Core Values of the Code

Both visible and invisible work are part of the agreement and compensation. 

An organization commissions an artistic performance for an agreed-upon fee. During the preparation process, it becomes clear that the collaboration also involves research, several meetings, rehearsals, travel, or documentation. Instead of automatically assuming that all these activities are included in the original fee, both parties clarify in advance the actual scope of work and what the fee covers. If the scope of work changes significantly, they adjust the terms of reference, schedule, or fee accordingly. 

We provide comparable conditions for comparable work and can explain any differences. 

Two people perform comparable work with comparable responsibilities for the organization, but their compensation differs significantly—for example, depending on the terms they were able to negotiate when they joined. The organization therefore continuously monitors pay disparities and establishes clear criteria for determining compensation. 

The institution examines who actually receives its calls for proposals and whom the criteria exclude. 

The organization finds that a similar group of people repeatedly applies to its open calls. Instead of concluding that others are uninterested, it examines where and how it publicizes opportunities, the language used to describe them, and the conditions for participation it sets. It considers whether certain groups are excluded by the very way the opportunities are advertised, the requirements, or the structure of the collaboration, and seeks ways to truly make job opportunities accessible to a broader range of people. 

When resources are scarce, the volume of work is adjusted—not, automatically, the conditions for the people involved. 

The organization has fewer resources and capacities for the coming period, yet it plans to maintain the same number of projects and outputs. Instead of automatically passing on the resource shortage to a higher workload, overtime, or lower pay, it will reassess the scope of the program. It may scale back, postpone, or modify certain activities so that the available financial, time, and human resources allow for high-quality work under dignified and long-term sustainable conditions. 

Once the goal and scope of the output have been agreed upon, the professional is given the freedom to follow their own professional or creative approach. 

The organization commissions the professional to create an artistic or professional output. At the start of the collaboration, both parties clarify the goal, scope, budget, deadline, responsibilities, and approval process. Within these agreed-upon parameters, the commissioning party respects the professional’s expertise and does not require ongoing oversight of every single step. If a problem arises or a major change is needed, both parties openly address it and work together to find a solution. 

The key terms of open calls for proposals and the decision-making process are known in advance. 

An organization issues an open call for proposals, in response to which applicants are expected to prepare their own proposals and invest time and effort. Therefore, even before applications are submitted, the organization publishes the key terms: what exactly is required, what the compensation or available budget is, the criteria by which proposals will be evaluated, who makes the selection decision, and when the results can be expected. This allows applicants to make an informed decision about whether they want to participate in the selection process and to understand how the decision-making process works.