Ed Catmull, Pixar: Keep Your Crises Small on HackerTube: recommended by 9 Hacker News commenters across 10 separate months, 2010–2017.
talk · evergreen
Ed Catmull of Pixar speaks at Stanford's 2007 Entrepreneurship Conference on running a creative company. He argues for surfacing small problems early and building good teams, with stories like the Toy Story 2 crunch.
Repeatedly called one of the most useful talks on building organizations and managing creative teams.
“one of the most useful talks of all time for building organizations is by Ed Catmull (of Pixar)”
14 Hacker News comments link this video. Each one links back to its thread.
Rich Hickey's talk on simplicity is a must watch. [link] And one of the most useful talks of all time for building organizations is by Ed Catmull (of Pixar) ▶ this video
in “Ask HN: What are some 'must watch' talks?” · View on HN
It's "The Pixar Story"[1]. A great documentary, highly recommended. But Pixar wasn't all roses either - during the tight production of Toy Story 2 (because they changed almost all of the story and had to rush it for christmas), a couple (who were both animators) forgot that their 1-year old was in the car (and not in the day care!), and the girl was there for almost 10 hours... She lived, but still a pretty horrible story. The source for this unpleasant anecdote is [2]. It's a long talk by Ed Catmull, but I can't recommend it enough. It's really, really awesome . Success hides problems (Ed Catmull) Want to know why Pixar was awesome for soooo long? It wasn't luck, and it wasn't because they had great animators. It wasn't even (entirely) because they told terrific stories. It was because they constantly learned from their "successes"... Watch (or listen) to Catmull's talk. I guarantee that you won't regret the 55 minutes you spend on it... [1]: [link] [2]: ▶ this video
in “What they don't tell you about being a game developer” · View on HN
Keep Your Crises Small, ▶ this video It's a lecture from Ed Catmull. I highly recommend it, many gems from a brilliant developer turned brilliant manager.
in “A conversation with Ed Catmull” · View on HN
I believe Ed Catmull refers to this as 'keeping your crises small.' That is to say, it's much better to actively surface problems before they leave the shop than it is to ship with issues, and try to deal with implosions after the fact (ahem, Vista). Here he is, giving a really good talk at Stanford Business School, in which he covers this (among other good ideas). About an hour, but worth much more. ▶ this video Interestingly, an ethos like this suggests that the fate of Microsoft is NOT inevitable. It's only becomes that way when you no longer care about shipping garbage. Exhibit B: Detroit in the 70's and 80's.
in “Microsoft's office: Why insiders think top management has lost its way” · View on HN
fantastic business talk by Ed Catmull (pixar co-founder) at Stanford ▶ this video btw: I find it hard to believe that Toy Story 3 could be any good (because of the "3"). Is it?
in “Animating a Blockbuster: How Pixar Built Toy Story 3” · View on HN
It's worth thinking about the team in advance, especially to understand what things you do well and where you need complementary talents. Good teams also work through the problems that are inevitable in new products. There's a great speech by Ed Catmull that makes this point well. ( ▶ this video ) Of course this is useless advice if you are doing a one-person business. :)
in “Things I’ve Learned from Reading IndieHackers” · View on HN
Google seems to be doing ok to me. I like your point that success can hide problems though; Ed Catmull presents it very well here: ▶ this video It looks like people were suggesting that Google takes this advice more to heart six years ago already: [link]
in “Google Canceled the Launch of a Robotic Arm” · View on HN
Ed Catmull, Pixar: Keep Your Crises Small , Stanford Graduate School of Business ▶ this video (54:11) Long. Worth it.
in “Inside Pixar's Leadership” · View on HN
Ed Catmull, president of Pixar, has made the same comment about their films. The entire video is worth watching, but the quote in question is at ▶ this video - The other thing to note is, there is a confusion, I think, that the people have and is — the books and press kind of work this way in that we think about "an idea." When we think of ideas for movies, we think about ideas for products. And it's usually thought of as some singular thing. But the reality is, these successful movies — as with all successful products — have got thousands of ideas. It's just all sorts of things necessary to make it be successful. And you have to get most of them right to do it. And that's why you need a team that works well together.
in “Ideas Matter” · View on HN
Article is a little shallow. Great video by Catmull to Stanford business school on it: ▶ this video (54 minutes) And here's an article by him: [link] e.g. Toy Story 2 was an impetus to creating the present review system; the reason for saying 5 good things is just to make the people feel better about the criticisms: the last thing you want to do after years of exhausting work is point out what sucked. Catmull is the main guy driving these standards; Lasseter is busy being a creative; BTW: I thought I'd discerned a hidden pattern of pixar having the writer voice the primary mentor role - Brad Bird voiced Edna Mode in The Incredibles ; Andrew Stanton voiced Crush in Finding Nemo - but... Brad Bird didn't voice Gusteau in Ratatouille
in “Pixar’s leaders want to make their creative powerhouse outlast them” · View on HN
Phrases like, "The myth of burn out" and "Burn out is just a rationalization for giving up early" give me great pause. Burn out is real . It is dangerous, and even an overwhelming, driving passion for your work, your creation, can lead to disaster. Ed Catmull recounted this story about the production of Toy Story 2 [1]: "So we came back, John [Lasseter] told the story crew to take a good rest over the holidays, and come back on January 2nd... we were re-boarding the movie. We had 8 months left. We then started this incredibly intense effort to get this movie out. It was boarded quickly, it was pitched to the company, it was an electrifying pitch. We had a lot of over-achieving people working for over-achieving managers to get the movie out. We worked brutal hours with this. When I say "brutal", we had a number of people that were injured with RSI [2], one of them permanently left the field. We had, actually, a married couple that worked there. This was in June, so it's summer, and the father was supposed to drop the baby off at daycare, but forgot; don't know why... but came and left the baby in the car, and came into work. Again, as the heat was rising, the mother asked... they realized and they rushed out: the baby was unconscious. The right thing was done, they put ice-water on the baby. The baby ended up being fine in the end, but it was one of those traumatic things, like, 'Why did this happen, are they working too hard?' So when I say it was intense, it really was inten
in “The Hacker News Generation (Afraid of Hard Work)” · View on HN
My Google interview experience: Google Internship January 2008: Had a phone screen. First question as I heard it: “Given a binary tree tell me if it is a binary tree?” I was a bit confused and said I didn’t understand the question and requirements. Given A tell me if it’s A. Yes? The interviewers response to my confusion was: “Do you even know what a binary tree is?” Yes, I do. When he restated the question as “given a binary tree tell me if it’s a valid binary search tree” I understood the requirements efffed up something in the implementation though. Then was asked to do another problem. Something with number sequence and iteration. Got told “division is slow” so don’t use it. Couldn’t see a solution without division on the spot. Then got asked if I know about Java serialization. My response: “implements Serializable” and you can write out or read in objects but I have never really used it in any serious way before. I got the reject. Which I expected more or less. Kind of frustrating since I felt the interview was pretty much done in the first few minutes since I was asked: “do you even know what a binary tree is.” Kind of an uphill battle from my perspective. YouTube February 2010: Applied for YouTube because I saw an ad in gmail. Why not. 2 phone interviews. And 4 onsite. I thought I did ok solved everything to the best of my ability. Frustrated that I didn’t get it. Really enjoyed it. Seemed like a lot of fun. One interviewer told me my current job sounded boring. Not at
in “My Google Interview Experience” · View on HN
Reminds me of Ed Catmull's talk about Pixar management at ▶ this video -- "If you have a good idea and you give it to a mediocre group, they'll screw it up. If you give a mediocre idea to a good group, they'll fix it, or they'll throw it away and come up with something else."
in “Ideas don’t make you rich. The correct execution of ideas does.” · View on HN
Reminds me of Ed Catmull's talk about Pixar management at ▶ this video -- "If you have a good idea and you give it to a mediocre group, they'll screw it up. If you give a mediocre idea to a good group, they'll fix it, or they'll throw it away and come up with something else."
in “The Value of Ideas” · View on HN