asianway
Well-Known Member
There's never gonna be a FL Al Lutz when there's 25 other bloggers to drown out Kevin's voice. There needs to be more unity in the fan community but we know that is not going to happen
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Kevin Yee- Airing of Grievances
- Thread starter disney fan 13
- Start date
tomman710
Well-Known Member
EXACTLY.
This is what I have been saying, we need a unified presence and a leader with a voice ... I am not ready to say that Kevin can't unify enough of a group but with the likes of Mongello and his Mongellions in addition to the complacent majority of guests ... we will always be an ignored minority.
However, I want to believe that Kevin's article is a start ... which is at least something.
(Oh wait ... he wrote the same thing in 2008 ... dammit.)
jakeman
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure comparing Mongello and his fans to a terrorist organization is entirely appropriate.
disneyflush
Well-Known Member
I haven't been to WDW for a while now waiting for some positive changes. The last trip I took I felt so disappointed in myself for letting my expectations be so high. What is that old song lyric, "If you don't expect too much from me, you might not be let down."
Disneyhead'71
Well-Known Member
Disney knows that most of you guys talk a good game but line up at the gates to be the first to use the new hand dryers in the bathrooms.
Truly don't be afraid to walk away and find other options. There are tons of great "Themed entertainment" options out there with companies that actually give a _______! For Theme Parks Universal Resort Orlando is an acceptable replacement. And I highly recommend places like Cheeca Lodge for themed resort experiences. I know snorkeling the Molasses Reef off of Key Largo can't really compare to The Living Seas at Walt Disney World's Epcot, but I will suffer through.
http://cheeca.com
Truly don't be afraid to walk away and find other options. There are tons of great "Themed entertainment" options out there with companies that actually give a _______! For Theme Parks Universal Resort Orlando is an acceptable replacement. And I highly recommend places like Cheeca Lodge for themed resort experiences. I know snorkeling the Molasses Reef off of Key Largo can't really compare to The Living Seas at Walt Disney World's Epcot, but I will suffer through.
http://cheeca.com
Disneyhead'71
Well-Known Member
tomman710
Well-Known Member
Better?
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
Mindless followers??
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
Great work Kevin, you highlighted many of the common complaints on here and did so in a measured, rationale way.
One thing that you mentioned toward the end of the article was that a lack of complaints doesn't imply approval. I was talking about this last night with some friends regarding broken effects, I think there is an unconscious appreciation for things. Someone could go on Expedition Everest without knowledge that the Yeti is supposed to move. They could enjoy the ride and be 85% satisfied. They're not sure why they're only 85% satisfied but they are. That same person could have gone on the ride with a functional Yeti, experienced the full experience and been 100% satisfied. Again they don't know why they were 100% satisfied, but they were. Which scenario is going to result in positive word of mouth?
It's comparable to going out to dinner and having a bad experience an indifferent experience and an excellent experience. I don't think Disney is in danger (yet) of giving bad guest experiences, but they're getting dangerously close to indifferent experiences. Indifference isn't the same as bad, but it's what you get from homogenization. Most people are indifferent towards chain restaurants. They know they'll get good food but they're not going to have that specialty item that they like from their favorite restaurant.
One thing that you mentioned toward the end of the article was that a lack of complaints doesn't imply approval. I was talking about this last night with some friends regarding broken effects, I think there is an unconscious appreciation for things. Someone could go on Expedition Everest without knowledge that the Yeti is supposed to move. They could enjoy the ride and be 85% satisfied. They're not sure why they're only 85% satisfied but they are. That same person could have gone on the ride with a functional Yeti, experienced the full experience and been 100% satisfied. Again they don't know why they were 100% satisfied, but they were. Which scenario is going to result in positive word of mouth?
It's comparable to going out to dinner and having a bad experience an indifferent experience and an excellent experience. I don't think Disney is in danger (yet) of giving bad guest experiences, but they're getting dangerously close to indifferent experiences. Indifference isn't the same as bad, but it's what you get from homogenization. Most people are indifferent towards chain restaurants. They know they'll get good food but they're not going to have that specialty item that they like from their favorite restaurant.
tomman710
Well-Known Member
And they won't be likely to tell their friends about an indifferent experience.
Patricia Melton
Well-Known Member
I am a big fan of Kevin Yee's. I have read ALL his books, and they are all excellent.
My one criticism of this new article from him is that he's missing something really obvious in his search for a "grand unified theory" to explain everything that happens at TDO...where he tries to reconcile the "Decline by Degrees", "the Rizzo Factor" (which assumes that tourists don't know any better so TDO can get away with shirking maintenance), and "Miller Lite Budgets" (spend on things that get attention but cut back on things that guests won't ever write home about)...Yee misses out that the one unifying element in all of this is that this stuff is all coming from the heads of the young MBAs that have infiltrated the Disney c-suite offices over the last two decades.
Guys are coming out of business school with MBAs after being taught by their professors that the way to get ahead in business today is to cut, cut, cut expenses. They are also taught by these professors to only push projects that will get them a lot of attention...because attention is what moves guys up the ladder.
Every single thing in Yee's article can thus be explained by MBAs hired by Disney who have this mentality...and who also don't see Disney as a permanent place they will work. MBAs jump from one company to another, and only stay in a job about 1-3 years before leaving for another company. The goal for these guys is to rack up a half dozen prestigious positions on their resumes before they are 40.
Disney is very foolish to hire these guys...because none of them want to become "lifers" with Disney...and so there is no incentive to make the company strong and healthy for the long term. These guys want to push projects that will make big splashes in the next 1-3 years while they are there...and have the payoff come before they jump ship to Coca Cola or IBM or a Wall Street Investment firm or whatever. The ultimate goal for these MBA guys is to become "consultants" with their own little firms where they can write their own ticket. Disney has too many people on staff in the executive offices who don't care about the company, only their own personal advancement.
My advice: put a hiring freeze on anyone from the Ivy Leagues. Get some new blood in there from state schools...with people who were not taught by the same professors who taught all the other guys in the c-suite offices. Disney should start hiring people who really want to be at Disney for life and retire far in the future with 40 years of time in the company.
Avoid at all costs the young guys out of Ivy League business schools who just want to score a flashy kudos on something and then bail on Disney while their personal stock is high from that success. This is clearly not good for the company long term to be run by people who only care about making a splash for the short time they are there...before they move on to something else.
It really does explain everything that Kevin Yee cites as wrong with Disney...especially the big push to forgo the maintenance...since no MBA ever got a promotion or a bigger new job somewhere else by championing maintenance. Their professors at Harvard told them never to do that!
My one criticism of this new article from him is that he's missing something really obvious in his search for a "grand unified theory" to explain everything that happens at TDO...where he tries to reconcile the "Decline by Degrees", "the Rizzo Factor" (which assumes that tourists don't know any better so TDO can get away with shirking maintenance), and "Miller Lite Budgets" (spend on things that get attention but cut back on things that guests won't ever write home about)...Yee misses out that the one unifying element in all of this is that this stuff is all coming from the heads of the young MBAs that have infiltrated the Disney c-suite offices over the last two decades.
Guys are coming out of business school with MBAs after being taught by their professors that the way to get ahead in business today is to cut, cut, cut expenses. They are also taught by these professors to only push projects that will get them a lot of attention...because attention is what moves guys up the ladder.
Every single thing in Yee's article can thus be explained by MBAs hired by Disney who have this mentality...and who also don't see Disney as a permanent place they will work. MBAs jump from one company to another, and only stay in a job about 1-3 years before leaving for another company. The goal for these guys is to rack up a half dozen prestigious positions on their resumes before they are 40.
Disney is very foolish to hire these guys...because none of them want to become "lifers" with Disney...and so there is no incentive to make the company strong and healthy for the long term. These guys want to push projects that will make big splashes in the next 1-3 years while they are there...and have the payoff come before they jump ship to Coca Cola or IBM or a Wall Street Investment firm or whatever. The ultimate goal for these MBA guys is to become "consultants" with their own little firms where they can write their own ticket. Disney has too many people on staff in the executive offices who don't care about the company, only their own personal advancement.
My advice: put a hiring freeze on anyone from the Ivy Leagues. Get some new blood in there from state schools...with people who were not taught by the same professors who taught all the other guys in the c-suite offices. Disney should start hiring people who really want to be at Disney for life and retire far in the future with 40 years of time in the company.
Avoid at all costs the young guys out of Ivy League business schools who just want to score a flashy kudos on something and then bail on Disney while their personal stock is high from that success. This is clearly not good for the company long term to be run by people who only care about making a splash for the short time they are there...before they move on to something else.
It really does explain everything that Kevin Yee cites as wrong with Disney...especially the big push to forgo the maintenance...since no MBA ever got a promotion or a bigger new job somewhere else by championing maintenance. Their professors at Harvard told them never to do that!
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
But, if they then say, " WWoHP and Antartica was amazing"...
njDizFan
Well-Known Member
I cannot agree with most of this post. You are blaming Harvard professors for the the management decisions of TWDC. Do we even know what percentage of TDO middle management has an ivy league backround? And are all these professors advocating for the abilition of long term growth for the quick dollar as you suggest. The problem comes from much higher than some accounting executive, its built into the Disney heirarchy. It's the people in charge making these decisions so they can post double digit quarterly earnings for Wall Street.
I understand your sentiment; that hard working, middle class people who love their business and love Disney ideals would be more apt to encourage long term health of the parks. But by demonizing the Ivy league graduates as elitist scum who's sole purpsose is to take the cash and run is innacurate or at least too broad encompassing.
Let's put the blame on the shoulders of the people who run the company and make the decisions. I'm sure there is some of what you talked about within TWDC and all fortune 500 companies but they created that culture.
flynnibus
Premium Member
Yes.. overly gross generalizations tend to explain everything all the time.. well done
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
THIS!!! These folks aren't interested in building a culture of QUALITY, only a buck. Also, I would imagine that you could run WDW with a lot less of these folks and maybe pour that money into things like hiring more maintenance folks and have more full timers (while also reduce the number of part timers).
I don't think it's entirely fair just to put that kind of ban on just Ivy League MBAs. This sort of thinking is preached at most business schools. It's also notable that most of the lead folks at TDO, past and present, went to Rollins College, a non-ivy. HOWEVER, Elite (Ivies, Stanford, UChicago) MBAs can have a very arrogant attitude towards the businesses they run. Just look at Jay "Theme Parks are disgusting" Rasulo (UChicago).Patricia Melton said:
That said, look at Walt Disney Animation. Run into the ground by a Harvard MBA (David Stantion) and his cohorts. Brought back by John Lasseter and Ed Catmull (Film School Grad and PhD in Computer Science) who made QUALITY and positive creative CULTURE a priority.
Patricia Melton
Well-Known Member
I don't know either guy, but I think Kevin Yee is the better of the two writers...and a more knowledgeable expert on Disney.
What I also like about Kevin Yee is that he never comes off as petty to me. There are times when Al Lutz seems to nurse personal grudges that come off as obsessions he has...while Kevin Lee doesn't seem to do this. I think Al doesn't even realize he goes off on tangents to harp about something that he personally has emotional investment in that derails the point he was trying to make. Kevin Yee does a better job of keeping his emotions under control.
An example of this is the obsession Al Lutz has with TDA canceling the holiday party over there. He becomes unhinged about that at times...whereas that's something that Kevin Yee might mention as one of his bullet points in an article, but he does not bemoan it over and over again.
Kevin Yee, thus, comes across as an expert on Disney that I enjoy reading...while Al Lutz comes across as an old man in a rocking chair ranting about things that sometimes matter mostly to him (with a little Disney insight thrown in here or there).
Patricia Melton
Well-Known Member
Yes.. overly gross generalizations tend to explain everything all the time.. well done
And pithy little sentences knocking someone's opinion are SO cliche. Smiley face!
Yankeesfan5
Member
Fantastic article, Kevin. The article made so many good points, and summed up the thoughts of many of us.
Patricia Melton
Well-Known Member
You should be very careful about inventing things that someone never said. I never talked anything about "elitist scum". That's you being melodramatic and projecting things that aren't there. Not a good habit to have.
The problem with the Ivy League MBAs is just as I put it (please read my comment again so you know what I actually said, not what you imagined I said)...these guys are taught by largely the same professors...who all belong to the same little network...and they all teach these guys the same things. Companies snatch these young Ivy League MBAs up after graduation because it's prestigious for them to announce to shareholders that they've hired "the cream of the crop!". But, are they really all that great?
It depends on what your goals are for your company. The MBAs churned out by Harvard in particular arrive at a company and decide to make a name for themselves by cutting expenses so they can boast "record profits' on their watches...and then they leave in a few years to do the same thing at another company. They get out of town before the consequences of all those cuts hit. In a lot of ways, the MBAs are like locusts that swoop in...make a lot of noise for a spell...and then leave things in ruins when they fly off to another pasture.
Graduates of state schools and colleges not in the Ivy League are not like this. For one thing, these people aren't being courted by as many companies to come work there just because of the name on their diploma...these guys know they actually have to do a good job to keep their positions and they also aren't taught they should leave one job for another one after a few years. The state school graduates plan on holding a steady job at one place for a career...not hopping from one office to another in different cities as much as possible to always be the new star in the constellation.
Between my husband and myself, we have a combined 60 years in business. I've seen this same pattern play out over and over again and will ALWAYS hire the state school graduate over the Ivy League MBA any day.