I’m not sure how this directly relates to Iger or how him leaving would potentially change this for the better. The IP mandate is only a fractional part of the issue. His exit could signal the end of the IP fixation (though I very much doubt it), but it won’t magically unlock more impressive attractions or better storytelling capabilities within Imagineering.
This I very much agree with. I believe the issues with Imagineering are multi-faceted.
But, I don't think most of the factors are specific to WDI. I think they mostly are dynamics happening in companies all over. Even the "IP mandate" is really the same business logic as why we see so many sequels, prequels, and other-media IPs/licenses (Barbie, Minecraft...) in movie theaters, or in the toy aisle, on Broadway, and really everywhere. It's about having a built-in, receptive audience, and reducing marketing burdens/costs because explaining and enticing around something new is exhorbitant, and the noise to fight through intense.
Other cotributors:
The reductions in workforce targeting expensive (i.e., experienced) workers has been happening intensely across corporate America in recent years. That's a brain drain. And it means fewer mentors around.
[An aside: when I was in my 20s and newly employed, designing things, I once presented my plans for a menu board at a themed restaurant that was going to have cool stainless steel panels and magnets with items and prices...My boss (an MBA) said "Sounds great!" and I went off to order the thousands of dollars in stainless steel. Luckily, this senior "old guy" in the shop pulled me aside and said, "Kid, magnets don't stick to stainless steel." (In my defense this was decades ago and before stainless steel appliances became popular, haha). He saved my, you know. Having experienced people around who have been through a lot and overcome a lot of challenges is so important and so powerful when coupled with energetic, young, skies-the-limit creatives.]
Also, work culture has changed a lot in the past decade or so. Many behaviors once typical (demanding bosses criticizing work, people interrupting each other in meetings, respect for authority/seniority) have been explicitly targeted for elimination in efforts to make workplaces less toxic, less traumatic, more sensitive to individual needs, etc. Younger generations just also bring with them different social cultures and rules of engagement. But there are tradeoffs, and I do think more bad work gets through now as people are more reluctant to be honest and critical, fearing being seen as unsupportive, toxic, etc. The "no idea is a bad idea" mantra once was intended to spur brainstorming and now applies beyond the whiteboard -- actual projects are just bad ideas that weren't
bravely stopped.
I think social media and the web-elevated voices of ordinary people means criticism reach the companies daily, hourly, whereas years ago they would have to do focus groups and surveys and be seeking feedback. This barrage of unsolicited feedback -- the constant criticism -- is traumatic in its own way on people at these companies and they of course try to filter it out, but it's hard, and it can feel personal. So "negativity avoidance" happens, where the companies sand off every sharp point, ease every angle, to avoid negative reactions from this group, or that group, these kind of people or those kind of people. What's left is safe, bland entertainment.
I also think everything is so public there's fewer places to experiment out of the spotlight, reducing innovation. Before the web, a company could release a product in a test market to see how it goes, without the entire world hearing about it. If it failed, no big. Try something else. Now if a company does anything, as small and off in the shadows as possible, it will be big news. And if it's a failure: HAHA!!! LOOK HOW DUMB THEY ARE! rings out loudly, everywhere, demoralizing employees, turning off customers and investors, and digging a deeper brand-hole to recover from. Innovating is incredibly risky now, so we get more rehash, repeats, clones, derivatives, and safer bets.
I could go on and list a few more but the point is this stuff isn't Disney-specific. I think this is the corporate world now, and what matters is how leaders deal with it. How they change an institution's approaches to get better results given these dynamics.
www.wdwmagic.com
