No, I'm not talking about the controversial ditty by Robin
Thicke but rather how the lines are often blurred when it comes to
Top Creative Talent and their behaviour; more poignantly why it
seems that we often accept that these individuals behave
Take the recent Jeremy Clarkson 'fracas'. Clearly Top Talent for
the BBC and some would say he used up his 9 lives a long time ago
but even with the enormous revenue that arguably he brought in for
the BBC, this was a step too far even for him which he paid for
with the ultimate sacrifice. What was interesting was how this
divided people's opinion; some vehemently believed he should have
kept his job regardless of the fact he physically assaulted a
fellow employee, while for others it was simple: he had to go.
Also hitting the headlines last month was the case of the High
Court Judges who were dismissed for allegedly looking at
pornography on court computers. This was very clearly deemed as
wholly unacceptable but has not provoked the same kind of reaction
from joe public perhaps because of the position of authority they
Instances of unacceptable behaviour are increasingly becoming
more of an issue and is something that here in the creative
industry and particularly from a HR perspective really pushes our
moral compass. We often find ourselves being told "that's just how
creative people are" and "but they are responsible for over a
quarter of our revenue" but are they really justifiable reasons for
turning a blind eye?
Ultimately we should be viewing a breach of an organisation's
code of conduct or any unacceptable behaviour as potential gross
misconduct that may result in dismissal. For every "livewire"
constantly blurring the lines of acceptability, there are a
plethora of many more amazing people out there who don't. Food for
thought next time you find yourself having this kind of
conversation with the business.
Tania Allen, HR Consultant