Soapbox Series: When the Answer is No (And What That Really Tells Us)
I’m back on my soapbox folks. It’s been a while.
I recently applied for a prominent leadership role in the Midlands cultural sector - a public appointment via DCMS.
I didn’t get shortlisted. No feedback, no conversation, just a quiet “no.”
Now, let me be really clear. This is not a plea for sympathy, or a request for pep talks about redirection or silver linings. It’s a reflection on what this kind of no actually means in our sector - and what it reveals about the deeper, often invisible power dynamics that shape who gets to lead.
I was ready.
With 19 years of experience across strategy, governance, fundraising and leadership, I came to the role with real breadth. I sit on regional boards, chair an NPO Steering Group, co-direct a trailblazing dance company, and regularly support organisations and artists across the Midlands to secure funding, develop strategy, and navigate change.
I’ve never chased status for the sake of it. But I do care about representation - and I want to see leadership that reflects the realities of freelance life, of regional diversity, of those of us doing the work differently. So yes, I put myself forward.
And I got nothing back.
What does that kind of silence mean?
When the answer is simply no, and no one tells you why, it’s rarely about capability. It’s more often about fit.
And “fit” is a loaded word in the culture sector. It can mean:
Will you conform to the tone we expect in decision-making rooms?
Do we already know your name through safe channels?
Will you challenge systems - or play the game?
Do you come with institutional backing - or do you stand alone?
The Hidden Power Dynamics
This experience crystallised something I’ve felt for a while: that many leadership roles in our sector are still governed by unspoken codes, informal networks, and a deep discomfort with disruption.
Here’s what I believe we need to name more boldly:
Networked Elitism
Leadership roles are often filled by quiet consensus among those already in the room. If your name isn’t circulating within those circles - or if you haven’t been “vouched for” by the right people - you’re less likely to be taken seriously.
Palatability Politics
If you’re visible, vocal, and unafraid to challenge the system publicly, you risk being seen as “too much.” Not because your analysis is wrong, but because your presence might make others uncomfortable.
Unwritten Rules
There’s still an unwritten belief that legitimacy comes from senior roles within major institutions. Freelancers, independents, and those working outside the traditional infrastructure are rarely afforded the same respect, even when our impact is demonstrable.
Strategic Silence
And when someone like me gets told no without feedback, it reinforces the idea that transparency isn’t required. That those outside the inner circle don’t deserve to know why they weren’t chosen.
So what excludes me?
Not a lack of experience.
Not a lack of skill.
Not a lack of regional understanding, policy awareness or cross-sector knowledge.
What likely excludes me is the fact that I:
Don’t perform deference
Speak publicly about structural failures
Work outside the safety net of major institutions
Prioritise lived experience over legacy positioning
Don’t soften my voice to make critique more palatable
This isn't unique to me.
I’m sharing this because I know I’m not the only one. So many brilliant, independent, values-led leaders are routinely passed over - precisely because we bring a different kind of energy. One that doesn’t centre tradition, hierarchy, or status, but instead asks better questions. Pushes for better systems. Makes space for better futures.
We need to talk about this.
We can’t build an equitable sector if we keep filling leadership roles through the same back channels. I say that before knowing who will get the role, we might be surprised if it is a freelancer?!
If feedback is only offered to those who already have status. If disruption is penalised and conformity is rewarded.
This wasn’t my moment - and that’s fine. But I won’t be quiet about why that is.
Because until we name these hidden dynamics, they will keep excluding people like me. and people like you - from leading the sector we help build every day.
Of course, I know that influence doesn’t always wear a badge.
A wise colleague reminded me recently that my influence already runs deep - through the clients I support, the peers I collaborate with, and the networks I help to grow. That these formal titles aren’t the only - or even the most meaningful - measure of impact. And I agree. But naming what excludes people like me from those spaces still matters. Not for personal validation, but because it points to something bigger: a system that quietly sidelines those who work independently, challenge politely held norms, or operate outside the legacy mould. Speaking about that isn’t about chasing power. It’s about using the power I already have - to say what too many others feel but stay silent about.
Shall we chat about this?
I’m hosting an open Zoom conversation to talk about this but also all the other challenges - so that we can talk about it yess, but also talk about solutions. The session is on Friday 18th July at 12:30-1:30pm.
Join Zoom Meeting
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84286474111?pwd=YonYHEHkWrztGpa0rTAaGCpjVohFFl.1
Meeting ID: 842 8647 4111
Passcode: 608492