#23 – Role Models From Pop Culture?
Part 1: What Can We Learn From The Fictional Characters We Love - & Hate?
It’s silly season here in the UK.
Our Prime Minister is standing down. A leadership election is underway. The thermometer is pushing 35°C. Next week the mercury will allegedly rise to 40°C (yes, I know most thermometers don’t actually contain mercury nowadays). Temperatures unheard of, in this ‘green and pleasant land’.
Newspapers running a series of weird and wonderful stories (many of them attacks by one leadership contender on another leadership contender).
In short, the silly season.
Defined by Merriam-Webster as:
“1: a period (such as late summer) when the mass media often focus on trivial or frivolous matters for lack of major news stories. 2: a period marked by frivolous, outlandish or illogical activity or behaviour.”
Let me be clear.
I didn’t start Practical Counsel because I wanted to put out a trivial or frivolous publication.
But I hope that Practical Counsel readers will, for the next 3 or 4 issues, indulge a bit of semi-trivial / lighter content - perhaps to amuse those lawyers who are kicking off their sandals and espadrilles and dipping their toes in the waters of the Mediterranean Sea, the Pacific or Indian Oceans, or holidaying elsewhere.
Especially if that semi-trivial / lighter content also contains a modicum of learning.
So, following a relatively heavy topic (that of Meta Learning), a series of issues where senior in-house lawyers and other industry experts share their favourite (fictional) characters from the world of film, television and literature – and what those characters mean to them in terms of thinking about leadership, management or relational skills, styles or behaviours.
Kicking off this series, I share three characters from two of my favourite films of all time. The lugubrious, hard-bitten, Phil from Groundhog Day, and the irrepressible duo of Woody and Buzz Lightyear from the much-beloved Pixar films, Toy Story 1, Toy Story 2, Toy Story 3 and, yes, Toy Story 4 (and associated spin-offs).
And former GC, Doug Curtis, now of Arnold & Porter, shares what Captain Kirk of the SS Enterprise (of Star Trek renown) means to him as a model of good leadership.
Enjoy reading, and please comment and contribute to the debate by posting direct on Practical Counsel. Also, please write in with your unique people issues to me (practicalcounsel@substack.com) - I unequivocally undertake never to reveal your identity and will change key details of your situation so as to preserve your confidentiality and anonymity (unless you don’t want this). I also undertake to write to you personally with my own thoughts and comments on your situation and am always happy to follow up with a call on Zoom or similar.
Groundhog Day / Toy Story – Learnings for Leadership?
I’ve argued elsewhere in Practical Counsel that there are learnings for leadership lurking around in the most unexpected places.
In issue #17, for example, I drew from the then woes of UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson and the near universal celebration of the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee to explore leadership through the lens of the respective leadership styles of Prime Minister Johnson and HM Queen Elizabeth II.
And in issue #20 I interviewed world famous orchestral conductor, Sir Mark Elder, and learnt from him about his approach to leadership – and extracted parallels to in-house leadership, for readers of PC.
But, Groundhog Day and Toy Story?
What possible relevance these, for the readers of Practical Counsel?
For those unfamiliar with Groundhog Day (1993), the film tells the story of Phil, a world-weary, jaded and cynical weatherman, played brilliantly by Bill Murray.
The TV channel for whom he works sends Phil to cover the annual Groundhog Day ceremony in Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania. On February 2nd each year, Punxsutawney holds a ceremony where the central figure is Punxsutawney Phil, a groundhog[1]. According to tradition, if the groundhog sees his shadow and returns to his hole six more weeks of winter-like weather will follow. If Phil does not see his shadow, he has predicted an ‘early spring’.
In the movie, weatherman Phil gets stuck in a time loop where every day he falls asleep at the end of Groundhog Day and wakes up ‘next day’ at the start of Groundhog Day … again and again and again.
A central theme of the movie is Phil’s relationship with his producer, Rita (played by Andie MacDowell), with whom he gradually falls in love, but who rebuffs all of his advances.
Increasingly depressed by the endless time loop in which he is stuck, Phil commits suicide in a variety of ways, but each time reawakens on February 2nd.
On one particular rerun of February 2nd, Rita persuades Phil to think of the loops as a blessing rather than a curse. Phil decides to use his knowledge of the time loop to change himself and others – and moving forward, he saves people from deadly accidents, learns to play the piano and helps the local community in a variety of ways, some large, some small.
Most importantly, Phil works continuously on himself, gradually learning to re-learn some of his behaviours and attitudes, in a sustainable way. Eventually – after many, many, iterations of Groundhog Day – his cynicism gives way to a more grounded happiness and a generosity of spirit, that finally wins over Rita.
One night, Phil and Rita share a kiss. Phil wakes to learn it is February 3rd and tells Rita that he now wants to live in Punxsutawney – a town he has previously despised – with her.
The movie is not only brilliantly made (if you haven’t watch it – I highly recommend it – it has aged incredibly well), but a charming and insightful metaphor for what it takes to achieve grounded and sustainable attitudinal and behavioural change.
Phil works on himself, and re-works on himself, and re-works on himself, gradually changing his ingrained attitudes and behaviours until his new habits become second nature to him.
We have talked extensively in Practical Counsel (issues #16 to #22) about how we learn. Groundhog Day - and the story of Phil and his redemption from the loop on which he is stuck - is, in a sense, a modern parable about personal growth.
Phil, seemingly unchangeable at the start of the movie, learns to make change through by trying something different, and learns to make that change sustainable through repeated practice.
So what about Toy Story[2]?
I imagine there are few readers of Practical Counsel who won’t have seen at least one movie from the hugely successful Toy Story franchise.
For those who haven’t, the conceit of the movies is that Woody, Buzz Lightyear, and a bunch of other ‘toy’ characters such as Mr. and Mrs. Potato Head, are the prized possessions of Andy. Andy is (at the start of the series of movies) a young boy, living in suburban America with his sister, Molly, and single mother. The movies tell the adventures of the toys, each of who have personalities of their own and come to life when the humans are out of sight.
In Woody and Buzz we have two different types of leaders, each with his own flaws.
Woody, as has been commented elsewhere[3], communicates effectively with Andy’s other toys, and assumes a clear leadership role in ‘managing’ the pack. He looks out for the other toys and galvanises them to action when circumstances require this.
That said, Woody can be controlling in his behaviours, tends to micromanage the other toys, and gives them limited opportunities to grow and reach their own maximum potential. He regards himself as indispensable – and the other toys live in his shadow, at least for most of the franchise.
Plenty of food for thought here, as PC’s in-house readers reflect on their own leadership and management styles.
Buzz, by contrast, is the ‘boosterish’ leader, at least initially deluded as to his own abilities and lacking in self-awareness. At the beginning of the franchise he genuinely believes that he is a real spaceman, rather than a toy, and believes that he can fly.
In the early movies in the series Buzz displays limited capacity to develop as a leader. But he does develop as a leader, moving from out-and-out egocentricity to become a loyal leader of the gang. When Woody gets into scrapes (for example in Toy Story 3) the other toys look to Buzz for leadership and Buzz (within the constraints of his own relatively limited intelligence) problem solves, to find a way out.
Ultimately it is Buzz who persuades Woody that the other toys will be okay without him and that Woody can ‘let go’ of his leadership responsibilities and trust in the ability of the other toys to pick up those responsibilities.
So plenty for PC readers to unpack as they watch each of the Toy Story movies and think about how they manage and lead their teams / organisations (where applicable) and how they manage their relationships with colleagues and clients.
I would recommend those who you who haven’t watched Groundhog Day or the Toy Story movies to do so … mainly revel in the fun and the comedy, but along with extracting pure enjoyment from these wonderful gems, spend a bit of time learning leadership lessons from the characters I have highlighted.
And as always, I encourage members of the Practical Counsel community to write in to me at practicalcounsel@substack.com with your people problems and issues that are currently concerning you, or that come up for you regularly. As always, I will anonymise your observations / issues and preserve confidentiality and write to you individually in response to any scenario that I use in this newsletter.
I encourage you, in particular, to contribute to this current series, by writing to me with your favourite characters from fiction, and the learnings you draw from them relating to leadership, management and relational skills.
[1] A groundhog is a rodent, belonging to the group of large ground squirrels known as marmots.
[2] Toy Story 1 (1995), Toy Story 2 (1999), Toy Story 3 (2010), Toy Story 4 (2019).
[3] see e.g. a 2019 piece by Scott Schuette on LinkedIn, and a 2014 blog piece by Alicia McCormick.
Captain Kirk – A Leader to Inspire
Insights from a Legal Leader, Doug Curtis
Doug Curtis is an ex-Deputy General Counsel of WeWork and was, earlier in his career, SVP, Legal and Compliance, of Reuters. He also has many years of experience as a private practice lawyer. Doug has a JD from Harvard Law School, where he was Treasurer of the Harvard Law Review.
Dear Jonathan,
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to contribute to this series on characters from popular culture and learnings for leadership.
What a great idea!
My nomination for ‘inspiring leader’ is Captain James T Kirk, commander of the USS Enterprise on Star Trek.
There is a LOT to be said about Captain Kirk’s leadership style – and some of it may be a mixed bag, but here a few key points:
· Captain Kirk approached the unknown with an open mind and a passion for learning
· He surrounded himself with, and relied upon, diverse colleagues and perspectives. Think of the purely logical approach of the Vulcan, Spock, and the compassionate and scientific approach of Dr McCoy.
· He always remained part of the ‘away’ team. Kirk did not isolate himself in a remote command center or hide away on the ‘management / leadership floor’. He was always a leader on the front line, and never lost sight of the daily changes facing his team.
My feeling is that a lot of legal leaders - myself among them - can learn a lot from reflecting on Captain Kirk’s leadership style.
I’m very much looking forward to reading other contributions and nominations to this series of issues. And I’d be interested to hear what other readers think of Captain Kirk’s approach to leadership.
Best wishes
Doug
Key Takeaways
1. This issue of Practical Counsel starts a series of issues combining some light-hearted fun with a bit of serious learning. Nothing too heavy – it’s summertime for lawyers in the Northern Hemisphere and many are on their summer holidays.
2. In each of the next 3-4 issues of Practical Counsel, senior in-house lawyers and /or industry experts will nominate / present their favourite characters from fiction who speak to them with regard to leadership, management and relational issues.
3. In this issue I nominated Phil from Groundhog Day and Woody / Buzz Lightyear from the Toy Story franchise.
4. For me, Phil represents a great example of the ability to change even the most ingrained of habits and behaviours by working on oneself, day by day, over a long period of time. Phil transforms himself from a hard-bitten narcissist into someone who gets on with people and who contributes to those around him.
5. Woody, for me, represents the ‘partial’ leader – someone who has some real leadership qualities, but also some real leadership flaws. He is a micro-manager and unable to let go. Buzz also has significant leadership flaws – but does grow as a leader over time, albeit in a relatively limited way.
6. Doug Curtis, formerly DGC of Reuters and WeWork, nominated Captain T Kirk of SS Enterprise / Star Trek fame. For him, Captain Kirk exemplifies an open, ‘present’, inclusive, diversity friendly leadership style.
And now …….
Contribute to the debate and write in with your comments and observations. Also write to Jonathan with any other people issues you face as an in-house lawyer.
Jonathan can be reached by email at practicalcounsel@substack.com
A note for you picky lawyers; and a plea for tolerance
I am a British lawyer by background and went to both school and University in the UK. So my English is British English. I have taken a conscious decision to write this newsletter in British English, but to try to avoid phrases that aren’t common outside the UK. Sometimes, though, I’ll use a phrase that isn’t commonly used outside the UK, without realising that it is a Britishism. I also endeavour to use the vernacular spellings of my contributors (e.g. to use US spellings for a US contributor), but won’t always get this right.
My plea is for you to tolerate the British spellings and grammar and the occasional Britishism. And to focus on the substance of the newsletter rather than the occasional (to you) annoying turn of phrase, bit of grammar or unorthodox spelling, or the occasional inconsistency in spelling as between, for example, UK and US ‘standard’ spellings.
Thank you and best wishes,
Jonathan Middleburgh