Pete:

‍This is a question for the Fefus in admin/working for theater companies! So many companies, especially the nonprofits, have talked a lot about DEI in the last few years. However, almost all creative positions in the industry are filled through a closed, referral-only hiring process. There’s no way for a director, choreographer, designer or other creative worker to apply for a job through an open call. They have to either catch the attention of the company or be referred by someone already in the theater’s network. This is obviously a huge problem, and yet there’s been entrenched resistance to changing it. How do companies square this lack of transparency with their stated DEI goals? Why are they so committed to the closed hiring process? How could it be changed? Everyone wants the best teams for their shows, but how would an open call with applications, just as these companies already do for every other position, take away from that? Why do so many companies take such pride in hiring the same “Usual Suspects” over and over again? Genuinely asking.

-

Dear Pete!

First off, I really appreciate this question—I think it’s an essential one for the health of our theater ecosystem. And, as an arts administrator working at a small organization (we’re a staff of 5ish during any given fiscal year), I’ll say we’re 100% guilty of returning to familiar designers. Now, we’re a small team, and I do think that dictates our approach.

The last time we had a job posting for an administrative job, we received over 200 applications, and it took so much staff capacity to sort through. We’re now seriously considering revamping our hiring practices to have a smaller open window, even though that goes against some of the values we preach about giving each applicant time and space to put their best foot forward. Because, on the flip side, we do not have the time to do our work and genuinely give each applicant the time they deserve without it affecting our own mental health and capacity. I imagine if we were to do an open call for designers, we’d get a similar number of applicants and face a similar tension.

Satisfying answer? I imagine not. But I think many theaters are experiencing a similar tension. Some of the theaters I’ve seen that are most committed to DEI work for their extended community do the worst job of taking care of their staff, who are so determined to go the extra mile for the more inclusive option that they no longer practice what they preach.

On a slightly different note about “usual suspects,” I do think there are some theaters that view this approach as a manifestation of DEI values, especially when it’s more formalized. As I imagine you’ve experienced, it can be hard to find one contract as a designer. THEN, you have to find another, and another, and another in order to pay the bills. Having resident artists or usual suspects, or playwrights who you’ll produce every year allows theaters to commit to taking care of those people in a different way, sometimes even offering insurance or other benefits that freelancers aren’t offering. But again, you’re so right in acknowledging the lack of transparency, and the effects that this has on folks who aren’t driving in that insider track.

I’ve seen some theater communities or arts service providers begin to rethink this system with directories. Theatre Bay Area has a talent bank which includes actors AND directors, designers, etc. A.R.T./NY has organizational and individual directories that highlight the work of member artists. Rise Theatre (by the good folks at Maestra) have a great directory. Spreading awareness about these more collective spaces for folks to share their portfolios might be one way to start to tearing down these barriers to entry.

One of my favorite pieces of advice I ever got in college was from a playwriting professor who said that we need to think of our creative projects along a triangle: one point is the $$$, another is the people, and the final point is the art itself. It’s (unfortunately) a rarity to work on projects where all three points are met. But we should always aim for at least two. I’ve found that the people point is the one I have the most control over—even if that means doing dramaturgy for a reading in a friend’s apartment for free. And the energy I get from those joyful projects fuels the search for other projects. As we work towards a world where all three points can be met more frequently, I’m sending you strength for finding the spaces that will let you find the people you love collaborating with!

To taking care of everyone,

Fefu