Star Trek: Into the Future

In 1966, America had just landed its first space probe on the moon and the Apollo program was just taking its first steps. We were a mere three years from landing a man on the moon. However, what most people don't realize is that, in 1960's more than half of all Americans believed that the space program was a waste of money. The Cold War, which had initially spurred the drive into space, had cooled down- and with it the American fervor for conquering space.

When Star Trek aired in September of 1966, most Americans just didn't get it.  Touted as a "Wagon Train to the stars," Gene Roddenberry tried using the popularity of westerns as a selling point since the idea of a science fiction show was unpalatable to the television executives of that time. Though he managed to sell the idea eventually, the show struggled from the beginning. Star Trek was too visionary and too controversial (portraying the first televised interracial kiss) for those raised during the Great Depression. When it was cancelled in 1969, the network never expected it to become the icon it is today. What the executives failed to understand was that the show epitomized the hopes and dreams of the youth in the 1960's. The parents may not have been watching the show, but you better believe that the kids were!

Since that time, numerous television series and feature films have spun-off from the original Star Trek series.  While everyone has their own likes and dislikes regarding each one, the Star Trek franchise itself has not diminished in our affections.  Not only have the shows entertained us, but they have inspired advances in technology that have enriched our lives:from automatic doors to cell phones. The franchise hit the peak of its visibility in the 1990's with three television shows and four movies.

Now, eight long years have passed since the last Star Trek series, Star Trek: Enterprise, aired on television. With the reboot of the timeline in the 2009 movie, Star Trek, and its upcoming sequel, Into the Darkness, there is a lot of discussion regarding the possibility of a new television series.  While rumors fly about a possible series by Bryan Fuller about the decline of the Federation in the far, far future, as yet there is nothing on the horizon.

I'm just one voice in a sea of Star Trek fans, but I would love to see a series based on the struggles and successes of Star Fleet cadets.  Too long has the spotlight been on the older generations.  Let me see what life is like for the struggling students.  What are their ideas for the present and their vision of the future?  How do they handle the intense competition and colliding ambitions among their peers?

Whatever the subject of the next Star Trek series may be, my greatest wish is that networks won't wait another 8 years to get it started.  And since we're talking about wishes, I might as well sneak in another one: that the producers of the next series maintain Roddenberry's vision for the franchise.  Instead of a dark and brooding tale coupled with unlikeable characters (as is so popular with current producers), keep the hopeful and inspiring vision of the future that Roddenberry cast for us in his original series.

Until then, live long and prosper.

Captain Jonathan Archer: Corporate Mogul?

Over the last few weeks, I have been examining each of the Star Trek captains to determine how they would measure up as leaders in the corporate world.  In this, my sixth and final installment, our subject is Captain Jonathan Archer, who served as the first captain of the starship, Enterprise, and became President of the United Federation of Planets in 2184. In the episode, In a Mirror, Darkly, from the original series, Archer is recognized as being "the greatest explorer of the 22nd century."

On paper, Archer's career is quite impressive. During his ten years as captain of the Enterprise, Archer most likely initiated first contact with more species than any other Enterprise captain.  His was the foremost voice that championed Earth's readiness to begin exploring space and he continuously fought against Vulcan intervention in the humans' quest to reach the stars. His sense of human destiny and steely determination refused to take "no" for an answer. It was largely thanks to Archer that the Enterprise was sent into space in the first place.

However, it cannot be said with certainty that Archer was correct in his assertions. Humans, and especially Archer himself, may not have been ready for the challenge. The truth is that Archer managed to alienate (excuse my pun) more species than he befriended. His poor diplomatic skills (to which he willingly admitted) also placed a constant strain on Earth's relations with the Vulcans and the Klingons and often pushed Earth onto the brink of war. In the corporate world, this inability to "play well with others" would be equally disastrous. 

Much of Archer's ambivalence to other species can be found in his history.  Archer believed that the Vulcans had held humans back and damaged the career of his father- the inventor of the warp five engine.  As a result, he traveled into space with a chip on his shoulder and that attitude made many situations worse.  In addition to the problems with alien cultures, Archer's anger and bitterness impacted the crew on more than one occasion.

Archer's emotional baggage made him a volatile captain.  In any given situation, the crew could not anticipate whether Archer would act with circumspect caution or with reckless abandonment.  With no prime directive to follow, the Enterprise needed a leader with a strong moral compass.  Archer just didn't seem to fit the bill. Against T'Pol's recommendations of non-interference, he would get involved with alien disputes; but a week later, he would rant at a crew member for doing the same thing. As a boss, this arbitrary type of leadership would be extremely frustrating!  In addition, it would not be unusual for Archer to take his anger out on his employees. 

It may be true that Captain Jonathan Archer was the most "realistic" captain in the Star Trek franchise, being free to show the weaknesses and drawbacks of his personality; however, most employees would probably prefer to work under a boss who has evolved- both personally and professionally- rather than under a leader who settles for being "only human."

Jean-Luc Picard, Captain of Industry?

Instead of entering the age-old debate of which Star Trek captain is the best, I am examining each in the light of how they would measure up as a corporate CEO.  In this third installment, I will be looking at the pros and cons of working at a company "captained" by Star Trek's Jean-Luc Picard; having already put Captain James T. Kirk under the microscope. 

Picard's style of leadership might most be termed as patriarchal in nature.  As the oldest of the captains of the Enterprise, it isn't surprising that he became a father figure to his crew- and to the viewers.  Picard seemed to believe the old adage that familiarity breeds contempt because he kept a firm, arm's length between himself and the men and women who served under him.  However, his approach did not come across as cold and indifferent, but rather the unshakable confidence of an experienced leader.  So, while his crew would hardly be chummy with him, they would feel that they could come to him for advice and help on any issue.

The Next Generation's captain was much more cautious and pedantic than the other captains; probably due to his age, his nature, and the era to which he was born.  He was more intent on maintaining the final frontier than exploring it and tended to be inflexible and a little too wrapped up in himself and his image. However, Picard certainly loved his ship and his crew; and was willing to lay down his life for either. 

In the business world, Picard's leadership style would make for a pleasant work atmosphere, but might not inspire the loyalty that Kirk would.  Like children are prone to do, his employees might decide to eventually leave home to make a name for themselves, but he seems the type to be willing to help further their career, even if it means working for the competition.  He would most likely guide the company on the safest path, rather than taking innovative risks; so his workers would probably have job security but his company would be unremarkable.  Overall, working under Picard in the corporate world, would be a safe (if dull) job.  And honestly, when it comes to earning a living, that isn't such a bad thing.

Captain James T. Kirk, CEO

As I mentioned in my last post, the debate continues to rage over which of the five Star Trek captains was the best.  Rather than rehash that discussion, I plan to look at each one and examine how they would measure up at the helm of a corporation rather than a starship.  I'll let you, my readers, decide which captain you would prefer to work for at your company.

First on the list, as he was first to appear on television (though not chronologically first) is Captain James Tiberius Kirk.  As a captain, what is there not to love about a dashing leader who is good with his fists and good with the ladies? Kirk is charismatic, innovative, and a risk-taker. He expects a lot of his crew, but is not a slave driver. One of his most defining characteristics is his refusal to accept defeat,as evidenced by his rigging of the Kobayashi Maru test.

How would those qualities translate into the corporate world?  As the head of a business, Kirk certainly has the drive and ambition to be successful. His innovative thinking could certainly lead him to open new frontiers in his field of business. His unorthodox and often risky way of doing things might propel him to the top of his field or, just as easily, bankrupt him.  However, even if the worst happened, his inability to to admit to defeat would not keep him down for long.  He'd be back at the helm of another company in no time.

What would it be like to work for James T. Kirk? I believe that his charisma would make him a popular boss and engender loyalty among his employees. Unfortunately, that loyalty may not be reciprocated.  Though he is friendly and compassionate toward his underlings, it is unlikely that he will remember your name- unless you are one of the chosen few that make up his inner circle. In addition, his spontaneity might be a bit to take on a daily basis.  His workers might come in one day and find that Kirk has decided to head the company in a completely different direction because a new idea has popped into his mind.

And what about the women?  In today's workplace, a womanizer is a sexual harassment suit waiting to happen. However, it is unlikely that Kirk would suffer from this fate.  If you will notice, in the series, Kirk keeps his escapades off the ship.  With the exception of the forced kiss (Plato's Stepchildren) and some extenuating circumstances (The Enemy Within), there is no hanky-panky with women under his command- despite the obvious attraction between him and Yeoman Rand. He might sleep with his business associates, but never with his employees.

Overall, it would be exciting and exhilarating to work for James T. Kirk, but professionally it could be a gamble. Kirk would always be willing to take risks to reach his goals, but would any of us really want to live like that at work?

The Captains of Star Trek

Like many Americans, my  first introduction to the world of science fiction was through the fantastically popular Star Trek franchise.  Being of a certain age, my "first contact" was with the explorers of the original Trek series.  For those of that generation, it truly was a brave, new world that Roddenberry served up to us.  One that our parents just didn't seem to get.

Since those early days of Captain James T. Kirk, we have had the pleasure of exploring the universe with four other Star Trek captains (yes, I include Benjamin Sisko; even though he "captained" a space station rather than a starship). Recently those five captains met at Comic Con in Philadelphia; together for the first time ever.

The event got me to thinking.  We often debate about the merits of each captain and are quick to express our opinion about who we would want to serve under on a starship. The personalities of each are uniquely their own and each one brings his own distinctive style of leadership to the bridge.  The merits and shortcomings of each captain have been dissected and discussed ad nauseam and I would have little that is new to add to that debate.

However, another question did occur to me.  Given their diverse styles of leadership, exactly how would that translate into the real world of today?  In other words, if each of these captains were placed in management positions in an office, which would make the better boss?

Over the next few weeks, I am going to examine each of the captains in this light; objectively (as much as is possible) looking at the strengths and weaknesses that they would bring to the corporate world. At the end of that time, I'll have a poll available and you (my readers) can decide which captain you would want at the helm of your company.

I hope that you will join me each week as we journey through the psyches of the Star Trek captains. Engage!