Join the original • “R-E-S-P-E-C-T”
Many words have multiple definitions. The first definition of “respect” is admiration based on notable qualities. This is where paid-pros stop reading because the only quality that’s notable to them is a paycheck. In their mind, to which no one else has access, this alone entitles them to “respect,” which they conflate with admiration. They may come to a set (or any workplace) expecting to be shown “proper respect” from the start. They won’t say it aloud because they already know they’re “professionals” and assume it’s common knowledge. Again, since this flattering self-assessment of their reputation exists only in their minds, that assumption is often incorrect and usually reveals itself in their behavior.
Paid-pros typically prefer the company of servile flunkies and can usually be placated with shallow flattery. Of course, if recognizing suck-ups is part of their skill set, then such interactions are primarily one-sided. The paid-pro might enjoy the brief boost to their ego from all the “respect” they think they’re getting, but there’s no incentive to return such gestures.
Respect also suffers from the obstinate cliché that it has to be “earned.” This can be problematic when the paid-pro interacts with others in their field. If unaware of another’s work history—having no idea if a fellow crew member has been previously paid for their contributions—they may intentionally withhold “respect” until they’re satisfied that it’s been “earned.”
To paraphrase an observation made by one of the author’s colleagues, if someone is reasonably skilled in their local market, they may earn a reputation that keeps them working. They become the proverbial “big fish in the little pond.” This only becomes a problem if they assume their reputation will precede them when they “make it” into the broader industry. They may take offense at the lack of recognition when asked for their bona fides upon entering a larger market, potentially burning bridges that haven’t even been crossed. A little humility is all it takes to recognize an opportunity to use—and expand—one’s skills on wider-reaching endeavors that could broaden their experience and increase future employment opportunities.
Suppose they manage to avoid that pitfall and get hired. In that case, a paid-pro might wait a while before anyone realizes that they’ll only start acting nice after getting the “respect”—i.e., “admiration”—they think they’re entitled to just because they’re being paid to be there. The author, a dog owner, has noted that most animals that can be described as minimally sentient understand that praise only comes after demonstrating a desired behavior.
Unaware of—or indifferent to—this broader definition, paid-pros may believe others are not showing them sufficient respect and may even infer they’re being actively disrespected. In reality, they’re just upset because no one is expressing the admiration—let’s just call it what it is: “ass-kissing”—to which they feel entitled because the only qualifier in their mind is that they get paid for what they do.
In most work environments, it can be safely assumed that everyone is being paid. Employers and employees are generally too busy doing their jobs to express “admiration” for a coworker just because they decided to be present during their contracted hours. That’s just how employment works. Genuine admiration comes from how well one completes a required task, not just from taking up space on the company payroll. It’s also rarely expressed outside of specific contexts.
• What “respect” actually looks like
Consummate professionals show respect for their colleagues simply by being polite. It should go without saying that politeness should be reciprocal—and yet, here we are.
Many people don’t consciously think about “politeness” outside of formal social interactions. Even then, they may only consider an abbreviated checklist that includes “minding one’s manners,” always saying “please,” “thank you,” and “excuse me.” However, being polite isn’t just about basic etiquette—it’s not even about setiquette—encompassing much more than extending common courtesy. While what’s considered “polite” varies between cultures, filmmakers should be most concerned with how it applies to business culture.
As previously stated—and it’s only repeated because so many amateur filmmakers continually fail to grasp this fundamental tenet:
Whenever two or more people agree to engage in an activity to create something of value, such as an intellectual asset like a motion picture, they are—by definition—engaging in business. As such, what they choose to do with that asset is subject to the same applicable laws, regulations, and standards as any other business venture.
• Politeness is more than manners
In most social interactions, politeness typically means making those around them feel comfortable and using the right words to avoid offending others. The author asserts that taking “offense” is always a choice by those who feel offended. Not being offended isn’t always easy, but professionalism demands stringent emotional management, especially under intense pressure. In a business environment—where time is a commodity—the “right words” are the ones that communicate information most efficiently. The onus is on the individual receiving that information to process and deal with it rationally and in the best interests of everyone involved.
To offer a first-hand example of how a limited understanding of politeness can compromise productivity: In the early 2010s, while producing a television pilot, the author would write memos at the end of each shooting day discussing the production’s objectives and effectiveness at achieving them. In addition to recognizing excellence from the cast and crew in specific areas—and thanking them appropriately—points of inefficiency, breakdowns in communication, and logistical failures would be identified, and suggestions for improvements were recommended.
During a subsequent production meeting, another team member described the memos as “terse.” An accurate description and assessment of the author’s intent when writing them. However, that team member was using “terse” to criticize the language of those memos, incorrectly inferring a tone they felt was harsh and choosing to take offense. To be fair, many contemporary speakers of English use the word “terse” in that way. Regardless, its definition is simply “sparing in the use of words; abrupt.” Its etymological roots have also been described as “‘...polite’, hence ‘concise and to the point.’”
The memoranda were not written with harsh intent or to deliberately offend anyone. They were composed with a straightforward tone, conveying the author’s observations and recommendations efficiently and succinctly. Their purpose was to communicate factual information, not feelings. In other words, they were business memos, not fan mail.
| The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the authors and—especially where guest posts are concerned—do not necessarily reflect the official policies and/or practices of the Utah Filmmakers™ Association, its Officers and/or Associates. |