When Ed Catmull, co-founder of Pixar Animation Studios, started his career, he had one goal: Create films using computer-generated animation. At the time, all animation was done by hand, and the concept of using a computer to create characters was deemed nearly impossible. In fact, his early pitches of computer animation were rejected by major studios such as Disney.
Though he faced a multitude of challenges, Catmull persevered. He worked tirelessly to advance the technology of computer animation and, eventually, co-founded Pixar to marry his love of animation with his expertise in computer technology. Through the journey of Pixar’s creation, Catmull developed leadership strategies that fostered creativity in the workplace while ensuring the company remained profitable and successful. Before we explore Catmull’s leadership strategies and eight tools for maintaining a team’s creative spark, we’ll examine Catmull’s background and the decisions that led to the rise of Pixar.
Catmull graduated from the University of Utah (U of U) with undergraduate degrees in physics and computer science. During his time in U of U’s graduate program, he learned how to work with highly creative and highly intelligent people. His professors gave him and his colleagues the freedom and resources to create whatever they wanted. They created programs that were forerunners of Photoshop, Netscape, PDFs, and user interfaces.
After graduate school, Catmull took a job at the New York Institute of Technology (NYIT) under the direction of Alex Schure. Schure believed that computers were the way of the future and brought Catmull in to run a research lab dedicated to the computer animation process. While Catmull made significant advancements with the NYIT research lab, both Catmull and his close collaborator, Alvy Ray Smith, believed the innovations they discovered would mean nothing if they didn’t have creatives and filmmakers working alongside them.
They contacted studios such as Disney to promote their services and technology as the “next big thing.” However, these studios still didn’t see the value of computer animation and passed on their proposal.
Using technology in filmmaking wasn’t seen as important in Hollywood until 1977 with the release of an industry-changing blockbuster: George Lucas’ Star Wars. While Lucas’ studio, Lucasfilm, used a lot of practical effects, Lucas saw the ways computers could improve the filmmaking process and create stunning new worlds. In 1979, Lucas created a computer division at Lucasfilm and hired Catmull to run the department.
Catmull experienced some success, including the creation of a new computer called the Pixar Imaging Computer. However, in 1983, Lucas tried to sell Lucasfilms’ computer division (also known as “Pixar”) following a divorce in which he lost half of his assets. Unfortunately, most companies still didn’t see the value of computer animation.
This changed with Steve Jobs. In 1985, Catmull scored a meeting through a friend and showed Jobs the technology they had created. Though Catmull and Smith were uneasy at first, they eventually agreed to a deal: Jobs purchased Pixar for $5 million in February 1986, and the company “Pixar” was born.
At first, Pixar struggled financially and was torn between its identity as a computer company selling products and an animation studio producing films. Jobs had never marketed high-tech machines like the Pixar Imaging Computer, and neither Catmull nor his colleagues had ever run a company before. Catmull tried to better his managerial skills by reading books but found most of them to be shallow and useless.
Despite Catmull’s best efforts, Pixar was constantly in the red. Though they had a fair amount of success as an animation studio (their early films earned them two Academy Award nominations and one win), they only managed to sell 300 computers. These sales didn’t cover the cost of building and developing the hardware.
With this in mind, Catmull decided to stop selling hardware. The team was much more passionate about filmmaking, and removing the costs of creating hardware would save them significant amounts of money. The problem, however, was that they now had no source of significant income. The short films they were making may have garnered awards and praise, but they didn’t bring in box office money.
Though Pixar was struggling financially, their film work had gotten the attention of major studios, including the biggest name in animated films: Disney. They called the Pixar team in for a meeting at their headquarters in Burbank. They were primarily interested in the talents of Pixar’s John Lasseter, who had worked for Disney in the past, but, since he wouldn’t leave Pixar to return to Disney, Disney agreed to make a deal with the studio that led to the creation of their first feature film: Toy Story.
Toy Story was a critical and commercial success. Many on the Pixar team expressed pride in having created such an acclaimed and important piece of cinema. Catmull, however, didn’t share in this excitement. Though he was immensely happy with Toy Story and its reception, he had a new obstacle on his mind: maintaining momentum. Toy Story set the bar extremely high, and Catmull wanted Pixar to continue to meet and exceed expectations.
As Pixar solidified itself as a premier animation studio, Catmull discovered the keys that made his company stand out from the rest: promoting candor in the workplace, embracing failure, and protecting new ideas.
Candor is willingness to be forthright about issues, concerns, ideas, and anything else on your mind. Candor allows teams to get straightforward feedback to improve their final product. This helps employees find flaws that they may have been blind to and get suggestions to move forward.
To make employees feel comfortable sharing their opinions, develop a judgment-free environment that allows employees to speak up. At Pixar, Catmull used Braintrust Meetings, where members of Pixar sat down to watch reels and discuss issues with a project’s creative team.
To develop a respectful and comfortable feedback session, follow these tips:
Failure is essential to a creative workplace. Without it, you can’t discover or foster new ideas because innovation requires risk. If you don’t take risks, your final product will likely be unoriginal. However, failure is hard to embrace.
As a leader, you can take the stigma out of failure by admitting your own failures. Explain what you learned from them, and how you moved forward. This will help your employees embrace and learn from their own failures.
Failure has two parts: the failure itself and how you respond to it. If you learn from your mistakes, it can help you grow and develop. Taking the time to analyze why you failed allows you to avoid similar mistakes in the future.
While failure is a necessary element of creative success, consistent failure can destroy a project or organization. If a team doesn’t seem to be learning from their mistakes, you will eventually have to pull the plug on a project or remove the people who aren’t growing. If this happens, take the time to analyze why this project or person failed to learn from their mistakes. This will give you insight when it comes time to start a new project or hire a new team member.
When searching for a new concept to work with, it's easy to look for flaws that can lead you to abandon or dismiss a project. While critique and feedback are essential to growth, the best way to find a new project is to look for what makes it exciting instead of what makes it problematic. It can be risky to endorse an unproven idea, but, often, those are the projects that produce the best results.
When these new concepts are introduced, they’re often messy and incomplete. In this state, it’s easy to pass judgment on them then toss them aside. However, as a leader in a creative organization, it's your job to protect and nurture these concepts until they grow into fully-fledged creations. New ideas are risky and messy because of their originality, but that’s what gives them the potential to become spectacular.
In a creative company, you have to balance the need to innovate with the need to produce. There isn’t one clear-cut way to ensure balance in your organization. However, one rule-of-thumb may help: Don’t let one team or person get everything they want.
Each department in your organization wants different things. These “wants” sometimes conflict with one another but also help keep teams in check. If one team gets everything that they want, it throws the company out of balance. For example, if you're leading a film studio, giving the creative team everything they want may lead to a bloated and over-budget film that’s too niche to sell. On the other hand, giving the marketing team everything they want may lead to an unoriginal and predictable film that appeals to the lowest common denominator.
Catmull’s and Pixar’s successes also depended on a willingness to implement change, accept randomness, and find your blind spots. Many creative organizations fall into the trap of holding onto systems that worked in the past without understanding why they worked. They try to force a process onto a problem or concept, even if that process isn’t the most effective for the project at hand.
Change is necessary. The world is changing all of the time, and you have to adapt accordingly. Just because a process that you have has “worked before” doesn’t mean that it’s the best fit for new issues or projects. You have to introduce new ideas to meet the ever-changing needs of your organization.
However, people will fight back against change. They often want to stick with the things they’re comfortable with because it’s safe. However, stubbornness often doesn’t yield results and can even harm your company in the long run. Constantly look for ways to improve your systems to keep up with change.
People are afraid that enacting change makes them look weak or incompetent. This is because change is often associated with a “broken” or “ineffective” process or product. The people who built said processes or products don’t want to look incompetent and will often try to lobby for their work, even if that work isn’t effective.
The following are a few tips to help you alleviate the fear of change:
Often, success and failure are due to random events. They can’t be predicted and can come out of nowhere. This is not an easy concept to grapple with because our brains aren’t wired to accept randomness. We like to discover a cause and an effect, but random events don’t adhere to these patterns. For example, you could be the most well-prepared person in the world, but if your car breaks down while you’re on your way to an important meeting, things may go downhill by no fault of your own.
When dealing with random events, keep the following tips in mind:
Everyone has blind spots, or problematic areas they’re unaware of. Discovering these issues isn’t an easy task because these trouble areas exist outside of your current perspective. For example, if you’re in upper management at a manufacturing facility, you may not know about issues on the production line if you're not seeing them for yourself.
These blind spots can be the destruction of an organization. They can lead to unexpected meltdowns or poor short-term decisions. To avoid potential disaster, raise your awareness and constantly search for the “hidden” problems in your organization.
When you’re in a position of power, people tend to tell you what you want to hear. This deferential treatment can skew your perspective in dangerous ways. Consider the following tips to help you find and navigate your blind spots:
People’s perspective on the world often distorts what’s right in front of them. In regards to creativity, this limited perspective often leads to inflexibility. People become convinced that their perspective is the correct perspective, and they ignore new information that contradicts their view. When you get together a team of dozens or hundreds of people, this inflexibility can stall a creative process.
To ensure that your team doesn’t fall into this inflexibility, create opportunities for them to expand their worldview and interact with people who have different perspectives. The following are eight tools you can use to help your team maintain their creative spark and challenge their own perspectives:
When Ed Catmull, co-founder of Pixar Animation Studios, started his career, he had one goal: Create films using computer-generated animation. At the time, all animation was done by hand, and the concept of using a computer to create characters was deemed nearly impossible. In fact, his early pitches of computer animation were rejected by major studios such as Disney.
Though he faced a multitude of challenges, Catmull persevered. He worked tirelessly to advance the technology of computer animation and, eventually, co-founded Pixar to marry his love of animation with his expertise for computer technology. Through the journey of Pixar’s creation, Catmull developed leadership strategies that fostered creativity in the workplace while ensuring that the company remained profitable and successful. Any company that values creativity in the workplace can apply these principles and strategies.
In this summary, Parts 1 and 2 focus on the origins of Pixar, Parts 3, 4, and 5 break down Catmull’s principles, and Part 6 provides a case study that reveals the effectiveness of these concepts.
As a child, Catmull was fascinated with the work of two men: Walt Disney and Albert Einstein:
Catmull’s appreciation of these two iconic figures eventually led him down the path of computer animation. At first, he studied the animation stylings of Disney Animation Studios and tried to hone his skills. However, after studying the form for some time, he realized that he’d never been talented enough to work at Disney as a traditional animator. This sparked his desire to find an alternative way to create characters and build worlds (much like Einstein had tried to find different ways to approach challenging and unexplained topics).
Catmull graduated from the University of Utah (U of U) with undergraduate degrees in physics and computer science. When looking at graduate programs, he met Ivan Sutherland, a pioneer in computer graphics, who convinced Catmull to study the field under him at U of U. Catmull’s colleagues became some of the leading figures in the computer industry. In fact, their efforts at U of U created a resource called “ARPANET” that would eventually develop into the internet.
While in U of U’s graduate program he learned how to work with highly creative and highly intelligent people. His professors gave him and his colleagues the freedom and resources to create whatever they wanted. They created forerunners to Photoshop, Netscape, PDFs, and user interfaces.
After his time in graduate school, Catmull took a job at the New York Institute of Technology (NYIT) under the direction of Alex Schure. Schure believed computers were the way of the future and brought Catmull in to run a research lab dedicated to the computer animation process. Catmull began to assemble a team to work for him at the research lab. He had never been responsible for hiring and had to learn on his feet throughout the process. During his time with at NYIT, Catmull learned two valuable lessons:
While they made significant advancements with the NYIT research lab, both Catmull and Smith believed the innovations they discovered would mean nothing if they didn’t have creatives— people who work on the creative side of animation such as directors, animators, and modelers— working alongside them. They quietly reached out to studios such as Disney to promote their services and technology as the “next big thing.” However, these studios still didn’t see the value of computer animation and passed on their proposal.
Using technology in filmmaking wasn’t seen as important in Hollywood until 1977 with the release of an industry-changing blockbuster: Star Wars. While Lucas’s studio, Lucasfilm, used a lot of practical effects, Lucas saw the ways computers could improve the filmmaking process and create stunning new worlds. In 1979, Lucas created a computer division at Lucasfilm, his production studio, and hired Catmull to run the department.
While at Lucasfilm, Catmull gave a group of Disney animators a tour of their facilities and showed off some of their technology. One of the animators, John Lasseter, was fascinated by the innovations and told Catmull that he had an idea for a film. The film, which he was planning on pitching to Disney, was called The Brave Little Toaster and would require the use of computer animation. He asked Catmull if they’d be able to work together to make this happen, and Catmull agreed.
After being let go from Disney for being “too ambitious,” Lasseter ran into Catmull at a conference and asked if he could join Lucasfilm. Catmull agreed and was thrilled to have a true “storyteller” on their team.
During his time at Lucasfilm, Catmull learned two valuable lessons:
The Pixar Name
One of the first major issues Catmull’s department at Lucasfilm addressed was “blue-screen matting,” in which an image could be digitally layered onto another image to create the illusion of environment (for example, a biker in front of a blue-screen could be added to a clip of an earthquake ripping up a road, creating the image of the biker speeding away from impending danger). Historically, editors had to physically doctor the physical film frame by frame to create effects of this nature, but Catmull and Smith wanted to create a computer program that would speed up the process.
After four years of work, the department created the technology and named it the “Pixar Imaging Computer.” The name “Pixar” came from a combination of two pitched names: Pixer (a fake Spanish verb created by Smith meaning “to make pictures”) and Radar (which another associate thought sounded more high-tech). This name would go on to become the title of their division at Lucasfilm and, eventually, the name of the iconic animation studio.
In 1983, Lucas divorced his wife, Marcia. The divorce put Lucsasfilm in a precarious financial situation. Lucas decided to sell Pixar to save money and keep Lucasfilm afloat. He hired a management team to make the division more appealing to buyers by reducing the number of employees and marketing a profitable product. However, none of these tricks worked. Catmull and Smith refused to lay off any of their team members and most companies still didn’t see the value of computer animation.
This changed with Steve Jobs. In 1985, Jobs was the director of Apple Computer Inc. and wanted to develop products that would shape the future of technology. Catmull met with Jobs and showed him the technology they had created. Jobs, a notoriously assertive man, avoided small talk and asked big questions such as “What are your long-term goals?” and “What can your tech do that other tech can’t?” Though Catmull and Smith were a bit uneasy because of Jobs's forceful personality, they eventually agreed to the deal. After negotiations, Jobs purchased Pixar for $5 million in February 1986, and the company “Pixar” was born.
At the beginning of its life as an independent company, Pixar struggled financially and was torn between its identity as a computer company selling products and an animation studio producing films. Jobs had never marketed high-tech machines like the Pixar Imaging Computer, and neither Catmull nor his colleagues had ever run a company before. Catmull tried to better his managerial skills by reading books but found most of them to be shallow and useless.
In the beginning of its time as an organization, Pixar was just as focused on selling the Pixar Imaging Computer as it was on creating animated films. In an attempt to run the product division effectively, Catmull sought advice from his friends in Silicon Valley. Unfortunately, this advice turned out to be ineffective and, sometimes, actively hurt the company, and Catmull learned there are no simple answers to complex problems.
For example, when considering how he should price the Pixar Imaging Computer, he turned to the presidents of Sun and Silicon Graphics. They suggested that he start with a high number, arguing that it was easier to bring the price down than to raise it. However, when Catmull took their advice and asked for $122,000 per unit, they failed to move products. Even when they lowered the price, Pixar was stuck with the stigma of being “overpriced.”
As Catmull struggled with Pixar’s early growing pains, he turned to an unlikely source for inspiration: the Japanese manufacturing industry. Following WWII, the Japanese manufacturing industry was struggling as a result of a shattered economy. In contrast, American manufacturing was booming. For efficiency, assembly lines were used to create products, stopping only when management deemed it necessary. However, while this kept things moving, it caused a lot of problems with quality assurance and required a team of inspectors to watch for faulty products.
To boost their productivity, Japanese companies started adopting the American system with one key adjustment: The line could be stopped by any employee at any time. This created an environment where problems were addressed at the source rather than after the fact.
Before long, Japanese manufacturing productivity skyrocketed, surpassing many American companies. Catmull appreciated this model because it encouraged innovation and open communication. When building Pixar, he allowed all of his employees to address issues at any time, even if it meant pausing a project. It gave his employees a sense of ownership over the process and helped build effective practices.
Despite Catmull’s best efforts, Pixar was still in the red. Though they had a fair amount of success as an animation studio (their early films earned them two Academy Award nominations and one win), they only managed to sell 300 computers. The sales didn’t cover the cost of building and developing the hardware.
With this in mind, Catmull decided to stop selling hardware. The team was much more passionate about filmmaking, and removing the costs of creating hardware would save them significant amounts of money. The problem, however, was that they now had no source of significant income. The short films they were making may have garnered awards and praise, but they didn’t bring in box office money.
Between 1987-1991, tensions between Catmull and Jobs intensified. Jobs was frustrated with Catmull’s inability to produce a profit, and Catmull was tired of Jobs's demanding and pretentious attitude. Jobs, having sunk tens of millions into Pixar, tried to sell the animation studio three times. Generous offers came from Microsoft, Alias, and Silicon Graphics, but Jobs never took the sale. Catmull believes this was because the offers made Jobs see the value of Pixar. For example, if Microsoft was willing to offer $90 million, Pixar must have significant value.
Fortunately, Pixar’s shorts had gotten the attention of major studios including the biggest name in animated films: Disney. After back-and-forth negotiations, Pixar agreed to a three-picture deal with Disney and started work on their first feature film: Toy Story.
Toy Story was Lasseter’s brainchild. He assembled a team of creators and got to work on the film. Though there were some obstacles during the production process, the team created a stellar film that exceeded expectations. Toy Story smashed box office records and helped Pixar’s IPO raise almost $140 million for the company (the largest IPO of 1995). Pixar was on the rise and now had the funds to ensure its continued success.
Following the monumental success of Toy Story, many on the Pixar team expressed pride in having created such an acclaimed and important piece of cinema. Catmull, however, didn’t share in this excitement. Though he was immensely happy with Toy Story and its reception, he had a new obstacle on his mind: maintaining momentum. Toy Story set the bar extremely high, and Catmull wanted Pixar to continue to meet and exceed expectations.
Catmull realized he had missed some serious issues as Pixar began its next project: A Bug’s Life. Having put together a successful team for Toy Story, Catmull asked his creative teams and production managers from that project to return for A Bug’s Life. However, many of the production managers were hesitant about returning for another project. Unbeknownst to Catmull, the production managers had been treated poorly by the creatives.
In this context, creatives are people who work directly with the animation and filmmaking process (animators, directors, modelers, and so on). Production managers, on the other hand, are the people responsible for keeping a film on-time and on-budget. On Toy Story, many of the creatives believed that the production department constantly overstepped and tried to micromanage the process. This led to open resentment that created a rift between the creative and production departments.
Catmull was shocked at this revelation. He had maintained an open-door policy throughout the entire process of Toy Story, but no one had ever brought any issues to him. Members of his production team admitted that this was because they were used to being brought on for a single film, then moving on to a different project with a new company— a common practice in the entertainment industry. Because of this, the production managers figured that they’d just finish out the Toy Story process and be on their way. However, because Catmull was asking them to return and work with the same creatives who treated them poorly, the production team felt the need to voice their concerns.
When Catmull spoke with creatives about the relationship, they shared their perspective. To ensure that things were going through “proper channels,” production managers had required creatives to go through management to speak to one another. For example, an animator couldn’t just ask a modeler a question. They’d have to go through management first. The creative teams quickly became frustrated at this micromanagement and felt that the rules were getting in the way of the artistic process.
When addressing these issues, Catmull discovered two important principles:
Catmull removed the mandates that required creatives to go through management to speak with other creatives and encouraged open communication instead. While he insisted that managers needed to be brought into the loop eventually, he understood the importance of quickly exchanging ideas and information in the creative process. Catmull’s changes worked. By the time A Bug’s Life wrapped up post-production, the relationship between the creative and production teams was a positive one.
As Pixar started its journey, Catmull had to determine what the company’s guiding principles would be. Following the success of Toy Story, Catmull and his team adopted two principles they believed would lead to success: “Story is King” and “Trust the Process.”
But while these mottos were inspirational, Catmull soon discovered they fell apart when put to the test. This realization came following a near-disaster with one of Pixar’s films: Toy Story 2.
Disney originally wanted Toy Story 2 to be a direct-to-video sequel. At the time, this typically meant the film would be given less attention, time, and money, leading to a lower-quality product. Catmull didn’t feel comfortable creating a mediocre film, so he asked Disney to make it a full theatrical release. To his surprise, they agreed.
While Catmull was thrilled to approach Toy Story 2 as a full-fledged theatrical release, he now faced a predicament. Pixar was still working on A Bug’s Life, and, suddenly, their workload had doubled overnight. Also, most of the team who had worked on the original Toy Story were involved with the A Bug’s Life production process and couldn’t also work on Toy Story 2.
However, confident in the principles and past success of his organization, Catmull was sure that he’d be able to put together a team to work on Toy Story 2. The concept had been developed by Lasseter, and the characters and world were already established by the first film. Catmull brought on two skilled animators (and first-time directors) to lead the project. Given the fact that they had a solid concept for the film, Catmull thought Toy Story 2 would be an easy win for the studio if the team just remembered that “story is king” and to “trust the process.”
He was wrong. The directors weren’t equipped for the job and expressed no confidence in their work. They continually asked for more time with Lasseter to work through problems, but he was too busy with A Bug’s Life to give them much attention. Catmull thought if he just “trusted the possess,” any issues would eventually work themselves out.
After A Bug’s Life premiered in 1998, Lasseter finally had the time to look at the team’s work. At this point, the Toy Story 2 team had been working for about a year, and Lasseter expected the film to be in a decent place. However, after watching their reels, Lasseter told Catmull they had a problem. The process wasn’t working, and Pixar was facing potential disaster.
While Disney was fine with the state of the Toy Story 2 because it was “only a sequel,” Catmull wasn’t willing to sacrifice the reputation of Pixar with a low-quality film. He released the directors of Toy Story 2 from the project and put Lasseter in charge. He felt guilty for putting the new directors into a situation they weren’t prepared for, but he knew that letting them go was the only way to get the film back on track.
He brought back a lot of the team from the original Toy Story to work on fixing this project. This group was known as the Braintrust (a term which Pixar would later adopt for film review meetings), and they were known for their ability to share feedback and critique one another without defensiveness or ego getting in the way. With only nine months to complete the film (a fraction of the time most films of this nature need to be successfully produced), the team scrapped most of the existing film and started from scratch.
Over the next nine months, the team worked frantically to develop the project. The employees of Pixar were exhausted and overworked, but they were dedicated to making the project work. Fortunately for Pixar, their hard work paid off. Toy Story 2 was met with critical and commercial acclaim and made over $500 million at the box office. The film did so well, in fact, that many claimed it was even better than the first film. While Catmull was proud of the success of the film, he recognized that the way it was developed wasn’t sustainable.
After Toy Story 2, Catmull realized that Pixar’s original mottos were comforting but ineffective:
Instead of these concepts, Catmull developed a new focus for the company: Find and support the right people to create amazing films. To Catmull, quality wasn’t just a goal of the company. It was the core of the company. Though Toy Story 2 was a rough process, it cemented this ideal in Pixar’s DNA. They could have easily created a quick direct-to-video sequel as Disney had proposed, but they refused to settle.
Catmull’s core error with Toy Story 2 was that he relied on the wrong things to ensure quality. Moving forward, Catmull shifted the way he ran Pixar and used the following principles to guide the direction of the company:
Micromanagement can stifle creativity and prevent your team from doing their best work.
Think of a time that someone micromanaged you. How did it make you feel? Describe the situation and how it impacted your work.
Now, think about the way you would have handled the situation if you hadn’t been told how to. Would you have been more effective? Describe your solution.
With this situation in mind, describe a situation in which you’ve micromanaged someone else.
Knowing how micromanaging impacted your work, how could you have approached the situation differently to avoid micromanaging your employee?
As Pixar solidified itself as a premier animation studio, Catmull discovered the things that made his company stand out from the rest. In this section, you will learn the core concepts that you can use to develop a successful creative organization. These keys include promoting candor in the workplace, overcoming fear, and embracing failure.
Candor is a willingness to be forthright about issues, concerns, and ideas. In a creative environment, candor allows teams to get straightforward feedback to improve their final product. This helps employees see flaws they may have been blind to and get suggestions to move forward.
To ensure that employees feel comfortable sharing their opinions, develop a judgment-free environment that allows employees to speak up. At Pixar, Catmull developed this environment using a process he called Braintrust Meetings. Every few months, Pixar team members who aren’t directly involved in a particular project gather to watch material from the project. Afterward, they talk with the project’s director and head creatives about issues and potential routes forward. These meetings rely on everyone sharing their opinions openly and willingly.
Ensuring candor isn’t easy. People often let their fears and insecurities get in the way of open feedback. As a leader, Catmull believed his responsibility was to ensure people feel comfortable enough to share their thoughts. For example, new members attending Braintrust Meetings often feel insecure about sharing their opinion because they’re new to the group and don’t want to step on any toes.
To navigate this, you have to remind employees of the following:
To develop an effective feedback session, build an environment of mutual respect and comfortability. To achieve this, consider the following tips:
Though these feedback sessions are a powerful tool to create candor, they won’t automatically fix all of the issues in your organization. Here are some things to consider about the complexities of implementing feedback sessions:
Pixar’s Notes Day
In addition to Braintrust Meetings, Pixar uses another forum for the discussion of feedback through “Notes Day.” On Notes Day, Pixar shuts down regular operations and runs a variety of discussion forums based on topics submitted by employees. These topics range from highly technical concerns such as rendering techniques to common issues such as dealing with entitled people. While Braintrust Meetings help the company dissect the issues of a film, this method of feedback keeps Pixar up-to-date on issues outside of those specifically related to a project. Pixar leaders use this information to find problems they may not have noticed and crowdsource solutions to issues.
Failure is essential to a creative workplace. Without it, new ideas can’t be discovered or fostered because innovation requires risk. If you don’t take risks, your final product will likely be unoriginal. However, just because failure is a necessary component of creativity doesn’t make it an easy concept to embrace.
Often, people define failure as a “necessary evil.” While this is well-intentioned, it actually perpetuates the stigma of failing. Failure isn’t evil. It’s an inevitable result of highly innovative work. When you and your team fail, it may not be pleasant, but it gives you valuable information as you continue to explore new ideas and concepts.
When you remove fear, you normalize failure. At Pixar, this normalization has become so prevalent that directors actually worry when they’re not experiencing any failures or issues. For example, Catmull once praised the team of Toy Story 3 for not having a lot of issues during their production process. The team was offended because they believed Catmull had implied they hadn’t taken enough risks.
To determine if your company has a negative view of failure, consider what happens when a mistake is found:
As a leader, one of the best ways you can take the stigma out of failure is to admit your own failures. Instead of ignoring your mistakes, explain what you learned and how you moved forward. This will make your employees more comfortable embracing and learning from their own failures.
When money is involved, it’s often hard to accept failure because of the amount of resources it can cost. To circumvent this, create low-stakes environments where teams can explore new ideas without the fear of costing the company significant amounts of money. This could be a think-tank or R&D department that focuses on investing time in new concepts.
Middle managers often fear failure because they’re under pressure to stay within deadlines and budgets. To keep up with demands from upper management, middle managers often resort to micromanaging their teams and severely limiting the risks that they’re able to take. However, the purpose of a manager isn’t to restrict risk-taking. It’s to create an environment in which employees can fail and recover.
Getting managers to embrace the potential of failure requires that you build trust. You have to trust your managers to deal with problems as they arise and avoid the urge to jump in the first sign of failure. Likewise, managers have to trust their employees to take risks and do the jobs that they were hired to do. Lastly, employees have to trust that their manager won’t punish them if they fail. Instead, managers have to be patient and willing to help employees.
This trust is developed through transparency and candidness. When you keep secrets from your employees, you send the message that you have something to hide, and that you can’t trust your employees. In contrast, transparency shows your team that you have no hidden agenda, and you trust them with valuable information.
As a leader, one of the worst things you can do for your team is stagnate. Out of fear, some leaders spend so much time planning ways to avoid failure that they ultimately don’t make any progress towards their end goal. This leads to decreased productivity and morale as employees lose faith in their leadership. Also, over-planning often leads to attachment, making leaders willing to adjust and adapt as issues arise.
Make decisions and take risks as a leader. When you make decisions, it allows your team to feel like they’re actually working towards a final destination. Even if these decisions don’t pan out in the end, it gives your organization momentum. This isn’t to say that planning isn’t important. Have a roadmap in place as you work through a project, but you can’t allow that roadmap to dictate every decision that you make or keep you pushing ahead on a project.
For example, the original concept for Monsters, Inc. started as a film about a 30-year-old man who was dealing with “monsters” that represented his childhood fears. The filmmakers moved ahead with the idea but discovered a more effective story within the world of “monsters.” The final product was ultimately a very different film about a group of monsters scaring children to generate electricity. However, the film wouldn’t exist at all if they hadn’t taken the time to experiment with the original concept.
While failure is necessary for creative success, consistent failure can destroy a project or organization. If a team doesn’t seem to be learning from their mistakes, you will eventually have to pull the plug on a project or remove the people who aren’t growing. If this happens, take the time to analyze why this project or person failed to learn from their mistakes. This will give you insight when it comes time to start a new project or hire a new team member.
For example, Pixar had a string of troubled projects in the early 2010s. Catmull and his team had to pull the plug on a long-developing project and new directors seemed to be struggling to learn from their mistakes. Pixar’s leadership team got together to discuss why their projects weren’t working as well as they had been in the past. The leadership team realized their teams were struggling because their new directors didn’t have mentors to ensure their success. Leaders developed a mentorship program to guide their new directors and projects.
When searching for a new concept to work with, it's easy to look for flaws that can lead you to dismiss a project. While critique and feedback are essential to growth, the best way to find a new project is to look for what makes it exciting instead of what makes it problematic. It can be risky to endorse an unproven idea, but often, those are the projects that produce the best results.
As a leader in a creative organization, it's your job to protect and nurture these concepts until they grow into full-fledged creations. Think of a new idea as a caterpillar becoming a butterfly. Before its transformation, a caterpillar is vulnerable and slow. It needs time inside of its protective cocoon to develop into a butterfly. When you oversee creative projects, create that cocoon to allow new concepts to grow into something greater. This doesn’t mean isolating the project from feedback or input, but give it the room to fail and struggle in order for it to develop.
The creative process isn’t clear-cut and straightforward. It requires trial and error to be successful. Because this process can be time-consuming and expensive, you may try to cut out the messier parts of your process to speed up development and ensure lower costs.
However, be careful about the amount of streamlining you do. Trying to avoid the creative “messes” by cutting time out of development and overcommitting to choices early on prevents your team from finding potential errors and developing stronger ideas. While the need to efficiently create new works can create a level of motivation for you and your team, it often leads to unfinished projects or poorly developed concepts.
In a creative company, you have to balance the wants and needs of each department. Each department in your organization has a different interest. For instance, your marketing team wants to create a product that sells, your management team wants to create a product that’s easy to make, and your creative team wants to make a product that’s wholly original. There isn’t one clear-cut way to ensure balance in your organization.
However, there’s one rule-of-thumb: Don’t let one team or person get everything they want. Because departments’ “wants” often conflict with one another, they act as a counterbalance with other teams. If one team gets everything that they want, it throws the company out of balance. For example, if you're leading a film studio, giving the creative team everything they want may lead to a bloated and over-budget film that’s too niche to sell. On the other hand, giving the marketing team everything they want may lead to an unoriginal and predictable film that appeals to the lowest common denominator.
Balance is not stagnant. It changes all of the time and requires constant attention. Even if a project achieves perfect equilibrium for a moment, the balance will likely begin to shift as team members make more decisions. Be aware of the shifting dynamics between decisions and make choices accordingly.
While protection is important in the early phases of a new project, the concept will eventually have to stand on its own. Once you’ve taken the time to develop and foster a project, hand it off to other people to ensure that it’s worth continuing to invest in. At that point, it will either fly or fall. If it flies, you can continue to work with the project or concept. If it falls, you’ll have to swallow your pride and let go of it for the good of your organization.
Promoting candidness in the workplace allows you to hone your projects through feedback and discover issues you may not have noticed.
Think about your current workplace. What feedback systems do you have in place? Are they effective?
Using Braintrust Meetings and Notes Day as a guide, how could you build feedback systems into your organization that promote candidness in a safe environment?
Candidness requires safety and comfort. List three ways that you could help your employees become comfortable delivering critiques.
Another of Catmull’s keys to building a successful organization is beinge willing to implement change, accept randomness, and find your blind spots. Many creative organizations fall into the trap of holding onto systems that worked in the past without understanding why they worked. They try to force a process onto a problem or concept, even if that process isn’t the most effective for the project at hand.
For example, when Pixar started work on Toy Story 2, they believed the process they developed on Toy Story would allow new directors to succeed at the helm of the project. What they failed to recognize was that the reason Toy Story was successful wasn’t because of the “process.” It was because of the people. Without the right people, the “process” was hollow and almost led Pixar to its demise.
Many people believe, “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” meaning that processes that have worked in the past don’t need to be changed. This can be a dangerous belief, especially in the long term.
Change is necessary. The world is changing all of the time, and you have to adapt accordingly. Just because a process has “worked before” doesn’t mean it’s the best fit for new issues or projects. You have to introduce new ideas to meet the ever-changing needs of your organization.
For example, Catmull wasn’t a fan of Pixar making sequels. He built Pixar on the foundation that new and original projects were the most important thing to the organization and viewed sequels as “creative bankruptcy.” However, over time, Catmull changed his view on the importance of sequels. They usually produced high box office returns and freed up the company to use their funds towards new and experimental projects. Because of this, Catmull had the studio produce a sequel every other year to ensure they had the constant income to experiment with new concepts without putting the company at risk.
This isn’t to say that you have to make changes for the sake of making changes. There are reasons to keep processes in place, especially when they’ve been created to combat specific issues. However, too many well-intentioned rules and restrictions can kill a creative process.
People are afraid of enacting change because change is often associated with a “broken” or “ineffective” process or product. People don’t want to look incompetent and will often try to lobby for their work, even if that work isn’t effective. This fear can cripple your team and make them unwilling to adapt. If unaddressed, this could have disastrous consequences.
For example, as the Silicon Valley computer race continued through the ‘90s and 2000s, companies that were willing to change their focus according to new developments in technology succeeded. However, companies such as Silicon Graphics tried to continue selling large, expensive computers instead of investing in more economical models. While this kept them afloat in the short term, their aversion to change killed them in the end.
The following are a few tips to help you alleviate the fear of change:
Often, success and failure are due to random events. They can’t be predicted and can come out of nowhere. This is not an easy concept to grapple with because our brains aren’t wired to accept randomness. We like to discover a cause and an effect, but random events don’t adhere to these patterns. For example, you could be the most well-prepared person in the world, but if your car breaks down while you’re on your way to an important meeting, things may go downhill by no fault of your own.
Random events aren’t always bad. Sometimes, they’re the spark that leads to a new project or unexpected growth in a new employee. However, for these events to be effective, you have to be ready and willing to invest time in developing these random occurrences.
For example, your team is working on a new film about animated birds. For all of the new ideas you’ve tried to bring to the table, everything has felt derived or unoriginal. During a break, a few of your team members watch an unrelated video about a singing competition. This sparks an idea for a direction for the movie: an animated film that focuses on the importance of a bird’s “singing.” The random event of your team watching an unrelated video led to an idea for a new project.
Most people have been taught since they were children that hard work will yield success. While hard work is important, there’s another factor that plays into achievement: adaptability. When a random event throws your regular process out of whack, you have to be prepared to make adjustments.
For example, your marketing team has been preparing for a pitch meeting with the executives. An employee has worked for tens of hours developing designs for the pitch packet. A few days before the meeting, their computer crashes. With only a couple of days to adjust, you have to make some changes to meet your deadline.
When dealing with random events, keep the following tips in mind:
Everyone has blind spots, or problematic areas they’re unaware of. Discovering these issues isn’t easy because these trouble areas exist outside of your current perspective. For example, if you’re in upper management at a manufacturing facility, you may not know about issues on the production line if you're not seeing them for yourself.
These blind spots can lead to unexpected meltdowns or poor decision-making. To avoid potential disaster, raise your awareness and constantly search for the “hidden” problems in your organization.
When you’re in a position of power, people tend to tell you what you want to hear. This deferential treatment can skew your perspective in dangerous ways. For example, a high-ranking executive may believe that employee morale is high because, whenever she sees her employees, they seem happy and hard at work. However, she’s unaware that this high morale is an illusion. Her employees are actually unhappy with their work environment, but they don’t want to upset the “boss.” Employee frustration may continue to fester until, suddenly, people begin quitting “unexpectedly.”
There are three factors that lead to hidden information:
Now that you know what leads to blind spots, consider the following tips:
When someone claims “hindsight is 20/20,” they’re implying that you can understand a decision after the fact because you’ve experienced the results and consequences of that decision. However, it’s a skewed concept. In reality, your personal viewpoint distorts your version of reality and ignores other factors that may have impacted the result.
For example, if a young child burns their hand on a pot while it’s on the stove, they likely won’t touch it again. However, they won’t necessarily know the difference between the pot being on the stovetop and the pot being in the cabinet. Therefore, they may develop an aversion to grabbing pots because, in their experience, touching a pot means burning their hand. Even with hindsight, their view is distorted.
This isn’t to say that you shouldn’t learn from the past. Hindsight can be a powerful teacher, but it shouldn’t control your actions. For example, if a softball player pitches a great game after using a new warmup, she may continue to practice this warmup. However, she recognizes that it isn’t the sole key to her success. She knows there are other factors at play that impact the quality of her gameplay and continues to search for ways to improve her mechanics.
Your blind spots may contain problems that could have potentially disastrous consequences. To ensure the safety of your organization, take the time to find the problem areas that are currently hidden from your view.
Think of a time where a team member seemed to agree with everything you said. Did their support seem genuine or could you detect signs they were just telling you what they thought you wanted to hear? Describe the situation.
Think of your current workplace. Are candid feedback and open communication promoted? Why or why not? (For instance, do you believe a lower-level employee would feel comfortable giving feedback to the CEO?)
What ways could you promote candidness to ensure that your employees give their honest observations?
Think of a recent problem you had on a project. How could you have used perspectives from different departments to develop an effective solution?
People’s perspective on the world often distorts what’s right in front of them. In regards to creativity, this limited perspective often leads to inflexibility. People become convinced their perspective is the correct perspective, and they ignore new information that contradicts their view. When you get together a team of dozens or hundreds of people, this inflexibility can stall a creative process.
To ensure that your team doesn’t fall into this inflexibility, create opportunities for them to expand their worldview and interact with people who have different perspectives. The following are eight tools you can use to help your team maintain their creative spark and challenge their own perspectives:
When going through the development process, frequent feedback sessions allow your team members to get different perspectives on their work. This prevents your employees from becoming overly committed to their work and enables them to solve problems collaboratively. Frequent feedback also allows your team to fix potential problems early on instead of after they’ve put dozens or hundreds of hours into a project.
For example, at Pixar, Catmull created a process called “Dailies.” At Dailies, artists and creatives on a project get together at the beginning of the day to present their work for feedback. It allows artists to receive feedback from the entire team throughout the creative process. These changes may range from the size of a stick in the background to an entire character model. Because everyone has a voice and candidness is promoted, Dailies allow artists to look at their work from a different perspective and make adjustments to create a stronger product.
Research is essential to creation. Learning more about the subject of your creative project will help you produce a more realistic product. For example, if you want to create a film about living with a dog, you would need to understand what it’s like to have a pet. If you’ve done no research into the topic or haven’t had any experiences with a pet, your film probably won’t be accurate.
Note: Research is best when it’s first-hand. While you can take inspiration from previous creative projects, if you rely solely on the creations of others, your work will likely come across as derivative and unoriginal. The line between inspiration and theft is thin, and you’ll benefit from creating your own work based on personal research. (Shortform note: Think about the way Playmobil: The Movie tried to capitalize on the success of The Lego Movie.)
At Pixar, this first-hand research experience is a high priority. For example, for Ratatouille (a film about a Parisian rat who wants to become a chef), Pixar sent a team to Paris to eat in Michelin-star restaurants, interview chefs, and visit kitchens. Less enjoyably, they also explored Paris’ sewer system to see where the rats resided. Using this research, the team could create a detailed world for their film. While most viewers may not notice many of these intricacies, the details work together to create a relatable environment.
Though it may seem counterintuitive, creating boundaries for your teams can actually promote creativity in addition to efficiency. It forces them to approach challenges in a unique way and focus on the most important elements of the project. In many situations, creative solutions can actually produce stronger results than the initial plan.
As an example of the creative benefits, the team working on the original Halloween film had to create Michael Myers’ mask on a tight budget. Unable to afford a custom piece, the art director, Burt Wheeler, had to come up with a creative and cheap solution. Ultimately, he found an odd-looking Captain Kirk mask, spray painted it, and modified the eye holes so the actor could see. The result of this creative obstacle: one of the most iconic looks in horror movie history. (Shortform note: This example was pulled from this article.)
To improve efficiency, Pixar had to set boundaries because artists were spending too much time investing in things that had no bearing on the story. A Pixar producer came up with a system that limited the amount of time spent on any given aspect of a film. For The Incredibles, Walker posted images of each of the characters in the film. Next to them, he velcroed popsicle sticks to the wall, each representing a “person-week” (the amount of work one animator could complete in a week). If someone wanted to spend more time working on a particular character, they’d have to remove a popsicle stick from another character. This forced the team to focus their time on the most necessary components of the film.
Note: Setting boundaries doesn’t suggest that detailed work is unimportant. Rather, it deals with the realities of deadlines and budget. Of course, you want to create the best product possible. However, with any creative project that has deadlines and monetary restrictions, you have to set priorities for the good of the project as a whole.
While it's tempting to stick to methods that you already know, using new technology can allow your team to create new works in an original and more effective way. For example, where artists once had to use a pencil and paper to create sketches, tablets now allow them to create digital art that they can easily share and modify. This use of technology speeds up their process and gives them more creative freedom.
Technology can inspire creativity. As technology continues to improve, artists can develop projects in a wholly original way. For example, Pixar used new computer technologies to create films unlike anything anyone had ever seen before.
In a smaller-scale example, Pixar’s director, Brad Bird, wanted a way to sketch over top of digital models to help him give clearer feedback. For instance, if a character’s expression wasn’t reading, Bird wanted to be able to sketch something over the model that reflected the emotional state he was trying to evoke. The software team managed to develop a program that allowed Bird to deliver feedback in this way. The new technology streamlined the feedback process and gave animators and modelers a clearer vision of what changes their director was requesting.
Experimental projects give you a space to take risks without the pressure of making a profit. They allow your organization to explore new ideas, find better ways of working, and give employees with potential more experience. Think of these environments as a creative company’s R&D department. The nature and costs of these spaces vary from company to company, but the benefits of exploring new concepts in a safe space can yield industry-shaking results.
For example, Pixar likes to experiment by creating short films. While these projects have become a beloved and iconic part of Pixar’s releases (they show one before every feature film), these shorts aren’t meant to turn a profit. Instead, they benefit the company in the following ways:
The human brain likes to simplify our surroundings so that they’re easier to process. However, this simplification leads people to jump to conclusions that aren’t entirely accurate. For example, when asked to draw the human face, many people struggle to get the correct proportions. This is because the brain emphasizes the “important” parts of the face such as the eyes and ignores the “unimportant” parts such as the forehead.
In a creative organization, seeing something for what it is rather than what you want it to be is essential. This level of objectivity allows you to notice errors more quickly and pay attention to details you may not have previously noticed. This creates depth within your projects and ensures you're producing a fully realized product.
For example, when an artist learns to pay attention to the details of an object, they have to let go of any preconceived notions they may have about the subject. Rather than just painting a lake the color blue, they become attuned to the small flecks of green, yellow, and white that reflect off of the top of a river. This attention to detail allows them to create a more fully realized version of their surroundings.
Postmortems are meetings that occur after a project is completed in which you discuss the process as a whole. This allows you and your team to speak out about what’s working and what’s not. These postmortems should occur relatively quickly following the end of a project while the process is still fresh in everyone’s mind.
There are four important reasons to hold postmortems:
When developing your postmortems, consider the following tips:
Learning opportunities keep your team members open to new experiences and allow them to bond with one another. These opportunities don’t have to have to be specific to your industry. In fact, it's sometimes better if they aren’t. Tackling subjects they’ve never worked on before keeps team members in the mindset of a student, willing to learn and explore new ideas.
This also helps members of your organization bond in a way that they can’t during a typical work day. Being a student puts everyone on the same playing field, regardless of hierarchical level. Therefore, the intern may feel more comfortable speaking with an executive if they’re both working toward learning a new subject.
At Pixar, Catmull developed a program called Pixar University to create these opportunities. The classes range from ballet to computer programming. Catmull believes that this educational outlet helps his team members embrace what’s known in Japanese Zen as “the Beginner’s Mind.” “The Beginner’s Mind” removes the constraints of what you already know and allows you to focus on learning something new. When you’re a beginner, you have nothing to lose and are usually less afraid of failure. When this mindset is embraced by creative people, they’re better equipped to step into the unknown and explore new concepts.
In order to grow as a creative organization, you have to be willing to take risks and dive the unknown. This, however, is easier said than done. Trying to build something out of nothing requires mental fortitude and comfort with uncertainty.
One of the best ways to keep calm in the face of uncertainty is to form a mental model that keeps you focused on your objectives and confident in your decision-making. A mental model is a visualized scenario that represents a process. For example, you may compare your work on a project to climbing a mountain or running a race.
At the beginning of a project, creative teams don’t know where their project is going to take them. While they may have a plan, the creative process isn’t linear and often veers off in different directions. While the venture into the unknown is necessary, it’s also terrifying.
A natural impulse may be to take control of the situation and try to dictate a specific direction to avoid failing. However, if you begin to overthink every choice that you’re making, you risk stifling the creative process and creating unoriginal work. Instead, you have to become comfortable pushing into the unknown and building a project based upon your discoveries. The more avenues that you explore, the more fleshed out your final project will be.
To help you through your creative project, visualize your process as a journey. As you form your scenario, consider the following factors:
For example, Pixar director Andrew Stanton believes in the philosophy of “failing fast and failing often.” To him, this means that it’s better to make quick decisions to figure out what works and what doesn’t. To visualize this, he imagines himself captaining a ship on the open sea. He can’t see his final destination, but he knows that he has to keep the ship sailing ahead in hope of finding land. Though he may momentarily navigate his crew in the wrong direction, keeping the ship moving keeps the crew confident that their leader is actively trying to get them to shore. He can’t control the wind or the waves, but he can adjust the course when external factors impact the movement of the ship.
Creative teams aren’t the only ones who can use mental models to their advantage. Management teams have the challenge of balancing different departments, deadlines, and budgetary constraints. Through visualization, they can develop a mental model that helps them balance a variety of factors.
To help you maintain focus as a manager, develop a mental model that emphasizes the different areas you need to balance. As you form your scenario, consider the following factors:
For example, Pixar producer Lindsey Collins visualizes herself as a chameleon. She’s able to adapt to any situation based upon the needs of her environment. While she can’t control her environment, she can adjust the way she approaches a situation to ensure her survival. This mental model helps her when she’s dealing with strong personalities in high-pressure situations. Rather than forcing her environment to change, she adapts to the things she can’t control.
Mindfulness and Meditation
People often struggle to stay in the present. They spend a lot of time either reflecting on the past or planning for the future. While both of these concepts have benefits when used in moderation, focusing on either of them for too long causes you to ignore what’s right in front of you.
To combat this, find a mindfulness practice that works for you. These practices can range from attending a regular yoga class to practicing meditation on your own. For instance, Catmull regularly attends silent meditation retreats to keep him grounded in the moment instead of tied up in the past or future.
Using the eight steps to expand your team’s worldview promotes creativity in the workplace. Steps 1-4 highlight the importance of feedback meetings, research, boundaries, and technology.
Frequent feedback meetings are important to stay aware of the goings-on in your workplace. Using Dailies (Pixar’s daily feedback meetings) as a guide, how could you implement regular feedback sessions to keep updated on current projects?
Research is important to creative work. Think about your current workplace. What resources could you use to promote research in your workplace? This could include trips, online resources, and guest artists.
Boundaries can help your team discover creative solutions while staying efficient. Think of a project that went overboard with unnecessary details. What boundaries could you have set to help your project stay focused on the important aspects?
Technology can help artists with their work. Think of a project you’ve worked on that used outdated technology. In what ways could you have used updated technology to make that project more efficient?
Steps 5-8 highlight the importance of experimentation, attention to detail, postmortems, and learning opportunities.
Experimentation leads to innovative and original work. Think of your current workplace. In what ways could you promote experimentation? Think about think-tanks, experimental spaces, and giving employees freedom to solve problems.
Attention to detail requires that you abandon your preconceived notions. Using Pixar’s drawing class for inspiration, look outside of your window. Find an object and describe what you see. Look for tiny details such as texture and color.
Postmortems give you the chance to address issues directly following a project. Think about a project you recently completed. Think about three issues you faced during that project and how you plan to address them in future projects.
Learning opportunities give your employees the opportunity to think out-of-the-box. What opportunities could you offer to your team?
In 2005, Jobs told Catmull and Lasseter that he was considering selling Pixar to Disney. This shocked the Pixar leaders because, at the time, Pixar and Disney had hit a rough patch. However, leadership at Disney had recently changed, and the new CEO, Bob Iger, wanted to bring Pixar back into the fold. Disney Animation had been struggling for years, and Iger believed that Catmull and Lasseter could reinvigorate the organization by leading both Pixar and Disney Animation. Iger assured them that Pixar would maintain its autonomy and its company culture.
Ultimately, Jobs gave the decision to Catmull and Lasseter. During negotiations, Catmull drafted a lengthy list of demands that ensured Pixar’s culture wouldn’t be impacted after being bought by a massive entertainment studio such as Disney. These demands ranged from keeping a “no assigned parking” rule to ensuring that Pixar leadership could still distribute bonuses following box office success. In addition to these demands, Catmull insisted that Pixar remain separate from Disney Animation Studios with each company working on their own projects. Once these safeguards were established, Catmull and Lasseter agreed to sell Pixar to Disney.
Prior to the Disney/Pixar merger, Disney Animation had been struggling to create new and innovative works. Following the Disney Renaissance of the 1990s, the studio had failed to produce a critically and commercially successful film. Where they had once produced classics such as The Lion King or Beauty and the Beast, their recent output had been critical duds such as Chicken Little and Brother Bear. While these films had some merits, they were nowhere nearly as universally beloved as their predecessors.
Once the merger went through, Catmull immediately began his tenure as the president of both Disney Animation Studios and Pixar. When he arrived at Disney, he saw a number of alarming problems that stifled the studio’s ability to create innovative films:
While Catmull insisted that he didn’t want Disney to become a clone of Pixar, he recognized that the core values of the company were universal. With this in mind, Catmull immediately started making changes:
After implementing changes within Disney, the studio’s work began to improve. In fact, one of the first films under Catmull, Bolt, received an Oscar nomination. This sudden surge of success proved that the Catmull’s concepts could be effectively applied to another creative organization to boost their efficiency and creativity.
For reference, from 2000-2005, Disney Animation Studios’ theatrical releases had an average score of less than 70% on Rotten Tomatoes. Comparatively, between 2007-2019 (after Catmull had taken over and changed the culture at the studio), almost none of their films dropped below an 85% on Rotten Tomatoes (with the exceptions of Frozen II and Meet the Robinsons). The changes at Disney allowed for creative collaboration and open feedback. As a result, the critical reception of their films started to improve.
(For more information on how Rotten Tomatoes determines their scores, click here.)
Visualization helps you move through a project while staying focused on your goals and comfortable with uncertainty.
Think about an upcoming project. Describe your role and your responsibilities for this project.
Using the description of your role, develop a mental model that mimics your responsibilities and defines your process. Think about the mental models of sailing a ship, driving through a tunnel, and being a shepherd for inspiration.