BBC bosses will be looking to restore the sparkle of Strictly Come Dancing when it returns to television screens this weekend, after some celebrity contestants complained of poor conduct by their professional dancing partners.
That grievances can arise even in the most family-friendly of shows highlights how unacceptable behaviour can emerge in pressured work environments, as well as a greater willingness to call it out.
High-profile complaints have hit businesses in many different sectors, including finance and law.
Marcus Ryder, chief executive of the Film and TV Charity, who worked in television production for more than 25 years, warned that in his industry misconduct, including bullying, was “a systemic problem that needs systemic solutions”. He said he witnessed bullying at all levels, from a junior researcher to a senior executive. “This is not about rooting out a few bad apples . . . There is no doubt bullying is a major issue in film and TV.”
British broadcasters from the BBC to ITV to Channel 4 have been shaken by successive scandals, almost all involving well-known and well-paid presenters — or “talent”, as they are known in the trade — who have exploited the unseen side of the industry.
The BBC has had to defend itself repeatedly. An investigation is pending into the behaviour of former radio DJ Tim Westwood, who has denied any wrongdoing, and last year allegations of sexual misconduct were made against Huw Edwards, the broadcaster’s highest-paid news presenter. The corporation has announced reviews of Strictly contestants’ claims and introduced additional safety measures such as chaperones into the programme.
ITV faced claims of failing in its duty of care to staff after This Morning presenter Phillip Schofield’s affair with a younger colleague, which led to allegations of a toxic culture at the programme. Channel 4 has kicked off a wide running investigation into sexual abuse allegations made against presenter Russell Brand, who has also denied wrongdoing.
Media executives have admitted to duty of care failings, poor complaints handling and weak line management for stars who often earn huge salaries and carry their name on the door. Alex Mahon, chief executive of Channel 4, said following the Brand allegations that it was “clear . . . terrible behaviour towards women was historically tolerated in our industry”. She said this “behaviour is less prevalent now, but it’s still a problem and it’s something we must all confront”.
TV production often involves high pressure and late nights, mixed with a social environment for younger workers and older executives with access to private members’ clubs and bars. There can be an imbalance of power, with poorly paid staffers at a disadvantage to the stars they are employed to support.
Workplace experts report a growing willingness to call out bad behaviour but there are still barriers to doing so. Dr Richard Wallis, co-author of a study on management practices in unscripted television, said there was “an enormous amount of insecurity . . . It creates a culture where people get away with things”.
Jenny Tingle, assistant national secretary of Bectu, the union representing workers in film and TV, agreed: “You have to maintain a good reputation and good contacts.” While organisations have made changes, introducing pledges and helplines, “there is always going to be a fear for people speaking up”.
Reporting lines can be opaque, according to Caroline Norbury, chief executive of Creative UK, the independent network for the UK’s creative industries. “Who’s in charge is not always clear. You have an army of freelancers; whose responsibility it is for making sure [staff] behave ethically can get lost.”
Poor management
The most recent Looking Glass Survey, conducted by the Film and TV Charity, found that 46 per cent of respondents said they had experienced bullying, harassment or discrimination. A similar proportion — 45 per cent — of managers who had dealt with bullying complaints did not feel equipped to do so.
Another study by the Creative Industries Independent Standards Authority, a new body to improve behaviour, found that almost one in three professionals in creative industries were not confident they knew their rights in relation to workplace issues. This was most notable in TV and film, particularly among under-35-year-olds, those of mid-level seniority, and women. About half did not feel confident reporting concerns.
“We still promote people based on technical excellence,” said Colin Ellis, author of Detox Your Culture. “Some managers shouldn’t be managers. When we put people into those positions we don’t teach them the basics of management — how to give feedback, set expectations.”
When the TV and film industry was flourishing, production companies and broadcasters made efforts to train staff as a way to retain them, Wallis added. But as economic conditions have deteriorated “that’s gone to the wall. Commissioning has dried up. Why would we invest in our workforce when there’s no work?” Short-term contracts can act as a disincentive to dealing with management issues. “Much easier to let people come to the end of their three-month contract than address the issue,” he said.
Workplace experts said interventions were needed to help reduce abuse and bullying. “These include making expectations of acceptable behaviour very clear, providing feedback on how one’s behaviour [affects] others — most people don’t want to be jerks or be seen as jerks — and coaching on concrete actions to minimise bullying,” said Donald Sull, professor of practice at MIT Sloan School of Management. Bringing teams together to agree standards of behaviour and discipline procedures at the start of a project is important.
Norbury, however, is sceptical that management failures are the issue. “[The industry] may not produce traditional managers but [does] produce entrepreneurial flexible managers who are willing to change.”
Clash of cultures
The Strictly episode has illuminated the problem of two worlds colliding, with professional dancers who have grown up with intense discipline expecting the same of their students. Terry Hyde, founder of Stepps, a charity looking after the welfare of professional dancers, and a former dancer himself, spoke of a tradition of teachers shouting. “The old school way of training is fear. The professional dancers are so focused on getting a result, some of them go beyond what is needed.” Hyde came to realise there were other ways to get the best out of dancers, including visualising moves.
This chimes with research by Robert Lount, professor of management and human resources at Ohio State University. Abusive supervision, he said, is harmful to helping employees develop skills. “Followers who do succeed under an abusive boss are not succeeding because of the abusive behaviours, rather they are succeeding despite these unnecessary impediments and challenges.”
There is, however, difficulty interpreting such behaviour. “When someone is a high performer, we are inclined to have a more benevolent interpretation and believe they are trying to help us perform because this individual knows how to get results,” added Lount.
Sull of MIT cautioned that employees’ perceptions of abuse — such as rudeness, ridiculing and anger — or bullying can differ and “be shaped by, among other things, their sense of entitlement, emotional instability, and other personality traits.”
This underscores that while employers are more sensitive to allegations of bad behaviour they also need to keep a steady hand. “In the past, organisations would ignore it or circle the wagons. Now an organisation has a responsibility to investigate. Just because someone says someone’s behaviour or culture is toxic doesn’t necessarily make it so,” said author Ellis.
