 4 ff.). This would also be a very appropriate conceptual solution for the development of theaters and the solution of their problems, as those who develop, produce, and show the results on and behind the stage night after night not only have a right to be treated fairly but also to be involved in management decisions on an equal footing—through information, through regulated co-determination

356

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

rights and participation tailored to the theater operation. The more responsibility the employees share, the stronger their awareness of the theater and its problems and interests will develop. The theater can only benefit from this. Theater directors who are not willing or able to do so have missed the signals of the times and development. They have long been unable to lead their theaters into the future. In 1999, Carroll formulated the core points of a future Moral Management, which always refers to both the personal and organizational standards of a manager, and a closely related Ethical Leadership: In Moral Management, decision makers vigorously conform to high standards of ethical behavior. These standards are both personal and organizational. Ethical leadership is a principal characteristic of moral managers. Moral managers want to succeed, but only within the confines of sound ethical precepts. Moral managers are interested in profits, but they pursue financial success within the confines of legal obedience—the letter and the spirit of the law. They typically regard the law as an ethical minimum and they have a habit of operating well above what the law mandates. (Carroll 1999, p. 367)

In this context, compliance with laws as a standard is the minimum. Moral and ethical management go far beyond that. For theater operations, this would mean that no program, no production, and no operational process should take place without a thorough ethical examination to ensure that the corresponding activities take place within an ethical framework, do not violate the rules established therein, and serve the interests of the employees. The model of Moral Management is expanded by the so-called Integrity Strategy, the integrity concept of Lynne Sharp Paine (1994), who defined ethics as the driving force of every undertaking. In it, ethical values shape all activities of a company, in our case a theater, such as the development of overarching concepts and mission statements, programs and productions, conceptions in dealing with the audience, as well as general management instruments, such as decision-making structures and processes and the related design of the organizational structure. In this context, the term Organizational Ethics is also used, which define and set the standards for a fair, employee-oriented, and sustainable theater structure. Patricia H. Werhane developed a very interesting Moral Management Model for the cultural sector in 1999. In her book Moral Imagination and Management Decision Making (1999), she develops the concept of Moral Imagination, which serves as an essential instrument for integrating moral ideas into decision-making processes and judgments. With Moral Management and Ethical Leadership, which are based on Corporate Social Responsibility, very precise and by now tried and tested instruments

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

357

of Ethical Management are available, which have been used by many companies and managers in the economy and by NPOs and should also find their application in theater operations. In this way, the theater could not only solve the serious internal power and justice problems but also strengthen its role in the respective community. Core Themes of Ethical Management Based on the above explanations, the following general core themes of ethical management could develop, which could take the following form when applied to the theater. In column 1, I refer to the core themes already formulated by the Federal Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs (BMAS) in 2011, which I have transferred to the theater operation in column 2 and adapted accordingly (Fig. 6.2): The themes mentioned here reflect today’s understanding of social responsibility and are considered fundamentally relevant for every organization. Due to social developments, however, these core themes can further develop or new themes and fields of action can be added. (BMAS 2011, p. 24)

In this context, the work of the theater focuses on six key areas: organizational leadership, ensuring ethical work practices, fair operational and business practices, greater consideration of audience concerns, community engagement and development, and sustainability. As a result of this study, it can be concluded that, above all, organizational leadership, working conditions, and social protection, particularly for performers and artistic staff of the theater, must be at the forefront of a corresponding Code of Conduct (see below) if the theater wants to solve the aforementioned problems in a forward-looking manner. However, this Code goes beyond the partial improvement of these conditions. This includes embedding it in an overall ethical project. This also includes: • • • • •

Social dialogue within the theater at all levels; Job security; Health and safety in the workplace; Artistic and professional development; and Right to qualification (further and continuing education) for employees at all levels.

358

Organizational Leadership/ Management

Working conditions & practices

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment General company

Theater Operations

Managing and shaping the organization according to principles of social responsibility in which leaders take responsibility, including new models of leadership and a new organizational culture, as well as a new way of leading and managing people, renouncing claims to power and encroachment of any kind.

Management and employees jointly assume responsibility for the management of the theater and the development of strategies and concepts for the future against the background of the theater's social responsibility; The renunciation of claims to power and encroachments of any kind is made binding in the organizational mission statements.

Fair working conditions and employment relations, social protection, social dialogue, health, safety, training, development;

Fair working conditions, diversity, inclusion, elimination of pay gaps between genders and departments; social dialogue and protection at all levels; Long-term general and individual job security, health protection and precautions; training and development, right to qualification, development and personal training; Active human resources development; sanctions against all forms of power abuse and psychological and physical violence; ombudsman offices.

Fair operating and Anti-corruption, responsible participation, fair competition business practices

Combating corruption and nepotism, including in the awarding of directorships, among other things; fair practices in the social environment of theaters.

Consumer concerns

Education and Development; Stakeholder Management; Fair Advertising, Distribution and Contractual practices, factual and unbiased information of the visitors and the community, Protecting the health and safety of viewers, enabling sustainable consumption, Customer service, complaint management, arbitration, protection and confidentiality of customer data, consumer education and sensitization.

Fair advertising, sales and contracting practices, factual and unbiased information, protecting customer health and safety, enabling sustainable consumption, customer service, complaint management, arbitration, protection and confidentiality of customer data, consumer education and awareness.

Fig. 6.2   Core themes of ethical management in the theater (BMAS 2011; Schmidt 2019)

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

359

Community involvement and development

Partnerships with local organizations and stakeholders, promotion of education and culture, job creation, vocational training and qualification, development of technologies, access to these for third parties, income generation, protection of health, investments for the benefit of the common good (cultural infrastructure).

Opening up the theater; partnerships in the urban and regional community, with local organizations and stakeholders (community management); Collaborations with other cultural and educational institutions; Promotion of education and culture, job creation, vocational training and qualification, development of digitalization and innovative technologies, access to these for third parties, Creation of income, protection of health, investment for the benefit of the common good in cultural infrastructure through cooperation with the independent scene, etc.

Sustainability

Vermeidung von Umweltbelastungen, nachhaltige Nutzung von Ressourcen

Avoidance of environmental pollution, sustainable use of resources.

Fig. 6.2   (continued)

Model of a Leadership Compass Alternative forms of dealing with power include containment and restraint measures, such as Codes of Conduct and new organizational guiding principles, rules of ethical management, power management, and power balance. In the course of modern management, the organization can then be redesigned on this basis so that, in a third step, largely power-free working relationships emerge, which are particularly essential for an artistic operation as a prerequisite for creativity and innovation. A future management model for theaters should therefore be based on the two elements participation and balance of power, thus taking an innovative step forward, which could also have high relevance for the future orientation of NPOs in other areas of culture and society. Especially when it comes to containing power asymmetries and structural power more effectively, binding them and transforming them within the framework of new forms of balance. 

However, this also requires a willingness within cultural policy, political committees at the municipal and state level, and the sponsors/

360

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

shareholders to seriously engage with these issues and to acknowledge that there can be alternative forms of management as well as power usage and a genuine power parity in theater.

Management is based on guiding principles, strategies, leadership and management, structure formation and organization. Very few theater directors have ever seriously dealt with the development of their own leadership skills, models of leadership, or aspects of organizational structure and structure formation before taking up their positions. These tasks cannot and should not be taken away from them. They also cannot, as is so casually said, be learned on the job, as many theater directors have tried in vain in recent years, at the expense of their employees and the future viability of the theaters entrusted to them. Once the preparations for a corresponding reform process have been made, each leader must deal with a leadership model within the framework of a corresponding organizational culture, as I briefly outlined in Chap. 2, which dealt with issues of power, role, task, and personal culture (Handy 1978). Furthermore, a clear decision must be made for a leadership behavior that is oriented towards one of these three models, with the focus in the future being on the second and third models, which are still clearly separated from each other in Wien and Franzke’s work but can also be merged: • Leadership through control and supervision • Leadership through team development and management by objectives • Leadership as communicator, knowledge manager, moderator (Wien and Franzke, p. 153) However, further considerations for increased emotional leadership should also be included (see below). In the future, it will be the task of the selection committees to set the course for the leadership model. In order for theaters to break away from an autocratic model with strict hierarchy levels, pronounced power potentials, and a centralized decision-making structure, they must develop an organizational form in which team models are implemented and in which the leader or manager is no longer a potentate, but a moderator and knowledge manager. Ideally, the two models will be sustainably linked. As an instrument for implementation, for example, a leadership compass can be used, which contains the leadership guidelines and concepts of good management. A compass must also be lived and developed and must not only be found

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

361

on paper. What could such a leadership compass look like, and what guidelines should it focus on? I have sketched a first model here, drawing on Andreas Wien and Normen Franzke (Wien and Franzke, p. 164 ff.), who have developed a general model. I have taken some elements from it, adapted them to the conditions of theaters, and/or further developed them. I refer to groups of topics that have emerged as relevant in the course of the study (without claiming to be complete). MODEL OF A LEADERSHIP COMPASS for the theater

Creating transparency and openness • Open and transparent communication, discussion, and dispute culture in all directions • Diversity of opinions, transparency, and swift communication • Acknowledging achievements, showing respect to one another, and exercising prudence • Implementing and living diversity, gender justice, and inclusion Establishing justice and power control • Regulating the use of power and strictly renouncing abuse (Code of Conduct) • Creating balance between the areas of the theater • Wage and contract justice (individual and collective agreement justice) • Justice of working conditions Developing teamwork and cooperation • • • •

Transferring responsibility Promoting teams and cooperation Changing cooperations, project-relatedness, and project groups Establishing quality management in the teams’ self-responsibility

Demonstrating strategic and operational leadership capabilities • actively getting to know (learn) the work areas and all projects of the house • informing oneself about the current problems and successes of the theater, information rounds

362

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

• Openly discussing crisis scenarios and developing joint solutions • Preparing consulting and change management processes in teams Unlocking structures and making them workable • Implementing team leadership and modern directorates, flattening hierarchies and reducing management/reporting depth • Creating collective agreement justice • Introducing process-oriented structures • Developing and implementing modern, ethical, and future-proof guiding principles Developing and radiating a role model effect • • • •

Living justice and responsibility, as well as a willingness to learn Showing respect to one another Acting as moderators and communicators Collecting and distributing knowledge (knowledge brokers). ◄

However, a new ethical management model should be based on insights and research findings that also relate to the containment and control of power and its effects. In this context, I have identified three essential areas through which the contours of a future management model in the theater can be outlined. These include: • a moral management • the use of emotional competencies and leadership tools • elements of the learning organization model. Emotional Competence and Leadership (ECL)—Emotional Intelligence as an Essential Component in Theater Management A key to power regulation is a stronger focus on newer forms of management, at the center of which is the combination of classical knowledge concepts with elements of emotional intelligence. In 1983, Howard Gardner, formulated that we need to break up and expand the traditional concept of intelligence and that we must speak of many different, multiple intelligences in the future, which a person can draw on and combine accordingly. Gardner distinguishes between six intelligences that are used differently, including: linguistic intelligence, musical intel-

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

363

ligence, logical-mathematical intelligence, spatial and bodily intelligence, as well as personal intelligence (Gardner 1983). John D. Mayer and Peter Salavoy were the first to speak of emotional intelligence and defined it as a competence in dealing with emotions that can be used for both professional and private goals (Mayer and Salavoy 1990). Daniel Goleman subsequently developed the concept of emotional intelligence in 1995, based on these scientific achievements, which he justified in his book Emotional Intelligence: Why it can Matter more than IQ (Goleman 1995). Goleman assumed that we all have feelings and are determined by them without always being aware of them or having to be, but that we can always use these feelings in a useful way and even learn to control them to some extent. Goleman considered and formulated the associated emotional intelligence as an option to break up rational power and management concepts by classifying the EQ based on emotional intelligence as more important than the previously dominant IQ. Mere intelligence without emotional competencies is not a reliable factor for professional or personal success, which he defined as career paths, reputation and prestige, as well as happiness in life. Emotional intelligence thus becomes an essential part of the competencies that a person should possess in order to successfully interact socially, perform work and possibly even management tasks. These include professional and methodological competence, social competence, intellectual and emotional intelligence (Fig. 6.3). On this basis, Goleman developed a model of emotional competencies, which he defined as sub-areas of emotional intelligence. Area 1: Emotional self-perception and emotional self-awareness Within this area, both executives and employees recognize their own emotions and learn in this context also the consequences that may arise from them. The employees and the executives associate this with a determination of their own abilities and the accompanying self-worth. This is linked to an updated strengths and weaknesses analysis, which can now be derived action-guiding based on these emotional qualities and used as an instrument for self-assessment and external assessment (Goleman 1995). Especially in theater management, the analysis of one’s own abilities, strengths, and weaknesses will have to lead to new self-assessments. How suitable are theater directors whose emotional self-perception and emotional selfawareness are so pronounced that they neither know nor analyze their own emotions and their consequences sufficiently and have drawn their conclusions

364

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

Intelligence

Expertise

Methodological competence

Emotional Intelligence Communication Skills Conflict skills, Humanity, Compassion, Bar etc.

Social competence

Fig. 6.3   Competency requirements for professional success. (Source: 4managers, 2019)

from them. Thus, the analysis of these abilities and one’s own analytical ability can be recommended as essential prerequisites for the selection and deployment of future theater directors. Area 2: Emotional self-regulation and dealing with emotions The second area of emotional competencies follows directly and defines the control and management of emotions as a further level of maturity, both in the context of possible emotional self-recognition and a derived ability to lead and guide. This involves controlling the length and intensity of emotions and taking responsibility for one’s own emotions. In particular, it should be possible to gain control over negative emotions (fear, anger, aggression, envy, jealousy, etc.) and redirect or transform them (Goleman 1995). In the course of this study, it became alarmingly clear how strongly many theater executives still allow themselves to be guided by these negative feelings and incorporate them into their daily actions and dealings with employees. In theater management, it is necessary for leaders to control negative emotions and exclude them from management processes. Theater directors who are too guided by their feelings or overwhelmed by them are unsuitable as a leader who is ultimately responsible for the future of a company, for large financial flows, and above all for the well-being, development, and future of the staff. There are two ways to counteract this: intensive training

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

365

of emotional competencies—or exclusion from management functions in theater operations. To avoid all risks, these competencies should be regularly reviewed, as a once-excluded risk can reactivate at any time under certain environmental influences. The exclusion of emotional risks should not be confused with the exclusion of imagination and artistic creativity, which are important and existential, especially in artistic areas, and must be promoted and developed. However, since the genius principle of the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries has been gradually abandoned, no claim to absoluteness arises from this, as it has become clear that a brilliant, yet emotionally unpredictable artist must not assume leadership positions in such a complex and sensitive operation as the theater. Against this background, the need to place the management of a theater in several hands, for example, a directorate or a team leadership, becomes all the more evident, not only to exclude emotional risks but also to add up the emotional and intellectual abilities of several directors to meet the challenges of an increasingly complex operation in the face of ever-diversifying environmental conditions. Where the leadership person has not been sufficiently able to create justice and innovation so far, this can only be achieved by a team in the future. Section 3: Motivation Goleman suggests using emotions for goal achievement by applying self- or external motivation, i.e., by putting emotions into action. Through motivation, emotions can be controlled and stimulated, and they are responsible for expanding and better utilizing our abilities, which ultimately can have positive effects on our work and private life situations (Goleman 1995). For the theater business, working with motivation instruments is considered a priority before using orders, commands, demands, or restrictions. A leader must be able to motivate his or her employees and ensemble members during rehearsals consistently. It is their primary task to inspire and communicate through motivation, set impulses, and ensure quality and success. Section 4: Empathy Skills Empathy skills are crucial for our relationships and interactions with other people and are an essential prerequisite for developing and dealing with our social competencies (Section 5). With empathy, we develop an interest in the feelings and needs of other people or our employees, and through this interest, we gain an understanding of their emotions. In short, the ability to understand other people’s emotions can best be acquired by understanding one’s own emotions and learning

366

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

to control, master, and use them wisely. Those who understand and accept themselves can also better understand and accept others (Goleman 1995). With empathy skills, the abilities for self-perception, self-regulation, and motivation of people are combined and elevated to a new level. Without empathy skills, a theater director will be deprived of one of their most important tools, as without it, adequate, fair, and empathetic interaction with employees is not possible. Even an absolutely purist and rational, and thus fair, approach to dealing with employees will reach its limits in the area of personnel management because problem-solving, conflict resolution, and dilemmas will not be possible without empathy skills. Empathy is the essential prerequisite for good, conflict-free, and future-oriented personnel management and for developing one’s own social competencies, as well as the social competencies of employees and colleagues. Section 5: Social Competencies From this, social competencies emerge, which are the abilities to establish relationships with other people without exploiting them for one’s own advantage. Although it is possible to use these relationships in a work context, it can never be done without reflecting on the feelings and needs of the people with whom one works and/or whom one directs. Important skills in this area include: observing, listening, advising, convincing, from which the ability to lead and manage, teamwork, and the ability to create cohesion and corresponding group dynamics develop (Goleman 1995). In the theater, social competencies are an essential prerequisite for a leadership role. The existing knowledge, experiences, and skills should be complemented by the qualitatively important component of social and emotional competencies so that a theater operation can be managed in the future. Therefore it is necessary, to take into account the needs of the employees—and, excluding the characteristics that were unfortunately found in the theater operation at the management level in the fourth chapter of this work: power hunger, nepotism, psychological and sexual violence, unreliability, predictability, extortionate actions, arrogance, etc. These five competency areas discussed above are essential prerequisites for a new type of theater management in which emotional intelligence becomes the core concept. Especially in cultural enterprises, where complex creative work processes are bundled and many different, creative, and sensitive employees are involved, the ability to act socially competent and to establish social relationships is a priority for the success and quality of artistic and entrepreneurial work.

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

367

Emotional Leadership Styles Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee developed the concept of emotional leadership in 2002 based on the concept of emotional intelligence (Goleman et al. 2002). The core of the concept, which consists of six different situational leadership styles, is that the style is selected and adapted based on the respective circumstances and requirements. The prerequisite for this is that a theater director not only knows each of these leadership styles but also masters and knows how to apply and adapt them in the right situation. For a theater director, this means quickly analyzing and assessing the respective problem or initial situation and, based on this analysis, being able to make a decision on which of the leadership styles to use in order to meet the goals of the theater and the employees. In Fig. 6.4, I have transferred the concept of Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee to the theater operation and formulated corresponding suggestions and recommendations. The model of Goleman, Boyatzis and McKee is excellently suited for the theater and can be well applied there, which is mainly due to the possibility of adapting the leadership style to the respective situation and context, and assembling various components from this. The visionary leadership style is crucial in phases of developing overall strategies and concepts for a theater; in this phase, the employees must be attuned and committed to a higher goal. Special coaching is of great importance in development and change phases because employees need particular support and regular contact with their leaders in these phases to maintain their motivation and commitment. In crisis and conflict situations, as well as in cases of recurring problems in the theater, an emotion-oriented leadership style is particularly important. Especially when artistic processes do not succeed as intended and planned, or when there are conflicts between departments or employees. This occurs, as we have seen in the course of the study, particularly in rehearsal processes, in which employees need a particularly protected space, but also in the course of conflicts between directors and performers, the leaders should emotionally and mediatingly address their employees and their problems and concerns in order to quickly resolve the problems and restore the natural work processes in the theater. The democratic leadership style is the order of the day, it should be used in all operational work and decision-making processes, and not only serves to increase justice and participation, but also promotes diversity and inclusion. The two dissonant styles, the demanding and the commanding leadership style, should not be applied or only in rare exceptional situations. The demanding style can certainly be used in difficult final rehearsal phases when it is clear that this is an exception, and the leaders immediately switch back to a basic style that should be democratic and coaching. The

368

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

Leadership

Concept

Implementation in the theater

style Visionary

Establishing vision and creating resonance through inspiration, motivation, transparency and empathy as leadership tools (FI); Contributing to the participation of MAs, increasing their engagement and improving the working atmosphere. Prerequisites: Ability to gain and create trust, as well as trust others.

Common, long-term goals and strategies are developed and implemented. The contribution of employees is recognized as important, and they are supported in contributing their own ideas to an overall vision of the theater. When: Development of overarching objectives and when major changes occur.

Coaching

Attempt to align the personal goals of the MA with those of the company, in which a sincere interest in the MA is developed; discuss and encourage the individual development of the MA.

The theater implements regular discussions with employees in which their goals and interests are queried and integrated into the concept and overall strategy of the theater; the employees are supported and trained. When: In development and change phases in which the employees need to be encouraged and supported.

Prerequisite: the ability to foster MA, empathy and emotional self-awareness.

Emotion oriented

Creation of a bond and loyalty of the employees to the company and thus establishment of a good working atmosphere.

The theater improves its communication with MA; The interests and feelings of the employees are taken seriously; counseling sessions and conflict management are carried out. When: In problem phases, in crises and in conflicts.

Prerequisite: ability to empathize and manage conflict. Democratic

Appreciation for employees and their contribution to the company, which is expressed in their daily work and should therefore be taken for granted.

MA engagement is encouraged through democratic inclusion; teamwork is supported or develops at all levels of the theater. When: in the course of v on daily decision-making and work processes,

Prerequisite: team and cooperation skills, conflict management, the

Fig. 6.4   Leadership styles according to Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee applied to the theater. (Source: Goleman et al. 2002; Schmidt 2019)

369

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

Ability to step back as a leader and seek collaboration with MAs, creating eye level.

to strengthen participation, diversity and inclusion in the theater.

Demanding

Use of high performance standards so that work is done more efficiently and maximum performance is achieved. However, there is a danger here that, with permanent commitment, common goals and visions, as well as the commitment of the employees, will be lost. Prerequisite: empathy, so that excessive demands can be recognized in time and responded to adequately and quickly.

The overproduction and the crowded rehearsal processes lead to a permanently high work pressure and to permanent overload of the employees. In theater: this style may only be used temporarily, such as in final rehearsal phases, and then must be changed back to a coaching and democratic style.

Commanding

Must only be used in crisis situations, otherwise the working atmosphere, the satisfaction and the commitment of the employees will be undermined. Prerequisite: Self-awareness and self-control are required to use this style in an extremely controlled manner.

In theater, this style of leadership is also commonly used, as many leaders are unable to apply and motivate other styles. In the theater: May only be used in extreme emergencies, as it contradicts the basic rules of a team-oriented artistic operation.

Fig. 6.4   (continued)

same applies to the commanding leadership style, which may only be used in emergency situations. In cases where leaders and/or employees notice that one of these two leadership styles is applied frequently or permanently, this should be addressed with the aim of a corresponding change. The first step is to become aware that better results can be achieved with gentle and participatory leadership styles, especially in a creative company in which each employee has a high individual responsibility for the overall product and the entire company, as is the case with the theater. In a second step, conversations must be held and measures anchored with which a new, jointly recognized leadership style is developed, in a third step, appropriate training courses are offered and attended until implementation can finally take place.

370

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

Against the background of the study’s results, it must be noted that in many theaters, there is still a prevailing understanding among theater directors to communicate demands and orders and make decisions without democratic impulses and without the participation of employees, but also without any focus on the respective contexts within which these decisions must be made. With better training, especially in aspects of personnel management, it would have become clear much earlier that demands and orders only lead to frustration and emotional withdrawal of employees, resulting in a deterioration of work results and the quality of artistic productions. If a common vision or guiding principle anchors a shared and binding goal, such as the development of high artistic quality through contemporary, modern, and innovative theater, then this vision can only be implemented through a leadership style that consists of democratic, coaching, and emotion-oriented elements. Their use can be varied and combined depending on the situation and personality. However, a prerequisite for this is to become aware of these possibilities and the necessity because emotional leadership styles require a high level of identification to successfully contribute to an overarching overall goal. For the theater, their use is of great importance, which is why I also strongly advocate that the psychological prerequisites of future leaders be tested within the framework of so-called (short) assessments. Not every outstanding artist is an outstanding theater director per se, and not every outstanding theater director must necessarily be an outstanding artist. If one remembers that theater operations are based on clever, team-oriented, and cooperative division of labor, it must be reconsidered why a person at the top must necessarily combine all aspects, manager and artist, generalist and specialist. Also, and especially, at this level, a clever division of labor should be introduced within the management and implemented, for example, within a directorate to open up new, future-proof paths for the theater. The Theater as a Learning Organization Another form of power regulation can be achieved through knowledge acquisition and exchange on an equal footing. All reform areas that I have discussed in the previous sections already contain active learning of the organization within the context of change and transformation. The increase and general accessibility of knowledge within the organization will also lead to more knowledge circulating and being exchanged within the theaters. This should also be accompanied by transparent communication on an equal footing between management and employees, which prevents the expansion and abuse of power, addresses assaults and asymmetries, and makes suggestions for their containment.

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

371

In doing so, the theater can follow the principle of the learning organization (Senge 1990) and, based on this, develop a learning path for the entire theater, with which an organization can significantly increase not only its lifespan but also its effectiveness through systematic and accessible knowledge acquisition. 

The principle of lifelong learning, applied to an organization, also accelerates change and reform processes, because with each new stage of collective knowledge acquisition, the reflection and communication skills of its employees also increase, who benefit from the general learning of the organization, which is a prerequisite for stimulating change.

Unfortunately, there is no role model function for this in German public theaters, but they can certainly learn from role models in other societal segments. For example, there is a federal-state pilot project Lifelong Learning at the German Institute for Adult Education. The Hans Böckler Foundation launched a study in 2010 in which successful models in companies were presented, including Schott AG, START Temporary Employment NRW, Stadtwerke Dinslaken, ArcelorMittal Bremen or HOLCIM AG (Heidemann 2010). Leadership: Fair and Power-Free Human Resource Management (GMPM) An important component of a future management model is a fair and just human resource management. This must include the aspects of participation and morality mentioned above, as well as the development of a concept and instruments for personnel development. In the course of developing a fair and participatory human resource management model, the transition from management to leadership also emerges. While pure management is more task-oriented, leadership has a clear focus on the personnel of the organization. Management includes planning, organization, control, motivation, and communication, while: “Leadership, by contrast is frequently thought to include a greater sense of vision, mission, change, creativity, challenge and dealing with people as humans. (…) Whereas managers pacify problem employees, strive for a comfortable working environment and delegate cautiously, leaders challenge problem employees, strive for an exciting working environment, and delegate enthusiastically.” (Carroll 2003, p. 3).

372

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

John C. Maxwell defines in this context and based on a study of 1300 executives of large and medium-sized companies integrity as the essential prerequisite for moral leadership (Maxwell 1993). For this, he defines five normative guidelines that can also be applied to theater operations. • • • • •

“I will live what I teach. I will do what I say. I will be honest with others. I will put what is best for the others ahead of what is best for me. I will be transparent and vulnerable (Maxwell 1993, p. 173).”

Stephen Covey recommends in his book The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People seven criteria, which can also be applied to theater operations, that today make up a modern Moral Leadership. For this, I have listed the seven criteria developed by Covey in the following Fig. 6.5 and developed and proposed ways of transferring them to the German theater industry in the right column. These include: Regarding the stakeholder inclusion described in fourth place, the so-called Principles of Stakeholder Management were published in 1999 by the Clarkson Center, which define and explain the point very well: Managers should acknowledge and actively monitor the concerns of all legitimate stakeholders, and should take their interests appropriately into account in decisionmaking and operations (Clarkson Centre 1999, p. 4).

Further principles are: • • • • • •

to engage in intensive communication with stakeholders, to initiate activities to accommodate the interests of stakeholders, to analyze and understand the interdependencies among stakeholders, to cooperate with stakeholders, to avoid any activities that would violate the human rights of stakeholders, and to identify possible conflicts between the various interests of individual stakeholder groups.

In this sense, leadership also addresses the problems that I have analyzed and discussed in Chaps. 4 and 5, which lead to severe frictions and crises in theater operations, as we have seen from the results of the study. I would therefore like to strongly recommend at this point this very important tool, with which ethically oriented managers with high emotional intelligence and a pronounced competence for moral leadership can be recruited for the management of theaters, and

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures Criteria for moral leaders: Have a strong

Application to public theater operations

ethical character

Value-based management and leadership principles that are not bent situationally but applied as a matter of principle; this excludes preferential treatment of friends and relatives in the theater business (nepotism) as well as the acceptance of favors by the leaders; Love affairs with subordinate employees are generally only possible if the direct subordinate relationship is terminated and the supervisory bodies and the employees are informed of this.

Possess the passion to do the right things

Leaders of the theater try to resolve internal conflicts in a participatory manner, establish equity among staff* and between staff and management, as well as fair pay for staff*; They reduce overproduction and provide regenerative Recreation periods for their employees, they close the pay gap between women and men, and they are transforming the theater into a diverse and inclusive operation.

Are morally proactive

Leaders of the theater are role models in matters of ethics in operation and communicate the virtues of leadership/operation; they possess a so-called moral imagination, with which moral bottle-necks for the organization, the management and the employees can be identified and isolated at an early stage; Leaders place ethics at the forefront of strategic and operational work;

Are Stakeholders Inclusive

Theater managers consider all potential impacts on stakeholders in their decision-making and operations; this requires knowledge of audience and non-audience groups as well as the urban community, their demographics, their interests, and their social situations in order to develop offerings (content, price) that are tailored to them; in doing so, the interests of local community members should be given priority over, for example, tourists more interested in high culture, so that the programmatic offer and the ticket system can change drastically. This also includes the development of community formats, such as Bürgerbühnen (Dresden) or Volkstheater (Karlsruhe).

373

Fig. 6.5   Criteria for Moral Leadership in Theater according to Covey (Schmidt 2019)

those who do not possess these qualities can be prevented from being entrusted with tasks and responsibilities that they are not capable of handling: This involves appropriate selection processes (see below), as well as training and development programs, which are intended to compensate for and develop the missing personnel management skills at the management level. At the same time, further training should also be offered to employees at all levels, so that they can further develop their own competencies, withstand and/or mediate in conflict situations, and learn to correctly assess power abuses and quickly initiate countermeasures.

374

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

The offer for hitherto non-inclusive group must also be opened and thus the inclusiveness of the theater must be developed and secured; children and young people from socially disadvantaged families receive free access to the theater, its educational offers and the clubs; However, the theater also develops specific offers for employees, develops programs for the advancement of women, through PE and preferential hiring. Have a high standard of fairness.

Theater leaders should have a high standard of being fair and equitable, reasonable and indivisible in all their decisions and actions. They employ ethical procedures and processes at all levels of the theater to ensure that the processes and outcomes of all processes end fairly for the contributors.

Are principled decision makers.

Theater directors are role models for their staff and in the community, acting and deciding consistently and fairly in all processes and for all participants, under idealistic and non-negotiable ethical principles. In theater, these include, for example: Integrity, honesty, transparency, audience engagement and commitment. Idealism and non-negotiable principles must not be called into question by the so-called principle of freedom of art, otherwise the employees can no longer be adequately protected from the excessive demands from the production processes, from overwork and illness.

Combine ethical with management wisdom.

Theater managers link ethics and management in all their decisions and actions. This is the ability to link managerial and moral competence. One model is so-called corporate citizenship, which combines ethical interests with the interests and goals of the theater: • social standards internally and externally • Maximizing human capital through PE • Building relationships with employees • Collaboration with the community and NPO • Communication of corporate principles and values • Disclosure and transparency of results • Report of social and environmental commitment.

Fig. 6.5   (continued)

A self-contained personnel management system always starts with personnel selection and recruitment methods. It must be ensured: • that this process is transparent and fair, • that the employees of the house are given a fair chance to participate, • and that the personnel representation is involved in this process. This already applies to the level of theater management, whose selection should no longer be controlled by the German Stage Association, but should be carried out with a much more diverse consultant pool and with the participation

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

375

of ensemble representatives. In particular, the one-sidedness of the selection through the German Stage Association has also—but not exclusively—led to a policy of “accommodating” candidates close to the Stage Association for various artistic director positions in recent years (most recently in Potsdam, Mannheim, Konstanz, etc.). In order to break through the power of networks, the schemes and patterns of these networks must be broken, which usually relate to the most important and neuralgic power positions. These are: • the renunciation of the linkage of the particular interests of all artistic directors and theaters in the German Stage Association; • the renunciation of providing deserving employees and functionaries in the German Stage Association with management positions through the influence of selection committees. In addition, future theater directors and managers should undergo an independent assessment led by psychologists before their selection and appointment, in which the ethical, social, and emotional competencies mentioned above are tested (see also Sect. 6.2.2). This is intended to ensure that these concepts do not play a role in future management, or that, in the worst case—as some of the research results presented in Chaps. 4 and 5 suggest—management remains immune to these concepts or becomes contraindicated, and exposes employees to the same arbitrariness that still prevails in many theaters—confirmed by a large number of the aforementioned research results (see Chaps. 4 and 5). Code of Conduct and Good Corporate Governance as a Model The fact that power can also be successfully and sustainably regulated and used productively is demonstrated by numerous regulations that have been developed in business enterprises (Bress 2008). Under the term corporate governance, the principles of good corporate governance, frameworks are created for the management of companies, but also for the work of control and supervisory bodies. In particular, the supervisory bodies play a special role here. In the field of theater, they still fail because they have not been sufficiently informed or close their eyes to the grievances due to close and overly friendly connections between the theater’s management and supervision. In theaters, however, the reasons lie even deeper, because there too the supervisory bodies are usually not staffed with the necessary experts who would bring sufficient expertise in theater and management matters. In German supervisory bodies of theaters, volunteer city councilors and officials from ministries, senate, and city administrations are usually sent, who do not always have relevant prior

376

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

knowledge in the areas that are relevant and absolutely necessary for the control and supervision of theaters. Then the supervisory bodies run the risk of setting wrong priorities in the control and monitoring of management, focusing too much on side issues, and thus making the work of the theater more difficult rather than providing professional support. In theaters, simple measures such as the selection and dispatch of experts and the regular further training of representatives of the committees would help. This would also have positive consequences for the selection of suitable theater directors. In his dissertation Corporate Governance in Germany, Stefan Bress describes how—in comparison to theater—in Dax companies a so-called declaration of compliance must be made, which follows the “Comply or Explain” regulations. These state that companies should follow the recommendations of a code of good corporate governance (Comply) or have to explain why they cannot (yet) comply with them (Explain). A system of good corporate governance usually consists of • • • •

relevant laws, guidelines, and codes, specific declarations of intent by the company, a mission statement, and the instruments of management and control.

These instruments must be closely coordinated to unfold their effectiveness. Good corporate governance usually pursues two objectives: To establish a balance within the company and to achieve economic or other goals, such as minimizing risks, through the proper composition of boards (directorates) and committees and the alignment with specific forms of value creation, which must generally be long-term and not speculative in nature. These aspects also apply in a modified form to public non-profit organizations such as theaters, as there too, the aim is to achieve the following through good corporate governance: • reduce the classic risks in management work (personnel, structure formation, mission statement) • and in strategic management (finances, audience, lobbying, communication, strategy), • appoint directorates according to transparent regulations (criteria catalogs, tendering rules, composition of selection commissions, election procedures), • develop strategies that focus on sustainability and future viability, rather than short-term success through populist program policies.

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

377

Based on these aspects, a general and universal code for public theaters could be created, in which the cornerstones of good corporate governance are elaborated, and to which a specific part of the code for each individual theater is ultimately attached, which is based on regional conditions, the concerns of regional stakeholders and municipal and state politics, and finally on the specific conditions of the respective theater. Considerations on Corporate Governance in business have existed since the 1930s when Berle and Means in their study The Modern Corporation and Private Property pointed out that modern companies always run the risk of the interests of shareholders (stockholders) and corporate management diverging and that specific measures must be taken against this, including a set of rules for good corporate governance. (Berle/Means 1932) Various reports confirmed this in the 1990s and established the concept of Corporate Governance (Cadbury 1992; Greenbury 1995; Hampel 1978). The essential theoretical basis for the considerations on Good Corporate Governance was the Principal Agent Theory. According to this theory, ownership is on the side of the principal, but temporary decision-making power is on the side of corporate management (agent), which, according to the principle of Homo Oeconomicus, strives for profit maximization and has a highly rational approach to corporate management, while the principal is more interested in securing and long-term value growth. The conflict of interest that arises from this requires regulation. Today, however, it has been sufficiently researched that this Homo Oeconomicus does not exist in this rational form, and that management is also interested in sustainability as well as maximization (Coase 1937, 1960). Since no profits are generated in the theater, there is no direct conflict arising from this position. Nevertheless, numerous conflicts of interest exist between shareholders and theater management at other levels. Theater directors want to create a good, artistically demanding program at a high level during their term of office, which has a supra-regional impact. Hidden Agendas play no small role here, such as: • the desire for personal reputation as an artist and director, • increased visibility of artistic work in regional and national contexts, • increasing the attractiveness of the theater for top-notch directing teams and artists, • increasing the chances of subsequent directorships at larger theaters, • invitations to important festivals, awards, honors, etc.

378

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

In this respect, it would make sense to transfer the Principal Agent Theory to the field of NPOs and to work out the essential regulatory aspects in order to prevent conflicts of interest and the failure of theater management in the future and to close communication gaps so that failures like those in the aforementioned theaters can no longer occur. Shareholders and sponsors are primarily concerned with a culturally politically correct positioning, which is derived from the respective political power relations in the city council and state parliament. Points of contention include: • the focus of the work (overall artistic work vs. priorities), • program priorities (urban shareholders often desire tourist attractions, guest performances, musical focuses, classics, comedies, boulevard, musical—and occasionally successfully interfere with the theater’s program policy), • dealing with the visitors (priorities or entirety), • the organization of festivities for the city and the state, • possibilities of political interference (in Munich, the Kammerspiele and the Volkstheater were forbidden to make political statements; Nachtkritik 2018), • the economic objectives (shareholders: build up reserves, theater directors: exhaust finances). Aspects of sustainability, resource conservation, good personnel management, and adherence to ethical principles regarding one’s own position of power in the theater, as well as the development and implementation of reforms, do not play the role they should today because theater directors and shareholders/sponsors are naturally not or only limitedly interested in them. Depending on which groups demand which of these aspects to what extent, deliberately used and instrumentalized information-asymmetries can arise: at the expense of shareholders or stakeholders, but also at the expense of theater management. The latter are often detached from political information and intentions, as the numerous cuts, mergers, and closures of theaters, especially in eastern Germany since 1992, demonstrate. In addition, the work of theater directors is much less autonomous than that of the boards of economic enterprises. The so-called moral hazard of corporate executives, which must be contained and secured, arises in theaters at a different level, which is mainly expressed in the area of missing guiding principles and ethical regulations, insufficient or non-existent concepts for structural unlocking, personnel management, abuse of power, and a tendency towards nepotism. To regulate this, contracts must be concluded within the framework of a code, and so-called rules of procedure for theater management and supervisory bod-

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

379

ies must be developed and put into force. And this is precisely where the more comprehensive corporate or organizational codes come into play, which must be developed and adopted in a complementary manner to these regulations. Organizational Mission Statements as a Modern Management Tool A very essential tool is the already mentioned mission statement of the organization, which should generally be available as a written document for all employees and informs about the self-concept and the essential principles of the organization. This mission statement does not have to be replaced and re-established with each new directorship. A good mission statement can and should survive generations of new directors and only be changed when the societal situation and the specific conditions of the respective theater work have changed sustainably. The mission statement serves as a signaling system for orientation for the theater’s employees, as well as for stakeholders. With it, organizational goals are formulated, according to which the employees should align their work. Here, the essential aspects of ethical management and corporate social responsibility of the theater can be included, precisely defined, and anchored so that a renewed discussion does not have to take place or even setbacks have to be accepted with each change of management. The mission statement primarily serves as guiding, orienting, and motivating internally, while externally it serves more for brand and identity building, from which the so-called corporate identity (CI) emerges. The CI is the sum of all characteristics that characterize the organization, especially those that are intended to distinguish or highlight it from other organizations (Bleicher 1994; Steinmann and Schreyögg 2005). The mission statement describes: • The mission (What do we want to achieve?) • The vision (What do we stand for?) • The desired culture of the organization (How do we want to work?) • A mission statement, with the values, that should guide an organization. Here, a significant connection to the topics of power and structure can be made, the situational analysis of which I have carried out in the theaters in the previous chapters and which can be addressed and contained at this point. If both the vision and the mission and mission statement clearly commit to an employee orientation in management and a power-free leadership and communication, it will be very difficult for actors at management levels and other decision-making and coordination points of the organization to develop transgressive power instru-

380

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

ments and attributes. These can then be easily circumvented through an organizational mission statement—provided that this mission statement has a realistic reference to the organization, is firmly embedded and anchored there, and is truly lived and implemented. Because here lies a significant point of criticism that must be conceded. Steinmann and Schreyögg write: “However, these mission statements rarely have anything to do with the actual corporate culture; they are mostly more wishful thinking than a description of the cultural reality.” (Steinmann and Schreyögg 2005)

If theaters decide to use mission statements in the future, they must accurately describe the cultural reality of the working and production conditions and develop and anchor vision, mission, and values based on this. The description of the current reality should be carried out with the same ruthlessness as I have done with this study, as only an honest reflection can lead to a development path that is innovative and sustainable.

6.2.2 Team and Process-Oriented Structural Reform of Theaters (TPSR-T) A structural reform of the theater can have very different orientations. Depending on the main goals of the management and the organization that are currently in focus, and depending on the problems and crises that need to be solved and the results that are to be achieved in the future. However, if the theater addresses the processing of power and social injustice, it will not be able to avoid questioning its own structure, which is characterized by concentration of power, injustice, and decoupling between structure and processes. If these problems are to be seriously tackled, attention should be paid to team solutions and a stronger process orientation within the reform processes. The goal is then the development of a team and process-oriented organizational model that incorporates the suggestions of ethical management made in the previous section and further develops them structurally. In the following, I would like to present some essential aspects of a team and process-oriented structural reform, which of course must be adapted and varied under the given conditions of the respective theater. At their core, however, they are fundamentally based on the following elements:

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

381

New Structures: Flat Hierarchies, Teams, and Decentralization A decentralized, diverse, and flat management model will also contribute to preventing power from concentrating and articulating to the same extent as in the director-centered models of the old school. In this regard, I have introduced various directorial and collective management models in Chap. 2, in which a stronger mutual control is anchored with now several managers on an equal footing, compared to a previously ruling solo director or a dual leadership, who are granted all rights of access to personnel, planning instruments, and resources by contract (see also Schmidt 2016, 2017a). It has been shown several times that the four-eyes principle in the theater is not sufficient to completely eliminate friendly, “well-intentioned” agreements and the associated “circumvention” of this principle. With two people at the head of a theater, there are usually two options that cannot do an organization any good: friendship or the subordination of one to the other, both of which undermine the important concern of mutual control of decisions and cannot counteract the unfolding of power.  Only from a third person in a management committee do agreement processes become more difficult, the concentration of power and ethical misconduct are restricted, and with each additional person at the first management level, the power of individuals is further reduced.

Two aspects should be considered The ability to work must always be maintained. The form and size of a management team should be adapted to the respective size of the theater and the financial conditions. Pragmatic solutions must be found here, and one could say as a rule of thumb that at least 3 directors/leaders should be in the first management committee for up to 300 employees, and for every additional 100 employees, one more director/leader could join—up to an optimal size of 6 and a maximum size of 8 directors, as I have already discussed in the second chapter. Management teams with more than 8 members should be avoided. They require too many formalities, coordination, special committees, and referents to remain operational. Spontaneous management meetings are less quickly feasible due to the various schedules, and the discussion culture in the management meetings is also hampered because subgroups and subordinations form more quickly. The associated decision-making processes become more difficult and must then be more strongly moderated, and in principle also meticulously documented. The effort increases. Therefore, the management should have an appropriate and pragmatic size and reflect the theater (3 to 6 actors).

382

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

One should not be deceived by so-called sham solutions. Some general directors have implemented a so-called “executive management”, “theater management” or “management round” on a second level, which is chaired by the director with all decision-making rights or to which he reports. However, the decisive factors are the organizational chart and the statutes. The Balance of Power as the Basis for a New Organizational Model Nevertheless, a certain amount of power must be maintained, which is based on a healthy respect for the members of the management and the performance and role model function of each management member and vice versa. If the leaders take this role model function seriously, a great deal can be achieved and a clever organizational guiding principle can be demonstrated—without abuse of power and forays into ethical gray areas, as I have described in Chap. 4 of this publication. This is also about a form of smart power management, which is part of the tasks of a theater management.

 POWER MANAGEMENT means • The control of one’s own role model effect of the leaders and their use in open and transparent dialogue with the employees, especially in the context of change management, conflicts, problem solving. • The wise and very cautious use of management tools such as warnings and reprimands, dismissals and sanctions, as well as praise, promotions, and salary development. • Development and maintenance of a Code of Conduct. • Development, implementation, and use of organizational guiding principles. • Working on a modern organizational and management model, with the distribution of power to a management team and the transfer of parts of the responsibility to the employees and their committees, under the premise of participation and balance of power. • Personnel development plans and measures, which so far do not exist per se in most theaters and were not considered necessary, mainly due to the low interest of artistic directors/intendants, who think in much more limited cycles and the necessity of artistic successes. Personnel development should therefore always be part of the organizational guiding principles and corporate policy. • Salary development plans for the employees, especially the performers and the artistic staff, whose salaries are at the lower end of the scale and who have so far not recorded any salary increases, as compared to

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

383

t­echnical/administrative staff or musicians, are an important tool with which a management can demonstrate the wise use of instruments of power and gain respect. • Developing strong negotiating positions towards politics, sponsors, and shareholders, concerning the future of the theater, its resource allocation, and ultimately the sustainable development of the theater. With clever lobbying, a theater management can often achieve more than through a too close connection to politics and too much trust in the often less successful negotiations of the German Stage Association. Clever, transparent lobbying for a theater and its employees earns theater managements respect and recognition. Such a model of power management is based much more on respect than on influence, pushing, intimidation, and threats of sanctions and non-renewals. It is also based on reciprocity and on the fact that the employees are both affected and active parts in the power balance of a house. Possibly, the transfer of responsibility to the committees of the employees, as called for in modern participation models and as proposed several times by the ensemble-network and others, is part of a future model of power parity within the theaters. This power parity is based on three essential aspects: • the participation of artists and employees in strategic decision-making processes and thus in potential power over the orientation and future of a theater; • the development of management tools, based on the balance of power and the negotiation and recognition of power positions, and finally • the stabilization of the theater through real balance of power. The separation of powers by replacing the old theater/artistic director model The theater = artistic director model, as currently practiced in Germany, is the “sacred cow” of the theater world. Many wish for it to remain: politics needs its “one” contact person, the media needs its stars or targets, the directors themselves want to maintain their power, and those on the threshold of this office do not want to be appeased with a “consolation prize” just before the finish line, without even knowing what they are dreaming of. The resistance against touching the theater/artistic director model is almost as great as the pressure in the theater landscape, especially among the performers and employees, to abolish, reform, or change the model. However, one thing is also clear from the results of this study: in the medium to long term, the director model will collapse under the weight of tasks and responsibilities, the eyes

384

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

of the public, and the legitimate demands of the employees—unless a smooth transition is chosen, with which a controlled restructuring can be designed over a period of 10–20 years. This would be possible and realistic. For this, the willingness of politics, the theater association, and the media is needed to first recognize the restructuring as necessary and then to implement new models. I already presented a new basic model in 2016 (Schmidt 2016). It is based on a separation of powers in the theater so that in the future they no longer emanate from just one person who has all the instruments to establish rules, enforce them, and monitor their compliance disciplinarily. Even the last doubter should realize how much uncontrolled power lies in the hands of one person based on this sequence. There are hardly any other professions in which one person exercises as much power as an artistic director—or an archbishop/cardinal. In the Catholic Church, however, at least since the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965), comprehensive co-determination rights have been established at the level of dioceses, deaneries, and individual parishes—i.e., the working level—which, of course, do not exist in theaters (Ruh 2011). Even if the Church still has a long way to go back to its origins and has to reckon with much resistance, small steps are being taken to dissolve the power of the princes. 

Such a council is needed by the German theater system, needed by the theater association as an assembly of all artistic directors, in order to regulate the dismantling and softening of the power and central authority of the artistic directors and the participation of the employees in it.

The separation of powers also concerns another field: the division between the artistic, planning, production, and management tasks of the theater. Each of these areas is now so large that it should be represented by an experienced management member (director) at the first management level. The areas should also be balanced and given equal consideration in all decision-making processes; this includes an equal distribution of votes among the directors in the future management body. All important questions, topics, and decisions of the theater should therefore be negotiated and decided upon in a joint directorate/team of the areas. In this directorate, there is an elected or rotating spokesperson who handles external contacts, and a spokesperson who shapes internal communication—this could also be taken over by an elected communications director. This is based on newer management models in NPOs and business, in which the division into internal and external communication is already being successfully designed and refined.

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

385

The administrative management level includes, for example: • a managing director who is responsible for administrative and legal matters and manages resources, • a planning director who is responsible for all planning tasks of the house, implementing the decisions of the directorate, and also responsible for the KBB, • a technical director who oversees all technical resources and facilities and deploys them accordingly, • the lead producer—at the interface with artistic management, who as the production director is responsible for the production processes and their success. The artistic management level includes, for example: • the director for artistic conception and programming, who combines the tasks that a leading dramaturge used to have, now with significantly more artistic competencies, • the heads of the divisions, who are responsible for the ensembles in each artistic genre and its artistic deployment. In this variant, the tasks of the theater/artistic director could be meaningfully divided, deepened, restructured, and reconnected. At the same time, more knowledge and competencies will be gathered in the management in the future, which can complement each other and thus flow into the theater and the work. The model offers significantly more management functions at the first level of the theater than in the past. The incentive for young theater makers to get involved here and contribute to the development of the future of the theater will be much higher as a result. 

This will attract new, team-oriented, and less power-conscious candidates and teams to apply for the management tasks of the theater.

Separation of Office and Person The separation of office and person is an essential component of the leadership and management model introduced above. This involves two aspects, firstly the desired personal distance of the theater directors from their positions, so that they no longer perceive them as their life or lifelong functions. The management of a theater is a task that is granted for a limited time. This means that a director—metaphorically speaking—does not become a king or prince, but a “minister” (servant) who serves the theater, commits to the theater, but still has enough

386

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

distance to critically reflect on themselves and their tasks, possible mistakes, and crisis situations at any time and thus be able to manage them better. The other aspect concerns the—repeatedly mentioned and discussed by the survey participants—nepotism, whose translation into cronyism does not adequately describe the associated facts and entanglements and trivializes them too much. Because nepotism is a system of favoritism, a form of corruption that may still be “socially acceptable” in some environments, but is increasingly being fought against by society. The ethical principles for proper business management in the future exclude that a director enters into a relationship with a subordinate employee; even worse if such a relationship is kept secret for a long time and the director promotes this employee until she holds a high position of influence and responsibility that neither corresponds to her qualifications nor the job or hiring criteria. However, the theater director has no professional corrective with this colleague, nor is he himself able to objectively assess the colleague’s work. Even worse if the couple separates and the management work is negatively affected as a result. In the future, it should be excluded that new power positions or power axes arise from this form of relationships, which harm the employees and the processes and procedures in the theater. Artistic processes are most fruitful and successful when abuse of power is excluded. Conflicts naturally arise from a person who has more power due to their partner than is appropriate for the position and/ or qualification, even if the director or the person reacts with the words: “We have it under control.” This is usually a mistake. A too personal matter in the service naturally always leads to conflicts. Another fact is the promotion of partners, family members, friends, or preferred performers or employees. The responses of the participants have made it clear that thater directors and scenic directors quickly divide the field of employees and performers into those who are allowed to belong and those who are systematically excluded and, in case of doubt, even mobbed away. The fragility of artistic contracts and the associated careers at a theater means that this exclusion, the not-belonging, can lead to serious health damage to the affected persons, but also to severe existential problems due to non-renewals. However, if this plot of nepotism is regulated by clear rules and commandments, the mentioned problems and conflict fields can be very clearly excluded. This has the advantage of also reducing internal corruption and, in the best case, even preventing it. Balance and Limitation of Power During his career, an artist, such as a director who aspires to a leadership position, usually experiences that the associated path can mostly only be secured

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

387

through power and power strategies. Friendly words and too much empathy and interest in the development of the artists themselves rarely lead him further. The manners are successively worn down by this realization, and there are verbal disputes and verbal or even physical assaults, like those reported by the participants and which I analyzed in the fourth chapter. This already happens unnoticed among the very young assistants at the theater, who must quickly learn to assert their goals and ideas, attract resources, and secure and make use of the collaboration of performers and trades to do their own work well and at the same time realize their first directing projects. They learn from their mostly “invisible” mentors, the artistic directors or department heads, how to best deal with power, how to generate, maintain, secure, and expand it in order to achieve their own goals. No one knows these methods better than an artistic director who has made the difficult journey through the institution himself, up to its very top, and now wants to hold this position with all his might. Guest directors teach the young assistants everything else. That is why it is not surprising that the theater directors, who have fought for their status for years, are the ones who reject reforms most readily, who simply oppose even small attempts at reform, as can be seen, for example, in the reactions of the artistic director of the Berliner Ensemble, Reese, and others to the demands of the ensemble-netzwerk and the reform proposals of the publication Theater, Krise und Reform (Schmidt 2016). In response to the demands of the ensemble-netzwerk, they speak of “nonsense,” react with anger, or simply ignore reality, on a level that hardly does justice to the head of an institution (Akademie der Künste 2017). The reasons for this are manifold. I have reported on them repeatedly in this study: They lie in the outdated model of organization and culture of the theater, which is protected by those who benefit most from it, the all-powerful artistic directors. They also lie in the fact that artistic directors are treated like princes by the media and politics. The theater is, for the media, the artistic director, and in doing so, they completely forget that the theater is primarily made up of the work, commitment, and initiative of hundreds of employees who make it possible for an artistic director to rise above them and put the results of their collective work into his quiver. The higher an artistic director is lifted by the media and politics, the more the employees are humiliated. A third reason is the lack of social and emotional competencies in combination with a lack of training in management and personnel leadership for most directors on their way to becoming theater directors (see above). It is questionable why this is neglected precisely among those who deal with art, theater texts, actors, productions, artistic details, and also the leadership of people all their

388

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

lives, especially since artistic sensitivity inevitably gets lost the stronger power takes possession of a person and permeates their professional life. Even if the artistic directors and powerful directors certainly do not see it that way. But we do not know what artistic achievements these actors are truly capable of if the artistic directors were to be freed from their urge and “will to power”—at least partially. Far too often in the theater, it is still argued that only those with the greatest decision-making authority can also artistically assert and succeed the most. However, that is not what a collective art like theater is about. Therefore, the control over power and resources should be strictly separated from the content work. Those who direct should not have access to money and personnel; these should be organized, managed, and allocated by experienced and socially competent managers, thus avoiding conflict situations, favoritism, and discrimination in the artistic field that disrupt the theater operation. 

In the future, a clear separation should be made at this interface between those who make decisions and those who are involved in the artistic content and processes. A theater director cannot and must not be involved in the allocation of resources for his/her own or other projects, as this contradicts all rules of good management.

Anything else would lead to ever greater distortions and a further accumulation of power. In the end, a new value for artistic work in the theater is missing, the success of which is far too closely linked to power. What could be opposed to this? For example, a power-free zone of theater creation. The management creates the framework conditions, provides the resources, and develops the line that the theater will take as an organization in the coming years. The artistic direction takes care of—with significantly less power than today—the artistic program, appoints the directing teams, and makes the castings in coordination with the ensemble. Both areas are subject to control by the employees and regular evaluation, beyond a much more modern and professional supervision that advises and supports, rather than controlling and admonishing. Control, deregulation, and psychological reflection In order for a new management structure of the theater and a new division of labor based on it not to create new power poles again, the new structure should be deregulated and subject to control by employee representatives and the constructive and professional supervision of the shareholders.

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

389

The parameters for deregulation and control must also be developed against the background of the chosen management model. A universally valid recipe cannot yet exist today, it ties in the above-mentioned aspects of ethical management and the high integrity of a leader, as well as the models of normative correctness and power-management, the leadership compass and the framework conditions of the theater. Therefore, it is important that the mentioned instruments are implemented from the beginning in order to immediately collect data, detect susceptibility to power early and isolate it, and sharpen and further develop one’s own task profile based on reality. Deregulation refers primarily to a less extensive range of power and the decision-making framework of the new leaders. The balance should be sought between the managers (Managing Director, Planning, Production, Technology), the Artistic Directors (Concept, Department Management), and the ensemble representatives, as well as within the groups themselves. Regulations include, for example, representation rules, rotations of speaker functions, and regulation of distribution mechanisms of the most important resources, especially finances, spaces, and personnel. The leading director, for example, should not become THE Artistic Director and Intendant again. This term is replaced by that of Artistic Direction, consisting of at least two or more directors. Just as the tasks in management are clearly divided. From such a constellation, if finely regulated and controlled and evaluated in its task fulfillment, no director will be able to swing himself into the saddle as the sole ruler and tolerate or initiate abuse of power. The role of politics and the stage association Again and again, this study made it clear that politics as a financier and the shareholders as carriers of the theater must be taken more strongly and differently into responsibility in the future in order to accompany the necessary reforms. This concerns, on the one hand, the strengthening of the obligation to better inform themselves about: • • • • • • • •

the functionality and effectiveness of the overall structure of the theater, the management of the theater and its working methods, the basis of decisions (engagements, non-renewals), the forms and transparency of communication, the use and abuse of power, the working conditions of employees and performers, the possibilities of participation, the working methods of employee representatives.

390

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

A key task for the shareholders in the future will be to gradually reform the structures and management forms of the theaters or actively accompany the reforms, initiate the crucial change management processes, and provide the necessary resources for this. Reform processes require additional resources and additional commitment in the initial phases of their implementation before a so-called reform return sets in, on the basis of which the theaters can draw initial successes from the restructuring. Financial savings, which the sponsors are eyeing, may be limited, especially since costs increase year by year due to inflation, but the reforms will not make the production processes more expensive in the future. Efficiency gains are, above all: happier and healthier employees, fewer tensions and conflicts, a higher artistic productivity and radiance derived from this, and thus image gains, as well as, finally, greater stability and balance of power. This could be referred to as Artistic and Personnel Efficiency Gains, which are more important for the theater than pure economic efficiency, which ultimately is about savings. A committee of four to six directors will certainly behave differently on the subject of overproduction than a management committee of the second level subordinate to the artistic director, which is essentially powerless and serves to approve, comment on, and execute orders and announcements. This should not be obscured by the statements made by artistic directors time and again that “everything is decided by our team.” It would be fundamentally advantageous if the language of obfuscation, with which successes are embellished, conflicts are appeased, and assaults are swept under the rug, were replaced by a language of openness and transparency. Perhaps one or the other report to the supervisory board or some press release would then be peppered with significantly fewer success stories, but the employees would greatly appreciate it if the double standards in the presentation of facts were replaced once and for all by a clarity in which what is said applies. The Stage Association is currently the most important theater organization, consisting of theater directors and representatives of the sponsors, who appear and act in it with a shared mandate. It is therefore a hybrid, a cross between an employers’ association, which includes the shareholder representatives, and the artistic directors, who are all employed by them and are thus in a direct dependency relationship. This hybrid situation has led to the artistic directors splitting off into a kind of sub-organization, the artistic directors’ group, in order to discuss their topics and problems. However, this does not increase their influence in the committees of the Stage Association, which are dominated by the sponsors, such as the tariff commissions or the administrative board. In addition, the managing directors of the Stage Association have recently been strongly located on the pol-

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

391

icy line of the sponsors and have very rarely publicly intervened in mediating cultural policy problems in which theaters have been threatened with closure or have actually been closed or cut back. What has emerged from their conferences and annual meetings in recent years can be seen. At least no movement towards the future, but rather a persistence in the here and now, which is associated with immobility and a defense of the status quo. This has been the case for decades, although with the new president, who is a clever and successful artistic director, some movement and reform optimism seems to be emerging. As much conservatism as there was until then was hardly to be expected from an association that includes artistic directors who see themselves as modern, as visionaries, and as enlightened liberals, but never as conservatives. What does this do to artists who have to look forward but are forced to adopt such a conservative attitude just to secure their own position? The Stage Association, at any rate, will have to reposition itself, possibly divide or re-establish itself. Perhaps in the future it should consist of two legally independent but cooperating bodies, one for the artistic directors and one for the sponsors and shareholders, so that the eternal wall towards reforms and changes can finally be broken through, on an equal footing and without the fear of the artistic directors of jeopardizing their future prospects. If the single artistic director model no longer exists, one part of the Stage Association must also become a body that includes all management members of a theater on an equal footing and generates corresponding working groups from it. So far, there has also been a kind of multi-class system within the Stage Association, when the managing directors and administrative directors were also invited to the annual meetings, but could hardly contribute significantly to the debates and were allowed to, which were dominated by their artistic directors and the sponsors, to whom they were subordinate in a double sense. However, if the Stage Association does not reposition itself, there is a risk that alternative associations will be founded, which—similar to the ensemble-network—gain more and more influence, and increasingly question the current sovereignty of the Stage Association. The Psychology of the Theater Director Due to the statistical surveys, the insights gained from them on the above-mentioned topics, but also due to a large number of very clear and specific entries, the study has also become a contribution to the psychology of the artistic director. The theater director is psychologically perceived very precisely and on very different profile levels, which is related to the two essential exchange values of the theater that are linked to each other in the theater director himself: One currency is the real networks, which one has, friends and acquaintances who are in

392

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

the right positions and help with appointments, jobs, and productions, but also the right address books with the popular artists, with whom a good working relationship could be built up over the years. The other currency is of an auratic nature, it has something to do with the charisma and reputation of the theater directors, who have distinguished themselves through their artistic and management work in the perception of the theater society in a special way and thus exert a significant influence on the theater landscape—whether intentionally or not. Here there are two very contrasting lines of development. One line is represented, for example, by Claus Peymann, who, with his premiere of Audience Insult (Peter Handke) at the Theater am Turm in Frankfurt am Main (1967), quickly became one of the most important German directors. As a theater director, he did a great job in Bremen, Stuttgart, and at the Burgtheater Vienna and earned his merits there. After an initial phase of euphoria at the Berliner Ensemble, where he took over the artistic direction in 1999, he was finally very unworthily retired by the then cultural senator after a total of 50 years of theater work, and 38 years serving as a theater director in total, in 2017. In this context, the way in which the subsequent Berliner Ensemble director and the senator’s protégé violated all theater conventions and—against all customs—publicly bad-mouthed the work of his predecessor and his legacy. He significantly damaged the reputation of all those involved and also of the theater’s employees. With this, the new, non-auratic Berliner Enemble boss also opened up a new dimension of predecessor-bashing and nest fouling to underline his own reputation-fear. On the auratic side, for example, Frank Castorf also stands with an unworthy farewell from the Berliner Volksbühne in 2017, which led to an idolization and almost boundless reputation and role model effect of Castorf, which is now reflected in numerous invitations as a freelance scenic director to the first theaters and festivals of the country, and abroad. The result is the canteen or premiere party conversation, in which one mutually communicates one’s own exchange value through the self-formed narrative: On the one hand, it is about showing each other who is active in which networks with what influence, who knows whom and has harnessed them for their purposes, and to whom one has once enabled something and helped to a successful start, who has now come into a favorable position to exert influence, support, and help. On the other hand, the idol is seized and it is told who has come into contact with whom on which occasion and has worked together with whom. In these conversations, one assesses each other, sharpens the antlers, and determines who is the stronger in relation to the two currencies, i.e., who can be more useful and helpful to whom. For the ultimate goal of everyone in the theater

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

393

circus is to advance: to be appointed to a management position and finally to the next available directorship, to be allowed to do the next production at a major house or to be engaged there, and/or to achieve one’s own artistic breakthrough with one or more important productions and one day to be invited to the Berlin Theatertreffen with great success and much attention. On these exchange markets, the essential is negotiated—who has a future in the theater business at all. At the connected annual fairs, some of the journalists also mingle, who are too close to the theater directors and have hardly any objective distance, but at the same time sit on the juries and select who may rise, and at the same time also regularly write reviews and thus accelerate or crash the exchange value of the artist. The power of these journalists to find new theater geniuses is as great as their need to sell their trade magazines or feuilletons, some of which are unfortunately read less and less. This is also one of the reasons why the theater directors as single-ruling institutions are hardly touched, which prevents the modernization of the theater business. It remains to be hoped that the criticism and the feuilletons will reflect the reform of the theater landscape more strongly—there are already very positive exceptions—and thus advance it, and now finally take less consideration for the princes, who obviously were able to hide a lot from their interlocutors for many years and still can, about their real and missing competencies and the high social and mental distress of the employees in many theaters, about which so far only the fewest newspapers have reported. Suitability, Profiles, Selection Methods, and Criteria for Executive Board Members Selection methods and criteria for new executive board members and the examination of their suitability play a crucial role in the future of the respective organization. Many theaters in Switzerland now act as role models in this regard. For example, candidates for theater management and executive director positions in Zurich undergo a psychological assessment, which is used as a fourth evaluation and decision-making basis alongside their CV, reputation, and presentation. German theaters are far from this. Based on research among 60 of 130 theaters, none of them subject future theater directors and managing directors to a similar procedure. As mentioned above, the current procedure must therefore be urgently renewed. At present, over 80% of all selection processes are advised or controlled by the German Stage Association (DBV). As a rule, high-ranking incumbent or emeritus theater directors from the presidium of the DBV participate as representatives in the selection committees, thereby perpetuating the theater director-centered model without seeking new options and models. The appointed consultants focus on a group of five to ten people, including two to three high-ranking theater

394

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

directors from the presidium, a former president and an emeritus administrative director of the Stage Association, as well as a theater director who retired many years ago in Munich, who still has a lot of regional influence. The selection scheme usually looks very uniform: male, director, individual applicant—at least that is the result of an analysis of director appointments over the last ten years, in which less than 25% of women have been appointed, who now occupy only 23% of all theater director positions. Only gradually are women—especially in the context of the #MeToo debate—being appointed if they have worked in the narrower context of the Stage Association (e.g. in Potsdam, Marburg) or in the close environment of important theater directors and members of the DBV (Hannover). Another special exception—and a great success at this level—is now also the appointment of a woman as director of the Schauspiel in Dortmund and the appointment of two women in a team model for the Schauspiel Halle (drama). Switzerland is also a step ahead in this regard, with the appointment of teams of three women each at the Theater Neumarkt and the Theater Gessnerallee, both in Zurich, who will jointly take over the management and also work as specialists in their fields of dramaturgy, communication, and organization at the Gessnerallee—a new, remarkable organizational model in theater operations. However, in order to broaden and sharpen the view of the needs and requirements for a management position in the theater and to incorporate psychological and professional knowledge, independent psychological and professional profiles should be created, with which it can be precisely assessed to what extent the people in the final selection are actually suitable for leading employees and taking on such a large organizational responsibility. The final paper of the working group Future of Theater of the Dramaturgical Society—which, however, was not supported and therefore not published by its presidium because it contains too modern approaches—states: “These (modern) procedures have been common in business and non-profit organizations for about 20 years. The question arises why selection procedures for theaters are still being used that no longer meet current criteria.” (AG—DG 2018)

It is regrettable that the board of the Dramaturgical Society—a kind of junior organization of the German Stage Association—did not want to commit to publishing this paper on the future of German city theaters, but perhaps the concern is too great that they will no longer be considered for future appointments of theater director positions if they approve a paper calling for the abolition of the single theater director model, and greater than the responsibility for the future of

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

395

the theater landscape. It’s a shame about the work of a good team that worked intensively on it for almost two years and tried to show progressive and viable new ways with it. Model of a Psychological Assessment The purpose of the assessment is to illuminate the white and black spots of applicants for the highest leadership positions in the theater, to determine their competencies and potentials, as well as the associated abilities to lead a large theater organization and guide it into the future. Furthermore, it is about examining whether the applicants are capable of coordinating and delegating tasks, managing and developing staff, and deploying them according to their talents and potentials, and using resources in accordance with the upcoming tasks, but also with ethical norms and rules. Such an assessment should be carried out by professional experts and consulting firms, as is common for leadership positions in culture in Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian countries, but also in Switzerland and Austria. They have the knowhow and can ensure that a personnel development takes place at the top of the theaters, within which the theaters do not look back, but become viable again in the medium term. Neither closures nor mergers of theaters are an option. So far, however, the German Stage Association has not yet developed another response in view of the financial constraints of municipalities, the demographic situation, and the ongoing structural crises in theaters. Concepts and modern scenarios are lacking. But as long as these are not developed by the association of theaters, only directors who resemble the old models will continue to be chosen, instead of giving a chance to those who have modern role models, draw from new conceptual contexts, and want to dare something new. These must be candidates who have a very good education, clear, transparent visions for the future of the theater, and good results in the assessments of competencies, abilities, and psychological profiles. In order to make an initial proposal at this point and against the background of the results of the study, I have developed a catalog for the criteria for members of future theater management in the following box. Based on the results of this study and other evaluations, I have compiled the most important criteria that are necessary to manage a theater not only well, but ethically and with integrity, so that appropriate reform measures in the area of management and organizational structure can be developed and implemented, which will give the theater operation greater sustainability and viability. Above all, however, the catalog should also serve to select future employee-friendly, empathetic, and socially competent leaders who, against the background of the above-described, hitherto rather unclear

396

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

application procedures, had only very low outsider chances and should now finally have a better chance of perception and recognition in the selection processes.

 Criteria for Members of Future Theater Management (Theater Managers)  When considering the criteria, one should start with the mandatory requirements for management work and declare these as basic conditions that must be met by the candidates. Here, I would like to list the most important aspects again, which include knowledge in the following areas: • Methods and instruments of corporate management, such as strategic conception and planning, reform and options, organization of structures, delegation, motivation, communication, and negotiation skills, • Human resource management and personnel development, in particular personnel planning, working time regulations, disposition, teamwork, motivation, leadership, further education, development scenarios, participation, diversity, inclusion, and accessibility, • Collective bargaining and remuneration rights, • Basics of resource management and property management • Fundamentals of law: civil law, corporate law, legal forms of theaters and their respective rights (works constitution law, GmbH law—for GmbH, staff representation law), labor law (working hours law, diversity, etc.) and copyright law, • Contract management, negotiations, contract conclusion, types of contracts, possibilities of using oral and written contracts, contract supplements, • Knowledge of the economic requirements for managing a theater business (economic planning, accounting, budgeting and financing, balance sheet preparation, auditing), • Basic knowledge in related areas such as sales, marketing and PR, technology, workshops, construction, maintenance, and investments, • In-depth knowledge of political and strategic communication, and especially lobbying, • Ability to develop visions and future options, • Knowledge of change management, development and implementation of reforms, • Communication and moderation skills, motivation and transparency, • Empathy skills, ability to work in a team and delegate, • Ability to manage crises, moderate crises, and mediate.

6.2  Power-Dampening and -Containing Measures

397

Outlook I have deliberately listed the suitability of management members as the last and thus prominent aspect of the reform points I propose to address the problems that unnecessarily burden the German theater system. It should be borne in mind that, in addition to securing sufficient funding for theaters in the coming years, there will still be numerous other problems and conflicts to be fought out with politics. Added to this is the decreasing number of spectators who increasingly devote themselves to other leisure and educational activities rather than going to the theater. An indication of this is that the number of spectators has dropped from 21.0 to 20.5 million, and the audience revenues could not grow accordingly. The percentage box office results have also dropped from 18.2% (2017) to 17.8%, reaching a new low. A slight, but noticeable negative trend is thus emerging (DBV 2018). Even though the audience numbers have not yet developed too negatively, even after the Corona pandemic. The trend shows that theaters are stable, even in areas where the large stage format is being replaced by a multitude of smaller, lively formats in side series, through discussion events, small programs, readings, and forums. These are, however, very labor-intensive, personnel-intensive, and—in the classical-economic sense—significantly less productive and do not always correspond to the major goals of the theater operation. Even though they belong to the large area of theater, they are actively used in other segments of the German event landscape, at readings, cabaret, song and variety evenings, political events, and theater education additional offers. It would be worth considering to what extent the large formats should be brought back into play more programmatically so that the theater does not lose itself too much. The tasks of the theater management also include pacifying the theater internally and creating a fair and transparent situation there, which enables all performers and employees to develop, pursue their own occupation satisfactorily, and above all, not to be harassed and threatened by unfair non-renewal scenarios and other verbal, psychological, physical, sexual power abuses, which were reported in great detail in this study. The very clear result of the study was not to be expected in this extent, nor the 3400 additional written statements of the participants in the open sector of the study, which formed an enormous, rich fund for the evaluation of the results. After more than three years of sensitization work by the ensemble-network and the results of the study Theater, Crisis, and Reform, I could now assume that

398

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

the usual fears and obstacles in studies of this kind no longer occur, and that the vast majority of participants trust the format and content of the study. This has been fulfilled. Never before have results of this kind and scope been presented about the theater or another segment of the German or any other European cultural landscape at this time. This obliges. A third book about the Ethical Theater (2023) will complete this cycle of books. It is intended to incorporate all aspects of previous research and the excelling examples of the current practice in theaters in order to create a model of an ethical theater of the future. The results of this study are a mandate for all theater-makers, but especially for the German Stage Association and the shareholders of the theaters to set the course anew in the coming months and years, for a change in management models, for reforms of the organizational structure, for better selection and training of management members, and above all, to ensure better protection of artistic employees and performers. The German Stage Association cannot achieve this alone, which is why cooperation with the ensemble-network and with the trade unions (among others) will be an essential prerequisite for this. Theater experts in theater management at universities should also be involved in order to involve as much expertise as possible in the project Theater of the Future. This publication is intended above all to encourage artistic employees and performers. The collection, analysis, and evaluation of the interviews and data should be a sign that the scientists and all reform-oriented forces of the theater business are not indifferent to the future of the artists and the theater, but that they will actively participate in the debate and shaping of this future. It should also be an encouragement for the numerous students who flock to the theater or deal with the theater in their studies. Figures, analyses, and basics of this kind have never been collected on this subject area before. A basic study like this can serve as a basis for study and further work. Because the theater and its work must continue to be scientifically accompanied, analyzed, evaluated, and commented on, even if the results of these analyses go to the “substance” and initially provoke defensive reactions from those whose vested interests are supposedly threatened by them. Because as clear as the results of this study are, they will not please everyone, which is why I expect criticism and discourse. But: Without studies of this kind, without the collection, analysis, and evaluation of data and the development of new concepts in dealing with hierarchical structures and power and assaults in the theater, no new reforms can emerge, and it remains at a standstill. Berlin, June 2019

References

399

References Achtenhagen, F., et al. (1992). Lernhandeln in komplexen Situationen: Neue Konzepte der betriebswirtschaftlichen Ausbildung. Wiesbaden: Gabler. Akademie der Künste. (2017). In Tagung zur Zukunft der Theater in der Akademie der Künste am Pariser Platz, mit Lisa Jopt, Mieke Matzke, Thomas Schmidt u. a. Berlin. Bleicher, K. (1994). Leitbilder. Orientierungsrahmen für eine integrative Managementphilosophie (2nd ed.). Zürich: Verlag Neue Zürcher Zeitung. BMAS. (2011). Die DIN ISO 26000. Leitfaden zur gesellschaftlichen Verantwortung von Organisationen. Herausgegeben vom Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales. (Sic!) Bowen, H. R. (1953). Social responsibilities of the businessman. Iowa City: The University of Ioawa Press. Bress, S. (2008). Corporate governance in Deutschland: Der Einfluß des Deutschen Corporate Governance Kodex auf die finanzielle Unternehmensperformance. Siegburg: Eul. Brink, A., & Tiberius, V. (2005). Ethisches Management. Grundlagen eines wert(e)orientierten Führungskräfte-Kodex. Bern: Haupt. Cadbury, A. (1992), The financial aspects of corporate governance (Cadbury Report). London: Gee Publ. Carroll, A. B. (1999). Models of management morality for the new millennium. Presidential address to the Society for Business Ethics presented during its annual meeting in Chicago, Illinois, on August 7, 1999. Business Ethics Quarterly, 2001, 11(2), 365–371. Carroll, A. B. (2003). Ethical leadership: From moral manager to moral leader. In O. C. Ferrell, S. L. True, & L. E. Pelton (Eds.), Rights, relationships & responsibilities: Business ethics and social impact management (1st ed., pp. 7–17). Carroll, A. B. (2008). A history of corporate social responsibility: Concepts and practices. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon, & D. Siegel (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility (pp. 19–46). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Carroll, A. B., & Shabana, K. M. (2010). The business case for corporate social responsibility: A review of concepts, research and practice. The International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 85–105. Clarkson Centre for Business Ethics. (1999). Principles of stakeholder management. Toronto: University of Toronto. Coase, R. H. (1937). The nature of the firm. Economica, 4(16), 386–405. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1468-0335.1937.tb00002.x. Coase, R. H. (1960). The problem of social cost. Journal of Law and Economics, 3, 1–44. Volltext (PDF; 1,5 MB). Covey, S. R. (1998). The 7 habits of highly effective people. New York: Simon and Schuster. DBV. (2018). Theaterstatistik. Köln: Deutscher Bühnenverein. Epstein, E. M. (1987). The corporate social policy process and the process of corporate governance. American Business Law Journal, 25, 361–383. Frederick, C. W. (1960). The growing concern over business responsibility. California Management Review, 2(4), 54–61. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind. The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

400

6  Structural Power and Forms of Power Containment

Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. Why it can matter more than IQ. Learning, 24(6), 49–50. Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership: Realizing the power of emotional intelligence. Boston: The Harvard Business Review. Greenbury, R. (1995). Report on directors’ remuneration. London: Gee Publ. Hampel, R. (1978). Committee on corporate governance. Final report. London: Gee Publ. Handy, C. (1978). Understanding organizations. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Heidemann, W. (Ed.). (2010). Lebenslanges Lernen im Betrieb. Neuere Praxisbeispiele. Hans Böckler Stiftung, Arbeitspapier 153. Husted, B. W. (2000). A contingency theory of corporate social performance. Business & Society, 39(1), 24–48. Lydenberg, S. B. (2005). Corporations and the public interest: Guiding the invisible hand. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publ. Maxwell, J. C. (1993). Developing the leader within you. Nashville: Thomas Nelson. Mayer, J. D., & Salavoy, P. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 9(3), 185–211. Nachtkritik. (2018). Demo-Verbot für Münchens Kammerspiele? 18. Juli 2018. https://www. nachtkritik.de/index.php?option = com_content&view = article&id = 15674:maulkorbfuer-kammerspiel-intendant-matthias-lilienthal&catid = 126&Itemid = 100089. Paine, L. S. (1994). Law, ethics, and managerial judgement. Journal of Legal Studies Education, 12(2), 153–169. Ruh, U. (2011). Mitreden, Mitbestimmen. Partizipation in der Kirche – Eine Selbstverständlichkeit? Tut sich die katholische Basis damit schwerer als die evangelische? Vom 12.5.2011. In: Chrismon, Juni 2011. https://chrismon.evangelisch.de/artikel/2011/essayvon-ulrich-ruh-mitreden-mitbestimmen-11171. Schmidt, T. (2012). Theater-Management. Eine Einführung. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Schmidt, T. (2016). Theater, Krise und Reform. Eine Kritik des deutschen Theatersystems. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Schmidt, T. (2017a). Der informierte Künstler. Debatte um die Zukunft des Stadttheaters XXXI – Schmidt modelliert das neue Mitbestimmungstheater. 03. April 2017. Schmidt, T. (2017b). Qualitative Performance des Theaters – ein Modell für die Untersuchung der deutschen Stadt-, Landes- und Staatstheater. Zeitschrift für Kulturmanagement, 3, 137–164. Schmidt, T. (2018). Elemente des deutschen Theatersystems: Essentials Praxis Kulturmanagement. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Schmidt, T. (2019). Die Regeln des Spiels. Programm und Spielplan-Gestaltung im Theater. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline. The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Broadway Business. Steinmann, H., & Schreyögg, G. (2005). Management. Grundlagen der Unternehmensführung Konzepte – Funktionen – Fallstudien. Wiesbaden: Gabler. Teal, T. (1997). The human side of management. Harvard Business Review, 74(6), 35. (First published 1996). Werhane, P. H. (1999). Moral imagination and management decision making. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wren, D. W. (2005). The history of management thought. Hoboken: Wiley.

Appendix 1—Theater Crises in D, AUT, and CH 2008–2019 (March 2019)

In theaters in Germany, Switzerland, and Austria, numerous cases are known that belong to the group of power abuse, see Fig. A.1. For 12 years, crises have been accumulating in this theater landscape—50 alone were triggered by management errors, power abuse, or favoritism, as I was able to determine in a study. Nepotism and favoritism occurs, for example, where artistic directors equip their life partners with power and career in their own house. 36 of the 50 crises were due to structural errors caused by the artistic director-centered model and a too steep hierarchy, leading to significant conflict cases and communication errors.

Theatre Crises

Number

Management errors

41

Structural error

44

Mistakes in cultural policy

41

Lack of supervision

28

Abuse of power

18

Nepotism

12

Total

50

1Since

some of the crises occur together, the total number does not equal the sum.

Fig. A.1   Crises and power abuse in theaters in D, AUT, CH (2008–2019). (Schmidt 2019) © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 T. Schmidt, Power and Structure in Theater, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-42280-6

401

Appendix 2—Value-Based Code of Conduct for the Prevention of Sexual Assault and Abuse of Power (German Stage Association, DBV 2018)

I would like to list the core of the code of conduct established by the board of the German Stage Association in 2018, which is important and groundbreaking: “Based on the values mentioned above, we commit ourselves to binding rules of conduct for all employees in our institutions, regardless of their position: • I distinguish between what is allowed within and outside of artistic work and do not abuse the freedoms of art. • I treat everyone with respect, regardless of gender, age, religion, disability, origin, and sexual orientation. • I refrain from any form of sexual harassment. • I refrain from assaults in gestural, verbal, and physical form. • I handle the power entrusted to me responsibly. • I am aware that my behavior may have a different effect on my counterpart than intended. I deal with this empathetically and responsibly. • I communicate clearly and unambiguously. • I address conflicts openly and strive to resolve them fairly. • I actively intervene when I witness assaults, abuse of power, and inappropriate behavior of any kind and address inappropriate behavior directly.”

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 T. Schmidt, Power and Structure in Theater, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-42280-6

403

Appendix 3—Code of the Performing Arts Action Alliance (Excerpt) (as of: 12/08/2018)

“The Performing Arts Action Alliance invites you to join the following code to ensure socially compatible working conditions for performing arts professionals: • Signatories of the code ensure that minimum standards are taken into account in fee and remuneration payments to performing arts professionals. • Signatories of the code base their fee and remuneration payments on minimum standards and take into account additional factors such as experience and responsibility level, age, number of children, regional differences, etc., in order to adequately pay freelance employees and ensure transparency in this regard. • The signatories acknowledge that preparation and follow-up times must be taken into account in the remuneration for freelance work. • Permanent institutions signing the code commit themselves not to fall below the minimum fee recommendation of the BFDK when remunerating freelance performing arts professionals. • Freelance professionals who sign the code and implement projects adhere to the minimum fee recommendation of the BFDK and also comply with social minimum standards for project employment. • Permanent institutions that sign the code take into account plural perspectives when filling management positions and ensure equal remuneration/payment regardless of gender and origin. • Signing cultural institutions also create transparency regarding the fee structure in the non-tariff area. • Permanent institutions that sign the code ensure a balanced ratio of budget and personnel density.

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 T. Schmidt, Power and Structure in Theater, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-42280-6

405

406

Appendix 3—Code of the Performing Arts Action Alliance (Excerpt) …

• Actors in the performing arts with decision-making power design rehearsals in a family-friendly manner and advocate for family-friendly structures.” The action alliance includes: the Association of Scenographers, the Federal Association of Independent Performing Arts, the ensemble-network, the directornetwork, art but fair, the Dramaturgical Society, Pro Quote Stage, the Standing Conference on Acting Education, the flausen+ network, and the German Stage Association.

References

Acton, J. E. (1955). Letter to Mandell Creighton dated 5.4.1887. In G. von Himmelfarb (Ed.), Essays on freedom and power (pp. 328–341). New York: Meridian. Action Alliance for the Performing Arts. (2018). Ensuring social standards. Code for actors in the performing arts. PDF document from 08.12.2019. Amnesty International. (1999). Glossary for discrimination-sensitive language. The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry. Report of an inquiry by Sir William Macpherson of Cluny, February 1999, Chapter 6.34, accessed on Amnesty International’s homepage on 12.09.2018.https://www.amnesty.de/2017/3/1/glossar-fuer-diskriminierungssensiblesprache. Arendt, H. (1991). Elements and origins of total domination. Munich: Piper. Ashforth, B. (1994). Petty tyranny in organizations. Human Relations, 47(7), 755–778. Behrendt, B. (July 7, 2018). Big words, little action. Berliner Ensemble after Claus Peymann. Die Tageszeitung. Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley. Brandeins. (2018). The book of questions. https://www.brandeins.de/corporate-publishing/ das-buch-der-fragen/die-taschen-wirtschaft. Accessed 20 Aug 2018. Brink, A., & Tiberius, V. A. (2005). Ethical management—Fundamentals of a value-oriented executive code. Bern: Haupt. DBV. (2018). Value-based code of conduct for the prevention of sexual assault and abuse of power. Annual meeting in Lübeck. Cologne: German Stage Association. DeRue, D. S., & Ashford, S. J. (2010). Who will lead and who will follow? A social process of leadership identity construction in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 35, 627–647. DG—AG Future. (2018). Report of the working group on the future of city theaters of the Dramaturgical Society (Unpublished paper). Berlin. DiMaggio, P. (1986). Structural analysis of organizational fields: A blockmodel approach. Research in Organizational Behaviour, 8, 335–370. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The Iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 T. Schmidt, Power and Structure in Theater, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-42280-6

407

408

References

DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1991). Introduction. In W. Powell & P. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Einstein, A. (1952). Letter to Carl Seelig from March 11, 1952. Emerson, R. M. (1962). Power-dependence-relations. American Sociological Review, 27, 31–41. Etzioni, A. (1975). A comparative analysis of complex organizations. On power, involvement, and their correlates. New York: The Free Press. Feller, M. (July 30, 2018). Stephan Märki. The man with the gun case and his weakness for women. Bern. Jobs and contracts for friends and (ex-)girlfriends, weak leadership: How the resigned director Stephan Märki destroyed his brilliant record of the first years himself. Berner Zeitung. Foucault, M. (1993). Other Spaces. In K. Barck (Ed.), Aisthesis: Perception today or perspectives of another aesthetics. Essays (5th revised ed.). Leipzig: Reclam. (First published 1967). Galtung, J. (2004). Violence, war and their aftermath. On visible and invisible consequences of violence.http://them.polylog.org/5/fgj-de.htm. Hennis, W. (2000). Politics and practical philosophy. In W. Hennis (Ed.), Political science and political thinking (pp. 1–126). Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. (First published 1963). Han, B.-C. (2005). What is power? Stuttgart: Reclam. Hausmann, A., & Murzik, L. (2012). Success factor employee: Effective personnel management for cultural enterprises. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Henrichs. (December 9, 1977). Power today or never. Kiel. Zeitonline.de. Huber, A. (June 23, 2012). National Theater Mannheim. Stuttgart Could Be a Model. Stuttgarter Zeitung. https://www.stuttgarter-zeitung.de/inhalt.nationaltheater-mannheimstuttgart-koennte-vorbild-sein.51c04f41-174d-4a85-ad1e-25e1fadc17c9.html. Accessed 7 Oct 2018. Implementation Consulting. (2018).https://www.umsetzungsberatung.de/geschaeftsleitung/ machtmissbrauch.php. Accessed 20 Aug 2018. Kellerman, B. (2004). Bad leadership: What it is, how it happens, why it matters. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Kieser, A. (1994). External organization, self-organization, and evolutionary management. Journal for Business Economic Research, 46(94), 199–228. Kleinfeld, A. (2011). Corporate social responsibility: Questions and answers. Berlin: Beuth. Kohse, P. (February 23, 2019). Harsh accusations against Barenboim: Last greetings from the cult of genius. Berliner Zeitung. Luhmann, N. (2000). The medium of power. In A. Kieserling (Ed.), The politics of society (pp. 18–68). Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp. Luhmann, N. (2012). Power (4th ed.). Stuttgart: UTB. Luhmann, N. (2013). Power in the system. In A. von Kieserling (Ed.), Suhrkamp pocketbook science (stw, Vol. 2089). Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp. André. Macho, T., & Meyer, H. (July 18, 2008). What would Nietzsche have said about Christian Wulff? A conversation with cultural scientist Thomas Macho. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 166. March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. Oxford: Blackwell.

References

409

Märki, S. (2018). Press release on the resignation from all positions as director of the Bern Theater. KonzertTheater Bern, 06.07.2018. Mayrhofer, W., Meyer, M., & Titscher, S. (Eds.). (2010). Practice of organizational analysis. Fields of application and methods. Vienna: Facultas wuv. UTB. Meyer, J. W., & Scott, R. A. (1983). Organizational environments. Ritual and rationality. Beverly Hills: Sage. Münkler, H. (1991). Analytics of power: Nietzsche, Machiavelli, Thucydides. In M. T. Grenven (Ed.), Power in democracy (pp. 9–44). Baden-Baden: Nomos. Nachtkritik. (2012). Leaderless. The National Theater Mannheim is looking for a new management.https://www.nachtkritik.de/index.php?option=com_ content&view=article&id=6934:das-nationaltheater-mannheim-sucht-eine-neue-leitun g&catid=126&Itemid=100089. Accessed 16 May 2012. Nachtkritik. (2016). Press review from January 21 and 27, 2016—Rostock savings discussion: Stefan Rosinski presents an alternative theater model for Rostock—and reads the riot act to cultural policy in the city and country. Sewan Latchinian defends with a position paper.https://www.nachtkritik.de/index.php?option=com_content&view=article& id=12038:presseschau-vom-21-januar-2016-in-der-ostseezeitung-stellt-stefan-rosinskiein-alternatives-theatermodell-fuer-rostock-vor-und-liest-der-kulturpolitik-in-stadt-undland-die-leviten&catid=242&Itemid=62. Accessed 12 July 2012. Nachtkritik. (2017). Debate on the future of the city theater XXVIII—Stephanie Gräve and Jonas Zipf on management structures at theaters. Work and structure. By Stephanie Gräve and Jonas Zipf.https://www.nachtkritik.de/index. php?option=com_content&view=article&id=13506:debatte-um-die-zukunft-desstadttheaters-xxviii-stephanie-graeve-und-jonas-zipf-zu-leitungsstrukturen-antheatern&catid=101:debatte&Itemid=84. Accessed 18 Jan 2017. Nachtkritik. (2018). Bern’s artistic director Stephan Märki resigns. Relationship between management personnel. Announcement from July 6, 2018.https://nachtkritik.de/index. php?option=com_content&view=article&id=15647:berns-intendant-stephan-maerki-tritt-zurueck&catid=126:meldungen-k&Itemid=100089. nmz. (2014). New newspaper for music. Stage Association rejects Collective Bargaining Unity Act. In: nmz kiz-news. From December 11, 2014.https://www.nmz.de/kiz/nachrichten/buehnenverein-lehnt-tarifeinheitsgesetz-ab. Accessed 11 Dec 2018. Ortmann, G. (1990). Micropolitics and systemic control. In J. Bergstermann & R. Brandherm-Böhmker (Eds.), Systemic rationalization as a social process. On the framework conditions and course of a new cross-company rationalization type (pp. 10–120). Bonn: Dietz Nachf. Peterson, R. A. (Ed.). (1976). The production of culture, Sage contemporary social science (Vol. 33). Beverly Hills: Sage. Peymann, C. (May 10, 2018). Oliver Reese, search for the heart of the Berliner Ensemble. Der Tagesspiegel. Pfeffer, J. (2009). Understanding Power in organizations. In D. Tjosvold & B. Wisse (Eds.), Power and interdependence in organizations (Cambridge companions to management) (pp. 17–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.https://doi.org/10.1017/ cbo9780511626562.003. Picot, A., Reichwald, R., & Wigand, R. T. (2003). The borderless enterprise (5th ed.). Wiesbaden: Gabler.

410

References

Pongratz, H. J., & Voß, G. (1997). Externally organized self-organization. A sociological discussion of current management concepts. Research Article, February 1, 1997.https:// doi.org/10.1177/239700229701100102. Raven, B. H. (1990). Political applications of the psychology of interpersonal influence and social power. Political Psychology, 11, 493–520. Reese, O. (May 3, 2018). BE Intendant Oliver Reese: The customs in Berlin have become rougher. Conversation with Rüdiger Schaper. Der Tagesspiegel. Rüegg-Stürm, J., & Grand, S. (2014). The St. Gallen Management Model. Bern: Haupt. Rühle, G. (2014). History of the German Theater, 1933–1976. Frankfurt a. M.: Fischer. Sackmann, S. (2017). Corporate culture: Recognize—Develop—Change: Success through culture-conscious management (2nd ed.). Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler. Sargent, L. T. (1972). Contemporary political ideologies. Homewood: Dorsey Press. Schauspiel Frankfurt. (2016). Season booklet for the 2016/2017 season. List of employees. Schauspiel-Intendant Oliver Reese. (June 18, 2012). Reese’s salary grows significantly. Frankfurter Rundschau. Schlenker, B. R. (1985). Identity and self-identification. In B. R. Schlenker (Ed.), The self and social life (pp. 65–99). New York: McGraw Hill. Schmidt, T. (2011). Theater in transition. From crisis management to future viability. In K. Bekmeier-Feuerhahn, S. Höhne, et al. (Eds.), Yearbook of cultural management 2011 (pp. 161–180). Bielefeld: transcript. Schmidt, T. (2019). The rules of the game. Program and schedule design in theater. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Senge, P. M. (2017). The fifth discipline: art and practice of the learning organization (11th completely revised and updated edition). Stuttgart: Klett Cotta. Standard Contract Stage. (2018). Eighth collective agreement from May 8, 2018 for the implementation of the Standard Contract Stage. PDF. Theater der Zeit. (2016). Former Rostock Artistic Director Sewan Latchinian goes to court, June 2016. Theater der Zeit.https://www.theaterderzeit.de/blog/meldungen/personalien_ strich_kulturpolitik/der_rostocker_ex-intendant_sewan_latchinian_zieht_vor_gericht/. Accessed 1 Feb 2018. Völpel, M. (2011). Power and dependency of stakeholders: influence constellations in different crisis stages and organizational forms (strategic corporate management). Wiesbaden: Gabler Research. Whicker, M. L. (1996). Toxic leaders: When organizations go bad. Westport: Quorum Books. Zeit. (February 28, 2019). Interview with Daniel Barenboim. Die Zeit.