How Diverse are Theatres in Europe?

In 2018, amid the #metoo movement, theatre makers across Europe came together at the European Theatre Convention (ETC) conference in Bratislava to drive change. They recognised that gender and diversity inequalities are every bit as inherent in theatre as in film and other entertainment industries - and that addressing this challenge would require courage to submit to transparent self-assessment.

 

The outcome was a Diversity in Action Code of Conduct for European Theatres: 

 

1) Gender equality and increased diversity amongst theatre staff employees. 

2) Gender and diversity reflected across artistic creation and programming. 

3) Investment in training to allow equal opportunities for gender and diversity minority groups. 

4) Equal pay across gender. 

5) Clear objectives in theatre artistic and management plans. 

 

In 2019/20, to ensure the document would not be left to gather dust in a drawer, we agreed with the ETC member theatres to commission two researchers at the University of UCLouvain in Belgium, Annalisa Casini and Sarah Sepulchre, to conduct a study of diversity and gender equality in the staff and on stages in ETC Member theatres - and enable the formulation of concrete steps to bring about change.

 

 

The first two elements of the study were questionnaires on identity, occupation, economic situation, discrimination, and contract types. These were sent to ETC member theatres, with the first type filled in by interested staff members about their own experiences and situations, and the second type by theatre management with information representative for their venue about their entire staff. 296 staff members, from 33 of the 44 theatres, answered the first questionnaire; management from 22 of the 44 theatres, representing 4,191 workers, answered the second. 

 

The respondents to the first questionnaire were drawn from several countries in each European region. There were usually 1 to 2 participating theatres per country, with Germany standing out with 5 participating theatres. The number of participating employees from the individual theatres varied greatly, from one to 64 employees.

 

The results initially paint an optimistic picture on gender equality. The researchers found no proof of horizontal segregation (in which women and men occupy positions in line with gender stereotypes) or vertical segregation (an absence of women in positions of power) in the questionnaire filled in voluntarily by theatre staff. Most of the responding theatre staff were women, who also held 60+ percent of the roles as Playwright / Dramaturges, Director / Production / General Management and Production Stage Manager. 

 

However, when the theatre management answered on behalf of all staff members, a more familiar and negative story emerged. Women were found to have less secure contract situations than men, be more present in "stereotypically female occupations”, and be "less present at the top of the hierarchy”. The researchers mention at least one possible explanation for these contrasting answers: the "self-selecting bias” of the responding theatre staff. 

 

Looking more broadly, the results revealed a "noteworthy” near-absence of people from minority backgrounds in staff at ETC member theatres. This comprises sexual orientation, ethnicity, trans* and people with disabilities. Even within this small sample size, people from these minority backgrounds were found to occupy less prestigious or artistic positions in the theatre structure. Figure 1 shows that non-Caucasian people work mainly in the administrative and technical teams. Similarly, the study found that the contract situations for the few respondents that identified as trans* or disabled were "significantly more precarious than their respective counterparts,” even though the publicly funded theatre context means this precarity was overall still low.

 

 

 

The more negative conclusions about gender equality appear again in the third and final section of the study, which analysed gender visibility in ETC member theatres’ programming across more than 650 performances.  

 

Men were found to be more visible than women in programmes, with six men for every four women. As seen in Figure 2, men were also found to dominate the "prestigious positions” of playwright and director, as well as the technical staff, whereas women held 80% of the positions of "costumes and hairdressing”. On stage, 43% of characters were female, compared to 57% of male characters. As work on stage is inherently public-facing, there are questions about what this status quo leads audiences to consider ‘normal’ in theatre productions - or which sections of the (potential) audience might not feel represented on stage. 

 

 

 

Crucially, the analysis found that performances written or directed by women were more likely to be gender-balanced than those written or directed by men.  

 

"Gender stereotypes still have an influence on the choice of programmes,” the study concludes. "Overall, women remain less visible than men and are concentrated in low-prestige positions. The gender impact of decision makers is, in this sense, remarkable. Female authors and directors demonstrate a clear trend towards gender equality compared to their male colleagues, who are in the majority and who make men more visible.”

 

 

The contrasting conclusions of the study point to the heart of the conundrum in theatre and the wider performing arts. How is it that women continue to make up the majority of theatre staff, yet struggle to progress to leadership positions? How is it, too, that structural barriers remain in place, at least 40 years after questions about who gets to make art were first asked with any force? 

 

Responses from the study suggest that it’s perhaps not that leaders choose to ignore issues or ask the wrong questions. Perhaps instead they ask the right questions and get answers that don’t reveal the extent of the issue. Make no mistake: all elements of the diversity study reveal that there are serious access issues within organisations for people with disabilities, from ethnic minority backgrounds, or who do not broadly identify as a straight white male. Yet on the specific topic of gender, one slice of results made it seem as if there were no glass ceiling, while the other revealed a systemic issue.

 

 

ETC is extremely grateful for the theatres that chose to reply to the study. However, as ETC is a membership organisation, rather than a national funding body, we could not compel members to provide information. There is therefore a challenge in collecting and having comparable data, which is free from bias. Only 7 of our 44 member theatres provided information for all three sections of the study, and there is some concern about an overrepresentation from certain countries, or theatres that specifically value diversity issues.

 

To address this, the researchers recommend repeating the data collection either every year or every two years. This would allow for consistent comparisons to be made between countries, across theatre structures and over time, making targeted interventions more easy.

 

Related to this is a need to consider redoing the study in more languages than just English. Next time, we will consider creating a multinational and multidisciplinary network of researchers, and doing the encoding of programmes by people close to the theatres and selected shows. That way, a more detailed assessment would reveal whether people from minority backgrounds have access to strong roles on stage. The study reveals concerns that people who identify as female, non-Caucasian, LGBTQ+ and trans* feel like they play more stereotypical roles.

 

As we heard consistently during the 2020 European Theatre Forum (https://www.europeantheatreforum.eu/) - a large-scale event in which European policy makers and theatre makers came together for discussions on the stability of the sector - this data issue is very prescient: there is no EU-wide data collection body for these issues, which makes national comparisons difficult. But there is clearly value in stepping back and trying to assess the issue with a European focus, which accepts all of the challenges inherent in Europe.

 

 

One of the most concrete conclusions from the study is that having more women in decision-making positions diversifies creative teams, artistic choices and the perspectives shown on stage. It’s therefore of paramount importance for theatres to have more women as leaders.  

 

One solution that we are exploring is adapting the ‘F-rating’ to theatre, an idea that currently only exists in film. Created in 2014 for Bath Film Festival in the UK, the term stands for ‘Feminist’ rating, and is used to highlight films that are written and directed by women. Films that fulfil both categories and feature significant women on screen are awarded a ‘Triple-F’ rating. We think that this would be a useful measure in theatre, as it would highlight gender equality in the most public-facing part of theatres’ work - on stages - yet also carry an obligation to diversify the processes around that creation too.  

 

But this is just one tool, for one specific issue. At ETC, we support the use of quotas in staff and in programmes, and other tools to assess where theatres still have to take action to ensure that their work is relevant to and reflective of local communities. An upcoming ETC policy paper, due to be published in June, will contain other recommendations for theatres and funders to ensure the sector continues to diversify our staff and our output. 

 

If we are to be consistent in our words and actions, it’s time for a frank acceptance of where we stand and what we can improve. We applaud the bravery of the ETC member theatres for participating in the study, and for sharing detailed information about the people that make up their staff and creative teams. The study shows there is still a long way to go - but we hope it serves as an inspiration for others to offer themselves up for self-examination, so that the ETC Diversity in Action Code of Conduct can become a reality.