MyMagic+ article from Fast Company magazine

[Nubs70]

Interesting. We were having this discussion between a few of us not too long ago and a great number of us had examples of the post-visit surveys which all had plenty of sections to rate them negatively. I know I spent quite some time writing a piece of negative feedback in the section asking if I had anything negative happen in my trip.


The one in-park survey that I have been a part of in DHS did this.
Edit: Moved me aside to a terminal which I filled out myself

The in park survey I did at DHS last summer was Frozen focused. The survey may well have only had Frozen as an option. I answered anything but Frozen when asked by the CM. By the end, the poor CM was almost in tears because I would not answer Frozen.

 

[jakeman]

Yeah, the one I did was up front of DHS, next to Sid Cahuenga's. If memory serves, it seems like it was here:
View attachment 90023

Yep. I've taken a few there.

 

[GrumpyFan]

A survey limited to good to great response options will only yield positive results. This allows execs to claim with a straight face that guest satisfaction has never been better.

I've never seen that of which you speak. Does it really matter though? They (Disney) formed an opinion of what they perceived guests wanted, then spent a ton o' money building it, and it's here to stay. Like it or not.

 

[sshindel]

The in park survey I did at DHS last summer was Frozen focused. The survey may well have only had Frozen as an option. I answered anything but Frozen when asked by the CM. By the end, the poor CM was almost in tears because I would not answer Frozen.

Ahh, you had the audacity to question the wisdom of our lords and masters, Anna and Elsa. I'm surprised they didn't have you trespassed!

On the other hand, I've looked around all over Epcot just begging for someone to give me a survey to fill out. Has not happened! Next time instead of making a Kitchen Kabaret T-shirt, I think I'll make one that says:
"Please ask me about my opinion of Epcot" and walk around Spaceship Earth all day.

 

[Hakunamatata]

Be careful what you wish for. With the amount you think about churros you might end up being buried in them. While that might sound great on the surface, the bill at the end might have you second guessing your decision.

Don't they have a free snacking program.

 

[Laketravis]

Referral to WDW as a "burning platform". It's interesting to read that they (Disney Exec's) knew they had a problem with the product becoming stale, yet, they chose a different path rather than the traditional for trying to fix things. Rasulo seems to get most of the credit (or blame) for this, but, I have to wonder what else led to their decision to jump into this like they did? Were they trying to find an alternative way to improve the parks without actually investing big capital by adding attractions? Or, was it more driven by finances and an aversion to taking a risk on a big new attraction, only to watch it fail, as in the case of Expedition Everest's Yeti?....

A couple of years ago I posted on another forum (which eventually banned me) how Disney was attempting to take yield management to an entirely new level. Parks packed with people who wanted 100% utilization of 20% of the parks capacity was becoming an issue manifested by long lines and national news exposure prior to the time the patent was filed. Which was smarter at the C level - build a few more attractions which would also fall victim to long queues (or not) or try to "persuade" guests to "enjoy" the lesser utilized attractions?

Via a combination of software, psychology, and marketing they've done just that. Living with the Land has been elevated (artificially) to the same level as Test Track, Mickey's Philharmagic to that of Space Mountain.

MM+ is more than micro-demographic marketing. It's demand/yield management at it's finest. Why spend $300M on a new attraction when you can throw costumes on a couple more CM's and add their meet and greet reservations to the resource pool, or throw down some fake grass and convince guests to trade an FP for something else so they can sit on it during fireworks?

While the science and algorithms support their decision, I don't think wisdom does and unfortunately the fail won't be evident until it's too late.

 

[sshindel]

I see this as lack of project management discipline that resulted in massive scope creep.

A question for the author of the article, were there performance guarantees written into the 3rd party contracts?

Actually, from the article, it sounds like massive scope decrease. As some have pointed out, a lot of the things they sold to the board were never implemented.

 

[PhotoDave219]

Actually, from the article, it sounds like massive scope decrease. As some have pointed out, a lot of the things they sold to the board were never implemented.

Exactly. It's like that was the original scope of the project and they would just add on KTRW, FP, Photopass, etc. but instead all we are left with is just the add-ons from the project.

 

[sshindel]

Exactly. It's like that was the original scope of the project and they would just add on KTRW, FP, Photopass, etc. but instead all we are left with is just the add-ons from the project.

Honestly, I didn't read it that way at all. I might go back and re-read, but simplifying the guest experience was the prime objective, which was implemented. Addressing pain points, etc. The other stuff was there too, but seems to have been cut from the project that was rolled out.

At the core of the project was theMagicBand, an electronic wristband that Iger envisioned guests would use to gain entry to Disney World and access attractions; make purchases at restaurants; and unlock their hotel room doors. It would push the boundaries of experience design andwearable computing, and impact everything from Disney’s retail operations and data-mining capabilities to its hospitality and transportation services.

"On the surface, we had super happy guests, but in reality, we were making them go through so much hassle at the park that down the road, they would simply say, 'No más!' " says one former longtime Disney manager. As MacPhee, who has the look of a Division II offensive coordinator, admits, Disney World was on the verge of becoming "dangerously complex and transactional." The team soon presented its ideas to Rasulo. He gave them the go-ahead to rethink everything, including turnstile entrances and paper ticketing. That’s when the project got its code name, Next Generation Experience, or NGE. The founding five soon found themselves on a perpetual shuttle between Burbank and Orlando.

 

[Lee]

But as a driver of revenue and attendance? Nope. And doesnt really go towards the two problems Disney identified at the top of the article as the source of non-returning guests: long lines and high prices.

This.

 

[jakeman]

Actually, from the article, it sounds like massive scope decrease. As some have pointed out, a lot of the things they sold to the board were never implemented.

Exactly. It's like that was the original scope of the project and they would just add on KTRW, FP, Photopass, etc. but instead all we are left with is just the add-ons from the project.

Just to clarify, scope creep is when the financial scope of the project expands past its original financial intent by adding incremental items/labor along the way. The creep being referenced is probably labor and it is implied that it was managed by cutting features.

Scope creep is easy to get into and very difficult to recover.

 

[sshindel]

Just to clarify, scope creep is when the financial scope of the project expands past its original financial intent by adding incremental items/labor along the way. The creep being referenced is probably labor and it is implied that it was managed by cutting features.

Scope creep is easy to get into and very difficult to recover.

Scope Creep is actually used in the IT world as well to describe situations when the originally defined scope of a project changes and grows during the implementation of the project, including functionality that was not initially agreed upon.

 

[PhotoDave219]

Since you do not want to give your definition of groundbreaking we will go with Webster's.

Adj. 1. groundbreaking - being or producing something like nothing done or experienced or created before; "stylistically innovative works"; "innovative members of the artistic community"; "a mind so innovational, so original"

Last time I checked Disney was the first theme park to integrate all of these existing technologies into one unified system controlled by a smart phone app and accessed by and RFID bracelet.

That meets Webster's definition making it safe to call it groundbreaking.

Is MM infrastructure that should have been done? Absofreakingloutley. I have been saying that since day one. It also happens to be, by definition, groundbreaking infrastructure, just like the first concrete highway was groundbreaking in 1909 or the first traffic light was in 1914.

Is MM a revue driver? Not much, but a little. The system does have a potential for directly making money with the sale of bands, band accessories, etc. Certainly not enough to pay off the investment, but it does take a bit of the sting out of the price tag. I also have little doubt that this was used to sway more than a few naysayers.

The real value of MM is just like any other infrastructure project. Somewhat indirect. It will allow Disney to make much more efficient use of the parks. The data collected will most likely allow them to better market products, improve traffic jams, etc.

So addressing the revenue and attendance drivers… That is something that comes directly from the article itself. That's from Disney in the first couple paragraphs. The problems they identified were long lines and high prices… This really doesn't do much to impact that. As I've been saying for three pages now, this is just an infrastructure project. It's an infrastructure project that takes many existing Disney technologies and puts them altogether. I don't view that is new or groundbreaking… I view that as a necessary technology upgrade. In 2015 you should be able to make dining reservations with your phone at Walt Disney World. All of that seems insanely simple. You should also be able to tell what time your boss is going to come by… That may or may not still be in the pipeline even though it was teased almost 10 years ago.

When I strip away all the hype, all I see is things Disney already did and projects and programs they've already done and consolidated them in one package. And then I see the price tag… At least $1 billion? They paid $1 billion just to do that little stuff?

I just really don't see this as the big shiny toy that the executives are. Proud of. Just because it was a new concept or a new idea to some consulting in San Francisco that has no institutional knowledge or history of the Walt Disney World resort, doesn't make it New And groundbreaking.

They spent at least $1 billion on infrastructure and Turn around and neglected everything else? Yes, infrastructure is necessary and this was long, long, long overdue but we have sacrificed animal kingdom and the studios because of it. Yes we now have the ability to compile massive data analytics bur will that grow the audience more than 30% in the next 10 years like it grow in the past 10?

All this does is make me wonder exactly what the Disney IT department has done for the past 10 years as well as research. What have they done? Because this project just seems like keeping up with the times.... Why wasn't all this integrated years ago? Why wasnt it done that way from the start?

 

[jakeman]

Scope Creep is actually used in the IT world as well to describe situations when the originally defined scope of a project changes and grows during the implementation of the project, including functionality that was not initially agreed upon.

So basically the definition of scope creep is "something is wrong".

 

[sshindel]

So basically the definition of scope creep is "something is wrong".

In my world I think of it more as "work we didn't agree upon doing in the first place, but are being asked to do now, disregarding any impact to agreed upon timelines, cost, etc.

 

[PhotoDave219]

Honestly, I didn't read it that way at all. I might go back and re-read, but simplifying the guest experience was the prime objective, which was implemented. Addressing pain points, etc. The other stuff was there too, but seems to have been cut from the project that was rolled out.

I have that from sources outside of the article, and I won't elaborate further as I really don't want to get them in trouble….

Suffice to say what was originally pitched is nothing even remotely close to what we got. Somewhere along the line, somebody viewed this project as a way to address those pain points and I'm not really sure what they were thinking…

 

[PhotoDave219]

Just to clarify, scope creep is when the financial scope of the project expands past its original financial intent by adding incremental items/labor along the way. The creep being referenced is probably labor and it is implied that it was managed by cutting features.

Scope creep is easy to get into and very difficult to recover.

Well this was a perfect example of internal Disney politics taking a project and changing it into something completely different…

 

[sshindel]

I have that from sources outside of the article, and I won't elaborate further as I really don't want to get them in trouble….

Suffice to say what was originally pitched is nothing even remotely close to what we got. Somewhere along the line, somebody viewed this project as a way to address those pain points and I'm not really sure what they were thinking…

Yup, then you have info I don't have. The extent of my connections inside of Disney is having dinner once with a couple people who worked there. Can't say that was enough to give me what happened inside the board of directors meetings or any of the meetings pitching the idea down the line.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

This begs to ask, how does WDW quantify the perception of guest satisfaction. Without options that range from bad to great, the good to great surveys provide skewed results.

Where do they not have options ranging from bad to great? The survey's I've been asked to respond to have all had a full scale of options to rate my experience.

On our recent trip a few weeks ago, we received a survey for MK, one for EPCOT, and one for our resort - Grand Flo. All 3 had options to say that we were completely dissatisfied with an area, and several questions added an additional block for free form comments after a particular answer. There were areas that I was not so nice, and others that I praised for all 3.

 

[MichWolv]

what happened inside the board of directors meetings

Unlimited Mickey Bars, Dole Whips, and churros, with a private Frozen meet and greet!