Which is why we donât give notes this way at Pixar. We have developed our own model, based on our determination to be a filmmaker-led studio. That does not mean there is no hierarchy here. It means that we try to create an environment where people want to hear each otherâs notes, even when those notes are challenging, and where everyone has a vested interest in one anotherâs success. We give our filmmakers both freedom and responsibility. For example, we believe that the most promising stories are not assigned to filmmakers but emerge from within them. With few exceptions, our directors make movies that they have conceived of and are burning to make. Then, because we know that this passion will at some point blind them to their movieâs inevitable problems, we offer them the counsel of the Braintrust.
Related Quotes
Pixar's Braintrust has rules. First, feedback must be constructive â and about the project, not the person. Similarly, the filmmaker cannot be defensive or take criticism personally and must be ready to hear the truth. Second, the comments are suggestions, not prescriptions. There are no mandates, top-down or otherwise; the director is ultimately the one responsible for the movie and can take or leave solutions offered. Third, candid feedback is not a âgotchaâ but must come from a place of empathy. It helps that the directors have often already gone through the process themselves. Praise and appreciation, especially for the director's vision and ambition, are doled out in heaping measures.
We are a filmmaker-driven studio, which means that our goal is to let the creative people guide our projects. But when a movie gets stuck and it becomes clear that not only is it broken but its directors are at a loss as to how to fix it, we must replace them or shut the project down. You may ask: If it is true that all the movies suck at first, and if Pixarâs way is to give filmmakers - not the Braintrust - the ultimate authority to fix whatâs broken, then how do you know when to step in?
The criteria we use is that we step in if a director loses the confidence of his or her crew. About three hundred people work on each Pixar movie, and they are used to endless adjustments and changes being made while the story is finding its feet. In general, movie crews are an understanding bunch. They recognize that there are always problems, so while they can be judgmental, they donât tend to rush to judgment.
This concept, completely counter to what we believed and practiced at Pixar, could only result in an inferior product, so we made an announcement: From that day forward, there would be no more mandatory notes.
Disney Animationâs directors needed a feedback system that worked, so we immediately set about helping them create their own version of the Braintrust - a safe arena in which to solicit and interpret candid responses to developing projects. (This was made easier by the fact that they already liked and trusted each other. Even before our arrival, we were told, theyâd formed their own under-the-radar group called the Story Trust, but the lack of management understanding for that concept had prevented it from evolving into a coherent forum.)
I think youâre getting a sense of how hard our team worked to make sure Notes Day took us where we needed to go. As Tom put it, âWe didnât just want to make lists of cool things we could do. The goal was to identify passionate people who would take ideas forward. We wanted to put people with clever insights in front of Pixarâs executive team.
What made Notes Day work? To me, it boils down to three factors. First, there was a clear and focused goal. This wasnât a free-for-all but a wide-ranging discussion (organized around topics suggested not by Human Resources or by Pixarâs executives, but by the companyâs employees) aimed at addressing a specific reality: the need to cut our costs by 10 percent. While the discussion topics were allowed - even encouraged - to stray into areas that might seem only vaguely related to this goal, the fact that it was there was key. It provided a framework - and it kept us from falling into confusion.
Second, this was an idea championed by those at the highest levels of the company. Had the enormous task of making Notes Day a reality been shunted off on someone who didnât have the clout to throw muscle behind it - and not entrusted to Tom, who in turn recruited the most organized people in the company to help him - it would have been an entirely different experience. Employees wouldnât have bought into the idea because theyâd sense that management hadnât, either. And that would have rendered Notes Day moot.
Third, and relatedly, Notes Day was led from within. Many companies hire outside consulting firms to organize their all-staff retreats, and I understand why: Doing them well is a monumental, enormously time-consuming undertaking. But that our own people made Notes Day happen was, I believe, key to its success. Not only did they drive the discussion in meaningful ways, but their involvement also paid its own dividends. Seeing themselves engage and cooperate, steering the agenda toward something that could make a real difference, they remembered why they worked at Pixar. Their commitment was contagious. Notes Day wasnât an end point but a beginning - a way of making room for our employees to step forward and think about their role in our companyâs future. I said before that problems are easy to identify, but finding the source of those problems is extraordinarily difficult. Notes brought problems to the surface - but we still had the hard work in front of us. Notes Day didnât solve anything all by itself. But it shifted our culture - repaired it, even - in ways that will make us better as we go forward.