-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Disney largely disbands strategic planning unit
- Thread starter speck76
- Start date
Chernabog said:
I would not think so...a Disney product is a Disney product......what may no longer happen is the "board" making the parks add an attraction or show for a movie, or doing a promotion that only makes sense to them, not to the parks people.
prberk
Well-Known Member
Chernabog said:
No, actually it could (and should) make cooperation easier. What it does is it takes out the THIRD group (strategic planning) as an obligatory approval group that may or may not really understand the best workings of the separate departments.
Without Strategic Planning (bureacracy), the two (or more) other departments can actually communicate more directly, as needed, the way it used to be. They can also go more directly to senior management.
So, this is a good move, that encourages the creative minds to come back or stay on....
Paul
more info
Disney Cuts Strategic-Planning Unit
By MERISSA MARR
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
March 28, 2005; Page A3
Less than two weeks after naming Robert Iger as its new chief executive, Walt Disney Co. dismantled the company's strategic-planning unit, the centralized corporate decision-making operation favored by departing chief Michael Eisner but unpopular among the entertainment giant's executives.
Long the target of criticism within the Disney empire, the strategic-planning unit's powers largely will be handed back to Disney business divisions that have chafed under the strategic-planning operation, which analyzed -- and often shot down -- business strategies and deals that company managers proposed.
Peter E. Murphy, who steered the unit for the past seven years and was a close aide to Mr. Eisner, will step down as chief strategic officer and senior executive vice president and will take on a scaled-back role as an adviser to Mr. Iger, who takes over as Disney's chief executive at the end of September. Mr. Murphy's advisory role is expected to be a temporary stop before a job outside the company.
The overhaul is a first step in Mr. Iger's efforts to make his mark at Disney and likely will win him points with the company's executives and investors. Since being named Mr. Eisner's successor, Mr. Iger has set a priority of decentralizing Disney and making its division heads more accountable. Now Mr. Iger is betting that company unit heads can devise better growth strategies than did the centralized group.
One of the original executives who helped set up the unit in the late 1980s, Mr. Murphy was involved in such transforming deals as the acquisition of Capital Cities/ABC Inc., which nearly doubled Disney's size in the mid-1990s. In recent years, he became a lightning rod for attacks on the division as the company underperformed. His unit frequently was criticized for having too much power and quashing ideas that weren't its own, earning the moniker "the business prevention department."
"My job wasn't to win a popularity contest," the 17-year Disney veteran said, defending his role. "It was to be objective, honest, analytical and focus on shareholder value."
A small corporate-planning group steered by Disney's chief financial officer, Tom Staggs, will survive the current 30-person strategic-planning unit. Mr. Murphy insisted he was part of the decision to splinter the division. "We have been having a dialogue about this for many months," he said. "This was a decision I was part of and supported."
The first of its kind in Hollywood, the strategic-planning unit was created in 1985 by Disney's then CFO, Gary Wilson, now a member of the company's board. The division was a core part of the centralized management of Mr. Eisner, who had taken over as chief executive a year earlier.
The unit was conceived to house a high-powered team charged with seeking out and nurturing new growth opportunities, and setting the company on a strategic path. For the first time, it required each of the company's units to set out five-year plans as part of efforts to boost Disney's sluggish growth.
The unit quickly became a breeding ground for new talent. Mr. Staggs and the head of theme parks and resorts, Jay Rasulo, worked in the division. EBay Inc. Chief Executive Meg Whitman, who recently interviewed for the Disney chief executive job, was once part of the unit.
In the early years, the hoped-for dynamic tension between the unit and Disney's business divisions was artfully managed by Mr. Eisner's deputy, Frank Wells. After Mr. Wells died in a helicopter crash in 1994, sparring became more exaggerated.
Over time, the unit's role spread to such diverse duties as helping to stabilize Euro Disney during its difficulties. It also played a major role in the expansion of Walt Disney World in Florida and the development of the company's cruise line. The unit had its misses, though, such as the acquisition of what is now the ABC Family channel, for which Disney is widely considered to have overpaid.
When Disney bought Capital Cities/ABC in 1995, pressure rose for a more decentralized management. Mr. Murphy, now 42 years old, was promoted to chief strategic officer shortly after that deal.
"The disbanding of strategic planning is the natural evolution from a centralized system to a more decentralized control," said Larry Murphy, no relation to Peter Murphy, and the executive originally charged with running the unit.
Write to Merissa Marr at merissa.marr@wsj.com
Disney Cuts Strategic-Planning Unit
By MERISSA MARR
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
March 28, 2005; Page A3
Less than two weeks after naming Robert Iger as its new chief executive, Walt Disney Co. dismantled the company's strategic-planning unit, the centralized corporate decision-making operation favored by departing chief Michael Eisner but unpopular among the entertainment giant's executives.
Long the target of criticism within the Disney empire, the strategic-planning unit's powers largely will be handed back to Disney business divisions that have chafed under the strategic-planning operation, which analyzed -- and often shot down -- business strategies and deals that company managers proposed.
Peter E. Murphy, who steered the unit for the past seven years and was a close aide to Mr. Eisner, will step down as chief strategic officer and senior executive vice president and will take on a scaled-back role as an adviser to Mr. Iger, who takes over as Disney's chief executive at the end of September. Mr. Murphy's advisory role is expected to be a temporary stop before a job outside the company.
The overhaul is a first step in Mr. Iger's efforts to make his mark at Disney and likely will win him points with the company's executives and investors. Since being named Mr. Eisner's successor, Mr. Iger has set a priority of decentralizing Disney and making its division heads more accountable. Now Mr. Iger is betting that company unit heads can devise better growth strategies than did the centralized group.
One of the original executives who helped set up the unit in the late 1980s, Mr. Murphy was involved in such transforming deals as the acquisition of Capital Cities/ABC Inc., which nearly doubled Disney's size in the mid-1990s. In recent years, he became a lightning rod for attacks on the division as the company underperformed. His unit frequently was criticized for having too much power and quashing ideas that weren't its own, earning the moniker "the business prevention department."
"My job wasn't to win a popularity contest," the 17-year Disney veteran said, defending his role. "It was to be objective, honest, analytical and focus on shareholder value."
A small corporate-planning group steered by Disney's chief financial officer, Tom Staggs, will survive the current 30-person strategic-planning unit. Mr. Murphy insisted he was part of the decision to splinter the division. "We have been having a dialogue about this for many months," he said. "This was a decision I was part of and supported."
The first of its kind in Hollywood, the strategic-planning unit was created in 1985 by Disney's then CFO, Gary Wilson, now a member of the company's board. The division was a core part of the centralized management of Mr. Eisner, who had taken over as chief executive a year earlier.
The unit was conceived to house a high-powered team charged with seeking out and nurturing new growth opportunities, and setting the company on a strategic path. For the first time, it required each of the company's units to set out five-year plans as part of efforts to boost Disney's sluggish growth.
The unit quickly became a breeding ground for new talent. Mr. Staggs and the head of theme parks and resorts, Jay Rasulo, worked in the division. EBay Inc. Chief Executive Meg Whitman, who recently interviewed for the Disney chief executive job, was once part of the unit.
In the early years, the hoped-for dynamic tension between the unit and Disney's business divisions was artfully managed by Mr. Eisner's deputy, Frank Wells. After Mr. Wells died in a helicopter crash in 1994, sparring became more exaggerated.
Over time, the unit's role spread to such diverse duties as helping to stabilize Euro Disney during its difficulties. It also played a major role in the expansion of Walt Disney World in Florida and the development of the company's cruise line. The unit had its misses, though, such as the acquisition of what is now the ABC Family channel, for which Disney is widely considered to have overpaid.
When Disney bought Capital Cities/ABC in 1995, pressure rose for a more decentralized management. Mr. Murphy, now 42 years old, was promoted to chief strategic officer shortly after that deal.
"The disbanding of strategic planning is the natural evolution from a centralized system to a more decentralized control," said Larry Murphy, no relation to Peter Murphy, and the executive originally charged with running the unit.
Write to Merissa Marr at merissa.marr@wsj.com
HennieBogan1966
Account Suspended
I would have to agree with your first assessment Speck, that people don't get as "worked up" shall we say, when people in mgmt. positions get let go, as they do when the "little guy" gets let go.
I would disagree with the thought that these mgmt. people would have an "easier" time finding new jobs in the job market.
By the way, I thought that some of the same people going to bat for the little guys always say that there AREN'T ANY GOOD PAYING JOBS OUT THERE RIGHT NOW, HENCE THE NEED FOR GUARANTEED EMPLOYMENT, HIGHER PAY, BETTER BENEFITS, YADA, YADA, YADA.
It's awfully curious to me that you don't hear any of those comments regarding THIS dowsizing by the EVIL corporate giant that is Disney.
I would disagree with the thought that these mgmt. people would have an "easier" time finding new jobs in the job market.
By the way, I thought that some of the same people going to bat for the little guys always say that there AREN'T ANY GOOD PAYING JOBS OUT THERE RIGHT NOW, HENCE THE NEED FOR GUARANTEED EMPLOYMENT, HIGHER PAY, BETTER BENEFITS, YADA, YADA, YADA.
It's awfully curious to me that you don't hear any of those comments regarding THIS dowsizing by the EVIL corporate giant that is Disney.
DisneyFan 2000
Well-Known Member
'Cause no one ever complains when you kick the Villan's ___. 
HennieBogan1966
Account Suspended
What makes them Villians?
HennieBogan1966
Account Suspended
Ahhhh, the plot thickens. Figures!!!
DarkMeasures
New Member
Hmmmm.... I am still reading Disney War but it seems that Iger wants to try to help out but seeing what he did with Millionaire, I don't know. I mean I know he was working his butt off to keep ABC at number one but it all ended up dieing rather quickly and badly and left ABC at number 4.
HennieBogan1966
Account Suspended
Well, while there may be some internal struggles, I think that the real proof will come from Oct thru the New Year. Until then, I'm sure there will be lots of posturing, and grunting and groaning by the huge egos.
prberk
Well-Known Member
HennieBogan1966 said:
These are not largely traditional managers who might have worked their way up from a skilled or company-specific position. They are mostly MBAs from prestigious business schools. They are usually VERY marketable. And often this position can be a huge stepping stone to go further (notice the list of people in the article above -- like the current Ebay head -- who started in this position).
Strategic planning positions at this level are usually filled with highly-educated people, but are rarely "from the inside." This is why they are usually good as a SMALL group that helps upper management analyze things from the unit managers; BUT as a large group that actually drives decisions, they become an impediment to responsive management. Which is what happened here.
But as a group, the individuals are usually very marketable.
DisneyFan 2000
Well-Known Member
speck76 said:
Harsh. Especially seeing as how I was joking about the comment...
HennieBogan1966 said:
I would agree that the people in this department would have an easier time than most people finding a job.
1) They are typically MBA types that can cross over to many other industries so they are not very specialized in a certain industry.
2) They are very well educated. Education is a key factor in attracting good jobs.
3) They all have experience in running a large company (Disney).
4) They won't have to worry about making ends meet as I am almost positive they will all get very nice severences. You don't see many of the little guys getting up to multi-million dollar severences, which I am positive at least Mr. Murphy will recieve when he leaves.
KevinPage
Well-Known Member
I think the best way to view anything that Iger does (especially the first few years), be CAUTIOUS and also OPTOMISTIC.
This move to reduce power of the "planners" seems to be a very good thing, but how it will work long term and if there are any negative ramifications, are yet to be seen.
I have no real knowlegde about Iger himself, except for all the articles written about him the past few years, but my impression is that he doesn't have the 'glory hog' mentality of an Eisner (then again, who does?) & we might be pleasantly surprised at some of the changes he makes. (slow & steady as opposed to fast & widespreading)
He appears to me to be someone who knew what he needed to do to stay in good graces with the powerful, even if he didn't believe in their way 100%, and once he was given the chance to do it "his way" would then be able to change things for the better.
Granted, he is still a "corporate type" through ahd through. But maybe, just maybe he will be the type to let the divisions run things the way they see fit and not feel the need to smell Yeti's, pick the color of drapes to hotels, etc.
I myself don't give a rats patoot about ESPN or ABC (as long as they don't hurt the overall company). Theme parks & animation (since it is so closely associated with the parks) are my only concerns. If the proper people are in place to run those and not questioned on the paint brushs & screws they use, things will inevidently improve.
How will Jay Raluso now operate, a bean counter extradonaire, without massive micromanagement, will potentially be even more interesting in the coming years as he has the most direct impact on the theme parks.
This move to reduce power of the "planners" seems to be a very good thing, but how it will work long term and if there are any negative ramifications, are yet to be seen.
I have no real knowlegde about Iger himself, except for all the articles written about him the past few years, but my impression is that he doesn't have the 'glory hog' mentality of an Eisner (then again, who does?) & we might be pleasantly surprised at some of the changes he makes. (slow & steady as opposed to fast & widespreading)
He appears to me to be someone who knew what he needed to do to stay in good graces with the powerful, even if he didn't believe in their way 100%, and once he was given the chance to do it "his way" would then be able to change things for the better.
Granted, he is still a "corporate type" through ahd through. But maybe, just maybe he will be the type to let the divisions run things the way they see fit and not feel the need to smell Yeti's, pick the color of drapes to hotels, etc.
I myself don't give a rats patoot about ESPN or ABC (as long as they don't hurt the overall company). Theme parks & animation (since it is so closely associated with the parks) are my only concerns. If the proper people are in place to run those and not questioned on the paint brushs & screws they use, things will inevidently improve.
How will Jay Raluso now operate, a bean counter extradonaire, without massive micromanagement, will potentially be even more interesting in the coming years as he has the most direct impact on the theme parks.
imagineer boy
Well-Known Member
This is very good news! Iger will just sit at his office, gain weight, and swim in his money vault while all of the officials at the theme parks movie studios, and ABC will continue to make Disney the best company ever! I'm so excited! :sohappy:
HennieBogan1966
Account Suspended
Well, if you listen to all of the nay-sayers, you will read a lot on these boards about how there aren't any good jobs available out there. Now, this may be a larger issue (for those people anyway), as it speaks to an idealogical "belief" about the current economic status in the U.S., rather than FACTUAL data.
While I would agree that most of these individuals are more marketable, and better educated than the average hourly CM, it doesn't ALWAYS hold true that they would just "find" or "fall" into another high paying position with another company.
Where I was going with all of this earlier was how there seems to be a big difference with the people who will picket, boycott, and strike against companies (Disney), when it comes to the "blue collar" worker being laid off or short-changed. But when it comes to people in management positions, it's "Oh well, that's life." I'm just wondering what the difference in all of these people really is, other than how much they make for a living. I was just wondering aloud why we aren't hearing about the injustice of this unit being disbanded, and what is going to happen to the people that made up this unit. I wonder where all the people who supposedly "care" about fairness and justice for those being displaced are now!!!
In the end, it's about class envy. When it's management, it's "Axe em!!!" Then give us all raises from their salaries. What some don't realize is that sometimes, management is actually needed to run companies. And contrary to the popular belief, not ALL people in management ARE NOT crooked, cruel, and heartless.
And before anyone asks, NO, I am NOT in management with my company. I'm an hourly associate too!!! And guess what? I've also worked for The Disney Store in the past, and my Wife still does.
And if I might add, I actually agree with this move from a business perspective. It's about increasing efficiency and saving money. Just wondering where all the people who "care" about injustice and fairness are to fight for these folks who have lost their jobs.
While I would agree that most of these individuals are more marketable, and better educated than the average hourly CM, it doesn't ALWAYS hold true that they would just "find" or "fall" into another high paying position with another company.
Where I was going with all of this earlier was how there seems to be a big difference with the people who will picket, boycott, and strike against companies (Disney), when it comes to the "blue collar" worker being laid off or short-changed. But when it comes to people in management positions, it's "Oh well, that's life." I'm just wondering what the difference in all of these people really is, other than how much they make for a living. I was just wondering aloud why we aren't hearing about the injustice of this unit being disbanded, and what is going to happen to the people that made up this unit. I wonder where all the people who supposedly "care" about fairness and justice for those being displaced are now!!!
In the end, it's about class envy. When it's management, it's "Axe em!!!" Then give us all raises from their salaries. What some don't realize is that sometimes, management is actually needed to run companies. And contrary to the popular belief, not ALL people in management ARE NOT crooked, cruel, and heartless.
And before anyone asks, NO, I am NOT in management with my company. I'm an hourly associate too!!! And guess what? I've also worked for The Disney Store in the past, and my Wife still does.
And if I might add, I actually agree with this move from a business perspective. It's about increasing efficiency and saving money. Just wondering where all the people who "care" about injustice and fairness are to fight for these folks who have lost their jobs.
