There are three things I will say about The Devil Wears Prada:
- It is super fun to watch. Way better than the book. Like, WAY WAY better.
- Emily Blunt & Meryl Streep are fantastic. Anne Hathaway, too, but jeez, Emily and Meryl! What a casting!
- The real villain of the movie is not Miranda, but Andy’s boyfriend (more on this later)
Also, tons of spoilers ahead. Do me a favor. Just watch the movie. I am actually re-watching it while writing this, so I will start from the very beginning. A very good place to start.
It is okay to get a Mr. Collins job
A Mr. Collins job is the one that you don’t initially love, but that pays the rent. Remember when I wrote about Pride and Prejudice and job hunting? So yeah, Andy (Anne Hathaway) gets a Mr. Collins job. She wants to be a journalist and has no interest in fashion, but being a big magazine editor-in-chief’s assistant may open some doors (and pay rent). It doesn’t work out for her in the movie, but the decision is more than respectable. A girl has to do what a girl has to do.
It may be a Mr. Collins job, but you still need to show enthusiasm
You may not like Mr. Collins, but he is still a person worthy of your affection. You may not like the job, but the people around you take it seriously, so show some respect. Andy learns this the hard way in the stuff scene, the one with the masterclass about Andrea’s un-stylish cerulean top. While I firmly think a manager shouldn’t publicly scold a minion, Andy kind of deserved the reprimand.
Show enthusiasm and be kind to yourself - You need time to learn
Andy gets the worst possible onboarding ever, but I’ll focus later on why that is (it’s because of Miranda’s leadership style). Now, I will highlight that starting a new job is hard AF. You not only need to learn and understand a shit ton of new stuff, but you also have to apply it while surrounded by people to whom all that new stuff is second nature. Like Andy, you will need time, and it is okay, but listen, you won’t get better at it if you are unwilling to embrace it fully. In The Devil Wears Prada, Andy getting super good at the job goes hand in hand with her becoming a fashionista.
All right, let’s focus on Miranda (Meryl Streep) now.
Is Miranda a good boss?
Well, I won’t be the judge of that, but Miranda certainly has a strong autocratic and transactional leadership style. Is that something you would be comfortable with? Let’s see.
Autocratic vs. Participative Leadership
Autocratic leadership is when the boss calls all the shots and doesn’t care what the team thinks. Autocratic leaders are the sole decision-makers and don’t bother asking their team for their two cents. It’s basically them telling everyone what to do, and there’s no room for questions.
I just described Miranda 😀. I should add that she is rude and terrifying but also incredibly effective because, you know, autocratic leadership comes with its own perks, mainly super fast decision-making because leaders don’t have to waste time chatting about it. Additionally, everything’s crystal clear, there’s no confusion, and everyone’s on the same page as Miranda because there’s no other option. It’s like a relentless execution paradise.
At the polar opposite of autocratic leadership, we have participative leadership, where managers are open to chatting with the team and asking for their thoughts and ideas. They lead and help out, but they also value what the team brings to the table. Everyone feels like they matter, and it’s like a group effort that gets everyone involved and invested. I am getting Marty Cagan inspired/empowered vibes here.
Autocratic leadership is definitely handy when you need to make quick calls or keep a tight ship. But here’s the catch: it can also kill the creativity, motivation, team spirit, and folks’ souls. It can turn the workplace into a scary zone where no one wants to share their ideas or take the lead. Participative leadership, on the other hand, is all about chatting it up, trust, and teamwork, and it’s like a breeding ground for fresh ideas and innovation.
Which leadership style do you prefer? Experts say participative leadership usually leads to better choices and happier employees. I won’t disagree with that.
Transactional vs Transformational Leadership
Transactional leadership is like having a rulebook in charge, so yeah, basically Miranda. As an excellent transactional leader, Miranda uses rewards and penalties to keep everyone on track. She is all about structure, organization, and ensuring tasks get done. The good: things run smoothly. The bad, similar to autocratic leadership, is that it kills creativity and innovation.
Transformational leadership is the opposite. Transformational leaders are both inspirational and cheerleaders. They’re active, enthusiastic, and super passionate about the mission and vision. They want everyone to grow, feel empowered, and work together for a common goal. Transformational leaders are excellent at sparking creativity and motivation.
In a nutshell, transactional leaders are awesome at keeping things running smoothly day-to-day, while transformational leaders are more about the big picture and vision.
Which leadership style do you prefer? Experts say it often makes sense to mix these styles based on the situation’s needs. I won’t disagree with that.
If you want to explore these leadership styles in The Devil Wears Prada, I would recommend this case study.
Miranda is not the villain of the story, Andy’s boyfriend is
Miranda has a very extreme leadership style that won’t work for many people, but that also makes her incredibly good at what she does. Miranda is a bad fit for Andy, so she leaves her, perpetuating the idea that we don’t leave jobs but managers. Do you guys think Miranda is a better fit for Emily (Emily Blunt)? I am not sure, but it made me remember this tweet (yes, I keep saying Twitter) from Adam Grant a few weeks ago. It basically implies that after having a bad boss, folks only perpetuate their bad bossiness if they are already inclined to do so. Others would easily break the cycle.
The problem with Andy’s boyfriend (and her friends)
My problem with Andy’s boyfriend is that he is selfish and unsupportive.
It is true that Andy takes a Mr. Collins job that ends up absorbing her, and it is true that she kind of becomes a different person because of the job. Is this a bad thing? NOT AT ALL. I would add that Andy actually looks pretty happy in Paris (before being both deceived and disappointed by Miranda).
Focusing on your career is not bad, and your partner should support you. I am not a proponent of 60-hour weeks, but if you do it (whether you have to or want to), the person you are sharing your life with should make it easier for you and embrace that your career is part of who you are. And I don’t care that Andy is sacrificing her free time for a Mr. Collins job that is not in journalism. She should be able to experiment and evolve without fearing that her partner will freak out if she starts discovering a new and unique person inside of her. I can’t help but wonder what would have happened if Andy wasn’t a woman, but anyway, maybe this is why I am single.
Have an amazing week, my beautiful ones!
Do you want to receive posts like this one in your inbox every week? Subscribe to my newsletter!!
