In large organizations like video or movie productions, people work in teams to solve or come up with something new. In particular, in the production of movies, there are teams that works together in order to carry out the creation of movies. It is from the way they work that a person can deduce certain conclusions. In coming up with such conclusions, there are also various approaches that one uses to come up with such conclusions. In this essay therefore, it consist of two sections that are going to discuss the concepts that Catmull uses to come up with his conclusions regarding the production of Toy Story 2, which is a movie. Moreover, the essay will discuss whether his conclusion is right, the recommendations that he deduced and whether they are applicable in other settings.
In regards to the question of whether I agree or disagree with Catmull’s conclusion that giving a good idea to a mediocre team is not likely to be of use and in particular, that they are going to tamper with it, and on the other hand, the same idea or one that appears to be mediocre to a great team might be of use, either using it to achieve something new and great or may avoid it and manufacture a new one that works well (Catmull, 2008). I do not agree with the notion and conclusion that Catmull’s arrives at because of the Toy Story 2 that he uses to arrive at such a conclusion is clearly depictive of the fact or conclusion. In particular, Mr. Catmull relies on one side of the story, in that he considers only success of the people he believes are great but does not consider mediocre in practice but as a generalization of his perception. In addition to that, that the team was able to succeed is not reason enough to argue that they are a great team (Mathieu, Heffner, Goodwin, Salas, & Cannon-Bowers, 2000). However, the team comprising of new crop of people are tasked with the same job, and as a result, the movie not only come to fruition, but become one of the most successful that the industry ever produced (Savery, 2015). Despite the fact that he does not compare another team, that are unable to solve the problem that arises from the production of Toy Story 2, it is ullutrative of the error he makes in judgment despite the fact that the team however solve puzzle by not throwing the original concept away but adding some elements in the story, thus making a false illusion that they are great (Catmull, 2008). In regards to the story, I therefore do not agree that a good idea might not be of help to mediocre people but can greatly be of help to great people either by using it, modifying it or improving it by coming up with a new idea.
Catmull device a clear strategy that guides him in coming up with the conclusion relating to a good idea to mediocre and great people. In coming up with the conclusion, there are various concepts that one has to consider (Haefner, 2011). As far as the discussion of Catmull is concerned, he bases his conclusion on the outcome. To start with, his argument is based on what is the outcome of the team that is tasked with the responsibility of coming up with the Toy story 2. He observes that the team that he creates become successful in coming up with the movie within a span of 18 months which he believes is a success to him that cannot be accomplished by mediocre people. In addition to that, to that, he also bases his conclusion on illusion or perception. Firstly, he suggests that that for the team to accomplish the task in eighteen months, the job ought to have been an aggressive one (Leonard, Graham, & Bonacum, 2004). However, this makes him to create a mentality that the task is a difficult and whoever or any team that accomplishes it ought to be a great team. Secondly, perception comes into play when he believes that the team needs to work at a high rate to accomplish the task (Snyder, & Snyder, 2008). This is a perception as Catmull does not measure anything but assumes that it ought to be a high rate. However, the high rate makes him believe, the fact that the new team have accomplished their assignment, then they ought to be a great team which is not likely to happen mediocre people.
In addition to that, Catmull uses scientific approach to come up with his conclusion. Even though he does not give out the figure, the fact that he mentions that the Toy Story 2 brought about a major success commercially suggest that he looks at the figures in coming up with the conclusion. This forms his bases to argue that the team is a great one and achieves footing that cannot be achieved by mediocre if they are given a good idea (DeChurch, & Mesmer-Magnus, 2010). Moreover, the fact that the team actually include something new that turn out to be a great success for the movie production and Catmull mentions it in his conclusion of great team suggest that it is a scientific approach that is based on inferences in coming up with a conclusion. Lastly is the experimental approach. It is based on the idea of coming up with a problem and following a systematic approach of whether that it can be solved or not. In the case presented by Catmull, his problem is that he has a movie with a limited time frame for the team to work on (Millward, Banks, and Riga, 2010). He chooses a team that he undoubtedly believes that they have to work harder to come up with the movie. The team on the other hand adds several items to the original idea and accomplishes the task with mush success. Therefore, Cutmull concludes that the team is effective in analyzing and using a great idea or coming up with one based on the task that they have accomplished (Noe, Hollenbeck, Gerhart, & Wright, 2006). In addition to that, Cutmull, though it may be erroneous in thinking comes with an illusion that people ought to have be great to do as the team does but mediocre cannot be in a position to deliver as the team does in that situation.
Catmull gives various recommendations concerning team work that he believes worked well or works as far as team work in his production is concerned. However, his is just his team and does not necessary suggest that those recommendation are effective in another team work setting. However, there are those that can in deed work in another setting (Arvidsson, 2010). Thus, as far as the question of whether the recommendations put forward by Cutmull can be applicable in another team work setting, the answer is that, they can be in fact be effective as well in another team work setting but not all will translate well. Taking an example of a team in a bank, not all the recommendations translate as effective as other. Thus, below is an analysis on the recommendations that Catmull suggests and how they fare in a team of a bank setting. In particular, I intend to look at which one is more effective than the other.
In a team of a bank setting, constant communication can be useful in informing team members on how to achieve their goals. In the case of Catmull, he recommends that there has to be a regular communication to ensure either adjustments or new updates to the team and the organization at large (Nejati, Nejati, & Nami, 2010). In line with the same act, communication in a team of a bank setting will make it possible for the team to keep in check for whatever incidence that needs adjustment, process and report new changes that need to be included in the team which aims at achieving a specific goal. Therefore, communication becomes one of the recommendations that Catmull recommends in his video production, as effective in team work (Alper, Tjosvold, & Law, 2000). It is also as effective in a team work that aims at achieving certain goals in a bank setting.
In addition to that, Catmull recommends that there ought to be new blood, or rather outsiders who will be injected into the team to challenge the status quo. It can be a good idea in a team of bank setting in terms of bringing in new idea. However, it can also be a bad idea in the sense that the new blood will lack the experience in matters concerning the operations of the bank (Weingart, & Jehn, 2000). In addition to that, every bank has got its own culture that dos not necessary appear to be uniform across all banks. Thus, it will suggest that for the new blood to be as competent and easy to work in that environment, he or she has to not only conform to that culture, but also be familiar with it in order to fit well (Furst, Blackburn, & Rosen,1999). This may not be the case for all that are brought in as new employees in a team that is a bank setting. Therefore, even though new blood is good for any team, including that of a bank setting, it is not an effective to strategy to improve the activities of a team, and in fact, instead of pushing the team forward, it can be a factor that pushes a team to slow down instead of pushing it forward (Derby, Larsen, & Schwaber, 2006). Thus, registering as a recommendation that is not as effective as communication as in video production from the case study.
Another recommendation Catmull makes in relation to working as a team to produce the movie is staying on the rail. According to him, he believes that no matter how much success the team registers, it is a good idea that a team ought to continue be regarded as a success or continue staying relevant. Relating to this recommendation to a team in a bank setting, in that, it is not in order that a team relaxes after one major achievement (Ferris, & Davidson, 2011). For a team to remain relevant for a long time, it has to continue with the same pace of improving or retaining the successful status that it has reached. The tendency of most teams is to relax once they have achieved a certain goal, like in a bank for instance, teams are set to perform certain functions and attain a certain goal at the end of the day or during a specified period of time (Marks, Sabella, Burke, & Zaccaro, 2002). However, the bank does end its operation upon completion of just one task; thus, the team ought to maintain the same spirit and motivation throughout the period they continue to work with the bank or even improve it in order for the bank to continue prospering.
However, there is another recommendation that Catmull makes that appears to be only effective in the team work of the setting that he describes but cannot fit to that of other setting like say, the team of a bank setting (Kozlowski, & Ilgen, 2006). This is the recommendation that Art and technology leads to magic. As far as video production is concerned, the recommendation can be more fitting, but cannot be applicable in a setting that involves a team of employees working in a bank. Corvoisier & Gropp (2009) suggest that, even though technology is useful for any team members, even those in a bank as it is more efficient than human labor and assistance, art is irrelevant as far as banking industry and the team that is involved is concerned.
Lastly, Catnull suggest that there need to be post mortems in any organizations. In his organizations in particular, he believes that lessons learned may be useful to develop new insight and determine where leaders or the team goes wrong. In a bank setting for instance, it is important that the terms analyze what are possible causes of the failures that they continue to pose to the bank, or deformities in their strategies that are not yielding fruits if any sort (Hunjra, Chani, Aslam, Azam, & Rehman, 2010). Therefore, continual postmortem is as effective in a bank as it has been in many other sector of any organization.
Therefore, observation, experimental and scientific is some of the approaches that Catmull uses to come up with the conclusion. I do not agree with his approach because it not based on the right premise. For term work to work effectively however, Catmull recommendations are effective not only in the setting of the video, but also help a team that works in other settings such as a bank. However, not all recommendations can be applicable or acts as effective in the production of a video and also in other setting such as a bank in this particular case. Some of those that both promote or can be effective in both a bank and a video production include but are not limited to communication, postmortems and staying on the rail, on the other hand, combining technology and art to bring about magic and regularly bringing in fresh blood may not be helpful to other setting other than video production.
Catmull, E. (2008). How Pixar fosters collective creativity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.
Haefner, J. J. (2011). The fourth theory of worker motivation. Industrial Management-Norcross, 53(2), 17.
Haefner, J. J. (2012). The fourth theory of worker motivation. Quality Control and Applied Statistics, 57(5), 501.
Leonard, M., Graham, S., & Bonacum, D. (2004). The human factor: the critical importance of effective teamwork and communication in providing safe care. Quality and Safety in Health Care, 13(suppl 1), i85-i90.
DeChurch, L. A., & Mesmer-Magnus, J. R. (2010). The cognitive underpinnings of effective teamwork: a meta-analysis.
Millward, L.J., Banks, A. and Riga, K., 2010. Effective self-regulating teams: a generative psychological approach. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 16(1/2), pp.50-73.
Arvidsson, S. (2010). Communication of corporate social responsibility: A study of the views of management teams in large companies. Journal of Business Ethics, 96(3), 339-354.
Nejati, M., Nejati, M., & Nami, B. (2010). Teamwork Approach: An Investigation on Iranian Teamwork Attitudes/APPROCHE DE TRAVAIL D'ÉQUIPE: UNE ENQUÊTE SUR LES ATTITUDES DE TRAVAIL D'ÉQUIPE IRANIENNES. Canadian Social Science, 6(3), 104.
Alper, S., Tjosvold, D., & Law, K. S. (2000). Conflict management, efficacy, and performance in organizational teams. Personnel Psychology, 53(3), 625-642.
Weingart, L. R., & Jehn, K. A. (2000). Manage intra-team conflict through collaboration. Handbook of principles of organization behavior, 226-238.
Snyder, L. G., & Snyder, M. J. (2008). Teaching critical thinking and problem solving skills. The Journal of Research in Business Education, 50(2), 90.
Savery, J. R. (2015). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. Essential readings in problem-based learning: Exploring and extending the legacy of Howard S. Barrows, 5-15.
Furst, S., Blackburn, R., & Rosen, B. (1999). Virtual team effectiveness: A proposed research agenda. Information Systems Journal, 9(4), 249-269.
Derby, E., Larsen, D., & Schwaber, K. (2006). Agile retrospectives: Making good teams great.
Ferris, G., & Davidson, S. (2011). Political skill at work: Impact on work effectiveness. Nicholas Brealey Publishing.
Marks, M. A., Sabella, M. J., Burke, C. S., & Zaccaro, S. J. (2002). The impact of cross-training on team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(1), 3.
Corvoisier, S., & Gropp, R. (2009). Contestability, technology and banking.
Hunjra, A. I., Chani, M. I., Aslam, S., Azam, M., & Rehman, K. U. (2010). Factors effecting job satisfaction of employees in Pakistani banking sector.
Mathieu, J. E., Heffner, T. S., Goodwin, G. F., Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (2000). The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. Journal of applied psychology, 85(2), 273.
Kozlowski, S. W., & Ilgen, D. R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological science in the public interest, 7(3), 77-124.
Noe, R. A., Hollenbeck, J. R., Gerhart, B., & Wright, P. M. (2006). Human resource management: Gaining a competitive advantage.