You don't have in line to succeed him or your boss for example. To be a team player you do what your boss directs you to do. Refuse to do it for example , then your employment will be a short one .
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Chapek FIRED, Iger New CEO
- Thread starter Chef Mickey
- Start date
ImperfectPixie
Well-Known Member
Having been in creative businesses, there have been countless times where I've had to explain to my boss (usually the company owner) whether their ideas were possible and if I thought they would work well and/or look good. A good boss will take input from someone like me and be willing to compromise in order to achieve the best outcome. A bad boss will not listen to input at all and will just say "I don't care - do it." Even a bad boss can sometimes be swayed, though...especially if you use the "wasted money" angle.
Robbiem
Well-Known Member
My best ever boss once asked me what my job was. I said to get you what you need to do your job. He told me ‘no its to tell me what I need and when I’m wrong’. My worst boss when I diagreed with him told me I made him look bad and that I was the only person who worked for him who hadn’t told him how he was the best boss ever.
Being a good manager isnt about making all the decisions or imposing your will on the staff. Its about helping your people do their best work and knowing when to stand back and when to step in
ImperfectPixie
Well-Known Member
I feel like an entire generation of business majors never learned that.
James Alucobond
Well-Known Member
I don’t believe it’s a particularly generational divide. I’ve had bosses of all ages who are good and bad. However, I do feel that those who are reluctant managers are often the best ones. They’re usually also masters of the craft they oversee and concern themselves with removing barriers and providing opportunities for professional development. By contrast, those who only want to manage people and don’t actually fully grasp what their subordinates do are concerned primarily with making sure that they look competent in their ability to manage. For some, being challenged undermines that facade.
Robbiem
Well-Known Member
the type of workplace matters as well. In my experience soley office based workplaces tend to have worse management than places where people need to work as a team to get the job done. The best job I had was working for a transport system everyone needed to do their job to keep things working and managers who dictated to staff soon found they had problems compared to the more collegiate managers. Worst job I ever had was working for the (UK) central government no one would accept responsibility and just look to blame others rather than saying sorry I made a mistake and moving on. People were so afraid of loosing face they would do nothing constructive. It made me so mentally ill I quit and walked away
LSLS
Well-Known Member
Lol, so chapek is at fault for things that occurred when he was in the position of Josh, and now is responsible for the same things now that Josh is in that position? So, chapek had complete autonomy when he was in charge of parks, but now as ceo, he has changed the ceo duties to micromanages and make decisions for each and every thing that occurs in the parks. This right here is why people laugh at the love for Josh.
JoeCamel
Well-Known Member
One looks like a villain and 1 does not
Brian
Well-Known Member
The Hotel Plaza Boulevard entrance to WDW (across from the former Crossroads). Added bonus is that the WDW sign makes for a nice backdrop.
That will be a yawn fest if anyone shows up.
Stevek
Well-Known Member
It is pretty terrible…like it was written by some blogger/fanboy still living in mom’s basement
Disone
Well-Known Member
It's not just that. Josh came up through the ranks of Walt Disney World. You can think Joshes "care" is staged if you want, and you may very well be right but at least he makes an effort to connect with cast. At least he makes an effort to pretend he cares about something else besides the almighty ROI to the shareholder.
I don't have to believe that Josh is 100% perfect in order to believe that he would be better in the role than Bob chapek who comes across about as plastic as my credit card.
Last edited:
That's not correct. He started in Finance as Director, then VP in various locations.
LSLS
Well-Known Member
He came up through the ranks of WDW? His first job at WDW was as VP of Animal Kingdom. Again, you are making the point because he performs well in front of the camera he would be better running a company.
He may care more for cast members. Maybe, I have no idea. But if the ceo is responsible for overseeing the parks, then stop blaming chapek for everything that happened before the pandemic. If the person in charge of parks is responsible for the cuts, stop blaming chapek now. You can't have it both ways.
ImperfectPixie
Well-Known Member
I keep trying to get through to people that yes, Chapek is the head of the beast, but not to forget that there are people under him who are also responsible, along with the BoD.
Petition only did 3k over the weekend. Terrible! And you* call yourself Disney fans!
*you the preverbial. Not you personally unless you like Bob - what's wrong with you!
*you the preverbial. Not you personally unless you like Bob - what's wrong with you!
ImperfectPixie
Well-Known Member
Personally, I think the problem is bigger than Chapek. Yes, he needs to be gone, but what we all really want is for the company to return to the values and ethics that made it so huge to begin with. Just getting rid of Chapek won't do that.
John park hopper
Well-Known Member
Getting rid of Capek won' t change things IMO its the current corporate mentality maximize profits to appease shareholders at the expense of guests.
Last edited:
Disone
Well-Known Member
And you are making remarks and judgments based on never having work with him directly. You seem to be senselessly defending Bob chapek. That is not a stance I'm going to take. It's certainly not a bet the smart money is on.
Josh just does not have a history of huge cutbacks and budget first above all else.
In short Josh does not have that history or reputation but Chepek does.
LSLS
Well-Known Member
I'm not defending chapek, I'm saying the Josh love is laughable. He doesn't have the history? He's been in charge of parks for a year and a half. How many cuts have we seen? I'm making the case you need to pick a lane. Either the head of parks is responsible for the cuts and lessening of guest experiences, or the ceo is. Either chapek was responsible for all the cuts a few years back, or he's responsible now and took unfair blame for iger in the past.
My personal take? You are going to have a real hard time convincing me the ceo is intimately involved in the entertainment and experiences of a single division of a company this large. I'm sure he issues hire up edicts (just as iger did) as to we need this percentage of profits, etc., but I fully believe cuts and such are being sent down by the head of that division, not a micromanaging ceo.