First and foremost, no two arts organisations are the same. And why should they be? The length, breadth and depth of the arts, and more specifically, the dance world, is almost incomprehensible in the twenty-first-century, with new avenues to explore cropping up left, right and centre, filled with the new, the funny, the plain and the downright strange. Nevertheless, without two organisations advocating identical principles or sharing the same ethos, it is extremely difficult to compare the two across approaches, methodologies, procedures, attitudes, and a huge span of other values. Therefore, I write broadly, rather than pinpointing.

The most prominent power struggle to me is within a professional company. To achieve success as a company, one can presume that it takes sheer hard work and a vast team effort from all of those involved. However, once you delve deeper, it becomes clear that the rose tinted glasses have long been removed, resulting at worst in arrogance and highly-strung opinions. It is yet another topic that can be placed under the catch-22 category: the question of value. Who is more important within a professional company? The performers, who directly and ultimately deliver the goods to the eager audiences? Is it the team behind the scenes, creating all the publicity and directing the opportunities? To add a shot of controversy to the mix, it could even be the security team who come to unlock the doors in the morning to let everyone begin their work.

It is easy to forget sometimes that success must be shared by all those involved. For example, to witness a curtain call including the choreographer, the conductor, the wardrobe and dancers, all together as one triumphant team is a pleasure to observe in the acknowledgement of the array of talents involved. Despite this, it is understandable that audiences may live only for the performers and no more, failing to acknowledge the equating talent that has existed alongside the on-stage glory for months previously. Another concept: a dancer may have the most fantastic technique known to man, but this cannot be an applauded success without a backing team to promote their skill, manage their schedule and market their ability. This is not suggesting in any way that those dancers are ungrateful or forgetting their roots, it is simply a potential fly in the ointment of theatrical life. Equally, without performers, both media agencies and in-house marketing teams would receive considerably less work if there were no dancers to place on a metaphorical pedestal for the public paying to see their performances.

No matter how much academia is praised, without entertainment in our lives we would, firstly, not know any different, but secondly, suffer as unfulfilled beings brandishing torches for the arts that are denied. To be blunt, there are very different types of people in the world. If we were all the same, there would be no joie de vivre; none at all. Consequently, advocating the arts until the cows come home will not do any good either until a balance is maintained. A second power struggle, between academia and the arts, is beginning to emerge. A delicate balance must be achieved between all sectors: the instatement of the coalition government a few months ago and the cuts to arts funding highlight only too clearly how we cannot render anything more important or of more value than anything else. Who is to say that entertainment ranks lower than academia? It seems to merely be the instillation of a social stigma. Even within the arts sector alone, the cuts made by the Arts Council were a result of decision, preference and deliberation over who would get what, by subjective assessment criteria.

On a philosophical note, a success is arguably far greater the weaker the subject is, i.e. an individual conquering the world is far more impressive than a combined team of six large countries doing the same. However, the case of the arts I feel it is imperative to work as a team and acknowledge those around you as equally as beneficial to the cause at hand. Taking more into account will surely lead to a more informed and presumably more successful decision, taking the organisation – big or small – all the way to the big bucks.