Originally Posted By tiggertoo <<The key work is potential. Drive, desire, interest, temperament, and maturity are other key factors. Not everybody has the right combination of all of these factors to be a successful CM.>> But everyone has the potential to obtain them. I mean, it’s not genetic or anything. The largest stumbling block CMs face is simply peer pressure. However, they don’t have to give into it. They can choose to focus on their job. And, therefore, have the capacity for being a fine CM. It’s always sad when they don’t. <<Leads are the first step in management; supervising people is different than simply providing good Guest Service.>> Well, yeah, of course it is. But you generally can view them as good CMs. They know exactly what CMs should be doing better than most anyone on the location and most often try to provide a good example. Not all of them mind you, but most from my observations, as some do slack off and should thereby lose their LD status. Honestly, I’m not quite sure where you are trying to go with this and it’s relevance to my statement about finding good role models. <<IT is unfortunate that DL doesn't provide supervisorial training for first time supervisors>> During the interview process, the CM’s records are reviewed, leads and mangers are consulted regarding the CMs conduct over their career—note that leads conduct spot evaluations on the attraction and rate CMs performance. Most slacker would be screened out by this point. In addition, after the new lead is selected, there are “A leads†and managers that that are supposed to supervise and shadow them their first week or so. There is also a mentor system that allows CMs to link with a good lead to show them how to act in the capacity. Seriously, by the time a CM gets to that point where they are applying to become a lead, they should have a firm hand on the role of leads, etc… If for some reason they are not, surely by the time they are trained they’d have a grasp on their duties. There is no reason a lead should not understand their position, classes or no. If they choose to fail at their capacity, so be it. There should be no excuse. <<When I was in Foods, the only time I'd see my managers down in the kitchen was when it was lunch time...bleh.>> We’d get a manager down to the attraction quite frequently. I guess it depends on where you are.
Originally Posted By PastKnight DarkBeer the office is actually closer to downtown Anaheim off Harbor and Broadway on Lemon
Originally Posted By SpoonCM Of course it depends on where you are and who your managers are. I totally agree that when you are around people that care, then you'll care just as much. When people are there to nurture and support, it creates an enviroment where everyone else must strive for that high bar - anything less and your labeled and casted away. Which is why I have gotten where I have and owe it all to good managers and a strong cast. When I was in Foods, my own drive to become successful just was not enough. Management sucked and the cast had bad morale to show for it. I attained leadership roles while in Foods, but was never good enough for management and their chosen favorites. I do believe though that the Working Lead Program should be a part of lead training. It's a great asset and allows many kids to develop their own leadership style, instead of relying on what they see around them. Especially if they happen to be around a weak management team. Besides, sooner or later for anyone wanting to move onto Emerging Leaders, you will need to have completed Working Lead.
Originally Posted By tiggertoo <<I do believe though that the Working Lead Program should be a part of lead training.>> Actually I do agree we you about a lead training in that there should be some means to standardize the training, if for nothing else, to avoid deluding the standards. I admit, some managers and leads are bad, and we cannot count on them to train other leads any better than they--themselves--are. We should look to taking some of the matter out of their hand, purely as a safeguard. Heck, you may remember when DL managers started taking the Disney Look seriously again (2003). Prior to that point would be a perfect example of how deluded standards can become. However, the standards aren’t enigmatic. They are posted very prominently nearly everywhere. Leads really have no excuse not to enforce them other than pure laziness.
Originally Posted By HRM >>The key work is potential.<< oops, I meant to post "The KEY WORD is potential."; however. its obvious from the posts that followed #178 that everyone understood what I was trying to spell. ) tiggertoo >>...it’s not genetic or anything.<< Actually, some aspects of temperament and drive are related to genetic disposition, which in turn relates to the type of job/career a person is best suited toward pursuing. I do agree however that almost all people have the potential to learn and acquire the basic skills of any entry level position. I agree with you tiggertoo, that person has to choose to do so; and have the interest of the company to support that person as well. SpoonCM >>When people are there to nurture and support, it creates an enviroment where everyone else must strive for that high bar - anything less and your labeled and casted away. Which is why I have gotten where I have and owe it all to good managers and a strong cast. When I was in Foods, my own drive to become successful just was not enough. Management sucked and the cast had bad morale to show for it. I attained leadership roles while in Foods, but was never good enough for management and their chosen favorites.<< This is what I'm talking about. You obviously have the individual 'fortitude' (my new word for the week) to maintain your personal focus on becoming a good CM, combined with the good fortune to have a supportive management evironment, to become successful. What you described exists in every workplace; and just sometimes, the daily demands of family, school, and/or personal obligations just overshadow the desire to search for a good and supportive working environment. People get trapped in "just doing their job and surviving". This is where good management practices throughout the organization, and consistent follow-through make a difference. Congrats to you Spoon CM for getting to where you are now. Let me also say that it is important to note from the Posts by CMs and previous CMs here, that it is possible to succeed as a good CM at Disneyland. The recent conversation between tiggertoo and SpoonCM, and echoed by earlier CMs' Posts demonstrates, that they "Get It." If you can PastKnight, try hooking up with some of the CMs who have posted here, I'm sure they will help you succeed working for the Mouse. ºoº
Originally Posted By HRM WoW... Just Read Al Lutz's 11/8 article, especially noted the ending part about "The Disney Difference"... Any CM care to comment?
Originally Posted By iluvdisneyland Al is running a little late... The "Disney Difference" has been in existance for quite some time now.
Originally Posted By HRM I Luv! Hiya Doing?!?! Yeah, from what you and other CMs' have been Posting, I can see that. I guess my question is more regarding the tone of Al's comments, and specifically statements such as "[Disney] can't compete with the much higher wages being offered by In N' Out, Home Depot or other major retailers in Orange County..." Serveral comments also focused toward those CMs who have survived "Presenteeism" and have been working a lot due to the 50th Anniversary are now "burned out". Al did try to balance his comments by stating, "...Disney does offer a nice package of benefits, expecially for hourly service sector folks,..." I was just wondering if this was just more of Al's "unique brand" of reporting, or if there is actually something underneath his observations? )
Originally Posted By SpoonCM I rolled my eyes when he was trying to push the "Disney Difference." Hmmm, it's been around for more than a couple of years already. After all that, I couldn't bring myself to read the rest of the trash he was trying to spew. I do think many departments have been stretched to the limit with Presenteeism, but it ain't as bad as the drastic layoffs mid-summer. Given the huge loss in summer, an un-seasonal attendance for Fall, and projections of a Christmas we have never seen before, we need A LOT of new CMs. I can't say veterans are dropping like flies due to overwork, but I do know programs are being created to prevent turnover, especially with new hires.
Originally Posted By HRM Spoon_CM, Great to hear from you... Looks like this would be a great time to begin working for the Mouse... unfortunately, I don't have my personal things in order quite yet... I'll just have to keep working at it, and asking questions here at LP!! Yeah, I have to read Al's updates with tongue firmly in cheek; however, there are some little kernels of truth buried in his reports. I just come back to LP and CM's such as you, Iluv, and others who Post here to get the real story. Thanks again, and keep up the good work at DL!! ºoº
Originally Posted By tiggertoo <<Actually, some aspects of temperament and drive are related to genetic disposition, which in turn relates to the type of job/career a person is best suited toward pursuing.>> Not as much as you would think. I was actually surprised myself when I took a course on human genetics at UCR for my biochem degree. But let¡¦s get back on topic shall we? ƒº <<¡Kbut I do know programs are being created to prevent turnover, especially with new hires.>> Like what? Better pay maybe? PAs aren¡¦t near enough to determine a CM¡¦s readiness. Perhaps they should set up a mentoring program for new CMs, although not stringently supervised, it would be more/less an intermediary between trainee and trained CM.
Originally Posted By SpoonCM Pay increases would be nice, but I don't see that happening soon. I'm guessing more "fluff," but lets just say the are trying to find ways to reach CMs and assisting them and preventing the revolving door effect. If they get approved or changed is up in the air.
Originally Posted By iluvdisneyland HRM, For the jobs we do and the amount of pressure being placed on us, no Disney cannot compete with higher payers, such as those he mentioned in his article. On the other hand... those who have continued with the Company despite "presenteeism" phase I and II among many other things are very good Cast Members. The bulk of them care enough about their job to sacrifice a higher pay rate. And with it comes pride. There is a lot of pride. And that's good. Al's comments about the Disney Difference really surprise me... Disney Difference has been around for years. I thought Al got better information than that?
Originally Posted By PirateChick <Perhaps they should set up a mentoring program for new CMs, although not stringently supervised, it would be more/less an intermediary between trainee and trained CM.> The first shift I had at Buzz after I was signed off happened to coincide with my trainers shift. He was able to talk the lead into alowing us to be near each other in the rotation if I had any problems at all. It was nice to know he went through that in case I needed any help at all.
Originally Posted By HRM >>...those who have continued with the Company despite "presenteeism" phase I and II among many other things are very good Cast Members. The bulk of them care enough about their job to sacrifice a higher pay rate. And with it comes pride. There is a lot of pride. And that's good.<< Amen to that!! Thanks iluv... ºoº
Originally Posted By HRM PastKnight... Getting close to that time... Just wanted to make sure to wish you the best of luck (again)... Keep in touch...
Originally Posted By PastKnight HRM thanx buddy I am VERY excited. I go to traditions on the 10th and start training the 11th. I will post as soon as I can after that
