Originally Posted By Manfried <<Sometimes Reliable Sources are just plain wrong. Sometimes.>> Now if the person citing those reliable sources would just admit it. You know that he was wrong. Oh wait, pigs still don't fly.
Originally Posted By ChiMike >>I'm still patiently waiting for someone to explain to me why an executive structure in place since late 2005 spells instant doom for Disneyland because the corporate head shots got rearranged on Tuesday.<< The issue as I see it TP, is you are going to continue to wait because nobody on here at least has declared instant doom for Disneyland. I can only speak for myself, but I think that I have been careful enough, at least I hope so, to state my belief that Meg's promotion is a negative for DLR for no other reason that I can't think of one positive reason that it is a good thing. I'm pretty sure I have said it is negative by default. Unless someone can tell me that her promotion in what is clearly a different role than Al Weiss had, will help DLR. I will maintain that this restructuring was both unnecessary for DLR and will probably carry with it occasional negative issues for the operation of the resort. I back this up with my belief that the history of the resort shows it is most helped when TDA can compel Burbank directly for support. Do I think DLR will jump in the Pre$$ler Hot Tub Time Machine. Nope. This is negative news for NO OTHER reason but that TDA had allegedly hoped to be dealing with the Chairman of WDP&R directly and that did not pan out.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>I'm still patiently waiting for someone to explain to me why an executive structure in place since late 2005 spells instant doom for Disneyland because the corporate head shots got rearranged on Tuesday. << OK, I'll bite. It's because... Meg Crofton is the devil. Do you understand? Al Weiss may have simply been replaced, but he has been replaced with... the devil!
Originally Posted By ChiMike ..Man you guys are tough. Real tough. Just remember no one in the East took your warnings in the late 90s of Pressler. So.... There...
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>Man you guys are tough.<< No, no. I'm not saying Meg Crofton is the devil. It's the reason why so many others are having melt downs.
Originally Posted By ChiMike ^ I understand Doug! I like the tongue in cheek game TP and Hans are having at us poor WDW fanboys' expense. Every new post makes me chuckle.
Originally Posted By TP2000 And you are actually a great sport to play along with us, ChiMike! Your insight is appreciated, make no mistake. I do get your point that Meg's new role is a negative for DLR for no other reason that there appears to be no positive to it. That's a great way of putting it, and I can accept that. I think I was also projecting some of the more ridiculous comments on Miceage and such onto this thread, although we lack that shrill tone here thankfully. Meg Crofton does not appear to have any real fans anywhere, and if she does have fans they apparently don't have an Internet connection. The superficial similarities to Cynthia Harriss are quite noticeable and a bit distressing. Does anyone really buy that type of fake executive shtick any more? I can't imagine that any CM, from hourly churro salesman to tenured senior manager, would actually buy into that seemingly fake smile-for-the-camera-and-use-the-word-MAGIC-alot act that she has down pat. It makes you want to puke quite frankly, and I don't even work for her! This should be interesting to see how this plays out. All of a sudden the Disney theme park online community is rife with rumors and panic over a dark storm brewing on the horizon, even if not all of us can actually see the storm clouds. I can't wait to see how this pans out over the next few months.
Originally Posted By leemac TP - this is a new structure that is different to those under Rasulo but the difference is in the dotted lines that ping around the organizational chart. In the past resort presidents had a hotline to the chairman - those have been officially snuffed out. Now DLR and DLRP reports through an operational leader who is expected to manage aspects outside of operational issues (like future development etc.) which was outside of Al's remit. I appreciate that on the face of it the changes don't look like anything new. However it has been verbalized to me that it is adding another layer of management over DLR and DLRP which I think is the exact opposite of what is actually needed.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Meg Crofton does not appear to have any real fans anywhere>> and <<The superficial similarities to Cynthia Harriss are quite noticeable>> Meg is very different to Cynthia who was warm and personable (even if the perception was that it was all entirely fake) - Meg is a very introverted character. In the years I've known and dealt with her I've never felt I "know" her in the same way I do with the other executives I interact with. Cynthia was also a lot more decisive when it came to decision-making - Meg is a big fan of redundant committees and focus groups.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>Meg is a big fan of redundant committees and focus groups<<< Makes sense, when things don't get done. Can she use us as a focus group?
Originally Posted By TP2000 I've had plenty of experience with big corporate structures, and in my experience the execs in HR are some of the most boring, humorless folks I've known who are also the most removed from the core reason their company exists in the first place. The typical HR leader couldn't give a rats behind whether their company makes toothpaste or tires or TVs, they just want to keep their hand in the pie and get to all the high-profile meetings. I can only imagine that Disney has some of the most snooze-worthy HR execs who have very, very little interest in theme park and hotel operations. (Especially in Orlando, where few white-collar types spend a lot of time outdoors much of the year anyway due to the climate) It's a complete head-scratcher why you would elevate an HR drone to the top "Operations" spot overseeing three big theme park properties.
Originally Posted By leemac <<The typical HR leader couldn't give a rats behind whether their company makes toothpaste or tires or TVs, they just want to keep their hand in the pie and get to all the high-profile meetings.>> Amen to that. HR execs only exist to constantly tinker with the hierarchical structure - simply doing payroll and appraisals isn't enough. Only way to justify their Silver Pass. Tami Garcia is the SVP for HR at WDP&R - a nasty piece of work at the best of times. These convoluted structures are entirely her doing.
Originally Posted By leemac ^^ I should have also made a shout-out to her boss Julie Hodges (also a SVP) who is equally inept at understanding how to structure the division.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Cynthia was also a lot more decisive when it came to decision-making" That helps explain all of her team's panicky decisions and abrupt program changes when DCA was met with a mediocre response after it opened. "Meg is a big fan of redundant committees and focus groups." Maybe she should send one those focus groups over to the Carousel of Progress, which according to reports is currently falling to pieces.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "It's a complete head-scratcher why you would elevate an HR drone to the top "Operations" spot overseeing three big theme park properties." It really, really is. But then again, Cynthia was a retail queen who ended up overseeing DLR and the construction and launch of DCA. Go figure.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>Tami Garcia is the SVP for HR at WDP&R - a nasty piece of work at the best of times. These convoluted structures are entirely her doing.<<< So... wait... She's the one behind THESE choices? Not following, sorry.
Originally Posted By sjhym333 The reality in corporate America is that is really doesn't matter if you know what you're doing but what kind of impression you make. I think because upper mgmt in most companies are so removed from the day to day operation of things that they are often blinded by people who put on a good front or have shown some aptitude in one area and the assumption is that they are great and can do it all. When I worked for Disney full time there was a college guy who came in. Tall, handsome, well spoken and a nice frat boy kind of guy. He spoke a good game but was really incompetant. That didnt matter. He caught the eye of my bosses boss and was fast tracked into mgmt. Took a couple of years before someone finally realised that they guy had no idea what he was doing. He eventually was put into a position that he had very little authority and few CM's he was responsible for. During the last mgmt cuts he was let go and all his duties were sent to other areas where they should have been from the beginning. It's not just Disney. In my current job I constantly scratch my head at the people who move up around me. They have terrible people skills, often are clueless about the business we are in and seem to really not care about the product. But someone above me for some reason thinks they are great.
Originally Posted By TP2000 Yeah, it's not a concept exclusive to Disney. But some companies are better at avoiding it than others. It sounds like Disney, at least the theme park division, has a horrible time selecting top execs who actually care about the product they are leading. What I absolutely can't stand, because I have an excellent BS meter if I do say so myself, is the smarmy exec type who uses all the buzzwords and approved language to try and pretend they are following in Walt's footsteps. Meg Crofton appears to be exactly that type of person, and it's rather offensive. Honestly, is there really any CM with an IQ above 100 who can't see right through her gaggy HR acting job? I'm amazed that these folks think people actually believe what they say.
