A sequel? Nah, not this one

[CaptainAmerica]

Also, opening up the feedback options might reveal that certain parts of the company aren't doing their jobs well. So there's a bit of an incentive not to ask questions that might result in that sort of feedback.

That's completely backwards. The people who write the surveys are TRYING to reveal the parts of the company that aren't doing their jobs well. That's literally what they're paid to do.

 

[DVCakaCarlF]

How are you feeling about the current direction of the re-design or is it too early to tell?

Excellent question...curious as to the next direction or theme that will take place.

 

[SteamboatJoe]

Do you know who does write the surveys?

I can't speak for Disney but there are companys you can hire to do them. Good ones will make sure your questions and response options get you honest, valuable info without being leading or self-serving. They can also administer it in an unbiased (as possible) manner.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Do you know who does write the surveys?

https://www.linkedin.com/in/edkim7/

 

[MisterPenguin]

Doesn't seem very far-fetched to me given how railroaded some of these surveys seem. Surveys can be very useful for showing you were "right".

Except a number of insiders have given us clues as to what some of the survey results are including things the members of this board didn't think were that popular, but are. We we told that general satisfaction (GSAT) was higher for the MK with Stitch closed than open.

Of course surveys are not free from bias because just choosing what to ask about is bias. We may hate Attraction A and wonder how come Disney never asks about Attraction A so that we can spew our bile upon it. But Disney knows that Attraction A gets a good number of guests according to tracking data, and so they never ask about it.

But then, for example, our beloved Attraction B has been seeing its guest attendance numbers go down, and so Disney puts Attraction B on the survey. And then we panic thinking that Attraction B's days are numbered because of it and shake our fists that Attraction A still isn't being asked about!

Some will say "Hey, the survey is biased!" But in this scenario, no. It's not biased at all. Disney wants to know about an attraction that's getting less attendance, which is a perfectly normal thing to ask about. Or perhaps beloved Attraction B is expensive to run or needs major refurbishment and Disney wants to know if it's worth it.

Surveys are not a suggestion box. Anyone who thinks that they are doesn't understand surveys.

Anyone who thinks Disney hires expensive data and polling analysts and spends hundreds of thousands of dollars a year just to do what they wanted to do anyway is in conspiracy theory territory. Especially because Disney almost never reveals the results of the surveys, so, who are they justifying the results to? Themselves? They could have just decided to do what they want anyway.

No tool is perfect or without bias, but the claim the surveys are a sham is an absurd conspiracy.

 

[DVCakaCarlF]

Except a number of insiders have given us clues as to what some of the survey results are including things the members of this board didn't think were that popular, but are. We we told that general satisfaction (GSAT) was higher for the MK with Stitch closed than open.

Of course surveys are not free from bias because just choosing what to ask about is bias. We may hate Attraction A and wonder how come Disney never asks about Attraction A so that we can spew our bile upon it. But Disney knows that Attraction A gets a good number of guests according to tracking data, and so they never ask about it.

But then, for example, our beloved Attraction B has been seeing its guest attendance numbers go down, and so Disney puts Attraction B on the survey. And then we panic thinking that Attraction B's days are numbered because of it and shake our fists that Attraction A still isn't being asked about!

Some will say "Hey, the survey is biased!" But in this scenario, no. It's not biased at all. Disney wants to know about an attraction that's getting less attendance, which is a perfectly normal thing to ask about. Or perhaps beloved Attraction B is expensive to run or needs major refurbishment and Disney wants to know if it's worth it.

Surveys are not a suggestion box. Anyone who thinks that they are doesn't understand surveys.

Anyone who thinks Disney hires expensive data and polling analysts and spends hundreds of thousands of dollars a year just to do what they wanted to do anyway is in conspiracy theory territory. Especially because Disney almost never reveals the results of the surveys, so, who are they justifying the results to? Themselves? They could have just decided to do what they want anyway.

No tool is perfect or without bias, but the claim the surveys are a sham is an absurd conspiracy.

I wonder if Meet the Robinson’s” will work in place of Stitch?

 

[The_Jobu]

The stakeholders don't get to write the surveys.

It's not like this is some wild theory, corporate bureaucracy moves tasks up and down, surveys and statistics are often "massaged" to make whatever point someone wants to make. It's not just a Disney thing.

 

[Parker in NYC]

I wonder if Meet the Robinson’s” will work in place of Stitch?

Meet the what? No one remembers that movie. I don't even think it has a cult following. If it does, it brings new meaning to "cult following".

 

[MisterPenguin]

Meet the what? No one remembers that movie. I don't even think it has a cult following. If it does, it brings new meaning to "cult following".

Bowler hat guy sometimes makes an appearance during Halloween or characterpaloozas.

 

[Parker in NYC]

Bowler hat guy sometimes makes an appearance during Halloween or characterpaloozas.

Well, time for an attraction!

 

[The_Jobu]

Except a number of insiders have given us clues as to what some of the survey results are including things the members of this board didn't think were that popular, but are. We we told that general satisfaction (GSAT) was higher for the MK with Stitch closed than open.

Of course surveys are not free from bias because just choosing what to ask about is bias. We may hate Attraction A and wonder how come Disney never asks about Attraction A so that we can spew our bile upon it. But Disney knows that Attraction A gets a good number of guests according to tracking data, and so they never ask about it.

But then, for example, our beloved Attraction B has been seeing its guest attendance numbers go down, and so Disney puts Attraction B on the survey. And then we panic thinking that Attraction B's days are numbered because of it and shake our fists that Attraction A still isn't being asked about!

Some will say "Hey, the survey is biased!" But in this scenario, no. It's not biased at all. Disney wants to know about an attraction that's getting less attendance, which is a perfectly normal thing to ask about. Or perhaps beloved Attraction B is expensive to run or needs major refurbishment and Disney wants to know if it's worth it.

Surveys are not a suggestion box. Anyone who thinks that they are doesn't understand surveys.

Anyone who thinks Disney hires expensive data and polling analysts and spends hundreds of thousands of dollars a year just to do what they wanted to do anyway is in conspiracy theory territory. Especially because Disney almost never reveals the results of the surveys, so, who are they justifying the results to? Themselves? They could have just decided to do what they want anyway.

No tool is perfect or without bias, but the claim the surveys are a sham is an absurd conspiracy.

With all due respect, you have a history of saying that anything that suggests negative public reactions are being masked is a conspiracy. It's just a theory based on logical suppositions and the history of statistics and surveys to be manipulated to support whatever argument they need to support.

This may shock you, but not everything in the corporate world can be taken at face value.

 

[MisterPenguin]

With all due respect, you have a history of saying that anything that suggests negative public reactions are being masked is a conspiracy.

That's ad hominem.

If you know that Disney puts out sham surveys, show your source.

 

[The_Jobu]

That's ad hominem.

If you know that Disney puts out sham surveys, show your source.

Well, again with respect, I dont think bringing up your usual response to these topics is a personal attack. I'm not critiquing you or your character, I'm discussing your previous statements. Apologies if I offended you.

Please note that I have never said that I know this to be true, I said it was a theory, one easy to imagine given corporate bureaucracies. I dont understand the need to be so defensive, honestly. Do you really draw "wild conspiracy" out of the following conversation:

Person 1: These surveys seem designed to get a desired response
Person 2: Why would anyone want a desired response?
Me: It could help show success in some executives' monthly reports, or validate their ideas
You: Whoa, where's your tinfoil hat crazy person!?

It is a discussion forum after all. We're just talking.

 

[SteamboatJoe]

Those surveys must work. I roasted Bongo's three years ago when a surveyor questioned me about Disney Springs and now its gone. I also complained about the lack of a permanent, full-time counter service restaurant that serves tacos.

 

[_caleb]

That's completely backwards. The people who write the surveys are TRYING to reveal the parts of the company that aren't doing their jobs well. That's literally what they're paid to do.

The people who commission guest satisfaction surveys are not the people who write the surveys.

 

[SteamboatJoe]

Well, again with respect, I dont think bringing up your usual response to these topics is a personal attack. I'm not critiquing you or your character, I'm discussing your previous statements. Apologies if I offended you.

Please note that I have never said that I know this to be true, I said it was a theory, one easy to imagine given corporate bureaucracies. I dont understand the need to be so defensive, honestly. Do you really draw "wild conspiracy" out of the following conversation:

Person 1: These surveys seem designed to get a desired response
Person 2: Why would anyone want a desired response?
Me: It could help show success in some executives' monthly reports, or validate their ideas
You: Whoa, where's your tinfoil hat crazy person!?

It is a discussion forum after all. We're just talking.

The problem is your second point is an assumption which appears to be completely erroneous.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Well, again with respect, I dont think bringing up your usual response to these topics is a personal attack. I'm not critiquing you or your character, I'm discussing your previous statements. Apologies if I offended you.

Yeah... but it is a personal attack.

Rather than taking my points at face value and judging them on their cogency and logic, you "consider the source" and throw doubt on them.

That's the very definition of "ad hominem."

Please note that I have never said that I know this to be true, I said it was a theory, one easy to imagine given corporate bureaucracies. I dont understand the need to be so defensive, honestly. Do you really draw "wild conspiracy" out of the following conversation:

Person 1: These surveys seem designed to get a desired response
Person 2: Why would anyone want a desired response?
Me: It could help show success in some executives' monthly reports, or validate their ideas
You: Whoa, where's your tinfoil hat crazy person!?

It is a discussion forum after all. We're just talking.

That an executive is manipulating dozens of professionals trained in data analysis and polling just to validate their ideas and no one's blowing the whistle on them for that manipulation or waste of money or guest backlash? Yes, that's a wild theory.

 

[The_Jobu]

Yeah... but it is a personal attack.

Rather than taking my points at face value and judging them on their cogency and logic, you "consider the source" and throw doubt on them.

That's the very definition of "ad hominem."





That an executive is manipulating dozens of professionals trained in data analysis and polling just to validate their ideas and no one's blowing the whistle on them for that manipulation or waste of money or guest backlash? Yes, that's a wild theory.

Well, again, sorry if I offended you.

I would suggest, however, creating strawmen hurts your argument. It wouldn't be one maverick executive obviously, and there would be no need to blow the whistle on anyone, the firm that provides the "best" results would likely be hired again. As you say they are trained professionals, very skilled at delivering what is required. How many times have accountants "cooked the books" so an executive could claim better growth this quarter or something? Even at my past retail jobs I've seen managers manipulate surveys and guest feedback to report better results to the district manager. There really is nothing "wild" about this possibility, that is your own subjective opinion.

Really, I dont understand the need to be so defensive about something as mundane as corporate bureaucracy and data manipulation.

 

[marni1971]

That is not correct. What would Disney gain by spending significant time and money to generate surveys with artificially positive answers that mask how guests really feel?

No, you cannot express "exactly how you feel" but it's not some kind of tinfoil conspiracy. When you survey 1,000 different people and give them freedom to answer "exactly how they feel" you get 1,000 different responses. You need to narrow the choices so you can do some analysis with standardized data.

Everyone likes to say "Disney doesn't care about the guest experience," which is complete nonsense. No they don't care about the guest experience as such, but they absolutely care about the guest experience insofar as they want to to come back and spend more money with them and tell your friends what a great time you had so your friends will spend THEIR money with Disney too.

It’s closer to the truth than a lot would like.

 

[_caleb]

Except a number of insiders have given us clues as to what some of the survey results are including things the members of this board didn't think were that popular, but are. We we told that general satisfaction (GSAT) was higher for the MK with Stitch closed than open.

Of course surveys are not free from bias because just choosing what to ask about is bias. We may hate Attraction A and wonder how come Disney never asks about Attraction A so that we can spew our bile upon it. But Disney knows that Attraction A gets a good number of guests according to tracking data, and so they never ask about it.

But then, for example, our beloved Attraction B has been seeing its guest attendance numbers go down, and so Disney puts Attraction B on the survey. And then we panic thinking that Attraction B's days are numbered because of it and shake our fists that Attraction A still isn't being asked about!

Some will say "Hey, the survey is biased!" But in this scenario, no. It's not biased at all. Disney wants to know about an attraction that's getting less attendance, which is a perfectly normal thing to ask about. Or perhaps beloved Attraction B is expensive to run or needs major refurbishment and Disney wants to know if it's worth it.

Surveys are not a suggestion box. Anyone who thinks that they are doesn't understand surveys.

Anyone who thinks Disney hires expensive data and polling analysts and spends hundreds of thousands of dollars a year just to do what they wanted to do anyway is in conspiracy theory territory. Especially because Disney almost never reveals the results of the surveys, so, who are they justifying the results to? Themselves? They could have just decided to do what they want anyway.

No tool is perfect or without bias, but the claim the surveys are a sham is an absurd conspiracy.

I agree that the scenario you outline is probably pretty common and likely to be interpreted by uberfans as bias against our beloved attractions.

Surveys are commissioned by different departments for different reasons. Though they fall into the "customer satisfaction" category, they are likely to be prompted by a desire for feedback about a specific issue/attraction/initiative/service/idea. As such, there are different goals for the surveys.

But I also think (based on my own non-Disney professional experience) that not only are surveys biased in determining what questions to ask (the scope of the survey), but also in the interpretation of the data and later use of the data to support pre-determined agendas.

I don't think Disney commissions a survey just to get positive feedback to pat themselves on the back with. That does seem like conspiracy theory territory. But I do think Disney Execs (perhaps inspired by Walt himself) often engage in a bit of assumption, where they presume to know what the guest wants/needs despite what the data shows. I have no sources to support this theory.

I'm not aware of Disney doing any more open-ended, focus-group-type survey work. I have been interviewed several times about my experience at the parks, though, and rarely were the multiple choice answers I was asked to choose from representative of the feedback I really wanted to give.