Inside Look at Pixar HQ

LittleGuernica writes "Aintitcool's moriarty has taken a tour of Pixar's Headquarters in Emeryville, California and it just looks astounding. It instantly makes you wanna work there, or at least pimp up your cubicle... Which they don't have at Pixar, no they have cottages! Looks like Pixar created the optimal work condition for such a creative company, which leaves you no choice but to enjoy your job at Pixar every damn minute you work there."

Comments

isn't the

[bugsmalli]

CEO position open or something. Maybe they can use some new overlords now that disney is no longer in the animation...

Treating employees like human beings?

[FlyByPC]

What a concept! Wow!

Re:Treating employees like human beings?

[tomstdenis]

Hey, common you can treat people like crap, they'll do a good job in return and not just the absolute minimum! Honest!

Keep in mind during the dotcom boom many actually creative/innovative/perhaps not business worthy companies actually had things like real break areas, creative cubicles, music, gaming time, gyms, etc...

Now all those things are "anti-productive" and evil again...

Tom

Re:Treating employees like human beings?

[ScentCone]

What a concept! Wow!

Of course, if the average people employed (or employable) by the average business could ever, ever come close to being as smart, inspired, productive, and profitable as the army of PhDs and 140+ IQ types at Pixar, then we'd have more reason to wonder why the average employer doesn't look more like Pixar. But every company cannot have Pixar's capital (intellectual or financial) - there just aren't that many people of that caliber adrift looking for (and able) to do that sort of work. Hell, there isn't really even a market for more than a couple more Pixars, per se.

So, the uncomfortable truth: most of us (myself very definately included) are way, way too mediocre to demand the costs (which are way higher than the paycheck) that Pixar has to cover to keep a body around, productive, and happy. It's like looking at the New York Yankees and wondering why your farm-league team's locker room isn't just as nice, and why it's take-the-bus instead of take-the-Gulfstream.

Native talent. Raw brain horsepower. Big up-front financial investment. Hugely lucrative actual results. That's what enables that tech Valhalla you see at Pixar. Sure, you could have all of those things, treat people like crap, and then chase off all of that talent in about 6 months... but they're smarter than that. But what about all of the folks who try to get jobs at Pixar and just don't cut it? They, like me, toil in less idyllic environments, for less cash, with less cool office lighting, and with fewer Mr. Fusion-powered robo-scooters bringing them cardemom-enhanced lattes for "free." Oh well! It would all fall down if they didn't use their one-in-million people to make exceptional products. The other 999,999 of us per million get to have regular jobs, sometimes managed by average people without a large budget (because the average workers don't generally produce the above-average revenue that make fantasy office environments an asset rather than a liability).

If we only had a foosball table for every average office worker that deserved better... oh, wait.. we did! And we financed them with crashed dot-com stocks! There's a reason that didn't work out except for a handful of Pixars and their equivalents in other areas (Google, et al).

Re:Treating employees like human beings?

[Skater]

My employer recently had a "human capital" survey to get our opinions on work conditions. I wanted to tell them that calling us "employees" or even "human beings" would be a good step in the right direction. Even the term "resources" is slightly better than "capital". Unfortunately, I wasn't in the survey.

Re:Treating employees like human beings?

[JWW]

I think you're giving Pixar too much credit. Sure they hire smart, talented, people. But one difference is that they're not all exactly IT people, they're artists, IT folks, directors, voice actors, etc. Just some of the jobs are IT and Technology related, everyone else works with technology.

The really appear to have setup a great culture to create great movies. The work environment is part of that. However, there are many people who would like to see movies more often from Pixar and maybe see TV cartoons from Pixar with their characters. But they don't do that, they have a commitment to quality that goes beyond most other movie studios and in fact most other companies. And they know that to get that quality they have to trust their people and have to work collaboratively. It just amazes me watching their making of and listening to their commentaries on their DVD's how much of a team effort it is to bring their movies to life.

Its all about culture. The difference here is that pixar looks like it does because it hasen't succumbed to that "gotta make a profit this quarter" culture that currently pervades American business. Thats what makes other jobs suck, everybody says they hire the best people, Pixar just appears to treat them better.

Re:Treating employees like human beings?

[Loco3KGT]

You make a greater point than your parent in this thread. The reality is Pixar has an environment like that because you need an environment like that to do the things they do.

I work for a defense contractor. I couldn't imagine what our office would be like if it were like Pixars. In our office everyone wants their own office, they want a hardwood desk, book shelf, maybe an extra table. Everyone is allowed to bring in their own decorations but what you see are diplomas, family pictures, awards, certifications, some books, and a whole lot of business materials.

It's quite possibly the most dull and sedated atmosphere I've ever been in, but it's what works. We're not looking for creativity as much as "by the numbers". They work at work and they play at home.

An acquaintance of mine has a small startup of ~20 people (mostly part-timers) and it's dependent on creativity. So despite their small budget their office is set up to foster an amazingly different environment than ours.

Re:Treating employees like human beings?

[AT-SkyWalker]

Have you considered that maybe you look at yourself as "mediocre" because you have not been given the chance to tap into your potential?
The people at Pixar, or any other great company are not "better" than you, they are people that push their limits everyday and don't settle for a self fulfilling prophecy of being mediocre which most of us settle with. If every person looked with awe at great achievers there would be no more great achievements! What Pixar does, as a company, is that it realizes that the best in people comes out only when the right environments are created and made available; hence this company continues to dazzle us with eye candy every release. Pixar is not doing this because they have the Smartest people!!! Look around you, there are companies out there that have so much more talent than Pixar, yet they don't reach their potential because they treat their talented employees like machines. They seek "efficiency" with their employees, but the fact is with people you can only get "effectiveness" because people are not machines and they are never going to be efficient. Pixar's env. Helps their employees to be "effective" Your companies polices, timesheets, and big brother mentality is trying to make an "efficient" machine outta you. That simply doesn't work on the long run and leads to the mediocre, and the "its just a job" culture.

Re:Treating employees like human beings?

[Xorath]

I think you hit on the biggest point here and that is that Pixar isn't trying to define success as profitability this quarter. American and in many cases global businesses are too concerned with the immediate future the current quarter. No heed is paid to the future and as a result we have less than idea work conditions where companies are often understaffed because adding that extra body will blow the budget, so the end result is 1 person doing the job of 2 but in reality giving as much real productivity as about half a person.

Pixar has a good idea and they've taken it to the Nth degree. All I want is a good work environment where I'm able to start towards my potential instead of dreading walking into the office.

Re:Treating employees like human beings?

[ScentCone]

Are you always so negative?

Actually, I don't think I was being negative at all - just realistic. Being negative is what I was responding to - the implication that if only the average employee was treated differently he/she'd actually be smarter, more creative, etc. I don't buy that, not in so many words. Truly crappy work environments certainly taint creativity, but truly great environments can only do so much to make a non-creative person a creative rock star (which is to say, not much at all if you're not already that kind of person).

Most of us are human beings, each with the same built in potential.

That, I definately don't buy. Even if we were to stipulate that at birth, everyone has the same capacity for the type of work that makes a Pixar shine, by the time that people are in their 20's and 30's, and filling in that job application at Pixar/Google/wherever, life has happened to them. They have (or have not) been intellectually nurtured, have (or have not) had the discipline to polish their critical and creative thinking skills, have (or have not) spent their time in a way that prepared them for a job as challenging as a gig at a top-flight shop. We do not all arrive at the human resources office "equal" in our potential. A prospective employer's choice of decor and office culture will not make up for the substantial differences in experience and intellect that truly do exist, no matter how politically incorrect that may sound.

Point of interest: I'm going to say that my brother and I are probably equally bright and creative. But our characters, academic histories, and pursuits have been different enough that we've cut ourselves out for different activities. He actually does work at Pixar, and is definately thriving there. I'm more of an IT cowboy, and it brings me to different sorts of work. The specific character traits and skills that work for me in my setting are definately at odds with what's working for him (and thus, for Pixar, too). So, the point is: our potential to be valuable to Pixar is substantially different, just as our potential to be valuable to my customers (a more 1-on-1 consulting type audience) is different. We couldn't switch jobs now, and I don't think we could have switched paths years ago, either. Made of different stuff!

Re:Treating employees like human beings?

[booch]

That's one of my biggest pet peeves in the workplace -- being referred to as a "resource". Just like other resources, such as raw materials and electricity. I find it about as disrespectful as can be. And then they have the audacity to say that "our people are our most important asset".

Re:Treating employees like human beings?

[ScentCone]

I think you're giving Pixar too much credit.

Probably not enough, actually.

But one difference is that they're not all exactly IT people, they're artists, IT folks, directors, voice actors, etc. Just some of the jobs are IT and Technology related, everyone else works with technology.

Yup, but none of that changes my points about their overall profile or the fact that they've got the cream of the crop working for them (across all disciplines). That's not to say that Weta, or Industrial Light & Magic, or any of a number of other studios and related companies don't also have way, way talented people... it's just that Pixar (as an example, and as the topic of this whole thread) is able to (and must) afford people way outside the normal curve of people that most of us work with (or are).

And they know that to get that quality they have to trust their people and have to work collaboratively.

Surely you don't mean that the difference between their output, and that of some other company that's also techie-creative, is that Pixar "trusts" people to work collaboratively? I'd say that's backwards: Pixar has the pick of the litter for staff, and doesn't have to "trust" people of that quality to be engaged and energetically doing their piece of the work. When you're in a setting where the budget or other circumstances mean that you're working with less stellar people, you can usually "trust" that at least some of them will be weighing down the team, and require nagging from a project manager to get anything done, and simply not contributing to the project in proportion to their share of the payroll budget.

says they hire the best people

Meaning, they hire the best people they can afford. Pixar can afford better people than most of their competition, and they spend the money because of the results (and people) they get. Pixar just appears to treat them better

Because if they don't those people will just leave. The more talented you are, the more you can expect that sort of treatment. For the vast majority of us, though, the stakes are lower, the risks are lower, the pay is lower, the performance is more average, and the co-workers are not 100% rock-star.

Pixar DVD

[Anonymous Coward]

Big deal.

Check out the 'behind the scenes at pixar' special feature on any Pixar DVD. The same stuff + 50.

Sigh, and so history repeats.

[Icarus1919]

"I talked with a couple of guys who were also waiting there in the lobby, guys working with Pixar on an ancillary project. They sounded just as excited talking about the company as I'm sure I did, and it struck me: for hardcore animation fans, Pixar plays the same role that the Beatles must have for music fans in the '60s. We are living in a golden age, watching true giants in their primes, and each new film they put out is a joy because of the incredibly high genre defining standards that they hold themselves to."

Nothing's worse than hearing a line like this and knowing that it's only a relatively few years down the line before the wrong type of management takes over, and the public ends up with just another Disney that churns out the same type of rehashed stories to make a quick buck, and marry it with hurried animation carried on the backs of the overworked "Cottage" dwellers. Pixar is certainly a fine example of a company with more on their mind than the bottom line, and one that understands that happy workers are productive and creative workers, but it won't last. I'm sure we can all think of many companbies offhand that fell from such a height (I believe HP was featured recently on Slashdot.)

As a bit of an aside, Google may one day fall too. We can all hope that this won't come to pass, as Google symbolizes and displays pretty much every virtue that a techie could want in a company and it would be nice to see the proverbial good guys hold their own, for once. Perhaps their hiring practices will help protect against it. Once again, though, all it will take is a bad, short-sighted management and stock-holders that think only of the coming quarter and not several years down the line. Thinking down the line is how Pixar and Google came to rightfully stand on the pedastals that they now do (and hopefully will for years to come.)

Re:Sigh, and so history repeats.

[ken kenobi]

Umm... suggest you go watch Kurosawa's Seven Samurai. Sure Bug's Life is a nice movie, but original? No. Some scenes (the opening springs to mind) are a shot for shot lift (sorry, homage).

Re:Sigh, and so history repeats.

[qbzzt]

Nothing's worse than hearing a line like this and knowing that it's only a relatively few years down the line before the wrong type of management takes over,

What's the big deal? People are important, companies are just a way to organize them. If bad management takes over Pixar, the creative people will just move elsewhere.

As long as it's possible to move somewhere else where you can be creative, and as long as you really are productive (so somebody will finance you), who cares if this or that company fails?

Employee satisfaction first

[Pingsmoth]

is a concept that many companies don't understand. They stress, over and over, the idea of customer satisfaction, customer service, and friendly employees. I worked in retail for nine years and we were told day after day to smile, be friendly, be helpful, and care for the customer. But I found, day after day, that my employer was not willing to extend the same courtesies to me and the other employees.

I believe that if a company's employees enjoy their job, they will gladly serve the customers, help the customers, and extend that sense of friendliness without being prodded and told to do so.

A gilded prison, a happy worker does not make...

[Assmasher]

No offense, and I'm sure that much of the coolness of Pixar emanates from the creativity of the people who work there and the laxity of the 'corporate culture'; however, unless you work there you shouldn't presume that it is 'fun' because of the workplace. It certainly APPEARS to be a fun place to work ;).

I've worked in startups in old gymnasiums in the Mission District in San Fran and I've worked in plush corporate offices with EVERY amenity (massages, shoe shiners, crazy weird stuff...) and job satisfaction was related to the working space for no one at these two companies.

That being said, it certainly looks nice :). Makes it easier to empathize with children as an adult if you're not surround by grey cubicle walls, LOL.

But how many hours do they work?

[muntumbomoklik]

Well if you're already stuck in a 60 hour work week maybe it wouldn't make a difference, but what kind of hours do these people need to put in to get their stuff done? Are they given all of their amenities so they never need to leave? Vacation? Go outside?

Whenever a potential employer starts racking up the extra 'amenities', I start to wonder what kind of thing they want in exchange.

I'll just take the money, thank you very much.

Sigh, and so history repeats-Going Public.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Nothing's worse than hearing a line like this and knowing that it's only a relatively few years down the line before the wrong type of management takes over, and the public ends up with just another Disney that churns out the same type of rehashed stories to make a quick buck, and marry it with hurried animation carried on the backs of the overworked "Cottage" dwellers."

That's why you don't take a company public.

Private: Satisfy yourself.

Public:Satisfy someone else.

Unwise

[FreeUser]

Opterons have a better bang/buck ratio than any Apple product, and I say this as one who enjoys his powerbook immensly (of course, I also enjoy my Linux boxes, and my Linux partition on my powerbook).

This is Steve Jobs, though. He can probably get Xserves for Pixar at cost from Apple.

Then he'd be stealing from one set of stockholders to pad the pockets of another set. Unless Pixar becomes a division of apple in an official, complete merger, doing something like this would be a very bad idea. There's good reason companies keep separate books (and often separate stocks) even when they are conglomerated together.

Re:They've come a LONG way

[drsquare]

If someone's talking about a completely unknown person as if they were some massive slashdot celebrity, then the burden's pretty much on them to explain who the hell it is.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't want to have to research the people mentioned in every single slashdot post just to find out what the hell is going on. It's like those articles that consist of nothing but acronyms that no-one's ever heard of, and if you complain someone tells you to go and research it yourself...

Re:Rendering farm switched last year

[Swedentom]

From the article: "switching to Mac OS X and G5 workstations for its production work"