Originally Posted By Rebekah This topic is for discussion of the 11/10/2003 news item <b><a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-disney9nov09,1,1979925.story" target="_blank">LATimes: Disneyland's Ride Upkeep Criticized by Park Workers</a></b> The November 9th <I>Los Angeles Times</I> discusses Disneyland park workers concerns over maintenance policies. <small>Free registration required to view</small>
Originally Posted By ParrotHead This could turn out to be a very expensive lesson in being penny wise but pound foolish, as the saying goes. For several years now, critics have accused Disney of making decisions that saved money in the short term but cost money over the long term. Call me an optimist, but I don't believe that the executives would've done anything that they truly thought would've reduced safety levels. After all, this leads to expensive lawsuits and lots of negative publicity. However, I do believe that their lack of understanding of what may be called Disney's "corporate history" causes them to make poor decisions. They have Harvard MBAs, but they don't really understand how the theme parks work, and have worked--very successfully, I might add--for many decades. As a result, they very often don't get the big picture or understand the full ramifications of their decisions. A plan that looks great on paper to someone who has never worked in the theme parks (like Paul Pressler) might turn out to have some serious flaws when implemented in the real world. How can this be avoided? By retaining employees for decades and relying heavily on their input when making decisions. By hiring executives who have experience working in the parks, rather than bringing in a bunch of outsiders. And of course, by focusing on the big picture and understanding what will be most profitable over a 25-year period rather than just a 2- or 3-year period.
Originally Posted By Clopin lol BrigmanMT 2, I thought the same thing. (Why would Pa Ingalls criticize Disneyland?)
