-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Disney Outsources more Jobs
- Thread starter DisneyBuff
- Start date
Computer Magic
Well-Known Member
It will save money in the short term. Guest satisfaction and long term savings is unknown, hidden cost and soft dollars. Outsourcing works for some and for others they end up bringing back inhouse. Time will tell. I have been on both sides being a senior manager in IT.peter11435 said:
My only beef is sending the jobs overseas. Disney could have outsourced but kept the jobs in the US. I would do whatever I could to keep the jobs in the US.
Computer Magic
Well-Known Member
Is this the Walt Disney Internet Group? WDIG? How long has IBM been designing it?speck76 said:
Computer Magic
Well-Known Member
I see no problem in that as long as the jobs stay in the US. Although I think it would be cooler to have a Disney name tag then IBM name tag. And IBM is trained to know Disney culture.speck76 said:
speck76
Well-Known Member
Computer Magic said:
Disney is not outsourcing the whole department, only about 1/3 of it.
It makes business sense on many levels.
At the hotels thatt I work with, we have our own IT department, and they manage the company systems, but most hardware is covered by an IBM service contract. We have 24/7 service, which is something we could not provide without increasing the size of our own department. Also, we do not have to order parts, or stock parts, as IBM does this. In almost every instance, they can fix the machine much faster that we would be able to, unless we increased our costs by quite a bit.
Also, ERMCO manages running all of our cables. If they did not, doing so would either tie up our own department on the few occasions that we need new runs pulled, or we would have to hire bodies to do this, but what would they do the rest of the time?
Sprint manages our PBX system, yeah, we have our own telephone techs, but to manage a switch for a resort with 2850 extensions......it is easier and more cost efficient to have it under a contract.
Computer Magic
Well-Known Member
I guess I don't see that as outsourcing, maybe it is. We have service contracts for hardware and hire professionals for cable drops and electric runs. I look at outsourcing employees such as network admins, , server support, programmers, help desk, support analyst, directors, managers.speck76 said:
The reports from Disney is still vague, but if it includes overseas then the help desk, security, web designers and programmers would have to be involved in the outsourcing.
I can't see the data center in India so local support would still be for server and PC support. Of course maybe fewer since technology like SMS can fix issues from any distance. But India is a long distance.
Do you need a CIO or Director, I may know someone :lookaroun
This is good stuff.
speck76
Well-Known Member
I think a lot of what we have seen with the IT profession being moved overseas is fallout from Y2K.
Most IT people were fat and happy the few years prior to Y2K, they were in demand, and the salaries that were available were much higher as a result. Companies really had no choice, they had to get their issues fixed, and they had a deadline that they were not in control of.
Now, it seems that many IT people may have priced themself out of a job. Companies do not have the immediate deadline that Y2K presented, and they are finding it harder and harder to spend money in a non-revenue generating area.
Most IT people were fat and happy the few years prior to Y2K, they were in demand, and the salaries that were available were much higher as a result. Companies really had no choice, they had to get their issues fixed, and they had a deadline that they were not in control of.
Now, it seems that many IT people may have priced themself out of a job. Companies do not have the immediate deadline that Y2K presented, and they are finding it harder and harder to spend money in a non-revenue generating area.
Computer Magic
Well-Known Member
The same can be said with many industries and America work force. America became fat and lazy, steel mill, auto, manufacturing, etc.speck76 said:
Correct IT is a service not a revenue generating. If managed correctly, it can increase productivity and reduce cost. It not always easy to show on a financial statement, which is what looked at most.
The thing about outsourcing is the company loses some control. Also, depending how good the contract is written, could end up costing more. Contracted companies will do exactly what is written in the contract and nothing more, any thing else is chargeable. So if you don't have printers in the contract, everytime a printer is touched a bill is sent.
donsullivan
Premium Member
There is a lot of confusion around what ousourcing means in the IT industry nowadays. The minute many people hear the word outsource, they immediately think that the jobs are going off-shore but that typically is not the case.
I've worked in IT for 15+ years and seen and managed outsourcing deals of many types. There are really 2 different types of outsourcing that happen most often in the space.
1) True outsourcing where you contract with a company to take over responsibility for a specific task that they are equipped to do more efficiently because they specialize in that task. I've done this for the management of very large Wide Area Networks (5000+ sites) and it just didn't make any sense for me to staff up to support that. There are companies out there that do this for a living and could do it for pennies on the dollar vs. what it would cost me to do it on my own.
2) The 2nd type is sometimes called Out-Tasking where you bring in speciality skills for a specific project, and then when the project is over everyone goes on to the next one. This is most commonly on the programming/development side of the house. These are the sort of roles that are often shipped overseas, since the resources do not need to be physically present to do the work.
The bottom line is, this is the way IT operates today. The technologies are pretty commodotized, and in most cases, there are specialists that can do it cheaper than a generalist.
To be honest, I'm not surprised that Disney ended up doing this after the HUGE amount of money spent on their SAP implementation over the last too many years. I suspect someone finally told them it was time to stop spending so much money and starting showing some of the savings they committed to when that project started.
I've worked in IT for 15+ years and seen and managed outsourcing deals of many types. There are really 2 different types of outsourcing that happen most often in the space.
1) True outsourcing where you contract with a company to take over responsibility for a specific task that they are equipped to do more efficiently because they specialize in that task. I've done this for the management of very large Wide Area Networks (5000+ sites) and it just didn't make any sense for me to staff up to support that. There are companies out there that do this for a living and could do it for pennies on the dollar vs. what it would cost me to do it on my own.
2) The 2nd type is sometimes called Out-Tasking where you bring in speciality skills for a specific project, and then when the project is over everyone goes on to the next one. This is most commonly on the programming/development side of the house. These are the sort of roles that are often shipped overseas, since the resources do not need to be physically present to do the work.
The bottom line is, this is the way IT operates today. The technologies are pretty commodotized, and in most cases, there are specialists that can do it cheaper than a generalist.
To be honest, I'm not surprised that Disney ended up doing this after the HUGE amount of money spent on their SAP implementation over the last too many years. I suspect someone finally told them it was time to stop spending so much money and starting showing some of the savings they committed to when that project started.
Computer Magic
Well-Known Member
Very good post. I have also been in IT and IT Management over 15 years. It is how IT operates. I hate seeing jobs go overseas, but that what happens with IT jobs that don't physically have to be located at that site. Currently the saving justifies these jobs to be overseas.donsullivan said:
There aren't alot of roles but there are many people affected by overseas placement. What really got me interested when I read this article, is IBM is taking over IT functions in my area. The debate is going on about sending many jobs outside the US. I see similarities between this and our local company. So far Web design, programming, Help Desk functions are being considered to go outside the US.
KevinPage
Well-Known Member
John Stossel on 20/20 did a piece about the "Myth of Outsourcing" a few month ago on how everyone assumes it is a BAD thing 100% and that it really is good in many ways.
The only example I remember was a local small firm who outsourced 30 jobs, which was able to keep his company afloat and keep the 100 employees he had here in the USA. If he didn't outsource them, ALL of the employees would have been out of a job.
Granted this is not the situation Disney is in, but things like this are hardly "black & white".
The only example I remember was a local small firm who outsourced 30 jobs, which was able to keep his company afloat and keep the 100 employees he had here in the USA. If he didn't outsource them, ALL of the employees would have been out of a job.
Granted this is not the situation Disney is in, but things like this are hardly "black & white".
Computer Magic
Well-Known Member
That type of outsourcing makes sense. You are trying to save the company from going under and losing many more jobs.KevinPage said:
Disney could stipulate that the jobs they outsource have to stay in the US. That would be a good PR move. There are ways to outsource and keep jobs in the US while saving costs.
Computer Magic
Well-Known Member
:lol: You must be from another country, dislike Bill Gates or being sarcastic. :lol:Woody13 said:
Would like to put my 2 cents to this.
I work in IT for a utility company in Va, in the mainframe operations area, where, luck has it, I was hired on as a regular employee. All of my co-workers, who are now regular employees also, first started with the company as contractors. The decision was later made, to make all contractors regular company employees. A lot of companies are going with the contracting route.
Now, also, there was a study done at my place of employment, to 'outsource' the data center, and it was found that at this time, it is not cost effective.
Basically, what would have happened, is we would have still had our jobs, but, would just have been re-hired with the outsourceing firm. Our benifits would have changed, to be what the firm had, instead of what the current employeer had.
So, what is probably going to happen, is basically, the IT part that is going to be outsourced, will re-hire all the current workers, and they will continue to go to work as normal, but, just work for a different employeer.
The down side to that, is they will probably loose any benifits that they had working for Disney.
This kinda sucks for me, as I has wanted to eventually try to obtain employment with Disney doing what I do now - oh well.
You may even see, a few years down the road, Disney finds that outsourcing isn't the way to go, and go back to the way things were.
A company here in Richmond did just that a few years ago. They outsourced their data center, only to find it didnt work as planned, dumped the outsource firm and are now operating their own data center again.
Just my thoughts.
Gary
I work in IT for a utility company in Va, in the mainframe operations area, where, luck has it, I was hired on as a regular employee. All of my co-workers, who are now regular employees also, first started with the company as contractors. The decision was later made, to make all contractors regular company employees. A lot of companies are going with the contracting route.
Now, also, there was a study done at my place of employment, to 'outsource' the data center, and it was found that at this time, it is not cost effective.
Basically, what would have happened, is we would have still had our jobs, but, would just have been re-hired with the outsourceing firm. Our benifits would have changed, to be what the firm had, instead of what the current employeer had.
So, what is probably going to happen, is basically, the IT part that is going to be outsourced, will re-hire all the current workers, and they will continue to go to work as normal, but, just work for a different employeer.
The down side to that, is they will probably loose any benifits that they had working for Disney.
This kinda sucks for me, as I has wanted to eventually try to obtain employment with Disney doing what I do now - oh well.
You may even see, a few years down the road, Disney finds that outsourcing isn't the way to go, and go back to the way things were.
A company here in Richmond did just that a few years ago. They outsourced their data center, only to find it didnt work as planned, dumped the outsource firm and are now operating their own data center again.
Just my thoughts.
Gary
