Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
University of Amsterdam
Faculty of Economics and Business
Master Thesis
MSc Business Studies
Managing the commercial and artistic divide in the film industry: the
role of the First Assistant Director
Evi Smits
6138993
August 2011
Supervisor: dhr. dr. J. J. Ebbers
II
Abstract
One of the key challenges in the cultural industries is to manage the division between
art and commerce. In the film industry, this division is most strongly visible in the
relationship between the director and the producer. This thesis examines the role of
the first assistant director in managing the relationship between the commercial
objectives of producers and the artistic objectives of directors in film production.
Empirical data is obtained qualitatively through interviews with 14 Dutch first
assistant directors. This data is compared to secondary data in the form of interview
transcripts, resulting from interviews with directors and producers. As a result of
being in the middle position between producer and director, the first assistant director
experiences role conflict and role ambiguity. However, precisely because of this
position the first assistant director is able to perform a mediating role and therefore
proves to be valuable in coordinating the tension between art and commerce.
III
Table of contents
Abstract ...................................................................................................................II
Table of contents.....................................................................................................III
1. Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Motivation and discussion ............................................................................. 1
1.2 Research question and objectives .................................................................. 2
1.3 Research methodology ................................................................................... 3
1.4 Structure......................................................................................................... 4
2. Theoretical framework........................................................................................ 5
2.1 Organization theory ....................................................................................... 5
2.2 Role theory ..................................................................................................... 8
2.3 Managerial tension within organizations .....................................................10
2.3.1 Sources of managerial tension ..................................................................10
2.3.2 Managerial tension as a source for role conflict and role ambiguity .........12
2.3.3 Coordinating the managerial tension ........................................................14
2.4 Tension between art and commerce in the film industry ............................15
2.4.1 Dual leadership in the cultural industries .................................................15
2.4.2 Dual leadership in the film industry ..........................................................16
2.4.3 The first assistant director .......................................................................17
3. Research methodology........................................................................................18
3.1 Research design and strategy .......................................................................18
3.2 Sample and data collection ...........................................................................20
3.3. Quality of the research.................................................................................21
3.4 Method of analysis ........................................................................................22
4. Results .................................................................................................................23
4.1 Profile of the first assistant director .............................................................23
4.1.1 Difference opnameleider en first assistant director ...................................23
IV
4.1.2 Careers.....................................................................................................23
4.1.3 Tasks and responsibilities .........................................................................24
4.2 Relationship director and producer .............................................................26
4.2.1 Dual authority ..........................................................................................26
4.2.2 Multiple objectives and functional interdependence ..................................28
4.3 Relationship first assistant director and director ........................................29
4.3.1 Responsibilities and expectations..............................................................29
4.3.2 Loyalty towards director...........................................................................30
4.3.3 Conflicts with director ..............................................................................32
4.4 Relationship first assistant director and producer ......................................34
4.4.1 Responsibilities and expectations..............................................................34
4.4.2 Loyalty towards producer .........................................................................35
4.4.3 Conflicts with producer ............................................................................36
4.5 Performing the middle role...........................................................................39
4.5.1 Successful performance of role .................................................................39
4.5.2 Role ambiguity..........................................................................................40
4.5.3 Role conflict .............................................................................................42
4.5.4 Bridging role ............................................................................................44
5. Discussion and conclusion ..................................................................................46
5.1 Summary of findings.....................................................................................46
5.2 Discussion of findings....................................................................................47
5.3 Implications ...................................................................................................50
5.4 Limitations and recommendations for future research ...............................52
References...............................................................................................................55
Appendix: interview protocol ................................................................................59
1
1. Introduction
In this section, the subject of the thesis is introduced. First, the motivation for the
research is explained and a discussion is provided on the relevant literature on the
subject. Second, the research question and research objectives are explicated. Third, a
brief description of the research method is provided. Finally, there is an outline of the
structure of this thesis.
1.1 Motivation and discussion
In the cultural industries, the division between art and commerce is a common
problem. It is a conflict that emerges within different industries, like the game
industry (Cohendet & Simon, 2007), music industry (Thompson, Jones & Warhurst,
2007), orchestra business (Glynn, 2000), television industry (Caves, 2003), theatre
business (Eikhof & Haunschild, 2007) and the film industry (Delmestri, Montanari, &
Usai, 2005). The cultural industries are characterised by symbolic goods and a volatile
market. Creativity, flexibility and innovativeness are needed to conform to the
constantly rapidly changing environment (Banks, Lovatt, O’Connor & Raffo, 2000).
The pursuit of profit is not the only business goal, rather satisfying consumer’s needs
can provide a real challenge (Lampel, Lant & Shamsie, 2000). Good management is
thus of great importance. On the one hand, artistic freedom is needed to maximize
creativity, one of the most important resources within the cultural industries (Lampel
et al., 2000). On the other hand, constraints in the form of time, cost and market are
present. In order to achieve commercial success, effective production and economic
viability is needed (Cohendet & Simon, 2007). This means, however, that the desired
artistic value cannot always be obtained. The management of a cultural organization
has to find a viable way of upholding this delicate balance (Cohendet & Simon, 2007;
Lampel et al., 2000). The “eternal battle between creatives and suits” (Thompson et
al., 2007, p. 625) is a problem much covered in the literature on cultural industries.
Especially the nature of the conflict is discussed, however few have proposed
solutions or ways of dealing with the problem of the division between art and
commerce.
In essence, the conflict between art and commerce is a conflict between
individual roles (Eikhof & Haunschild, 2007). Business directors and artistic directors
2
are the two most powerful roles in cultural organizations (Dimaggio & Stenberg,
1985). In this dual authority structure, problems regarding maintaining a delicate
balance become apparent. According to Jones and Deckro (1993, p. 227), “one of the
keys to understanding behaviour in any organization is to understand the roles, role
expectations, role pressures and resulting role conflicts peculiar to a particular
structural form”. During work projects the coordination of role players is necessary
(Baker & Faulkner, 1991) and roles, in their turn, are created by the organizational
structure (Jones & Deckro, 1993). Therefore, organization theory and role theory are
useful tools in analysing and coping with the conflict between art and commerce.
Cultural organizations are not the only organizations coping with role problems.
Organizational structures wherein two leaders or managers are placed at the same
horizontal level, like dual leadership structures (Eckman, 2006; Reid & Karambayya,
2009) and matrix structures (Jones & Deckro, 1993; Sy & D'Annunzio, 2005),
provide a source for role conflict and role ambiguity. This is due to the dual authority
structure and the often conflicting objectives of the ones who possess authority
(Rizzo, House & Lirtzman, 1970). Roles that are positioned in the middle between
two managers, experience stress as a result of having to live up to multiple
expectations (Rizzo et al., 1970). Nevertheless, being in a middle position, these roles
may just be in the right place to act as a mediator between the two managers
(Galbraith, 1974; Reid & Karambayya, 2009). Thus, investigating the conflicts related
to the middle role and its potential in coordination the tension between business and
artistic leader in the cultural industries, may offer fruitful insight for other
organizational structures as well. Especially since the organization of the cultural
industries is said to serve as an example for organizational structures within other
industries (Lampel et al., 2000).
1.2 Research question and objectives
In this thesis, I employ organization and role theory to address the general problem of
the division between art and commerce with respect to the film industry, as a part of
the broader cultural industries. The film industry is an industry characterised by a
dominant organizational structure (project-based) and a clear division of roles
(Whitley, 2006). The producer and director are the ones who fulfil the key roles and
can be seen as the personifications of the conflict between art and commerce in the
film industry (Delmestri et al., 2005). However, the role in the middle between the
3
two managerial roles, the first assistant director, has never been mentioned or
examined in the literature on the subject. Probably, this role in the film industry can
affect the relationship between the producer and director and thereby have an
influence on the art and commerce conflict. Therefore, I want to contribute to the
existing literature by examining a third role: that of the first assistant director. This
role is chosen since the first assistant director is one of the leading positions, next to
the producer and director, in the film creating process (Wils & Ziegelaar, 2005).
The research question of this thesis is as follows: what is the role of the first
assistant director in managing the relationship, and tension within that relationship,
between the commercial objectives of producers and the artistic objectives of
directors in film production?
In order to answer the overall research question, the following sub questions
are formulated:
- What are the tasks and responsibilities of the first assistant director?
- What are the relations and tensions between the producer and director?
- What are the relations and tensions between the producer and first assistant director?
- What are the relations and tensions between the director and first assistant director?
Thus, the aim of this empirical research is to find out whether the middle role,
in the form of the first assistant director, proves to be valuable in coordinating the
conflict between art and commerce in the film industry, by using organization theory
and role theory as a guideline. This is aligned with calls from various authors to focus
more on organizational and individual work practices, in order to understand the
relationship between art and commerce (Eikhof & Haunschild, 2007; Jeffcutt & Pratt,
2002; Lampel et al., 2000; Thompson, Jones & Warhurst, 2007). Both producers and
directors will benefit when the desired artistic value is obtained without exceeding the
boundaries of time and money. As a result of a better balance, much less time needs to
be spent on discussing and sorting out conflict between the crewmembers (Eikhof &
Haunschild, 2007).
1.3 Research methodology
For examining the research question, a case study of the Dutch film industry is
conducted. An inductive research approach is used, because I want to gain a rich
understanding of the context and processes that occur in the film industry, with regard
to the different roles that are present within that industry. The research design is
4
descriptive as well as exploratory; tasks and responsibilities of the first assistant
directors are assessed and I explore the way in which the art and commerce problem is
perceived and possibly coordinated by the first assistant director. Both primary and
secondary data are used. Primary data is collected by doing face to face and semi-
structured interviews with 14 first assistant directors. This is complemented by
secondary data that consists of interview transcripts, resulting from interviews with 25
film producers and 16 film directors. The two types of data are compared and
analyzed, with the aim of assembling information on the relationship between the
three roles and the conflicts that are present within these relationships. Data analysis
is carried out by identifying key themes and patterns in the data, that are valuable in
order to provide an answer to the research question. Interviewee quotations are
included in the study to support the arguments.
1.4 Structure
The structure of this thesis is as follows. Chapter 2 provides a theoretical framework,
wherein organization theory and role theory are discussed first. Next, managerial
tensions within organizations are addressed, including the effect of these tensions on
organizational roles and the possible coordination of the tensions. Subsequent,
organization theory, role theory and the subject of managerial tension are applied to
the film industry. Problems regarding dual authority, and the resulting conflict
between art and commerce, are treated and the role of the first assistant director is
described. In chapter 3, the methodology of the qualitative research is discussed. The
chapter specifies the research design and strategy, the data collection method and
sample, the quality of the research and the method of analysis. Chapter 4 presents the
results of the case-study of the Dutch film industry. The findings will be validated by
using quotes from the interviews. In chapter 5, the results are discussed and a
conclusion is provided, including the limitations of this thesis and recommendations
regarding future research.
5
2. Theoretical framework
In this chapter, I discuss the theoretical framework. With respect to roles, some
organizational structures are more likely to encounter conflict (Jones & Deckro,
1993). Usually this is due to tension between managerial roles, which extends to the
rest of the organization (Reid & Karambayya, 2009). Employees that are ‘trapped’
between the managers experience role conflict and role ambiguity, according to the
literature. However, these employees may also be in just the right position to manage
the tension between the managerial roles in a productive way. In order to gain an
understanding of the dynamics of role stress within organizational structures, first
organizational theory and role theory are discussed. Next, managerial tension in
organizations is discussed followed by a specific example of an industry in which
tension between roles frequently occurs: the film industry as a part of the broader
cultural industries.
2.1 Organization theory
The organizational theory literature often makes a distinction between three primary
organizational structures: the functional structure, divisional structure and matrix
structure (Jones & Deckro, 1993; Krijnen, 1979). An organizational structure that has
received increasing attention recently is the project-based organization (Thiry &
Deguire, 2007). Below, these four organizational structures are briefly discussed.
In homogeneous and stable environments, it is the functional structure that
flourishes. Within a functional structure, there is a high degree of centralization.
Functional organizations consist of many hierarchical levels, with a small number of
subordinates per supervisor (Bosch, Volberda & Boer, 1999). Policy is decided by the
top management and the division of labour is based on knowledge (Krijnen, 1979).
Departments are thus formed according to their technical expertise (Jones & Deckro,
1993), like a sales department and research and development department. Bosch et al.
(1999) cite that functional structures are typically found in organizations that produce
standardized products with a relatively long life cycle. The authors indicate efficiency
as the main advantage of this type of structure. In addition, there is a low degree of
functional dependence, since the functional structure minimizes overlap across the
departments (Jones & Deckro, 1993). However, costs of coordination across the
6
departments are high (Jones & Deckro, 1993). Two other disadvantages, that are
mentioned by Krijnen (1979), are that the coordination by the top management
becomes more difficult when production increases and that the functional structure is
not flexible. Last mentioned disadvantage is especially experienced when changes in
the environment take place. In a more diversified environment, a divisional structure
is the more appropriate organizational form (Bosch et al., 1999).
Diversified markets and dynamic environments call for diversification
strategies (Jones & Deckro, 1993). The divisional structure is able to satisfy this
condition since the division of work is concentrated around products (Bosch et al.,
1999). Thus compared to the functional structure, another formation of the
departments is made (Krijnen, 1979); within the divisional structure departments are
formed according to products and to each product a team of specialist is assigned
(Jones & Deckro, 1993). Mintzberg (1980) states that the divisional form is typically
found in large, mature organizations and is characterized by vertical decentralization,
whereby a large portion of power is delegated from the top management to a set of
largely autonomous divisions. These divisions carry full responsibility for the
strategic decision making. The alleviation of top management tasks is an important
advantage of the divisional structure (Krijnen, 1979). This results in relatively low
costs of coordination. In addition, the teams of specialists are able to ensure timely
delivery and respond to task problems quickly (Jones & Deckro, 1993). Krijnen
(1979) reasons that the divisional structure is flexible, although the structure loses
some of its flexibility in a situation wherein strategic adaptation of the whole
organizations is needed. According to the authors, strategic decisions made by the top
management are likely to evoke resistance of the divisions, especially when decisions
are made that are not in line with the policy of the division.
A structure that is said to possess the advantages that are accompanied with
the functional and divisional structure, without adopting all the corresponding costs, is
the matrix structure (Jones & Deckro, 1993). The matrix structure is a structure
whereby authority is balanced between the functional hierarchy and the project
organization (Ford & Randolph, 1992). As in the functional structure, specialized
functional departments exist. In the matrix structure, however, this is supplemented
with the autonomy of the divisions as in the divisional structure (Bosch et al., 1999).
Within the matrix organization divisions consist of project teams that are added as a
second ‘layer’ to the traditional functional hierarchy (Ford & Randolph, 1992). This
7
means that employees permanently work in one of the functional departments and at
the same time, can temporarily be placed to work at one of the projects (Krijnen,
1979). This results in employees working across various projects and reporting to
different managers (Ford & Randolph, 1992). Matrix structures are typically found in
organizations that produce products with a relatively short life cycle and operate in
dynamic environments with many new product-market combinations (Bosch et al.,
1999). A main benefit of the structure is that it allows a diverse group of technical
experts to focus on a specific problem (Jones & Deckro, 1993). In addition, the
internal communication runs smoothly because of the close relationships among
departments and projects (Ford & Randolph, 1992). Moreover, the matrix
organization is highly flexible for three reasons, according to Krijnen (1979). First,
because of the permanent available means and persons, new projects can be realized
over and over again. Second, the exchange of means and persons between projects can
be made possible quite easily. Third, the resistance to change is likely to be small,
since employees are used to change within this type of organization as a result of
working across different projects. As a disadvantage, the matrix structure has a
tendency to evoke behavioural problems, like power struggles and conflict both at the
organizational and individual level (Jones & Deckro, 1993). This can be mostly
attributed to the division of responsibilities and authority among those in charge of the
functional side and those in charge of a project (Ford & Randolph, 1992).
Where employees within the matrix structure are assigned to new projects
after the completion of the previous project on a permanent basis, the project-based
organization (PBO) is temporary (Ford & Randolph, 1992). The functional
coordination, present in the matrix structure in addition to the work across project
lines (Hobday, 2000; Thiry & Deguire, 2007), does not exist in the PBO. The PBO is
a temporary organization, formed to achieve a specific purpose, that is dissolved as
soon as this purpose is fulfilled (DeFillippi & Arthur, 1998; Ebbers & Wijnberg,
2009; Ford & Randolph, 1992; Whitley, 2006) . People with different skills are
brought together to work on a specific project during a fixed period of time (Whitley,
2006). Goals are set in terms of outcome qualities, time and costs (Sydow, Lindkvist,
& DeFillippi, 2004). PBO’s are typically found in dynamic (Thiry & Deguire, 2007),
risky (Whitley, 2006) and uncertain environments (Ebbers & Wijnberg, 2009). Two
characteristics of the PBO, mentioned by Sydow et al. (2004), are the convergence of
people with different backgrounds, knowledge and specialisms into a project team,
8
and the highly autonomous nature of the project team wherein a strict hierarchy is
lacking. According to the authors, this should encourage a high level of creativity and
innovation. Whitley (2006) agrees to this by stating that the PBO is a structure
especially suited to the production of innovative products or services. Another
advantage of the PBO is that it is suited for the integration of experts and specialized
resources (DeFillippi & Arthur, 1998; Hobday, 2000; Sydow et al., 2004) in order to
deal with uncertainty (Ebbers & Wijnberg, 2009) and perform complex and non-
routine tasks (Hobday, 2000). A much cited weakness of the PBO in comparison to
functional organization structures, however, is its struggle with the integration of
structure, knowledge (Thiry & Deguire, 2007) and organizational capabilities
(Hobday, 2000; Whitley, 2006). The ability of the PBO to integrate structure,
knowledge and capabilities is limited since the organization dissolves after the
completion of the project. Also, time for reflection and documentation is scarce since
it already takes a lot of effort from the participants to complete the project within the
fixed period of time (Sydow et al., 2004).
Each of the four discussed organizational structures determines the roles that
are present within the organization (Jones & Deckro, 1993; Kahn, Wolfe, Quinn &
Snoek, 1964). According to organization theory, every position within an
organizational structure should have a specified set of tasks or responsibilities, that
determines the role one occupies (Rizzo et al., 1970). The properties of organizational
structures are used to shape formal work roles (Kahn et al., 1964; Morris, Steers &
Koch, 1979). The formation and definition of roles allows supervisors and managers
to provide guidance for subordinates and hold subordinates accountable for their
performance (Rizzo et al., 1970). To gain a better understanding of these roles, role
theory is discussed next.
2.2 Role theory
As mentioned by Biddle (1986), role theory consists of different perspectives that are
more often than not, unaligned. Nevertheless, role theory is a useful tool for
understanding and coping with human problems, according to the author. Role theory
includes functional role theory, symbolic interactionist role theory, organizational role
theory, structural role theory and cognitive role theory. In this thesis organizational
role theory is used since this addresses the roles of formal organizations: “a system of
positions and their associated roles” (Rogers & Molnar, 1976, p. 598). Organizational
9
role theory is rooted in the book of Kahn et al. (1964). The authors explain that a
person holds a certain position within an organization and that the activities that are
associated with this position make up a person’s role. According to Kahn et al.
(1964), a role is inevitably linked to other roles within the same organization.
Linkages between roles exist, for example, as a result of the hierarchy of authority.
People hold expectations to the other roles within an organization, because there
usually is some form of interdependence between roles. A person occupying a role is
expected to perform the associated set of tasks and make decisions that fit the role
(Rogers & Molnar, 1976). From the perspective of role theory, an organization can be
called a system of social constraints in which each role is influenced by the
surrounding roles (Jones & Deckro, 1993). However, the expectations projected to a
certain role may vary substantially, which may result in role conflict (Jones & Deckro,
1993; Rogers & Molnar, 1976). In addition, role ambiguity may occur when sufficient
or complete expectations to guide behaviour are lacking (Biddle, 1986).
By Biddle (1986, p. 82) role conflict is defined as ”the concurrent appearance
of two or more incompatible expectations for the behaviour of a person”. In other
words, role conflict arises when the behaviours expected of a person are not consistent
(House & Rizzo, 1972; Rizzo et al., 1970). Role theory also addresses the subject of
role ambiguity. As mentioned earlier, organization theory states that every role in an
organization should have a specified set of tasks or responsibilities. In order to make
decisions and perform well, an employee needs to know what is expected from him or
her from the superior (Rizzo et al., 1970). When the employee does not possess the
necessary information needed to perform or complete the required set of tasks and
responsibilities, role ambiguity arises (Rizzo et al., 1970; Tarrant & Sabo). Morris et
al. (1979) state that it is possible to experience role conflict and role ambiguity at the
same time, since the perception of incompatible expectations associated with role
conflict, may be linked to an element of role ambiguity that includes uncertainty about
the outcomes of one's behaviour. Research even demonstrates that an increase in role
conflict causes an increase in role ambiguity and the other way around (Rogers et al.,
1994).
Role conflict and role ambiguity are both forms of role stress (Tarrant & Sabo,
2010). Tarrant and Sabo (2010) indicate that to some extent, stress is needed for an
individual to evolve; to control and develop skills and capabilities. Nevertheless, high
levels of role stress can produce negative results. The existence of role conflict and
10
role ambiguity can lead to decreased individual satisfaction and decreased perceived
organizational effectiveness (House & Rizzo, 1972). In addition, they are positively
correlated with anxiety and propensity to leave, and negatively correlated to effective
performance (Rizzo et al., 1970). In their meta-analysis, Jackson and Schuler (1985)
find support for these consequences and in addition, find a negative relationship
between role conflict and role ambiguity and organizational commitment and
performance, although they state that the negative relationship between role conflict
and ambiguity and performance is at best modest. Also, role ambiguity leads to
dissatisfaction with the role and a distorted reality (Rizzo et al., 1970). Role conflict
and role ambiguity are, thus, often linked to undesirable outcomes for the members of
the organizational as well as the organizational performance (Rizzo et al., 1970).
However, Biddle (1986) warns readers to not blindly accepts these
conclusions since role conflict has not been explored in many settings yet. Questions
remain about the scope and effects of role conflict. Furthermore, Tubre and Collins
(2000), who revisited Jackson and Schuler (1985) with a larger database, find that the
relationship between role conflict and job performance is negligible. Consistent with
Jackson and Schuler (1985), their results do reveal that there is a negative relationship
between role ambiguity and job performance. Given the reasonable high correlation
(-.26) between the two variables, Tubre and Collins (2000) posit that job performance
could be substantially increased due to attempts in reducing role ambiguity. However,
perceptions of role ambiguity could influence perceptions of performance; the
perceived performance of individuals who perceive high levels of role ambiguity, may
be worse than the performance actually is (Tubre & Collins, 2000). The effects of role
conflict and ambiguity on organizational performance are not re-examined by the
authors.
2.3 Managerial tension within organizations
2.3.1 Sources of managerial tension
The most mentioned sources of role conflict and role ambiguity within an
organization are the existence of a dual authority structure, the pursuit of multiple
objectives and unclear roles (Rizzo et al., 1970). These sources are likely to be present
in an organizational structure wherein two leaders or managers are placed at the same
horizontal level, like dual leadership structures (Eckman, 2006; Reid & Karambayya,
2009) and matrix structures (Jones & Deckro, 1993; Sy & D'Annunzio, 2005).
11
Following Reid and Karambayya (2009), I expect that the challenges faced in dual
leadership structures, resemble the problems that are encountered in the matrix
structure. Within these structures, there is a constant need for balancing differences,
resulting in tension between the two managers (Reid & Karambayya, 2009).
For example, authority within a matrix organization is split between two
managers: the functional manager and project manager. The functional manager is
concerned with the functional line of the organization across projects and the
assignment of resources to the projects, while the project manager is responsible for
the succeeding of the project and the use of the resources for those particular projects
(Jones & Deckro, 1993). The two managers, thus, differ in their objectives, which
results in tension and power struggles between the managerial roles (Butler, 1973;
Ford & Randolph, 1992; Jones & Deckro, 1993).
Sy and D'Annunzio (2005) conclude that both top-level and mid-level
management indicate ambiguous authority, unclear roles and the misalignment of
goals and objectives as three important challenges of the matrix. First, difficulties
reported as a result of the dual authority structure are: confusion about final authority,
delayed decision-making processes, indistinctness on accountability issues, and
managers who are not used to share decision rights. The stated problem is that
managers within the matrix structure can have responsibility without having authority.
As an example the authors mention a manager who has the responsibility to develop a
global policy, but does not have the authority to implement this policy at regional
levels. Second, the study indicates that confusion over roles and responsibilities are
present in almost every matrix organization. This leads to misidentification of the
boss, unclear job descriptions and guidelines, and uncertainty about who to contact for
information. The problem of unclear roles is significantly more reported by mid-level
managers than top-level managers. This is explained by the difficulties that arise
during the transition of the organization to a matrix structure. Top-level roles are
clearly determined and defined after the transition, while the same does not happen
for mid-level roles. Executives expect mid-level managers to adapt to change when
necessary, but the problem is that these managers need guidelines from the executives
in order to be able to adapt to change. Third, a reported problem of the matrix
organization includes conflicting objectives between the dimensions of the matrix.
According to the questioned managers, this involves insufficient processes to align
goals, inadequate communication between matrix dimensions and a lack of
12
coordination across work plans. The suggested solution to this problem is a constant
communication of the organization’s vision and objectives to the employees, to make
sure that objectives and goals are aligned. This may help to minimize conflict and
clarify ambiguity (Sy & D’Annunzio, 2005).
Something that possibly reinforces the tension, created by multiple lines of
authority and misaligned objectives, is functional interdependency (Butler, 1973;
Pondy, 1967). Pondy (1967) states that business dimensions are functionally
interdependent when they have to make use of the same facility or service like
development or production; when there has to be consensus about decisions related to
the joint activities; or when input is needed from one dimension in order to continue
work in the other dimension. According to Morris et al. (1979, p. 62), roles within
organizations are functional interdependent when an individual is “directly dependent
upon the work of others to complete his or her own task assignments”. When
functional interdependent business dimensions or roles have different objectives, a
source for tension exists (Pondy, 1967). These tensions, however, do not result in role
conflict and role ambiguity according to Morris et al. (1979), who do not find
functional dependence to be a significant predictor of role conflict and ambiguity.
On the one hand, managerial tension, due to dual authority, the pursuit of
multiple objectives and functional interdependence may create role conflict and
ambiguity for employees that are in the middle position between two managers (Kahn
et al., 1964; Rizzo et al., 1970). This is discussed in more detail in paragraph 2.3.2.
On the other hand, employees that are in the position of being in the middle, may have
a role in managing the tension between the managers (Galbraith, 1974; Reid &
Karambayya, 2009). This is discussed in more detail in paragraph 2.3.3.
2.3.2 Managerial tension as a source for role conflict and role ambiguity
In an organization with a dual authority structure, there is a violation of the principle
of unity of command (Ford & Randolph, 1992; Jones & Deckro, 1993). This principle
states that there should be one leader and one consistent set of objectives (Rizzo et al.,
1970) and that “every subordinate should be assigned to a single boss” (Ford &
Randolph, 1992, p. 275). In classical organizational structures, like the functional and
divisional structure, the principle of unity of command holds, but within the more
complex, project-driven structures, this principle is likely to be violated (Rizzo et al.,
1970). A difference between project-driven structures has to be noted; although the
13
matrix organization is inevitably accompanied with a dual authority structure, this
does not necessarily apply to the PBO.
A violation of the principle of unity of command is related to role conflict and
ambiguity within an organization (Morris et al., 1979; Rizzo et al., 1970; Tarrant &
Sabo, 2010). Jones and Deckro (1993), who developed a framework for examining
role conflict in a project-driven organization, state that within a dual authority
structure employees are confronted with multiple reporting lines as a result of which
employees may suffer from multiple, and often incompatible, orders and objectives.
They may undergo stress from the position of being in the middle (Rizzo et al., 1970).
For example, within a matrix organization, functional specialists are assigned to
projects according to their skills (Jones & Deckro, 1993). When assigned to a project,
these specialists have to report both to the functional manager and the project manager
and are, therefore, in the middle between two managers. They have to live up to the
expectations of both managers, who differ in their objectives and who both identify
their objectives as important. To live up to the expectations and demands of the one
manager, inevitably means falling short in meeting the expectations and demands of
the other manager. This creates role conflict for the functional specialist (Jones &
Deckro, 1993). Another example can be found in the research of Sy and D’Annunzio
(2005), who describe a brand manager of an automotive manufacturer, that has to
report to the vehicle program manager as well as the functional manager. The former
manager is responsible for profit and loss, while the other manager is responsible for
the number of vehicles sold. This may result in discrepancy for the brand manager,
since he or she will not always be able to meet both objectives simultaneously. In
terms of management, Rogers et al. (1994, p. 21) argue that in order to decrease role
conflict and ambiguity “employees must have a clear chain of command that clearly
delineates what decisions should be referred to management and what decisions
employees are allowed to make themselves”.
In sum, the literature assumes that, especially in dual leadership structures and
project-driven structures, role conflict and role ambiguity are likely to arise as the
result of dual authority, multiple objectives and functional interdependence. However,
when taking into account the negligible relationship between role conflict and job
performance, found by Tubre and Collins (2000) and the warning of Biddle (1986) to
not blindly accept the negative effects of role conflict, it seems that a further
examination of the position in the middle is in place. The employee who is likely to
14
experience role conflict and ambiguity as a result of tension between two managers,
may also be just the right person to coordinate the tension-loaded relationship
between the two managers.
2.3.3 Coordinating the managerial tension
To start with, some authors state that conflict is not necessarily a bad thing. Pondy
(1967) argues that the conflicts following from project-driven organizational
structures, are not necessarily bad as long as they are managed properly. If managed
properly, “this process results in higher levels of coordination and an ability to make
complex decisions more effectively than do simple bureaucratic procedures” (Joyce,
1986, p. 539). In addition, the discussed violation of the principle of unity of
command, may be an opportunity to gain recognition and visibility for some, instead
of causing role stress (Rizzo et al., 1970). Also, Pondy (1967) indicates that conflict
may be functional for the organization as well as the individual. Besides, according to
Faulkner (1983), the image of self and that of work do not have to be closely linked.
From the perspective of role theory, it is assumed that an employee finds it difficult to
view the self separate from work. However, if an employee is able to take some
distance from work, the degree in which role conflict and ambiguity arise may be
decreased, the author states. Thus, the conflict that employees close to the two
managers experience is not necessarily overtly present. Nor does conflict merely
produce negative effects. These employees may even fulfil a mediating role.
Galbraith (1974) proposes that the coordination of interdependent roles, such
as the two managerial roles, can be improved by the creation of an integrating role.
Such a role could equalize power and increase the joint decision making processes.
Also, Reid and Karambayya (2009) indicate that mediation can be used as a technique
for conflict management. A few conditions are attached to this mediating role
however, according to the authors. The integrating role should be fulfilled by a person
“who can exercise expert power in the form of persuasion and informal influences”
(Galbraith, 1974, p. 34) and the mediating aspect should not require the employee to
move outside his or her normal role (Reid & Karambayya, 2009). Moreover, Jones
and Deckro (1993) indicate that an employee, in the middle between two managers,
needs to possess the ability to deal with role stress effectively.
To conclude, the role of the employee trapped between managerial tensions is not
clear. On the one hand, the literature suggests that this person is negatively influenced
15
by the tensions, resulting in role conflict and role ambiguity. On the other hand, this
person may exert a positive influence in the coordination of the tensions. In the next
section, a concrete example of an industry is discussed in which tension between two
leaders is common and a middle position is clearly present: the film industry.
2.4 Tension between art and commerce in the film industry
The film industry is part of the cultural industries, in which dual leadership structures
prevail (De Voogt, 2006). First, the tensions within the cultural industries as a whole
are discussed briefly. Subsequently, this discussion is applied to the film industry.
Finally, the middle position in the film industry is addressed.
2.4.1 Dual leadership in the cultural industries
Within the cultural industries, there is a division between art and commerce, resulting
in a constant tension between the creative and the commercial side (Caves, 2003;
DeFillippi, Grabher & Jones, 2007; Eikhof & Haunschild, 2007; Reid & Karambayya,
2009; Thompson et al., 2007). Authority is usually split between a business director
and an artistic director: the two most powerful roles in cultural organizations
(Dimaggio & Sternberg, 1985). These two directors differ in their objectives.
On the one hand, the business directors carries responsibility for the
commercial objectives. Within cultural production, constraints in the form of time,
cost and market are present. In order to achieve commercial success, effective
production and economic viability is needed (Cohendet & Simon, 2007). On the other
hand, the artistic director is responsible for creativity and innovativeness, which are
both important in order to respond to the constantly rapidly changing environment
within the cultural industries (Banks et al., 2000). Artistic freedom is needed to
maximize creativity (Lampel et al., 2000). Both business and artistic objectives should
be kept in mind for a cultural organization to survive in the volatile market (Banks et
al., 2000). Since the needed leader competencies are difficult to unify in one person,
dual leadership structures exist, accompanied with tension between the two executive
leaders (De Voogt, 2006). Achieving the commercial objectives almost inevitably
means compromising on the artistic objectives, and the other way around (Jones &
Deckro, 1993).
16
2.4.2 Dual leadership in the film industry
Project-based organizations are dominant in the film industry (DeFillippi & Arthur,
1998; Ebbers & Wijnberg, 2009; Whitley, 2006). In the past, major studios employed
their actors under long-term contracts and employed a permanent staff of technicians,
custom designers and script writers. In the 1950’s, however, the Hollywood studios
gave way to project-based filmmaking when they considered the costs of employing
and maintaining permanent staff too expensive (DeFillippi & Arthur, 1998). As
Ebbers and Wijnberg (2009) state, the project-based organization is an attractive
organizational structure in the film industry wherein demand is difficult to predict,
activities are mostly non-routine and the distribution of success and failure are highly
skewed.
People involved in film making can be classified into one of three
occupational niches, according to DeFillippi and Arthur (1998). Directors and
producers are called the principals and are involved in the formation of the
organization and its strategy. The second occupational niche is that of the
professionals, who are hired by the principals and all make their contribution to the
strategy, either in the business domain or the artistic domain. Thirdly, there are the
apprentices who are engaged with the routine, yet necessary tasks. However, the three
niches do not function independently. Rather, tasks and roles in film production are
interdependent (Ferriani, Corrado & Boschetti, 2005). Each individual involved
contributes its own unique talent, input and technical expertise to a collaborative
project. Each specific role is dependent on the skills and collaboration of the other
roles in order to accomplish the project task (Ferriani et al., 2005).
As principals, the producer and director are the ones who fulfil the key roles in
film production (Baker & Faulkner, 1991). They form the leadership duo and can be
seen as the personification of the conflict between art and commerce in the film
industry (Delmestri, Montanari & Usai, 2005). The producer is in charge of the
financing and organization of the film. He or she is the one who hires the film crew,
including the director, and tries to keep peace when there are tensions between
crewmembers. When the film is finished, the producer is in control of the marketing
and release strategy, including scheduling the previews (Squire ,1986). According to
Squire (1986, p. 28), producers nowadays can be best described as “entrepreneurs
trained in business who have learned to put deals together”. The director is the artistic
leader of the film process. He or she has the privilege to mold and shape the film. The
17
role of the director includes hiring the actors, rehearsing with the actors, maintaining
close contact with the scriptwriter, deciding which take is best and supervising the
sounds of the film. In certain tasks, the roles of producer and director overlap.
Together they look at the budget, decide about the look, texture and visual style of the
film, figure the number of shooting days and fine tune the editing process. However,
the overlapping tasks vary with each film project (Squire ,1986).
Hence, a dual authority structure, the pursuit of different objectives and
functional interdependence are present in the film industry. As mentioned earlier, this
provides a source for role conflict and role ambiguity for the role in the middle. In the
film industry such a role is present in the form of the first assistant director.
2.4.3 The first assistant director
The first assistant director is one of the leading positions, next to the producer and
director, in the film creating process (Wils & Ziegelaar, 2005). The first assistant
director is included in the directors immediate family, but is also accountable to the
producer. He or she is in control of the actual functioning of the set (Squire, 1986).
The first assistant director is likely to experience role conflict and role
ambiguity as a result of a conflicting set of demands coming from the producer on the
one hand and the director on the other hand. As Faulkner (1983, p. 143) puts it: “it is a
necessary evil when working directly with people who face the conflict between
business and creative side of filmmaking”. However, being in a position just under the
producer and director, I expect that the role of first assistant director can be valuable
in coordinating the tension between art and commerce.
The role for the first assistant director has never been examined. Next to the
producer and director, I add this third role in order to deepen our understanding of the
dynamics of this role and its possible mediating effects in finding a balance between
art and commerce in the film industry.
18
3. Research methodology
In this section, the research methodology is presented. First, I will elaborate on the
chosen research design and strategy. Second, the sample and the data collection
process are described. Third, the quality of the research is addressed by discussing to
what extent credibility, transferability, dependability and confirmability are ensured.
Fourthly, the method of analysis is discussed.
3.1 Research design and strategy
The aim of this research is to explore the role of the first assistant director in
managing the conflict between art and commerce in the film industry. An inductive
research approach with qualitative data is used, because I want to gain a better
understanding of the nature of the art and commerce problem and the way in which
this is perceived and (possibly) managed by the first assistant director. An inductive
approach allows for the development of understanding and permits the research to
change while it progresses. A disadvantage of this approach, however, is the small
sample size, as a result of which generalizability is limited (Saunders, Lewis &
Thornhill, 2009).
The purpose of this research is descriptive as well as exploratory. For this
research it is important to know what is the role of the first assistant director and why
this role is valuable in relation to the conflicts that are present in the film industry. A
descriptive research design is used to provide a detailed picture of the tasks and
responsibilities of the first assistant director. In addition, an exploratory research
design is used to examine the relations between the first assistant director, director
and producer. An exploratory design is accompanied with the advantage of gaining
new insights on the subject, and flexibility which allows for intermediate adaptations
(Saunders et al., 2009). A combination of both designs enables me to reach the
research objectives and provide an answer to the research question.
Two types of data are used, primary and secondary, that both consist of
interviews. The research strategy used to collect primary data is a case study of the
Dutch film industry. A case study is conducted because of its usefulness in gaining an
understanding of the context and the processes that occur in the film industry.
Qualitative data is collected by conducting face-to-face and semi-structured
19
interviews with first assistant directors. Semi-structured interviews are used since the
interview questions are open-ended and variation in the order of the questions may be
needed. Moreover, it allows me to collect a rich and detailed set of data (Saunders et
al., 2009). The process of data collection for the primary data is described in
paragraph 3.2.
Secondary data refers to data that is originally collected for other purposes
(Saunders et al., 2009). The qualitative secondary data used in this research consists
of written materials in the form of interview transcripts. First of all, I use the
interview transcripts that follow from a series of semi-structured interviews with
Dutch film producers. For this series, 25 film producers were interviewed in the
period of February - June 2007. In addition, I use the interview transcripts that follow
from a series of semi-structured interviews with Dutch film directors. For this series,
14 film directors were interviewed in the period of February - September 2008. Both
series of interviews were held with the aim of understanding careers and partnerships
within the film industry. Regarding partnerships, the focus is on the relationship
between producer and director.
A main advantage of the use of secondary data is that it allows for comparison
with the primary data, thereby triangulating the findings and placing them in a more
general context. Furthermore, re-analyzing secondary data may lead to unforeseen or
unexpected insights (Saunders et al., 2009). The two types of data can be well
compared, because of the similar interview methods and the use of raw data in the
form of transcript (Saunders et al., 2009). The purpose of the research for which the
secondary data was collected is thus not likely to have had an impact on the
presentation of the data, unlike secondary data in the form of a report. A disadvantage
of the use of secondary data is that processes within the film industry may have
changed in the meantime. However, the period of time between the collection of the
primary data and secondary data is relatively short (four years and three years), thus it
is not likely that processes have changed considerably. Another disadvantage is that I
am limited to the information the secondary data offers. The interview transcripts may
not include the exact information that is needed in order to answer the research
question. For example, in the interviews with film producers several roles in the film
industry are discussed, but the role of the first assistant director is not included. This
would have been very useful for this research.
20
3.2 Sample and data collection
Data for this research is collected qualitatively through the approach of first assistant
directors in the Dutch film industry. The population consists of all the first assistant
directors present in the Netherlands, of which 14 first assistant directors are
interviewed for this study.
The Assistant Directors Club (ADC), the Dutch branch organization of
assistant directors, is used to approach members of the population. Not every first
assistant director is a member of this organization, nevertheless it is a useful tool in
collecting contact details. The ADC has 47 members, although not all of them are first
assistant directors; also second en third assistant directors are part of the organization
(these functions will be explained in chapter 4). When excluding these last mentioned
groups, 39 first assistant directors remain. Expecting a response rate of 50%, I
randomly selected 30 first assistant directors to send a letter of request to. An answer
was received from 16 respondents, implying a response rate of 53%. From the 16
respondents, 3 respondents were not interviewed. One respondent could not find the
time to do the interview, the other respondent was no longer working in the film
industry and the last respondent was no longer performing the function of first
assistant director. In addition to these 13 respondents, one first assistant director was
interviewed who is not a member of the ADC, but was recommended to interview by
another respondent. Eventually, the sample consists of 14 respondents, that were
interviewed in the period of April - June 2011.
The interviews took place in Amsterdam, The Hague, Utrecht and Haarlem. In
these cities, 8 interviews were conducted in a cafe, 3 interviews were conducted in the
office of the respondent and 3 interviews were conducted in the home of the
respondent. The sample consists of 12 men and 2 woman, with an average age of
43.6. The year in which the respondents became professionally active in the film
industry lies between 1967 and 1996. All 14 respondents work freelance and 5 of
them also have their own company.
All of the interviews more or less followed the same interview protocol (see
Appendix). The interview consists of 51 open-ended questions, that were prepared by
using the theory described in chapter 2. Questions were asked about the career of the
respondent, rewards, the formation of film projects, the pre-production, the
production, loyalty, and collaboration and relationships with other roles on set.
21
The last question provided the respondent with the opportunity to talk about subjects
that they thought were not covered (well-enough) in the rest of the interview. Because
of the semi-structured nature of the interviews, some of the questions were changed or
removed and new questions were added during the period that the interviews took
place. Also, the order of the question asked varied from interview to interview.
The interview had a duration of approximately one hour. First, the interviewee
was asked permission to record the interview. In addition, terms of confidentiality
were addressed. Anonymity is ensured in this study, which enhances the feeling of the
respondent to be able to say anything. The interviews were audio recorded, so that no
information would be lost. A transcript was made of each interview by listing to the
audio recordings.
3.3 Quality of the research
In this paragraph, four measures of research quality are evaluated with respect to this
thesis: confirmability, credibility, transferability and dependability (Guba, 1981).
Within the limits of time, careful attention was paid to safeguard these quality
measures.
To ensure confirmability, the triangulation technique is used. Triangulation
“refers to the use of different data collection techniques within one study in order to
ensure that the data are telling you what you think they are telling you” (Saunders et
al., 2009, p. 146). The combination of a case study and secondary data in this study,
enhances the confidence that can be placed in the results. By analysing the results
from different points of view, I am able to give a more balanced and detailed picture
of the situation.
To ensure credibility, member checks were done; the interview transcripts
were sent to the corresponding respondents and prior to the preparation of the final
version, the research report was sent to all respondents in order to give them to
opportunity to agree or disagree with the findings. In addition, I have had the
opportunity to visit a film set, so I was able to observe the film process in practice.
This facilitates the interpretation of the findings. Moreover, the triangulation
technique, as described above, contributes to credibility as well. On the other hand, I
was not able to spend an extended period of time at the site (the film set as well as
each interview location), which limits the time the interviewees had to feel at ease.
Furthermore, extended interaction would have given me the time to gain a better
22
understanding of, and pay more attention to the characteristics that are essential for
this research (Guba, 1981).
To ensure transferability, this section provides a detailed portrait of the setting
in which the research is conducted. This is helpful in assessing the generalizability of
the sample to the population and to other contexts. It has to be kept in mind, however,
that behavorial phenomena are inevitably context bound, so generalization of the
results must be made with caution.
To ensure dependability, I provide an audit trail in this section, which is open
to external scrutiny. Through the documentation of data, methods and decisions about
the research, the research can be repeated at another time and place (Guba, 1981). In
addition, the use of multiple methods following from the triangulation is demonstrated
to enhance dependability (Guba, 1981). However, both types of data consist of
interviews. It would have been better to complement the interviews with, for example,
a survey research since other types of data may provide different perspectives on the
subject.
3.4 Method of analysis
The data is analysed by thorough examination of the interview transcripts. Both the
primary and secondary data are used to develop categories, which emerge from the
theory as well as the data itself. In order to structure the data the relevant data are
attached to the appropriate categories and within the categories key themes or patterns
are identified.
Results are based on the analysis of both the primary and secondary interview
transcripts and supported with interviewee quotations. It is important to note that the
analysis is only focused on the pre-production and production phase. The post-
production phase is excluded, because the first assistant director is not involved in this
phase. Furthermore, mainly the roles of the first assistant director, the director and the
producer are addressed. Although other roles are briefly discussed, they are not part of
the main focus of this study.
I expect to find that the first assistant director experiences role conflict and
role ambiguity as a result of conflicting expectations, while at the same time he or she
fulfils a valuable role in managing the relationship between the producer and director.
The results lay the foundation for further exploration on the subject.
23
4. Results
4.1 Profile of the first assistant director
4.1.1 Difference opnameleider en first assistant director
Although the most appropriate Dutch translation of the term first assistant director
seems to be opnameleider, there are two big differences between the roles. The first
assistant director is involved in the pre-production and is responsible for planning the
film, while the opnameleider is not involved in the pre-production and is merely an
executor of the film’s planning. “The opnameleider executes what is planned by the
producer and the first assistant director executes what is invented by himself” (First
assistant director K). The second difference it the type of assistant that is accompanied
by the two roles. The first assistant director is accompanied by two assistants. “I also
have a second assistant director who is placed in the office and does the clerical work
(…) In addition, there is a third assistant director, who stands next to you on set, only
during the production” (First assistant director I). The opnameleider is only
accompanied by one assistant; the assistant opnameleider, who can be compared to
the third assistant director.
Two respondents remark that the term opnameleider only exists in the
Netherlands. “In the rest of the world it is just called first assistant director, with or
without preparation time” (First assistant director L). Although a distinction can be
made, every interviewee perceives him or herself as a first assistant director because
there are responsible for the planning most of the time. For this reason, the term first
assistant director will be used in the remainder of this thesis, unless the term
opnameleider is mentioned in one of the interviewee quotations.
4.1.2 Careers
Only two respondents have a degree that is related to the film business. For the rest of
the respondents, no similarities in the type of education can be observed. Their
educational backgrounds differ from having no degree; to law; to mechanical
engineering.
Most of the respondents seem to derive from the production department,
although this is hard to say since more than half of the respondents have performed
roles on the production side as well as the directing side. Performed roles on the
24
production side include assistant production, assistant location manager and line
producer. Performed roles on the directing side include assistant director, assistant set
dresser, assistant costume, assistant in lighting, assistant in sound and screenwriter.
Deriving from the directing side is possibly advantageous, according to one
respondent. “I did not come from the production side, as most of my colleagues, but
from the set; from the technical side that caused me to have more credits with the film
crew. People from production do not have that much credit since they know little
about the execution, they are not on set, so they do not possess the practical feeling
and know how” (First assistant director H). Production assistant is the role most
mentioned by the respondents as a starting point for their film careers. The two roles
that are mostly performed as a stepping stone to first assistant director are assistant
opnameleider and opnameleider.
There are three ways to switch from one role to another. The first is taking
initiative yourself. “I offered myself as opnameleider, because it could be conducive
to my career” (First assistant director D). The second way is to be asked by the
producer to perform another role. “From being an assistant, you have to be given the
opportunity to work as an opnameleider or first assistant director” (First assistant
director E). A given opportunity seems to be mostly based on satisfactory
performance of a previous role. Third, the transition could be a coincidence as a result
of someone getting ill or fired. “I was given the opportunity to jump into a film
project, because someone else got ill which gave me the chance to set up for first
assistant director” (First assistant director A).
4.1.3 Tasks and responsibilities
The producer, or one of the producers’ delegates, is predominantly the one who asks
the first assistant to participate in a film project. Sometimes the first assistant director
is asked to participate by the director, who was satisfied with the performance of the
first assistant director in a previous project. This only happens informally, however,
by means of a call. Formally, the first assistant director is always asked by the
producer since this is the person in control of the finances and responsible for the
composition of the project team. According to some respondents the selection of
project team members takes place in consultation, although the producer is the one
who takes the final decision. “Often the director is asked whom he wants to work
with, after which he mentions a few names. Then it is not the director who approaches
25
me, but the line producer who has the overview of the finances and availabilities of
people” (First assistant director A). To be asked by the director to participate in a
project can be of influence to the direction of the loyalty of the first assistant director.
This is explained in more detail in paragraph 4.3.2.
It can be concluded from the interviews with directors that the selection of a
first assistant director indeed mostly results from mutual consultation, although it is a
subject of controversy in the relationship between producers and directors. Producers
like to think of the first assistant director as someone who guards their interests on set,
while directors are anxious that their creative interests are not promoted. “There are
opnameleiders who are on the side of production and there are opnameleiders who are
on the side of the director. The best ones are the ones that perform autonomously”
(Director N). Since producers are said to be ones taking the final decision, they may
push for a certain first assistant director in order to exert control, “like a spy on set”
(Director G). “It could happen that a producer says that a certain opnameleider is not
available when you prefer someone that they do not like” (Director H). Nevertheless,
most producers indicate that they allow the director to put their stamp on the selection
of project participants, because the collaboration would be forced if producer and
director do not agree. “If a director does not want someone, it inevitably comes back
to you during production. It really is a concertation” (Producer X).
During pre-production the main task of the first assistant director is to make a
planning that includes the logistics surrounding the script. The gathering of
information from all heads of departments is found to be very important in the pre-
production phase. “There is a daily torrent of information that you need to incorporate
in the planning” (First assistant director J). Usually the first assistant director is also
involved in location visits, rehearsals, the casting, discussions about special effects
and stunts, and meetings between the producer and director. The first assistant
director is responsible for signalling and tackling problems in advance. “When you
signal any problems in the planning, you immediately discuss them with the director,
the executive producer and the cameraman and try to come up with a solution” (First
assistant director M). At the end of pre-production there is a breakdown meeting,
during which the details of every scene are discussed. This meeting is held with the
aim of getting everyone on the same page.
In the production phase the first assistant director executes the planning. He or
she is the coordinator that is in charge of the daily supervision on set. The first
26
assistant director circulates the relevant information among the departments, and
makes sure that every department knows what needs to be done. He or she is always
busy preparing for the next take. “You are the spider in the web, controlling all the
departments. You are responsible for the succeeding and running in time of a
production day. You must ensure that people do their work, and do it well and on time.
Communication is very important. Every department has to know what needs to
happen, so that no department is waiting while it can already make preparations for
the next take” (First assistant director B). Moreover, the first assistant director carries
responsibility for the crew, as regards their working hours and safety.
4.2 Relationship director and producer
First of all, it is important to mention that it is often not the producer him or herself
who is present on set during the production. He or she delegates tasks and
responsibilities to an executive producer or line producer. The majority of the
respondents mention that contact with the producer takes places only a few times
during production, and that most of the communication on set is handled by the
producer’s delegates. “You do not have much to do with the producer on set; you
occasionally wave to him when he passes the set” (First assistant director K).
Nevertheless, both the executive producer and line producer act on behalf of the
producer, so in the remainder of this thesis the term producer is used.
4.2.1 Dual authority
According to seven respondents the overall responsibility of the success of a film can
be attributed to the producer. According to them the producer is the one who makes
the film possible. He or she chooses the director, and has to make sure that the
director is comfortable. In addition, the producer has the means available to him to
correct and control the shooting. “The producer, at all times, whatever we do on set.
He has so much means of control (…) he has the opportunity to unravel everything
that goes wrong and happens on set” (First assistant director F). One respondent states
that “the producer is the manager and the director is the employee” (First assistant
director I). In contrast, according to one respondent, the director carries overall
responsibility. This is supported with the argument that the director is responsible for
the creative content. The producer is merely the one who creates the right
circumstances for the director to do his work. As a third notion on the issue of overall
27
responsibility, six respondents indicate both producer and director as overall
responsible for a film’s success. The producer is financially responsible, while the
director is creatively responsible. “It is not a one-sided answer. That is the nature of
film production; it is actually the producer and director. Without the producer; no
director and without the director; no film” (First assistant director A). Authority is
thus probably dual and by all means ambiguous. This may have something to do with
the fact that is hard to decide whether a film is successful. “That depends on how you
define the success of a project. An artistic successful film may flop because of bad
publicity or wrong programming. Conversely, a lousy movie can still become a
blockbuster” (First assistant director D). Moreover, it could be that a film was not
supposed to be commercially successful in the first place.
Overall, the interviewed directors indicate that producers are more responsible
for the commercial success of the film, while they attribute final responsibility for the
artistic success mostly to themselves. One director mentions that producers are
responsible for attracting the first 300.000 visitors through casting and promotion, yet
it depends on the work of the director whether the film attracts many more visitors.
Two directors mention not to see themselves as just executors or employers. “I want
to have the feeling that I am equal to the producer (…) I am not an employer”
(Director C). The interviewed producers, on the other hand, also name the director as
being the one mostly artistically responsible. When the director is not found to be
artistically responsible by a producer, this is supported with the argument that they are
the ones responsible for hiring the director. “When a director does not perform well, it
was my mistake to hire him” (Producer C). With respect to the commercial success,
producers hold themselves responsible as often as they mention the director to be
responsible as directors are indirectly responsible for the financing, since their names
and reputations are associated with film. This could attract or discourage investors.
Also, directors are often involved in the promotion of the film.
On the subject of accountability, answers of the first assistant directors also
differ. Six first assistant directors think they are accountable to the producer only.
“That is my boss; he is the one who pays me, not the director” (First assistant director
I). None of the respondent mention the director as the only person who they are
accountable to. A majority of seven respondents think they are accountable to both the
producer and director. “Technically to the producer (…) but I am the assistant of the
director, his most important assistant. In that sense I am accountable to him as well”
28
(First assistant director A). One director provides an explanation for these different
answers, by stating that it is not certain whether the first assistant director belongs to
the production or directing department. “That [first assistant director] is the only one
who falls directly under me, but is selected by the producer” (Director B).
4.2.2 Multiple objectives and functional interdependence
The main bottleneck in the relationship between producer and director is that the
director always needs more time and money, than the producer allows. One
respondent puts forward that “obviously it is a tense relationship” (First assistant
director C). For the producer financial interests dominate, yet creative interests
dominate for the director. “The director will always fight for more money and the
producer will always say: there is no money. So on a production day they are making
compromises all the time” (First assistant director M). A respondent describes this as
the same problem as the one the first assistant director is dealing with, only at a higher
level.
The interviewed directors and producers acknowledge that conflicts indeed
occur between them, although most of them do not perceive it as a conflict. It is said
to be more like an on-going discussion about choices that have to be made. “It is
looking for a combination that works, just like in a marriage. Either you have your
own way, or you agree to the other, or else you make a compromise” (Director A).
One producer points out that it is healthy to have some tension. “It is normal for a
director to ask for 24 production days, while there is only room for 22 production
days in the budget. That is fine, as long as you come to an agreement” (Producer X).
One possible cause of the tensed relationship lies with the emotional
attachment one has to the film project. In general, directors feel more emotionally
involved with the project; the film even feels like a child to him or her. “The script
has been circulating in the hands of people for one or two years, so the script has
become like a bible, every scene has its function” (First assistant director C). The
producer, on the other hand, is concerned with the budget and is less likely to feel
emotionally attached to the project. This seems to transform the balance of power in
favour of the producer. For the producer knows that he or she is in the position to
make the dreams of the director come true, by producing his or her film. “They just
feel that you are hooked” (Director J). Sometimes it is the other way around, that the
29
producer is the one who has been working on a film project for a long time, while the
director is not involved until the start of production.
Another possible cause of the tensed relationship is that directors feel that they
do not have a permanent stake in shaping financial matters. “I deliver something
which brings in money for them, so they cannot say that I am not allowed to look into
the budget” (Director C). When the budget would be more transparent for directors,
they could anticipate on potential financial bottlenecks and make an estimation of the
financial consequences of their decisions. Furthermore, the director’s vision could be
more integrated in the budget.
Although the objectives of producer and director are conflicting, they are
interdependent. One requires the input of the other in order to complete the film.
Therefore, like one respondent notices, it is important for a director and producer to
work closely and frequently discuss the film that they are producing together. “I feel
that these two people should make a beautiful film together. The producer brings in
the money and the good people, and the director has the creative ideas” (First assistant
director I). Following from the interviews with directors and producers, it seems that a
close collaboration between the two results in more trust and equality, which in turn
leads to less conflicts or conflicts being solved more easily. When working in a close
collaboration, producers are more involved in the artistic choices of directors and
directors are more involved in the financial choices of producers. Eventually, it is the
reputation of the director that is at stake as well as the continued existence of the
producer.
4.3 Relationship first assistant director and director
4.3.1 Responsibilities and expectations
From the interviews can be concluded that there are two main responsibilities that a
first assistant director has towards a director. The one most mentioned is that the first
assistant director should create the circumstances in which the director is able to focus
entirely on his work. “My priority is to ensure that a situation is created where he can
optimally focus to be creative. I always try to create a warm bed” (First assistant
director E). This is done by taking care of communication and logistics. The first
assistant director makes sure that all means are available to the director and questions
from the crew are mainly addressed to the first assistant director instead of the
director. “I am his logistic conscience, that is the best way to see it” (First assistant
30
director I). The director has to feel calm “even though the walls are coming down
behind him” (First assistant director C). The second responsibility is to think along
with the director from a creative point of view. It has to be stressed that the first
assistant director is not in the position to take creative decisions, but it is up to the first
assistant director to put forward possible solutions when a director asks for advice. “It
is pleasant for a director when you sense his style and know where the film’s centre of
excellence is” (First assistant director J). Another respondent says “I think the director
likes it when you possess some dramatic insight to think along, which means you
understand why a director makes certain choices” (First assistant director B). In
following the responsibilities towards the director, the first assistant director always
need to consider the limits of time and money set by the producer. However, “he
[director] must not have the feeling that someone is breathing down his neck” (First
assistant director N).
Following from the interviews with directors, directors appreciate a first
assistant director with organization and management skills. A first assistant director
should keep the overview, provide the director with information and deal with time as
efficiently as possible. “The confidence that the job is done within the time and
budget specified (…) that is something I worry about too” (Director D). Like the first
assistant directors indicate, thinking along is something that is valued as well. A
director mentions that it is nice when a first assistant director knows about the
profession of director and knows when to push through. “He should think along with
respect to content and has to perform a bridging role between production, direction
and crew” (Director M). Furthermore, a first assistant director should be a nice and
fierce person that does not yell too much. “He should not be a bully who antagonizes
the crew” (Director F).
4.3.2 Loyalty towards director
Although it is not that black and white, the loyalty of the first assistant directors
mainly lies with the director. “It is supposed to be fifty-fifty but it varies. It is mostly
dependent on the person” (First assistant director B). Even though the respondents
know that are responsible to the producer as well, loyalty is mainly directed towards
the director for two reasons. First, the director is the one who makes the film, he or
she guarantees the creative content and is seen as a source of inspiration. “If the
director is not happy with what he does, it has no function. You may have finished on
31
time and within budget, but that does not mean that a better film is produced” (First
assistant director C). Second, the director is the one that the first assistant director
works with on a daily basis. The producer is hardly ever in the picture, while the
director is on set all day long. Still, the planning should always be kept in mind. It is a
disaster for production, when a first assistant director only tries to please the director.
“I often stand behind the director, but I am also responsible for the planning and want
to be finished in time” (First assistant director K).
Two respondents mention that their loyalty towards the director is greater, in
case they are approached by the director to participate in the project. “Then you are
more willing to go through fire and water for a person” (First assistant director M).
On the contrary, another respondent says loyalty does not depend on the one who
approached you, rather it has to do with being realistic; when you know someone has
prepared extremely well and tries his very best then you have to stand up for
someone, even when you do not like the person. Also, the phase of the project can
influence loyalty. It is mentioned by one respondent that during pre-production
loyalty is directed towards the producer, whereas during production “my loyalty shifts
to the creative side” (First assistant director E). That is because the director has a
certain vision on the execution of the script that needs to be supported.
The way in which loyalty towards the director is expressed usually includes
making sure that he or she can make some more takes, although this is likely to result
in overtime. “When the director is stressed for time and I know that he is doing very
well, I will try to convince the producer to agree on that” (First assistant director B).
For this to happen, the crew has to be asked for permission. “I would rather ask the
crew to stay a bit longer, than to have to inform the director that he cannot get what he
wants because the crew is going home” (First assistant director G). It has to be
pointed out that the director is not always given the opportunity to shoot another take.
This is only done when the first assistant director or producer thinks it is beneficial to
the film. Some scenes are very important, while others are less relevant and can be
removed.
The respondents indicate four reasons for wanting to work with a certain
director again. First of all, the capability of the director is found to be very important.
A director needs to be well-prepared, know what he is doing and have vision. In
addition, clear communication is appreciated. “He does not have to listen, of course
that would be nice, but a good instruction is much more important” (First assistant
32
director I). Furthermore, it is nice to work with a director who thinks along. Some
respondents indicate that the job becomes a lot easier when the director respects their
decisions, thinks about solutions and keeps budget and time in mind. Lastly, a
personal click with the director is seen as important. Whether there is a click with the
director “can make or break a relationship on set” (First assistant director K).
Therefore, this could influence the number of conflicts a first assistant director has
with a director and the way in which these conflicts are solved.
4.3.3 Conflicts with director
Three types of conflict between first assistant directors and directors can be
distinguished. The first type of conflict is about time. It is basically the same problem
that producers and directors are struggling with: the director always wishes for more
time than he or she is allowed. “It is always a time conflict; that the director wants
more time than that you have. That is the standard, it happens at every shoot” (First
assistant director N). Time conflicts can be caused by bad communication, like
expectations that are not pronounced or things that are not well-tuned. Also, the
découpage (the shredding of scenes into small takes) is made without noting the
planning made by the first assistant director. “The découpage does not determine the
planning and that is the problem” (First assistant director K). This, for example,
results in production days with 17 takes while during other days 32 takes have to be
shot. Although first assistant directors know that directors do not like to be pushed,
they have to set limits. “We are supposed to shoot an entire film, not just five
beautiful scenes” (First assistant director M). Directors, on the other hand, want to be
completely satisfied with the takes that are shot, since it is their name that is
associated with the film. One respondent explains that directors are learned, during
their education, to push for more takes to the best of their ability. “As a director you
must never surrender immediately because then you are fooled. Therefore they
strongly maintain as long as possible” (First assistant director H). It depends on the
attitude of the director, whether the first assistant director is able to meet the planning.
In the end, it is the director who is creatively responsible.
The second type of conflict concerns the communication of the director. The
respondents report that directors often alter their wishes without communicating this
to the first assistant director. “Sometimes the director thinks of something and forgets
to pass it on” (First assistant director J). A possible cause of this is mentioned by one
33
of the respondents, who states that most directors are working on a film 24 hours a
day and are constantly thinking of improvements. “In his creative process, he thought
of new ideas and changed things on his own, but I was not given the time to prepare
those things” (First assistant director H). The first assistant director is thus often
accused by the director when things are not in place or when the director’s wishes are
not complied with, while the first assistant director was not at all posted on those
wishes. One respondent indicates that it is important to always check the planning and
correspondence in order to verify whether the director did or did not communicate
something.
The third type of conflict has to do with inexperienced directors. This is an
irritation addressed by three respondents. According to these respondents, an
inexperienced director is not able to handle the pressure associated with filmmaking.
Inexperience may also manifests itself in inadequate preparation, which influences the
way in which work can be done efficiently. Often the first assistant director is left to
face the music and forced to take action more strongly. “The incapacity of the director
was ventilated to me (…) he needed someone to give vent to and I was the one most
close to him” (First assistant director C). Another respondent even reported to be fired
as a result of a director that could not handle the situation on set. The director in
question could not deal with the first assistant director pushing her, therefore she got
the respondent fired. “She knew she needed nine more days and she knew that I was
not prepared to give her those” (First assistant director E).
Conflicts with the director are mainly solved by discussion and negotiation.
Together, the first assistant director and director decide whether to delete a scene,
shorten a scene or keep the scene at the expense of another scene. In solving conflicts
with the director, the role of the first assistant director is an advising and supporting
one; he or she rarely has the right to make the final decision. “I communicate
consequences: when you take more time for this scene, there is only half an hour left
for that scene. It is up to me to inform him when a day is not running smoothly and I
should not give him the idea that we have all the time in the world” (First assistant
director M).
In case the conflict cannot be solved by discussing and negotiating with the
director, two other options are mentioned by the respondent. The first is asking the
crew to work overtime. The second is to call in the producer. “When the director says
“I will not negotiate anymore, I must have this scene”, that is when I bring in the
34
producer” (First assistant director B). In this case, it is up to the first assistant director
again to explain the problem and point out to the producer where the director could
accelerate or simplify. Usually this result in a discussion between producer and
director and subsequently the producer makes the final decision. He or she decides
whether a scene is deleted based on its added value to the film. It is important to most
respondents that producers act decisively. “I can bang the table and shout that we have
to be finished at six o’clock but if the producer does not do the same; the director will
think that he is able to continue the shooting anyway, so then you are in a very weak
position” (First assistant director M).
4.4 Relationship first assistant director and producer
4.4.1 Responsibilities and expectations
Following from the interviews, there are four responsibilities that a first assistant
director has towards a producer. To finish on time and stick to the budget is the most
important one. A planning is made and the producer wants the first assistant director
to meet this planning and deal with time as efficiently as possible. “I have to make
sure that we uphold the limits of time and budget and create as much as production
value as possible (…) if we have fifty extras, then he [the producer] wants to see those
fifty extras in the shot” (First assistant director G). Furthermore, the producer needs to
be warned when certain aspects of production become too expensive. “You are
supposed to keep an eye on his wallet, you are not allowed to waste any money on
set” (First assistant director N). A second responsibility is communicating to all
departments and actors. Everyone needs to be informed what has to be done. This also
includes keeping the producer posted on the progression made. In the third place, the
first assistant director is responsible for creating a pleasant atmosphere on set.
Humour, keeping the director happy and making people feel appreciated are important
aspects of this responsibility. “It is a business where people perform better when they
feel good. So I think that is a responsibility of the first assistant director as well:
create the circumstances for people to feel good” (First assistant director C). To make
sure that the crew behaves itself when outdoor shootings take place, is a fourth
responsibility mentioned by only one respondent. “I think you have to maintain a
certain reputation on the street. We have to behave ourselves instead of acting like a
bunch of rascals” (First assistant director N).
35
Producers themselves indicate that staying within the budget, meeting the planning
and communication indeed are very important. “those [first assistant directors] are key
individuals to me. They exert all control during production” (Producer S). One
producer however finds the completion of a production day in time not that important.
Another one mentions that “when someone exceeds the budget and ignores
everything, that does not mean that I will never work with him again” (Producer X).
Furthermore, some producers appreciate it when people perform their function
without bothering him or her too much. They state that filmmaking is complicated
enough even without all the conflicts and troubles. “When people keep on bothering
me with their problems, that is an important reason to never call these people in the
future again” (Producer C). Lastly, producers mention that they like it when people
behave themselves and think on behalf of the company.
4.4.2 Loyalty towards producer
As mentioned in paragraph 4.3.2, loyalty is generally not fixed. It mostly depends on
the project and the person. According to the respondents, their professional loyalty
should be fifty-fifty. In practice loyalty appears to be directed somewhat more
towards the director, however first assistant directors always reserve some loyalty for
the producer since limits of time and money are bared in mind. In some cases the
loyalty of the first assistant director mainly lies with the producer. This, for example,
occurs when the director is not a pleasant person. “If I work with a director whom I do
not like, of course I will not hinder him, but I will not help him either (…) then I am
on the side of production” (First assistant director E). In addition, loyalty may lie with
the producer when the producer is more inexperienced than the director. “In that case
my loyalty will be somewhat more directed to the producer because the director
already knows what to do” (First assistant director F). Furthermore, the producer can
count on more loyalty when the first assistant director thinks he or she is right. This
may happen in case the director is only focused on the creative side and does not take
the number of working hours into account. “It sometimes occurs that I support the
producer, for example when we are working overtime a few days in a row already
(…) so it depends on my personal opinion; whether I agree with the producer or not”
(First assistant director G). A few respondents mention that their loyalty is always
directed towards the producer, since he or she is the one that pays their salaries and
provides them with work.
36
The importance of a crew’s loyalty is addressed in the interviews with producers. A
number of producers indicate that they strongly need the loyalty of the crew in case he
or she needs them to put in extra effort. “It often happens that projects are stalled
because of rain and other climatic conditions, yet it is necessary to continue the
shooting. This can only be done when your crew is loyal” (Producer P).
According to the respondents, a producer is nice to work with when he or she
understands their situation and thinks along. It is appreciated when he or she does not
blame the first assistant director when a shooting is hindered because of bad weather.
“A pleasant producer is also someone who understand my function. It is enjoyable
when I can discuss about solutions with him” (First assistant director K). It is also
found to be important that the producer supports the decisions that are taken by the
first assistant director. “A clever producer is someone who knows how to delegate. He
pays me to do my job, so he should let me perform my job” (First assistant director
H). Again, the chemistry or a personal click is of importance as well. It makes it much
more easy to work with someone when there is a good connection.
4.4.3 Conflicts with producer
Three types of conflict between first assistant directors and producers can be
distinguished. A conflict addressed by all respondents is about the involvement in the
pre-production process. The essence of this problem is that first assistant directors are
not involved in the pre-production at all (that is when they are called opnameleiders)
or involved in the pre-production too late. It is mainly a question of money. The
planning is often made by someone from the production team who is on the payroll
anyway. However, by one respondent this is called “Penny-wise Pound foolish
thinking” (First assistant director H). The argument is that people from production do
not have the same expertise as the first assistant director. This results in an inefficient
planning, which could put the producer to expenses in the end. It could even cost him
or her more money, than the involvement of the first assistant director would have
cost. “Producers need to realize that we could actually bring in money by the expertise
we contribute” (First assistant director A). Furthermore, during pre-production “there
are ten people working, however, when things go wrong during production there are
forty people working and you [the producer] will lose in one day the amount
equivalent to what people in pre-production cost in a week” (First assistant director I).
Thus, eventually a bad bargain is dear at a farthing. One respondent explains that this
37
could be due to the fact that it is hard for producers to estimate what it brings them
when they provide the first assistant director with extra preparation time. The
respondents point out many advantages that are associated with their involvement in
the pre-production. The pre-production is the time to make a planning that is as
efficient as possible with regards to time and costs and discuss it with producer and
director. Subsequently, first assistant directors are more able to work efficiently
during production, distinguish what is and is not important, make decisions more
quickly, anticipate and answer questions of the crew. Especially the first assistant
director should be aware of everything, since he or she is the contact point on set. “A
film is made in the pre-production, during production it is only recorded” (First
assistant director M). It is indicated that the needed preparation time equals half of the
production time. When the first assistant has not had enough time to prepare the film,
too much time is spend on solving problems and handling unexpected situations on
set. “This keeps you from doing the things that you are actually supposed to do” (First
assistant director L). In addition, they do not know why things are planned the way
they are and constantly have to keep up with the facts. Only one advantage is
mentioned as a result of not being involved in the pre-production: responsibility can
be pushed off to someone else.
The second conflict is about assistants. First assistant directors want to be able
to choose their own assistant(s), while producers often do not allow them so.
Producers want to save money on assistants, therefore they usually pick those
assistants who are inexperienced and therefore cheap. However, the second and third
assistant are said to be very important to most respondents. A good assistant is said to
be complementary because he or she is needed to win time, helps to anticipate and
prepare and is able to think along. “I think that a good assistant is the oil of the set”
(First assistant director C).
The third conflict is related to the in time completion of a production day, for
it frequently occurs that a day’s planning is not met. Normally a production day
consists of ten working hours, however working overtime is not unusual. “You rather
finish ten minutes too late than ten minutes too early. If you finish ten minutes too
early, the director will tell you to shoot another take” (First assistant director M). The
problem is that the first assistant director often gets blamed by the producer for the
overtime, while he or she is not able to control everything on set. “As an
opnameleider you would like to say to everything is under control, but you know that
38
is not true. For you are dependent on the director, the circumstances and the facilities
that are provided to you by the producer” (First assistant director N). Little causes,
like a broken camera, a tensed actor or two extras who are a few minutes late, could
easily result in an hour delay. “You are as strong as you weakest link” (First assistant
director I). The respondents indicate that producers tell them to move faster all the
time, but they do not advise them how. Most respondents declare to look at home
when they made a mistake themselves, but they also feel that producers need to
realize that not everything is the fault of the first assistant director. Sometimes
overtime is owing to departments that only try to save their one’s skin and sometimes
it is owing to producers themselves, who have not provide the first assistant director
with the right means needed to meet the planning or have not given them the
opportunity to elaborate on the functioning of the crew.
Like conflicts with the director, conflicts with the producers are mainly solved
by negotiation. When a problem presents itself, respondents report this to the
producer. It is important to communicate what causes the overtime and at what point
this can be corrected. Then possible solution are discussed. The first assistant director
usually proposes ways in which things can be made more simple or more cheap. This
often includes changing the script, skipping locations and/or using less means. “You
describe some scenarios to him and you put him to the choice. An adequate reaction
to this is very important” (First assistant director J). The duration of the discussion is
dependent on the producer. Some will immediately follow the judgement of the first
assistant director, while some will push their own opinion. Anyhow, the final decision
is made by the producer. Sometimes, a conflict is solved by asking the crew to work
overtime, which is mostly done by the first assistant director. When a first assistant
director is loyal towards the producer, he or she is more willing to do this, unless it is
unreasonable to ask the crew to work overtime again. In that case they tell producers
to approach the crew themselves. One respondent mentions that it is important to
request the crew to work overtime as soon as possible, preferably a few days before.
“If working overtime is necessary I will ask the crew if they want to do it. I will not
suddenly shout that the crew must continue to work until midnight. That is something
I do not support. In case they do not want to, it is the producer’s problem (…) it is
better to have people complaining two days before than standing on set without any
crewmembers” (First assistant director H). Respondents mention that directors
generally do not interfere in conflicts between the producer and first assistant director.
39
In rare cases the director protects the first assistant director by telling the producer
that something is not his or her fault. The lack of involvement of the director in
conflicts between producer and first assistant director can possibly be explained by
the ultimate responsibility of the producer; given that the producer is the one who
makes the final decision there is no need for the director to intervene, yet when the
director and first assistant director clash it may be necessary for the producer to cut
the knot.
4.5 Performing the middle role
4.5.1 Successful performance of role
From the interviews can be derived that the respondents feel to have successfully
performed their role when they were able to keep the producer happy, the director
happy and the crew happy. This is done by fulfilling all their responsibilities as good
as possible. “My job is to let people function in such a way that they rise above
themselves (…) you want everyone to feel happy, to do their work with pleasure and
with the higher purpose in mind: making a beautiful film” (First assistant director D).
Respondents indicate that it takes time to perform their role successfully.
“When you are young and still have so much to learn, you are more insecure”(First
assistant director B). By one respondent, the first time on set is described as
overwhelming because so much departments are involved that all have their own
wishes. “My first job was a big one, a series of 150 days. This did not go well at once,
because you do not know what you are doing, why you are doing it and how you are
doing it. You have no clue where you are and what is expected from you” (First
assistant director F). Over time, respondents mention to understand the process of film
making much better. For them this has resulted in being able to make better
judgements, communicate better and motivate people better. Also, they have learned
to demand for more preparation time. Moreover, some respondents mention to have
become better in dealing with conflicts and stress. Nowadays they are able to stay
more relaxed, relativize more and be more flexible. In addition, they learned not to let
someone run them over. “You develop a thicker skin and learn how to balance things
better. You grow in your position” (First assistant director M).
40
4.5.2 Role ambiguity
To the question to what extent the respondents know what is expected from them
before the beginning of the project, most respondents answer that they do know what
is expected from them. It is not like expectations are documented or explicitly
mentioned, rather each first assistant director performs his or her role in a certain way
and when they are approached, they know that producers or directors want them to
perform their role in that particular way. “I know what is expected of me very well.
That is why they call me” (First assistant director I). For example, a producer may
either look for a squaller or for a more modest first assistant director. Respondents
that indicate not to know what is expected from them in advance, do state that this
becomes clear within one or two days. For one thing, because of conversations with
the producer and/or director. “The conversations show what it is that he wants from
you exactly (…) from such a conversation, you have to find out which position you
hold” (First assistant director N). On the other hand, because of the corrections made
by colleagues. “In course of time everyone knows what to do and what not to do. I do
not know how this works exactly, but I do know that an opnameleider plays a part in
this too. I tell people what I expect from them as a result of which they probably will
change their behaviour, and other people do the same” (First assistant director N).
As a second aspect of role ambiguity, several respondents indicate to be
uncertain about the authority they possess. This is expressed in three ways. First, the
first assistant director is said to be the manager on set, although they neither have the
authority to make financial decisions nor the authority to make creative decisions. It is
expected from them to think along and advice the producer or director, but it is not
appreciated when they express their opinion whole day long. “Producers and director
often say: during production he is the boss. This does not mean that I am in charge of
the cash, nor does it mean that I am in charge of the content (…) nonetheless, I still
intervene because I have to” (First assistant director H). In addition, the first assistant
director is said to carry overall responsibility for the planning, but they are often not
given the opportunity to be involved in the pre-production. “That is a strange thing
about our profession; you are the boss of the script, you must take care of everything,
but you are not given the time to witness the whole process” (First assistant director
M). Thirdly, the first assistant director is the central figure on set and is supposed to
manage the staff, but he or she is not given the opportunity to hire, evaluate or fire the
41
crewmembers. “As a first assistant director you are the store manager, but you did not
hire the personnel” (First assistant director M).
The third aspect of role ambiguity includes the lack of evaluation and
assessment. According to the respondents, they almost never receive an assessment of
their functioning. This affects role ambiguity since the first assistant director is not
given the information that would be useful in order for him or her to adjust
performance to the wishes of the supervisor: the producer and/or director. Two
respondents argue that the lack of evaluation and assessment stems from the project-
based character of the industry. “It has to do with the project-based character of the
work, the high amount of time-pressure and the fact that everybody is gone after the
last day of shooting. After all, it is a temporary organisation” (First assistant director
A). Respondents do indicate that some form of assessment can be derived from being
asked to participate in another project. On the basis of the first assistant director’s
personal and professional qualities, producer and director decide whether they want to
work with him or her again. “I am said to be good or not good, that is why they will
call me again or will not call me again” (First assistant director E). Another
respondents remarks: “you are as good as your last job” (First assistant director F). It
also occurs, however, that a first assistant director is never approached by a certain
producer again, without them knowing why. In addition, most respondents say to be
evaluated during a project, by the producer, director or crew. “You will notice
whether something is going well. That becomes clear very rapidly. If you are shooting
and things are not going well, then immediately a producer will come to you saying
that you are too slow” (First assistant director B). Also, respondents indicate to be
evaluated by the crew when they are not leading by example or do not provide
crewmembers with the right information. Plus, when too many mistakes are made the
first assistant director gets fired. In contrast, when a film gets awarded “you will hear
nothing from no one” (First assistant director C) however bad production may have
been. The lack of evaluation and assessment is said to be regretted since this could
decrease role ambiguity and increase team performance and even the performance of
the whole film industry.
A negative effect of role ambiguity, mentioned by some respondents, is that
they miss the opportunity to grow. Sometimes it is good to hear what went wrong and
what went well in order to be able to correct yourself. “I definitely feel like I am not
developing” (First assistant director M). Another respondent was starting to doubt
42
himself, as a result of not knowing why he got fired. “At that time we did not even
discussed that things were not going well. If he [director] had told me that things were
not going too well, I could have done something about it” (First assistant director K).
A second negative effect is that it takes time to clear up the ambiguity. “You must
chat a lot, talk a lot and write emails a lot in order to get things clear and tell people
what you are doing and which consequences are linked to certain decisions” (First
assistant director J). A third negative effects is that, without assessment, you overlook
the opportunity to motivate each other. A positive assessment during production, like
giving someone a pat on the back, could motivate him or her to keep up the good
work.
However, also one positive effects of role ambiguity is mentioned, which
includes that there are no rules or agreements to comply with. This increases the
freedom of the first assistant director to act, meaning that the first assistant director is
able to decide how to fulfil his or her own role to a large extent. It might also occur
that mistakes are not noticed because of the lack of rules, which could be beneficial to
the first assistant director.
One respondent denies the need for an evaluation. The respondent says that an
evaluation is unnecessary, because “you do not even have the time to change your
behaviour because the team is together for only a short period of time” (First assistant
director I).
4.5.3 Role conflict
Every respondents points out to be confronted with conflicting expectations. On the
one hand, the first assistant directors has to make sure that the shooting is completed
within the time and budget specified. On the other hand, the first assistant director has
to provide the director with the material that he or she needs in order to make the
desired film. It is a role that is said not to be easy. “You always have two faces. You
are constantly compromising. You are never able to fully support your director
because you know you are there to represent the interest of the producer too” (First
assistant director A). As a first assistant director, you must meet your responsibilities
towards the producer and meet your responsibility towards the director, which “are by
definition incompatible with each other” (First assistant director D). The same
respondent remarks: “It is a political game, during which you must navigate between
the wishes of the director and the opportunities that are provided to you by the
43
producer. You are the glue and the bumper between two superpowers” (First assistant
director D). It also happens that the producer or director requests for something that
the first assistant director does not agree or has difficulty with. According to one
respondent, it will cost you work when you are not able to find the right balance
between time and creativity. “An executive producer would like it when I pay
attention to time but the moment he discusses with the director which first assistant
director to select for the next project, the director is likely to say that he prefers
someone else because he thinks I am too strict” (First assistant director M).
Some respondents note that the experienced role conflict negatively influences
their performance, physically as well as mentally. “If I have to work under huge
amounts of pressure qua time and the amount of work, this could injure my
performance because I get more and more tired” (First assistant director E). One
concrete negative effect of role conflict is that it is said to resolve one’s focus. “It may
happen that a discussion takes places at which someone blames you for something or
heaps abuse on you, as a result of which you are dreadfully cut up by it and focused
on yourself instead of on the things you are supposed to do as a professional” (First
assistant director J). Another negative effect is that it may demotivate someone if he
or she is hardly ever able to meet the expectations of someone, without falling short in
meeting the expectations of the other.
On the contrary, other respondents emphasize a positive effect of role conflict:
it keeps you alert and stimulates the team to constantly perform at the top of its
ability. “It ensures you to keep sharp, to constantly deal with new challenges, and
constantly consider creative solutions which eventually benefit the quality of the
project” (First assistant director A).
In spite of negative and positive effects of role conflict, rather many
respondents indicate that the role conflict does not affect them much. Four arguments
for this can be deducted from the interviews. For one the thing, conflict does not
bother them much since “a job never lasts longer than a few weeks” (First assistant
director D). Second of all, conflict is seen as a part of the game. “It is part of the job,
as an opnameleider you are aware of this and you learn to deal with it” (First assistant
director K). Another respondent mentions that “you are able to choose whether to
participate. It is also possible to choose not to participate and find another job” (First
assistant director I). Thirdly, two respondents indicate that conflict does not bother
them much because they are able to separate their work life from their private life.
44
One of these respondents remarks that you should never perceive it to be a personal
struggle, but think of it like “a carpenter who builds a wooden case. It is a thing that
must be completed in a set amount of days and then you deliver it and you are done. It
is just a job, nothing less” (First assistant director I). The fourth arguments includes
that some respondents deliberately choose to perform a role that is associated with
conflict. On the one hand, since it is a role that suites them. “Somehow it is in your
character to look for such a position” (First assistant director N). On the other hand,
since they enjoy the rush that is associated with the conflict. When they get something
done, it provides them with a lot of satisfaction. “You only have the opportunity to
enjoy the most appealing aspect of the function, the rush, in case there are conflicts
(…) it is fantastic when you manage to tackle the conflict” (First assistant director F).
4.5.4 Mediating role
A majority of the respondents indicates to perform a bridging role between the
interests of the producer on the one hand and the creative interests of the director on
the other hand. “I am a mediator, definitely” (First assistant director L). Most first
assistant directors perceived it to be their responsibility to intercede between director
and producer and to control the conflicts that take place between them. They are able
to perform this role precisely because they neither belong to the production
department, nor to the directing department. “I am like an isolated island, that is
obliged to hold everyone together and have everyone make compromises, in order to
ultimately obtain the best possible result” (First assistant director M).
The respondents explain to perform their mediating role mostly by discussing
with the producer on the one hand and the director on the other hand. The first
assistant director tries to think of creative solutions in order to bring together the
opposing tendencies. From the interviews can be concluded that is very important for
a first assistant director to anticipate and communicate. First, he or she clearly
explains the problem(s) to both the director and producer and describes the
consequences that are linked to certain decisions. “My role is a mediating and
communicating one, I have to impress a mirror upon them by, for example, telling
them that certain things will not work or are impossible” (First assistant director M).
Then, choices have to be made in order to continue the shooting in such a way that it
will be finished on time. This usually entails the deleting of scenes, the shortening of
scenes or the shooting of scenes in a different way. Of course, the accuracy of the
45
film’s story has to be kept in mind. “It is weighing up all the time (…) you are
constantly thinking creatively and practically in order to save money on the one hand
and to solve things creatively on the other hand. Mainly it is about thinking logically
yourself and solving practically” (First assistant director A). The first assistant
director tries to propose solutions that work for both the producer and director. “Then
you have to be able to bring forward solutions of how the same story can be told in
less time” (First assistant director J). In each discussion either the producer or the
director has to make a concession. One time the director is said to listen to the
producer, the other time the producer is said to listen to the director. This it said to
depend on the person, the direction of the loyalty of the first assistant director, and the
situation. It is up to the first assistant director to decide whether the producer or
director is right in the particular circumstances. In case a first assistant director is
more loyal to the director, he or she is most likely to give the director the benefit of
the doubt and the same applies to a first assistant director who is more loyal to the
producer. However, it is remarked to be important for a first assistant director to never
pick a side for the duration of the whole production. “You have to make sure that you
warrant your middle position, so that you are able to bow to the director one time and
bow to the producer the other time” (First assistant director F). In case major
problems arise, it may be necessary to have everyone gathered around the table to
brainstorm together about possible solutions and to get everyone on the same page.
Eventually, it is the producer who makes the final decision.
In addition, it is part of the middle for the first assistant director to be the
station of support where people can relieve their feelings. “For a director to say to
you: I hate it when the producer acts like that. Or the other way around, that the
producer tells you: listen, we have to figure out how to navigate the director in
another direction, because he has an enormous platform of demands to which we are
not able to obey to” (First assistant director B).
One respondent notices that a big advantage of the bridging role of the first
assistant director is that producer and director are able to proceed on equal terms. As
the first assistant director yet is the messenger of the bad news, they cannot accuse
one another for this. Therefore producer and director are able to talk to each other in a
normal, not argumentative, way. “That is important since they are the ones that
eventually have to come to an agreement” (First assistant director D).
46
5. Discussion and conclusion
In this final chapter, a summary of the research and results is provided as well as a
discussion and implications of the results. In addition, the limitations of this research
are described and recommendations are made for further research.
5.1 Summary of findings
In this qualitative study the role of the first assistant director is examined in managing
the relationship, and tension within that relationship, between the commercial
objectives of producers and the artistic objectives of directors in film production.
Empirical data is obtained by means of interviews.
The main task of the first assistant director is to execute and control the
planning during the production of a film. On set the first assistant director can be seen
as a manager or coordinator who leads up to all departments and handles the
communication. As the name suggests, the first assistant director is the director’s
assistant, although he or she is accountable to the producer as well.
The producer and director both carry responsibility for the commercial and
artistic success of the film. By the respondents their relationship is described as
‘tensed’, for the producer is mostly responsible for the commercial side and the
director is mostly responsible for the artistic side. Both parties want to protect and
pursue their own interests. Although the objectives of producer and director differ,
one requires the input of the other in order to complete the film. During production
the opposing interests often result in conflicts between producer and director, and in
conflicts between first assistant director and director or producer.
The first assistant director and director are in a close collaboration during the
production of the film. The first assistant director is responsible for keeping the
director focused and giving creative advise when necessary. Overall, the first assistant
director has to provide the director with the takes needed to tell the film’s story
adequately. Conflicts between director and first assistant director are mostly about
time; the director always wishes for more time than the planning allows.
The responsibilities of the first assistant director towards the producer include
meeting the planning in terms of time and budget, keeping all departments informed,
creating a pleasant atmosphere on set and controlling the behaviour of the crew when
47
shooting outside. Conflicts with the producer are about the involvement of the first
assistant director in the pre-production, the right of the first assistant director to
choose his or her own assistant and the causes of overtime during a production day.
Equal to conflicts with the director, conflicts with the producer are solved by
negotiation or requesting the crew to work overtime. However, while conflicts with
the director can be solved by calling in the producer, the director is hardly ever called
in to solve the conflict between first assistant director and producer.
Precisely because the first assistant director does not belong to either the
production or the directing department and is in charge of the daily supervision on set,
he or she is able to perform a mediating role between the commercial objectives of
producers on the one hand and the artistic objectives of directors on the other hand.
The first assistant director is the lever and the bumper between financial and creative
interests. He or she constantly tries to bring together the opposing tendencies by
discussion, negotiation, clear communication, inventive thinking and the proposition
of solutions.
5.2 Discussion of findings
For a start, the word conflict is often used in the literature on cultural organizations to
describe the art and commerce problem. The word is used in this thesis as well, as it
immediately clarifies the mutual relationships. However, following from the
interviews with first assistant director as well as producers and directors, it has to be
remarked that the word conflict seems excessive. It is more like an on-going
discussion about choices that have to be made in order to continue the film’s shooting.
Compromises have to be made on both the artistic and commercial side. Conflicts as
described by Cohendet and Simon (2007), DeFillippi et al. (2007), Eikhof and
Haunschild (2007) and Glynn (2000), who all describe the art and commerce problem
in different cultural industries, are thus not necessarily perceived as conflicts by the
members of the cultural organizations.
In addition, the term dual leadership, used to describe the leadership
arrangement between producer and director as mentioned in paragraph 2.4.2, needs to
be revised. Authority indeed is split between the two managers, which indicates a dual
authority structure. Nevertheless, the producer and director are not exactly placed on
the same horizontal level, since the producer is said to be the one who is ultimately
responsible. In case the director or the crew do not perform well, the producers has the
48
means available to him or her to signal this and correct performance where necessary.
Thus, although dual authority is present, dual leadership is not according to the
definition of De Voogt and Hommes (n.d.), which states that dual leaders have equal
rank. Co-leadership, whereby leaders are in a different hierarchical position but share
the leadership in practice (De Voogt & Hommes, n.d.), seems to be a better
description of the relationship between producer and director. Still, leadership
structures in cultural organizations are often described as dual leadership (see De
Voogt, 2006 and Reid & Karambayya, 2009). Although this term possibly suits
leadership arrangements in other cultural organizations, like theatres or orchestras, the
term should not be copied unthinkingly.
The support, found in this thesis, for the mediating role of the first assistant
director is in accordance with Galbraith (1974) and Reid and Karambayya (2009),
who propose that a mediating role could equalize power and increase the joint
decision making process. The first assistant director indeed proves to be valuable in
upholding the delicate balance between art and commerce in the film industry. Given
this finding it is remarkable that theory on mediating roles is limited. More research
should be conducted in this field, since mediating roles may prove to be valuable for
other organizational structures and shared leadership structures, like dual leadership
and co-leadership, as well.
As dual authority, multiple objectives and functional interdependence are
found to be present in the film industry, conditions are in place for the first assistant
director to experience role ambiguity and role conflict. First, since formal role
descriptions and formal performance interviews are lacking in the film industry, the
first assistant director experiences role ambiguity. In addition, where in traditional
organizational structures authority equals responsibility (Sy & D’Annunzio, 2005),
this is not applicable to the project-based organizations of the film industry. The first
assistant director is responsible for the management on set, but he or she does not
possess the authority to make decisions accordingly. Second, role conflict arises, since
the expectations projected on the first assistant director by the producer are
inconsistent with the expectations projected on the first assistant director by the
director. The producer wants the first assistant director to watch over the schedule and
budget, while this inevitability means that the first assistant director is not able to
comply to the wishes of the director, who wants to shoot as many takes as possible.
Role conflict is thus embedded within the role of the first assistant director.
49
Although before mentioned findings on role conflict and ambiguity are in accordance
with role theory as mentioned in paragraph 2.2, perceptions of role ambiguity and role
conflict are quite different among the respondents. Some respondents indicate to
know exactly what performance is expected and do not have a problem with the lack
of evaluation and assessment, yet others do not know what performance is expected
and feel like the lack of evaluation and assessment slows down their opportunity to
grow. In addition, some respondents indicate to experience role conflict as a result of
being in the middle, yet others do not. Role theory should therefore consider that role
conflict and role ambiguity do not necessarily arise when conditions for role conflict
and ambiguity are present.
The differences in perception of the respondents can possibly be explained by
job tenure (Rizzo et al., 1970); the longer one performs a job, the more information he
or she is likely to have obtained and the more time he or she has had to adjust to and
deal with the job effectively. This is confirmed by respondents who have remarked
that over time they have learned to deal with conflict and stress, and understand the
process of film making much better. Like Faulkner (1983) states, people in the film
industry learn to survive in an environment full of dual interests. Another explanation
is that first assistant directors that were not able to deal with the experienced role
conflict and ambiguity, probably went looking for another job. Differences in
education may be of influence too, although educational level is only found to be very
weakly correlated to role conflict and ambiguity (Dimaggio & Sternberg, 1985;
Morris et al., 1979). A useful supplement to this research would be to examine
quantitatively whether first assistant directors experience role conflict and role
ambiguity.
With regard to the negative effects of role conflict and ambiguity proposed by
the theory, no support or rejection can be established since this is not a quantitative
study. Still some remarks on the subject can be made. Role ambiguity appears to be
more important in determining team effectiveness than role conflict, like mentioned
by House et al. (1972). According to the respondents team effectiveness and
individual performance could be increased when evaluations and assessments would
take place. Moreover, the role of the first assistant director appears to be much more
effective when he or she would be given more authority. In contrast, a decrease in role
conflict does not seems to increase the performance of the team or the first assistant
director considerably. Even though role conflict delivers stress to the first assistant
50
director, it is said to produce some positive effects as well. It is said to keep them alert
and stimulated to constantly think about creative solutions to the challenges opposed
on them. Also, the rush associated with dealing with the conflict is mentioned as a
positive effect. While respondents implicitly indicate that they would prefer a
decrease in role ambiguity, role conflict thus seems to be more accepted. This may be
due to the temporary character of the project-based organization (Lundin &
Söderholm, 1995), the fact that some individuals are able to not let work affect them
personally (Faulkner, 1983) and the willingness of people working in the cultural
industries to take for granted some negative side effects, like lower wages and
uncertainty, because of the attractiveness of cultural occupations (Menger, 1999).
This thesis thus confirms the findings of Pondy (1976) that conflict is not
necessarily a bad thing. Tension in the relationship between producer and director can
be healthy since it may bring out the best of both worlds, and for the first assistant
director role conflict at some level is required to master and/or extend his or her skills,
like stated by Tarrant and Sabo (2010). Therefore, the goal should not be to eliminate
(role) conflict all together.
5.3 Implications
There are several implications for practice that follow from this study. At first,
implications for the film industry are discussed. As other cultural organizations
struggle with problems of art and commerce too, and dynamics between artistic
directors and business directors are similar to those between producers and directors,
some of the following implications may be applicable to the broader cultural
industries as well. Subsequently, implications for matrix organizations and shared
leadership structured are discussed.
First, it seems that the more role ambiguity can be decreased, the better the
first assistant director is able to perform his or job and with that, the mediating role.
The film industry should thus look for ways to decrease role ambiguity so that project
participants are given more opportunity to grow. This could be done by providing the
first assistant director with more authority so that he or she is able to make more
autonomous decisions. This is in accordance with the vision of Sy and D’Annunzio
(2005) who state that authority should be decentralized to those who have the most
accurate information, and with Morris et al. (1979) and Schuler (1979) who find that
providing individuals with a larger voice in decisions affecting their role is likely to
51
decrease uncertainty about their roles. In addition, role ambiguity could be decreased
by incorporating evaluation and assessment in the project-based organizations of the
film industry. This will not only benefit team performance, but presumably the whole
industry.
Second, it turns out to be of great importance for producers to involve the first
assistant director in the pre-production process. Preferably, the first assistant director
should be given the time to make the planning, that equals half of the production time.
Eventually this is in the benefit of the producer too, since less time and money have to
be spend on correcting mistakes resulting from an insufficient planning. To prevent
even more problems the amount of production days should be adjusted to the planning
made by the first assistant director. To discuss about these things and decrease the
number of conflicts between first assistant director and producer, it would be useful
for the branch organizations of both professional groups to gather in order to make
clear agreements and formulate some guidelines. It is also useful to discuss about
areas of responsibility, communication processes and overtime.
Thirdly, although this is highly unusual in the film industry, it appears that
there would be much less conflict on set when the budget would be based on the script
and the director’s vision of the film. Nowadays it is not assessed whether the script
can be produced with the available budget. Producers should take a look at the script
first and then assess the amount of money that is needed to make the script. In case
there is only a maximum amount of money available, the script should be adjusted to
the budget.
Fourthly, proper team selection turns out to be very important. Factors such as
experience, communication skills and tolerance for ambiguity and conflict seem to be
crucial for project participants to possess, especially for the first assistant director.
Furthermore, like stated by Jones and Deckro (1993) and Galbraith (1974), for a first
assistant director to perform his mediating role, he or she should preferably be able to
deal with role stress effectively and be able to exercise power in the form of
persuasion and informal influences.
Fifthly, the findings of this research provide insights for the management of
role stress in matrix organizations and shared leadership structures. This research
highlights the importance of decentralization, communication processes, team
member selection and reflection on performance. In matrix structures role conflict and
role ambiguity is experienced by project members as a result of reporting to both the
52
functional manager and project manager. First of all, as much authority as possible
should be given to the project members so that they are able to make the decisions
that come with the job and so do not constantly have to ask for permission from the
project or functional manager. In addition, project members should receive clear job
descriptions and be involved in the project from the beginning, so that they clearly
know what is expected from them and are able to witness the whole process.
Furthermore, in the film industry people appear to be focused on solving problems
through persuasion and negotiation. These skills may be crucial for matrix
organizations as well, therefore they should be consider when assembling a project
team. At last, project members should be assessed on their performance and have the
opportunity to participate in the evaluation of the project.
Functional organizational structures and divisional organizational structures
are not considered to equally benefit from the findings, since in these structures the
principle of unity of command is not violated as a result of which no role conflict or
ambiguity is likely to arise.
5.4 Limitations and recommendations for future research
This empirical study has a number of limitations. Each limitation comes with one or
several recommendation(s) for future research.
First, only the Dutch film industry is examined. In other countries the film
industry may be organised differently, so caution needs to be exercised when
generalizing the findings of this research to international contexts. A few respondents
have reported, for example, that in other European countries the first assistant director
is always involved in pre-production and departments consist of more people.
Besides, roles may be valuated differently in other countries. In the Italian film
industry, for example, directors play the key role (Delmestri et al., 2005). It would be
interesting to examine the role of the first assistant director in countries where the film
industry is organization differently. International structures may even serve as an
example for the Dutch film industry.
Second, only the roles of the first assistant director, director and producer are
examined. Other roles may have an influence on the art and commerce problem too
and thereby affect the role of the first assistant director. For example, from the
interviews can be concluded that the camera man plays an important role on set since
he or she influences the planning, is able to bring forward solutions, and is partly
53
responsible for the look and feel of the film. Future research could examine which
roles contribute to the ability of the first assistant director to perform his or her role
successfully. In addition, it would be interesting to investigate whether other roles
have a mediating role as well and whether other roles experience role conflict and/or
role ambiguity as well. Another intriguing subject for future research on this subject
would be to study combined roles, like a director and producer in one or a first
assistant director and producer in one. Probably a combination of these roles results in
decisions being made more easily since less discussions need to take place.
Thirdly, no distinction is made between commercial and art house films. In
case a film is not meant to be commercially successful, priorities are probably placed
differently. This may affect the dynamics and number of conflicts during production
and thereby the role of the first assistant director. A field research could be conducted
whereby a first assistant director is observed during the production of a commercial
film on the one hand and during the production of an art house film on the other hand.
However, it should be kept in mind that it is not always clear in advance whether a
film belongs to the commercial genre or to the art house genre; an art house film may
turn out to be a blockbuster.
Fourthly, it is hard to draw general conclusions from this research, since every
film project is different as dynamics may change from team to team. Every
combination of people results in a unique chemistry, which affects the atmosphere on
set. In addition, some individuals are open to new ideas and the creation of balance,
while others are not (Delmestri et al., 2005). Also, ways to handle conflict differ from
producer to producer and director to director. Some producer, for example, are able to
combine business and creative aspects successfully, while others aggravate the
conflict (Faulkner, 1983). Lastly, every project comes with its own circumstances. A
month of bad weather will not advance the ability of the first assistant director to meet
the planning. For future research on this subject, it would be interesting to look into
personal characteristics which make it easier for a person to deal with role conflict
and role ambiguity, or which are useful in performing a mediating role. An
assessment of such characteristics may help individuals to determine whether the role
of first assistant director would suit them, and may prove to be useful for producers
when selecting the project participants. Moreover, it could be examined whether the
first assistant director experiences less role conflict when he or she is working with a
director and producer that are in a close relationship. It can namely be concluded from
54
the interviews with directors and producers that a close relationship between them
results in less conflicts and discussions. Art and commerce problems are then
internally solved, as a result of which less conflicting expectations are projected on
the first assistant director.
55
References
Baker, W. E. & Faulkner, R. R. (1991). Role as resource in the Hollywood film industry.The American Journal of Sociology, 97(2), 279-309.
Banks, M., Lovatt, A., O’Connor, J. & Raffo, C. (2000). Risk and trust in the cultural industries. Geoforum, 31(4), 453-464.
Biddle, B. J. (1986). Recent development in role theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 12, 67-92.
Bosch, F. A. J. V. d., Volberda, H. W. & Boer, M. d. (1999). Coevolution of firm absorptive capacity and knowledge environment: Organizational forms and combinative capabilities. Organization Science, 10(5), 551-568.
Butler, A. G. (1973). Project management: A study in organizational conflict. The Academy of Management Journal, 16(1), 84-101.
Caves, R. E. (2003). Contracts between art and commerce. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 17(2), 73-84.
Cohendet, P. & Simon, L. (2007). Playing across the playground: Paradoxes of knowledge creation in the videogame firm. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 28(5), 587-605.
De Voogt, A. (2006). Dual leadership as a problem-solving tool in arts organizations.International Journal of Arts Management, 9(1), 17-22.
De Voogt, A. & Hommes, K. (n.d.). The signature of leadership: artistic freedom in shared leadership practice. Retrieved from: http://aa.utpb.edu/media/leadership-journal-files/2007-archives/The%20Signature%20of%20Leadership.pdf, 7 juli 2011.
DeFillippi, R. J. & Arthur, M. B. (1998). Paradox in project- based enterprise: the case of film making. California Management Review, 40(2), 125-139.
DeFillippi, R., Grabher, G. & Jones, C. (2007). Introduction to paradoxes of creativity: managerial and organizational challenges in the cultural economy. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 28, 511-521.
Delmestri, G., Montanari, F. & Usai, A. (2005). Reputation and strength of ties in predicting commercial success and artistic merit of independents in the italian feature film industry. Journal of Management Studies, 42(5), 975-1002.
Dimaggio, P. & Stenberg, K. (1985). Why do some theatres innovate more than others? an empirical analysis. Poetics, 14(1-2), 107-122.
Ebbers, J. J. & Wijnberg, N. M. (2009). Latent organizations in the film industry: Contracts, rewards and resources. Human Relations, 62(7), 987-1009.
56
Eckman, E. (2006). Co-principals: Characteristics of dual leadership teams. Leadership and Policy in Shools, 5(2), 1-20.
Eikhof, D. R. & Haunschild, A. (2007). For art's sake! Artistic and economic logics in creative production. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 28, 523-538.
Faulkner, R. R. (1983). Music on demand: Composers and careers in the hollywood film industry. New Brunswick: Transaction Books.
Ferriani, S., Corrado, R. & Boschetti, C. (2005). Organizational learning under organizational impermanence: Collaborative ties in film project firms. Journal of Management and Governance, 9, 257-285.
Ford, R. C. & Randolph, W. A. (1992). Cross-functional structures: A review and integration of matrix organization and project management. Journal of Management, 18(2), 267-294.
Galbraith, J. R. (1974). Organization design: An information processing view.Interfaces, 4(3), 28-36.
Glynn, M. A. (2000). When cymbals become symbols: Conflict over organizational identity within a symphony orchestra. Organization Science, 11(3), 285-298.
Guba, E.G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries, Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 29 (2), 75-91.
Hobday, M. (2000). The project-based organisation: An ideal form for managing complex products and systems? Research Policy, 29(7-8), 871-893.
House, R. J. & Rizzo, J. R. (1972). Role conflict and ambiguity as critical variables in a model of organizational behaviour. Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 7(3), 467-505.
Jackson, S. E. & Schuler, R. S. (1985). A meta-analysis and conceptual critique of research on role ambiguity and role conflict in work settings. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 36(1), 16-78.
Jeffcutt, P. & Pratt, A. C. (2002). Managing creativity in the cultural industries.Creativity and Innovation Management, 11(4), 225-233.
Jones, R. E. & Deckro, R. F. (1993). The social psychology of project management conflict. European Journal of Operational Research, 64(2), 216-228.
Joyce, W. F. (1986). Matrix organization: A social experiment. The Academy of Management Journal, 29(3), 536-561.
Kahn, R. L., Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R. P. & Snoek, J. D. (1964). Organizational stress: Studies in role conflict and ambiguity. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Krijnen, H. G. (1979). The flexible firm. Long Range Planning, 12(2), 63-75.
57
Lampel, J., Lant, T. & Shamsie, J. (2000). Balancing act: Learning from organizing practices in cultural industries. Organization Science, 11(3), 263-269.
Lundin, R. A. & Söderholm, A. (1995). A theory of the temporary organization. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 11(4), 437-455.
Menger, P. (1999). Artistic labor markets and careers. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 541-574.
Mintzberg, H. (1980). Structure in 5's: A synthesis of the research on organization design. Management Science, 26(3), 322-341.
Morris, J. H., Steers, R. M. & Koch, J. L. (1979). Influence of organization structure on role conflict and ambiguity for three occupational groupings. The Academy of Management Journal, 22(1), 58-71.
Pondy, L. R. (1967). Organizational conflict: Concepts and models. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12(2), 296-320.
Reid, W. & Karambayya, R. (2009). Impact of dual executive leadership dynamics in creative organizations. Human Relations, 62(7), 1073-1112.
Rizzo, J. R., House, R. J. & Lirtzman, S. I. (1970). Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 15(2), 150-163.
Rogers, D. L. & Molnar, J. (1976). Organizational antecedents of role conflict and ambiguity in top-level administrators. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(4), 598-610.
Rogers, J. D., Clow, K. E. & Kash, T. J. (1994). Increasing job satisfaction of service personnel. Journal of Services Marketing, 8(1), 14-26.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students (5th edition). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Squire, J. E. (Ed.). (1986). The movie business book (1st ed.). New York: Simon & Schuster, Inc.
Sy, T. & D'Annunzio, L. S. (2005). Challenges and strategies of matrix organizations: Top-level and mid-level managers' perspectives. Human Resource Planning, 28, 39-48.
Sydow, J., Lindkvist, L. & DeFillippi, R. (2004). Project-based organizations, embeddedness and repositories of knowledge: Editorial. Organization Studies, 25(9), 1475-1489.
Tarrant, T. & Sabo, C. E. (2010). Role Conflict, Role Ambiguity, and Job Satisfaction in Nurse Executives. Nursing Administration Quarterly, 34(1), 72-82.
58
Thiry, M. & Deguire, M. (2007). Recent developments in project-based organisations.International Journal of Project Management, 25(7), 649-658.
Thompson, P., Jones, M. & Warhurst, C. (2007). From conception to consumption: Creativity and the missing managerial link. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 28(5), 625-640.
Tubre, T. C. & Collins, J. M. (2000). Jackson and schuler (1985) revisited: A meta-analysis of the relationships between role ambiguity, role conflict, and job performance. Journal of Management, 26(1), 155-169.
Whitley, R. (2006). Project-based firms: New organizational form or variations on a theme? Industrial and Corporate Change, 15(1), 77-99.
Wils, J. & Ziegelaar, A. (2005). Eindrapport: Sectoronderzoek film en televisie. Leiden: Federatie Filmbelangen.
59
Appendix: interview protocol
Dit interview heeft als doel inzicht te krijgen in carrières van opnameleiders in de Nederlandse film- en televisie industrie. Alle antwoorden die u geeft zullen vertrouwelijk
worden behandeld. Indien u er bezwaar op heeft dat er geluidopnamen worden gemaakt dan zal ik dat achterwege laten. De opname is echter niet bedoeld voor verspreiding of openbaring
maar puur voor het achteraf uitwerken van het interview.
Contactgegevens:Naam respondent:Woonplaats:Leeftijd:Geslacht:Datum:Interview locatie:
CARRIEREGEGEVENS
1. Wat is uw professionele status of arbeidspositie?
Freelancer / ZZPer(Mede-)oprichter(Mede-)eigenaarDirecteurWerknemer Anders, namelijk
2. Welke opleiding en richting heeft u gevolgd?
OpleidingRichting
3. (Indien van toepassing) Welk jaar bent u begonnen met deze opleiding en welke jaar bent u afgestudeerd?
BegonnenAfgestudeerd
4. In welk jaar bent u professioneel actief geworden in de film- en televisie industrie?
Jaar
5. Ziet u uzelf meer als opnameleider of First Assistant Director?
6. Welke betaalde functies heeft u gedurende uw carrière vervuld?
60
7. Hoe is de stap van assistent opnameleider (of een van de andere functies) naar opnameleider verlopen?
BELONING
8. Kunt u aangeven welke vorm van financiële beloning u doorgaans ontvangt en waarom juist deze vorm?
TOTSTANDKOMING VAN PROJECTEN
9. Kunt u aangeven door wie u doorgaans wordt benaderd om mee te werken aan een project en waarom juist door deze persoon?
PRE-PRODUCTIE
10. Kunt u omschrijven hoe het pre-productie proces verloopt en wie daarbij betrokken zijn?
11. Hoe zou u uw functie en de daarbij horende verantwoordelijkheden tijdens de pre-productie omschrijven, indien u hierbij betrokken bent?
12. Wat zijn de gevolgen van de mate van uw betrokkenheid in de pre-productie voor uw positie en uw functioneren op de set?
PRODUCTIE
13. Hoe zou u uw functie en de daarbij horende verantwoordelijkheden tijdens de productie omschrijven?
14. Wanneer heeft u uw functie tijdens de productie volgens uzelf succesvol vervuld?
15. In hoeverre weet u voor aanvang van het project wat er van u verwacht wordt tijdens de productie op de set?
61
16. In hoeverre ontvangt u een beoordeling van uw functioneren op de set en welke criteria worden hierbij gehanteerd?
17. Welke voor- en nadelen zijn er aan verbonden als deze criteria vooraf juist wel of juist niet expliciet worden gemaakt?
18. Wie is er in uw ogen de eindverantwoordelijke voor het slagen van het project?
19. Aan wie legt u direct verantwoording af?
SAMENWERKING
20. Kunt u aangeven welke andere functie(s) op de set het meest belangrijk voor u zijn om uw functie succesvol te kunnen vervullen? Waarom?
21. Kunt u aangeven met welke andere functie(s) op de set u, professioneel gezien, het meest botst? Waarom?
VERHOUDING OPNAMELEIDER EN REGISSEUR
22. Welke verantwoordelijkheden heeft u ten opzichte van de regisseur?
23. Kunt u aangeven hoeveel belang u hecht aan een vaste relatie met een regisseur en waarom?
Met een vaste relatie bedoelen we dat u bij voorkeur altijd met dezelfde persoon samenwerkt indien deze u voor een project benaderd.
24. Welke factoren spelen voor u een belangrijke rol in uw beslissing om in de toekomst opnieuw met een bepaalde regisseur samen te werken?
25. Welke van uw (persoonlijke of professionele) eigenschappen spelen volgens u een belangrijke rol voor regisseurs om juist u te willen hebben voor een project?
62
26. In hoeverre is er sprake van conflicten op de set tussen opnameleiders en regisseurs? Kunt u hier een voorbeeld van geven?
27. Kunt u aangeven hoe deze conflicten worden opgelost?
28. Kunt u een of meer voorbeelden geven van een situatie waarin de producent heeft moeten bemiddelen tussen u en de regisseur? Hoe vaak komt dit voor?
VERHOUDING OPNAMELEIDER EN PRODUCENT
29. Welke verantwoordelijkheden heeft u ten opzichte van de producent?
30. Kunt u aangeven hoeveel belang u hecht aan een vaste relatie met een producent en waarom?
Met een vaste relatie bedoelen we dat u bij voorkeur altijd met dezelfde persoon samenwerkt indien deze u voor een project benaderd.
31. Welke factoren spelen voor u een belangrijke rol in uw beslissing om in de toekomst opnieuw met een bepaalde producent samen te werken?
32. Welke van uw (persoonlijke of professionele) eigenschappen spelen volgens u een belangrijke rol voor producenten om juist u te willen hebben voor een project?
33. In hoeverre is er sprake van conflicten op de set tussen opnameleiders en producenten? Kunt u hier een voorbeeld van geven?
34. Kunt u aangeven hoe deze conflicten worden opgelost?
35. Kunt u een of meer voorbeelden geven van een situatie waarin de regisseur heeft moeten bemiddelen tussen u en de producent? Hoe vaak komt dit voor?
63
VERHOUDING REGISSEUR EN PRODUCENT
36. Hoe zou u de relatie tussen producent en regisseur omschrijven?
37. Welke knelpunten heeft u ervaren tussen de belangen van de regisseur en de belangen van de producent?
38. Kunt u een of meer voorbeelden geven van situaties waarin uw verantwoordelijkheden richting de producent moeilijk verenigbaar waren met uw verantwoordelijkheden richting de regisseur?
39. Kunt u een of meer voorbeelden geven van een situatie waarin u heeft moeten bemiddelen tussen de producent en de regisseur?
LOYALITEIT
40. In hoeverre ligt uw loyaliteit op de set in verhouding bij de producent of bij de regisseur?
Regisseur Producent%: %:
41. Hoe uit deze loyaliteit richting producent en/of regisseur zich?
42. In hoeverre is de mate van uw loyaliteit richting ofwel de producent ofwel de regisseur afhankelijk van het specifieke project?
PERSOONLIJKE ERVARING
43. Welke gevolgen hebben conflicten op de set voor het eindproduct volgens u?(positief dan wel negatief)
64
44. Welke gevolgen hebben conflicten op de set voor uw prestaties als opnameleider? (positief dan wel negatief)
45. In hoeverre hebben conflicten op de set invloed op u als persoon?
46. Waarom heeft u voor de functie van opnameleider gekozen?
47. Wat is het belangrijkste dat u geleerd heeft in uw loopbaan met betrekking tot het omgaan met conflicten op de filmset?
48. Wat vindt u de leukste aspecten en minst leuke aspecten aan uw functie?
49. Hoe zou u de huidige staat van de Nederlandse filmindustrie beschrijven?
50. Wat kan er volgens u verbeterd worden aan de organisatie van de Nederlandse filmindustrie?
TER AFSLUITING
51. Heeft u het gevoel dat ik vragen heb overgeslagen die u wel relevant acht voor dit onderwerp? Zo ja, welke?
HARTELIJK DANK VOOR UW MEDEWERKING!
![Mecánica de Fluídos [Smits]](https://img.pdfslide.net/doc/110x75/557212bf497959fc0b90d8f3/mecanica-de-fluidos-smits.jpg)
