I'm a freelancer, and I've been brought in on a part-time basis by an arts organisation for some years now where I've originated a really specific strand of work for them for a very complex audience, which was my suggestion and was a brand new, innovative area of practice and expertise. The organisation has won awards as a result of the work I've developed, and we're regularly fully booked, and the feedback remains insanely brilliant.
As a result of this work, this practice has become the core of what I offer as a freelancer and I am now regularly sought after by other organisations to develop something similar with and for them though using different models for delivery.
I love my original client very much. They are also close to home, they are my bread and butter each month when all other contracts vary hugely, so I need them as much as they need me...or so I thought.
They've approached me now to ask if I would train some other people to be able to do what I do. They would like a few short basic training sessions, then I design each project, and then these other people add capacity to the programme so I keep on delivering my bit but they come on board to offer more sessions. The organisation knows I have capacity to deliver more sessions and, much as I like the people they want me to train, they do not have the same level of skill and knowledge that I have and nor will I be able to transpose all that skill and knowledge through a few training sessions either - it would result in something very superficial, which, to me, isn't good enough. What I do is built around me, who I am, and my way of doing things, it may not work when handed over to others and I do not want something that is unique, working brilliantly, and that creates impact to become something mechanical and generic just so other people can add capacity. There is also no indication either that more sessions will actually be required, so I could go to all the effort of training people, developing new projects and teaching it all to new facilitators, but then little gets used. I would get paid for all the training, development, etc.
I feel really bruised by this, but I don't know if that's reasonable or rational (I'm neurodivergent and have RSD). It feels like the organisation thinks anyone can do what I can do, and that I should just be generous and lovely and hand it all over to others. I could use more income from more sessions, if I deliver more sessions then the integrity and quality of the programme is guaranteed and that matters to me, the audience, and I would have thought the organisation too. I get that it's lovely to develop other people, but by doing so I feel like I will be giving away the best bits of myself and my body of work.
I don't want to give an ultimatum and say no, if this is what you want to do, then I'm out and good luck with it as I've invested years of my life and passion into the project, but at the same time it would kill me to know that I have trained someone else to run a session based on all my creativity, skills, knowledge, and experience that they then get paid for and that I have no involvement with; the sessions will be coordinated and line managed by employed staff at the organisation so I won't get to see the work in action. If anyone can do what I do once I train them then what's the point in me being there any more?
I feel really stuck and stressed in trying to work out how to respond. AIBU?
Note: Any new freelancers brought in to deliver are paid the same as me, none of us have contracts as it's a rolling and ad hoc agreement, so there are no terms and conditions in place nor any financial hierarchy other than when someone else delivers my work, I don't get paid.