tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post1484025812156214171..comments2024-02-08T07:33:49.907-08:00Comments on Re-Imagineering: Fixing WDIMr Bankshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12952506736745891323noreply@blogger.comBlogger58125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-60050514952501128142007-07-01T15:52:00.000-07:002007-07-01T15:52:00.000-07:00To the above: This blog started at Pixar. Blog mem...To the above: This blog started at Pixar. Blog members are from that studio, Disney Animation, and Imagineering current and Imagineering retired.<BR/><BR/> I hate censoring comments on this blog, but if incoming comments like yours continue to debase the healthy exchange of ideas here then I'm afraid your comments won't see the light of day.<BR/><BR/>Good luck.Mr Bankshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12952506736745891323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-39451543124920751112007-07-01T15:40:00.000-07:002007-07-01T15:40:00.000-07:00So I take it the guys who run this blog are the Im...So I take it the guys who run this blog are the Imagineers who were willing to keep quiet and churn out the trash just to keep their jobs, otherwise they'd have been fired by now.<BR/>Right?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-62579882452732407262007-04-20T09:30:00.000-07:002007-04-20T09:30:00.000-07:00Thanks for clearing up my misconceptions, anon! Yo...Thanks for clearing up my misconceptions, anon! You are absolutely correct! Every comment you've submitted is a testament to the True Faith of Walt Disney Imagineering! The greatest design institution ever to be created!<BR/><BR/>How could I have been so blind and so ignorant to think that years of headbanging and handwringing over the quality decline in Imagineering would <I>never</I> produce results in turning around the company? *slaps forehead*<BR/><BR/>Of course! This is simply a contest of wills wherein the faithful all-knowing torch bearers of Walt's Legacy™ need only <I>hang in there</I> and wait out the nitwits who seized control of the leadership 13 years ago! For they do not have any true love for Disney, their hearts are not pure! They do not possess the resolve and fortitude to stay <I>their</I> course and keep Imagineering on its continuing and inevitable descent into the seventh level of hell! They will indeed give up, once they recognize the folly of their design decisions by the ongoing decline in park attendance and attraction turnstile clicks!<BR/><BR/>I must now drive to Emeryville and pay penance for my sins.judihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15415067631504911897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-15041267702164526822007-04-17T22:59:00.000-07:002007-04-17T22:59:00.000-07:00>/bsdb said...Admitting defeat and moving on takes...>/bsdb said...<BR/>Admitting defeat and moving on takes a level of maturity that many individuals in our society are incapable of achieving, let alone comprehending. Remaining in a hostile environment, staying the course in the face of adversity ceases to be noble past a certain point, and simply becomes cowardice.< <BR/><BR/>Well, as the point of this blog, and this “Fixing WDI” post in particular, is to discuss ways to repair the damage that has been done to WDI, what is your solution? Nothing you have posted gives any sort of resolution to the problems facing Imagineering. Bagging on particular Imagineers for not quitting is not constructive.<BR/><BR/>Things are already bad enough at WDI without completely abandoning the company’s capabilities to a management that would probably be willing to just outsource theme park attractions to some outside company. Your solution of all creative Imagineers fleeing when faulty management would result in the company becoming a useless division incapable of fulfilling it’s intended function.<BR/><BR/>Fixing WDI would require reestablishing creative integrity, quality and passion throughout the company’s employees. If faulty management is the cause of the deterioration, then dealing with that would be the optimum solution, not abandoning the creative talent that actually maintains Disney’s leadership in the theme park industry.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-10437133878887887572007-04-17T08:53:00.000-07:002007-04-17T08:53:00.000-07:00You suggest that everyone who faces years of adver...<I>You suggest that everyone who faces years of adversity should eventually just give up?</I><BR/><BR/>Actually, yes. <BR/><BR/>Not all battles can be won. It is the wise warrior who can recognize these situations and walk off the battlefield in one piece. Sun Tzu detailed this centuries ago in "The Art of War." <BR/><BR/><BR/><I>While politics within Imagineering have resulted in a detrimental atmosphere, your solution that all those who feel oppressed by that atmosphere should flee would leave Imagineering in the hands of those who brought it about.</I><BR/><BR/>I have no problem with cutting my loses and moving on. If I did, I'd still be married to an abusive jerk, I'd still be working for nitwit educational developers, and I'd still be socializing with individuals who swallow their self-esteem every time their "rich and famous" friends disrespect their needs and treat them like dirt.<BR/><BR/>Admitting defeat and moving on takes a level of maturity that many individuals in our society are incapable of achieving, let alone comprehending. Remaining in a hostile environment, <I>staying the course</I> in the face of adversity ceases to be noble past a certain point, and simply becomes cowardice.<BR/><BR/>There is no shame in giving up when the time is appropriate. And his appropriate time happened years ago.<BR/><BR/><BR/><I>That doesn’t sound like a very reasonable solution. It serves neither the Imagineer nor Disney. You don’t nurture creativity by running away from a challenge.</I><BR/><BR/>"Challenge"? There's a huge difference between a challenge and a dogfight.<BR/><BR/>Staying too long in a dogfight does <I>not</I> serve the Imagineer. It ultimately weakens him/her. Creativity will always deteriorate when too much time and energy is focused on negative adversarial endeavors.<BR/><BR/>In order to best serve Imagineering and Disney, one has to first serve one's creativity and health. And playing company politics does little to promote either one.judihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15415067631504911897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-54503650160781182007-04-16T22:45:00.000-07:002007-04-16T22:45:00.000-07:00You suggest that everyone who faces years of adver...You suggest that everyone who faces years of adversity should eventually just give up? While politics within Imagineering have resulted in a detrimental atmosphere, your solution that all those who feel oppressed by that atmosphere should flee would leave Imagineering in the hands of those who brought it about. That doesn’t sound like a very reasonable solution. It serves neither the Imagineer nor Disney. You don’t nurture creativity by running away from a challenge.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-3810658062856445372007-04-14T08:28:00.000-07:002007-04-14T08:28:00.000-07:00anon concluded:I would imagine that the frustratio...anon concluded:<BR/><BR/><I>I would imagine that the frustration he must be facing after over a decade of the treatment he has suffered would cause some attitude issues, but I doubt it would curtail his innate creative capabilities.</I><BR/><BR/>Given my own experience of working with textbook publishers who believed "interactive design" simply meant placing words on a computer screen, I must disagree with your conclusion.<BR/><BR/>Eventually, working in a contentious atmosphere year after year wears you down and definitely affects your creative abilities, innate or otherwise. A nurturing, supportive environment must exist for those talents to remain flexible and fresh. <BR/><BR/>Facing negativity about your work on a continuous basis <I>does</I> affect your overall attitude and job performance, not to mention your health. This is why ongoing training and 'creativity bootcamps' such as Pixar University are so important, to keep those skills and innate talents from becoming atrophied, to keep the juices flowing by having new challenges from which to grow.<BR/><BR/>I've been in professional situations where managers with less training and far less design sensibility were making creative decisions that affected the entire product line. Usability suffered with each revision, and sales plummeted as a result. <BR/><BR/>Ultimately, there would be nothing left to hang my hat on, to make the job worth sticking around for. Obviously, "T" still finds <I>something</I> enjoyable and/or rewarding in this job, else he would just finally give up and leave.<BR/><BR/><BR/>When an abused wife first complains about her husband's treatment, it's easy to be sympathetic. But after hearing years of the same complaints over and over about his abuse, the sympathy starts to wane. It's natural to think to yourself, "How abusive could this person possibly be if she's still sticking around, allowing him to treat her this way?"<BR/><BR/>You stated it yourself, anon. Much like an abused spouse, "T" has endured "over a decade of the treatment he has suffered" at WDI because he's been marginalized to the point of being "powerless."<BR/><BR/>So why does he stay?<BR/><BR/>Why does he stick around and put up with this disrespect, year after year after year, for as long as he has? If I were in his shoes (and I have been with other media <I>edutainment</I> companies), I would have told them off and marched out the door, long before now.<BR/><BR/>Just as I have little respect for that battered wife who refuses to leave her abusive husband, I have little respect for creative professionals who refuse honor their own talent and self-worth enough to leave toxic environments, no matter how well they're compensated.<BR/><BR/>Either you honor your creativity by nurturing it and protecting it or you don't. But constantly whining about how bad conditions are when you refuse to get off your butt and change the channel gets zero sympathy from me.judihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15415067631504911897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-84147190666953878902007-04-13T10:25:00.000-07:002007-04-13T10:25:00.000-07:00I have my views, and others have theirs. Either yo...I have my views, and others have theirs. Either you're a fan or you're not. Either you agree with his particular creative decisions and directions or you don't. Doesn't matter what happened thirty or forty years prior to today, you're only as good as your last project.<BR/><BR/>I have a great deal of respect for individuals who can step back and look at the bigger picture, realize they're getting the shaft, and finally proclaim, "No more. I'm done. No amount of compensation is worth being treated like dirt." And after years of watching this Imagineer being treated like dirt, I eventually lost respect for him, because he was unable to do this. <BR/><BR/>Why couldn't he walk away then? Why can't he walk away now? Who the heck knows. Either his self-respect is that faulty, or his desire for material wealth and fan adulation trumps everything else. Perhaps it's a combination of both.<BR/><BR/>All I know is that most anyone else with a modicum of self-respect would have told his corporate masters to go F themselves and walk out the door years ago. If things have been even half as bad as anon has described, then this individual must be a major masochist for being able to tolerate the crap for this long.<BR/><BR/>This individual's continued endurance of the disrespect and demonstration to work for Disney at any and all costs, does little to win <I>my</I> admiration and respect, especially when the sycophant cheerleaders publicly defend him with every dysfunctional step.<BR/><BR/>This man is not "fighting the good fight" to bring back Walt's Legacy. That activity ceased years ago. This is about greed. This is about being in the spotlight, being admired by adoring fans and innocent youth who aspire to follow in his Imagineering footsteps. <BR/><BR/>This is about executive privilege and power and the wonderful lifestyle that goes along with it. This man would rather stay safely employed in a stress-inducing viper pit, than risk the unknown vast expanse of the consultant landscape. He would rather swallow his professional pride to continue his executive lifestyle than live an average and ordinary life with dignity like everyone else. One look at his fairy tale custom home in the hills says it all.<BR/><BR/><BR/>If you wish to continue drinking the kool-aid, anon, feel free. I choked down my last cup after BB took over the design studio. That should have been any self-respecting professional's last straw.judihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15415067631504911897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-72436716673446735112007-04-12T22:23:00.000-07:002007-04-12T22:23:00.000-07:00>/bsdb said... I doubt Disney management feels stu...>/bsdb said...<BR/> I doubt Disney management feels stupid for firing the Kirks, or any other executives and managers long since gone. WDI is way too top heavy with execs.<<BR/><BR/>Certainly they don’t feel stupid. Most who do stupid things are oblivious to their own stupidity. But those on the outside can see it clearly.<BR/><BR/>>There are still execs in Glendale who are quality-minded, such as Joe Rohde, Tim Delaney, and Tom Morris. But I don’t see anyone claiming that they’re “powerless” and just barely surviving. Far from it. And I wouldn’t exactly call DAK and Expedition Everest nor HKDL “leftovers.” Same for Nemo Subs, the first major E-Ticket DL has seen in over a decade.<<BR/><BR/>Yes, there are still a few remaining quality minded execs at WDI, but while those you noted won’t be claiming they are powerless or barely surviving, that doesn’t mean that they aren’t. In some situations they have indicated that they are frustrated with the current situation. <BR/><BR/>As for DAK and Expedition Everest, to be frank, Rhode has been given UNPRECEDENTED breadth of freedom to research and produce the projects he’s been working on. But even he has indicated dissatisfaction with WDI management in recent years.<BR/><BR/>Disneyland’s Subs, being an enhancement of an existing attraction, took a lot of work to keep alive. Even Sklar vowed they wouldn’t be closed (though he didn’t really put any significant effort to back that promise). But being that the attraction was Pixar related, corporate bought into the concept. It finally required “L” to ensure the quality was returned.<BR/><BR/>>I also doubt that “L” is mostly responsible for the budget mushrooming on FNSV. Some additional costs to plus the show, yes. But most of the added costs? That’s unfair.<<BR/><BR/>Well, the initial scope of the project was reduced from the point of it’s preliminary budget against all objections of the creative team. It took “L” to get that budget reinstated and enhanced to meet his quality standards. So while you may claim it’s unfair to “blame” him for that, many would applaud him for his dedication the quality that Disney was once noted for.<BR/><BR/>>Perhaps it’s not a matter of jealousy, but a matter of frustration with stagnant designs and concepts that seem to recycle over and over. Did it ever occur to you that much of what has been presented in the past decade hasn’t been his best work? And that maybe, just maybe, the idea well is starting to run dry?<<BR/><BR/>And what gives these stagnant executives the qualifications to question the designs and concepts of some of the world’s top creative talent? Do you have any idea of the extent of the outstanding concepts that have been developed and shot down by certain executives? Quality, integrity and exceptional concepts are not the main focus of WDI’s current management. And since they control all access to Disney’s upper management, they can inhibit their exposure to certain outstanding designs and concepts while promoting lesser versions.<BR/><BR/>>You attribute his lack of professional support from Imagineering leadership to jealousy. Given the work he’s done over the past 15 years, I don’t find that argument convincing. I don’t see a plethora of brilliant design work to be jealous about. And the previous fan support has been steadily declining over the past decade as well. Many fans are tired of his everchanging stories and self-promotional acts, just as are many leaders in Burbank and Glendale. And I don’t believe their reasons aren’t completely without merit.<<BR/><BR/>And why don’t you see the plethora of brilliant design? Could it be that over most of the past decade he has been denied the opportunity to develop any of the ideas he’s come up with???<BR/><BR/>As for fan support, that has never wavered.<BR/><BR/>Ever since the death of Frank Wells, Imagineering has been in decline. The unprecedented access that “T” had with Eisner and Wells ensured that projects would maintain the quality, integrity and outstanding show that Disney was known for. <BR/><BR/>After Wells’ death, Eisner shut himself off from WDI and added layers of management to further isolate himself. From that point, WDI management took advantage to reduce the creative power “T” had formerly held. So, as the “costly” creative show elements were no longer had corporate management (Wells) support, they were able to slowly reduce “T”s power and responsibilities. From overseeing the EDL project to being shut out of most every key project that comes along, it would seem obvious that there is some level of conflict that he ahs no control over that is keeping him down.<BR/><BR/>>He’s not the same brilliant Imagineer he was 20 years ago, when EuroDisneyland was first being conceived and the main team was put together. Times change, tastes change. But this man seems to stay stuck in the past. And that’s why many fans such as myself aren’t so quick to defend him anymore.<<BR/><BR/>And, how do you KNOW he’s not the brilliant Imagineer he was 20 years ago? You count yourself as a fan, but it appears that you are more in tuned to the feelings and attitudes of the current management and looking to continue the fallacy that the issues that “T” faces are of his own doing. I would imagine that the frustration he must be facing after over a decade of the treatment he has suffered would cause some attitude issues, but I doubt it would curtail his innate creative capabilities.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1953887566071563192007-04-12T00:07:00.000-07:002007-04-12T00:07:00.000-07:00Just a few quick thoughts:I doubt Disney managemen...Just a few quick thoughts:<BR/><BR/>I doubt Disney management feels stupid for firing the Kirks, or any other executives and managers long since gone. WDI is way too top heavy with execs. Cuts still need to be made, to bring the ratio of execs to worker bees down to a reasonable level. This is one of the reasons why WDI is such an expensive firm for the parks to do business with. Overhead is killing them. And all that executive overcompensation doesn't help.<BR/><BR/>There are still execs in Glendale who are quality-minded, such as Joe Rohde, Tim Delaney, and Tom Morris. But I don't see anyone claiming that they're "powerless" and just barely surviving. Far from it. And I wouldn't exactly call DAK and Expedition Everest nor HKDL "leftovers." Same for Nemo Subs, the first major E-Ticket DL has seen in over a decade.<BR/><BR/>I also doubt that "L" is mostly responsible for the budget mushrooming on FNSV. Some additional costs to plus the show, yes. But most of the added costs? That's unfair.<BR/><BR/>Perhaps it's not a matter of jealousy, but a matter of frustration with stagnant designs and concepts that seem to recycle over and over. Did it ever occur to you that much of what has been presented in the past decade hasn't been his best work? And that maybe, just maybe, the idea well is starting to run dry?<BR/><BR/>You attribute his lack of professional support from Imagineering leadership to jealousy. Given the work he's done over the past 15 years, I don't find that argument convincing. I don't see a plethora of brilliant design work to be jealous about. And the previous fan support has been steadily declining over the past decade as well. Many fans are tired of his everchanging stories and self-promotional acts, just as are many leaders in Burbank and Glendale. And I don't believe their reasons aren't completely without merit.<BR/><BR/>He's not the same brilliant Imagineer he was 20 years ago, when EuroDisneyland was first being conceived and the main team was put together. Times change, tastes change. But this man seems to stay stuck in the past. And that's why many fans such as myself aren't so quick to defend him anymore.judihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15415067631504911897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-48421178286052705842007-04-09T12:59:00.000-07:002007-04-09T12:59:00.000-07:00As I posted previously, I stopped drinking the fan...As I posted previously, I stopped drinking the fan worshipping kool-aid. I have a better appreciation for looking at issues from both sides now. And in the case regarding the Dueling "T" Imagineers, it's not as cut and dry as some anonymous posters would have us believe.<BR/><BR/>Not everything comes down to 'jealousy' as it pertains to the older "T" in Glendale. I've heard this argument before, and it just doesn't wash.<BR/><BR/>For instance, take the sub rehab project. The original budget proposed to Matt by older "T" and his blue sky team was between $40 to $50 mil. Some sources now claim the final total will be closer to $100 mil. It was my understanding that "L" only added about $10 mil to the tab for his additions.<BR/><BR/>If that is indeed the case, where did the other $40 to $50 mil come from? Who was responsible for these added costs? Given the budget explosion history of older "T" from previous projects, not to mention the hyperfocus on the bottom line by Burbank, wouldn't it make more logical sense that this project was <I>deliberately</I> low balled in order to get the green light? <BR/><BR/>Gee whiz... I wonder which Imagineer might have done that?<BR/><BR/>And how, precisely, is this related to 'jealousy' on the part of other Imagineers, like younger "T"? Why would any executive continue to be 'jealous' of another executive at a <I>lower</I> position in the corporate food chain, even after all these years? Maybe this whiny excuse worked initially, but not anymore.<BR/><BR/><BR/>By keeping my discerning ears open to all arguments, I've heard frustration from many parts of Glendale regarding how older "T" plays the political game. <BR/><BR/>Yes, everyone who manages to survive in Glendale must play politics to some degree. But... I do not believe that one Imagineer's particular flavor of politicking is <I>holier</I> and less sullied than another's. All politicking, by nature of the activity, is inherently rife with self-serving motivation and action.<BR/><BR/><BR/>I'm really tired of these single-sided defenses where one "T" is placed on the pedestal and the other "T" is completely trashed for having no redeeming qualities whatsoever. Why is everything measured in such severe and limiting terms?<BR/><BR/>Both "T" Imagineers have good points.<BR/><BR/>Both "T" Imagineers have bad points.<BR/><BR/>And most importantly of all, both "T" Imagineers are <I>executives</I>. <BR/><BR/>Senior Vice President and Executive Vice President. Not your average get-yer-hands-dirty low-ranking peon-creative-artist-types. And this has been the primary focus of their Disney professional existence, good or bad, for a very long time. <BR/><BR/><BR/>The Dueling "T" Imagineers lost all desire to work at the lower creative level, decades ago. It's all about being at the top of the food chain. It's all about the compensation, benefits, perks, and power.<BR/><BR/>The Dueling "T" executives create an adversarial atmosphere in Glendale which makes for a shitty work environment. And whether or not their supporters choose to acknowledge this fact, these two are significantly responsible for the waning morale in Creative Development.<BR/><BR/>It no longer matters who is <I>right</I> or who is <I>wrong</I> regarding their positions. As far as I'm concerned, both engage in the politicking, so neither one is correct. Splitting moral hairs to see which executive engages in more ethical behavior more often or who is more concerned with Walt's legacy is a futile exercise at this point.<BR/><BR/>Cleaning up the Imagineering snake pit will require the dismissal of both "T" Imagineers, not just one. <BR/><BR/>And "boo hoo" to the supporters of younger "T" and older "T" alike. Neither executive holds a monopoly on creativity and the Disney vision. But both Imagineers have clearly demonstrated that it's more about their <I>own</I> individual needs and wants over the company's. And that's not what "effective" executives should be concerning themselves with the most.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Time to put your executive overcompensation where your mouths are and prove your creative worth, Dueling "T" Imagineers. Just like Steve Kirk, Bob Rogers, Craig Hanna, Eddie Sotto, and Bob Baranick have done.<BR/><BR/>Here's my Disney dream: good riddance to you both.judihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15415067631504911897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-85696866187462085002007-04-09T10:44:00.000-07:002007-04-09T10:44:00.000-07:00Over several decades I've been an occasional outsi...Over several decades I've been an occasional outside contractor with Disney/WDI. While I would have no idea how to "fix" it, here are some impressions I got which might be useful to someone trying to improve the creative situation at WDI/WED.<BR/><BR/>(1) The location in Glendale is dismal - it's an area primarily occupied by equipment vendors, former manufacturing and now rundown plants, vehicle maintenance facilities, warehouses, and so on -- not the sort of "creative" environment found at the Disney Studios a few mile away. <BR/><BR/>The interior of the building is surprisingly sterile in feeling - even though there are lots of "Disney" decorations on the walls, etc., everything feels kinda' old and dirty - like an old museum that had been closed years ago.<BR/><BR/>(2) Everybody wants to be able to s say they're working for Disney, so they'll "cheerfully" accept working conditions they might not otherwise agree to -- They'll "happily" do anything to keep their job. However, there seems to be a feeling of sadness and resignation that I feel everywhere I've encountered the organization. This has been amplified by the fact that I, as an outsider, WAS excited to work on WDI projects, but I was able to distance myself avoid whatever negativity was going on there.<BR/><BR/>(3) It might have been just a coincidence, but several of the people I worked with complained of illnesses of various types which might have been stress-induced or due to some environmental presence in the neigborhood. One took an early retirement, another was told by his doctor that if he didn't quit his job there, he wouldn't live much longer (He did quit and is much happier and healthier now.) Another passed away recently, far too young.<BR/><BR/>(4) I was paid well, and in a very timely manner. Other WDI contractors I've met were surprised by that. -- Don't know anything specific, but it might be something to look into. I was frustrated that some of the work I did was suddenly cancelled (I was paid for it though, so I'm not complaining.) Another project was cancelled and re-instated three times - though I did make more money through that process, I would have preferred to have made less and done a better job.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-36992077215142038662007-04-08T22:24:00.000-07:002007-04-08T22:24:00.000-07:00>/bsdb said...Hmm... I wouldn’t exactly call “T(B)...>/bsdb said...<BR/>Hmm... I wouldn’t exactly call “T(B)” powerless. Far from it, actually. He’s managed to survive for over 37 years, despite other ‘old school’ Imagineers (like Steve Kirk) and members of his ‘team’ (like John Stone, Nina Rae Vaughn, and Bruce Gordon) being kicked to the curb, one by one. “T(B)” might not possess the same degree of clout and power he once held inside Glendale, but he’s far from having lost control completely. Nemo Subs is just weeks away from being released, with double the original budget and reduced hourly capacity over Sub Voyage. Yet “T(B)” still remains gainfully employed in the WDI executive ranks. Powerless? I don’t think so. <<BR/><BR/>Surviving is just what he’s done. But not without cost. Probably the only reason that he has survived is because Disney management would be seen as total fools if they fired him as they did the Kirks (and THAT maneuver exposed their stupidity). “T(B)” is one of the few remaining creative executives that still maintains passion for quality and integrity in the projects he works on (over just appeasing budget minded management). Fans and many in the company know that. (BTW: Subs increased budget brought to you by “L”)<BR/><BR/>Unfortunately, as politics are currently more important than quality at WDI, those who are willing to cow tow to the bottom line are rewarded and given prestige projects while those who still strive for creative integrity are bypassed and given leftovers.<BR/><BR/>>/bsdb said...<BR/>So I take it those Emeryville field trips by “T(B)” have been measurably less successful than what “T(F)” has done to butter up “L”? Well, at least he got some frequent flyer miles for his efforts.<<BR/><BR/>While “T(B)” may have gained some f/f mileage, Disney has subjugated a key creative force, all due to internal politics and jealousy. <BR/><BR/>Morale within WDI peaked immediately after the Pixar merger announcement indicating “L” would be taking over creative control of WDI and the political faction began being very nice-nice to the creative talent. But as soon as they realized that “L” wasn’t going to make any moves, the political forces moved to butter him up and reestablish their power.<BR/><BR/>So, politics rule and creativity suffers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-42979716357672336612007-04-08T11:40:00.000-07:002007-04-08T11:40:00.000-07:00jonathan said:>>>One final rant: I'm really tired ...<B>jonathan said:</B><BR/>>>><I>One final rant: I'm really tired of everyone acting as if Pixar has all the keys to success. To my knowledge, their management structure and turn-around dates are very different than Disney's. How fast would they collaspe if they had to open their own theme park, distribution networks, merchandise development department, and all the other pots Disney has their hands in? They do one job: make 3D films. When you only do one thing, its easy to become good at it. Their size also plays a big part in their daily communication and thought process. Disney gave up a lot of this when they decided to go global.</I><<<<BR/><BR/>Right, because no one can take the basic tenets of good business and expand it to other venues. Do like Walt Disney did and stick to cartoons...umm...hrm...<BR/><BR/>>>><I>Its a joke when people mention "When Walt was alive..." because the world has a million different variables that have changed since those days. Any speculation as to what Walt would have done are purely speculation. Just because a person works for the company doesn't give them the real insight to speak on Walt's behalf. Anyone claiming that Walt would have been the savior to all of ills of modern times are nostalgic. WED started as group of guys in a warehouse. Today its a big corporate wing with more employees and middle management than ever.</I><<<<BR/><BR/>Let's see. Walt WOULD have put creativity first. Walt WOULD have put the quality of a thing above quantity of a thing. Walt WOULD have sunk every last dime into a project he believed in. Walt WOULD have put his Guests first and foremost above all else. Walt WOULD NOT have stood for corporate BS and inter-office politics, especially if they stood in the way of progress and development. Walt WOULD NOT have let corporate ego play a part in Imagineering.<BR/><BR/>You see, your one of those many people that hear "What would Walt do" and automatically think we're trying to second guess and mystically channel the <B>specific</B> decisions that Walter Disney would have made with regard to a <B>specific</B> thing. That’s utterly ridiculous. Walt was a man with very defined principles. He did things a certain way and did them that way based on a very strict, personal sense of morals. When we ask “What would Walt do?”, we mean what would he do <B>in principle</B>. Which is very easy to accurately speculate on, because we have a very clear understanding of his principles from his past actions. It’s the reason so many of us can agree on many things, in principle. <BR/><BR/>By the way, nostalgia is a compliment around here.<BR/><BR/>>>><I>Instead of blaming the 'suits' for their inability to hear anything but money, these people should be finding a way to speak their language. Creative and business people might not think alike, but no one is winning when there is a break-down in communication.</I><BR/><BR/>There is no common ground between greed and creativity. A point I was somewhat hinting at earlier. Creative types often make good businessmen because doing what they love drives them to be successful at it. But men and women driven to accrue nothing but profit for the sake of profit alone will never understand, and thereby be unable to nurture, a creative environ. Fire and Water. Two different philosophies that neither support, nor perpetuate the other.Digital Jedihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02374739586203788564noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-63041229113344877862007-04-07T22:37:00.000-07:002007-04-07T22:37:00.000-07:00How is the break-down in Disney any different than...How is the break-down in Disney any different than the break-down of other companies? This is all office politics. It happens everywhere!<BR/><BR/>Its a joke when people mention "When Walt was alive..." because the world has a million different variables that have changed since those days. Any speculation as to what Walt would have done are purely speculation. Just because a person works for the company doesn't give them the real insight to speak on Walt's behalf. Anyone claiming that Walt would have been the savior to all of ills of modern times are nostalgic. WED started as group of guys in a warehouse. Today its a big corporate wing with more employees and middle management than ever.<BR/><BR/>I don't believe Disney can be "fixed" in the way the authors of this blog wish it to be. Its a great intention with respect towards a legacy, but corporations are reactionary entities. Despite what many of you want to believe, businesses are in business to make money. When lack of money becomes a threat, they react. I can't think of many Fortune 500 companies that have aggressive pro-active business strategies. Talent, property, and franchises are viewed as assets that support the bottom line. They are not viewed AS the bottom line. Most wait for a problem to arise. Unless the accountants tell them there is a problem, office conflicts and subjective critiques of creativity fall on deaf ears.<BR/><BR/>Disney has so much baggage. Some of its good. Some bad. To change the momentum of what has been going on for half a century is tough. When a competitor learns from Disney's mistakes, that competitor will be able generate all the magic and wonderment that Disney does...probably more.<BR/><BR/>This past year was one of the most successful financial years for the company in a long time. They've had several hits as well as a bumper crop of guests in the parks. The money is talking and its saying "Nothing is wrong". <BR/><BR/>Instead of blaming the 'suits' for their inability to hear anything but money, these people should be finding a way to speak their language. Creative and business people might not think alike, but no one is winning when there is a break-down in communication. <BR/><BR/>One final rant: I'm really tired of everyone acting as if Pixar has all the keys to success. To my knowledge, their management structure and turn-around dates are very different than Disney's. How fast would they collaspe if they had to open their own theme park, distribution networks, merchandise development department, and all the other pots Disney has their hands in? They do one job: make 3D films. When you only do one thing, its easy to become good at it. Their size also plays a big part in their daily communication and thought process. Disney gave up a lot of this when they decided to go global.Jonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09561853388217594450noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-37667521963934503782007-04-07T16:12:00.000-07:002007-04-07T16:12:00.000-07:00anonymous #15 confidently claimed:The only “T” tha...anonymous #15 confidently claimed:<BR/><BR/><I>The only “T” that I know of that has reached fan idolization level in NO WAY deals with the politics of the company and that’s why he’s been effectively rendered powerless.</I><BR/><BR/>Hmm... I wouldn't exactly call "T(B)" <I>powerless</I>. Far from it, actually. He's managed to survive for over 37 years, despite other 'old school' Imagineers (like Steve Kirk) and members of his 'team' (like John Stone, Nina Rae Vaughn, and Bruce Gordon) being kicked to the curb, one by one. "T(B)" might not possess the same degree of clout and power he once held inside Glendale, but he's far from having lost control completely. Nemo Subs is just weeks away from being released, with double the original budget and reduced hourly capacity over Sub Voyage. Yet "T(B)" still remains gainfully employed in the WDI executive ranks.<BR/><BR/><I>Powerless</I>? I don't think so.<BR/><BR/><BR/>anon15 continues:<BR/><BR/><I>Those who do play the politics, schmooze up to the other “T (F)” and work with him to butter up the one (“L”) who is supposed to be breaking down the political stranglehold at WDI. Unfortunately, their efforts appear to be working and the politics are as strong as ever.</I><BR/><BR/>So I take it those Emeryville field trips by "T(B)" have been measurably less successful than what "T(F)" has done to <I>butter up</I> "L"?<BR/><BR/>Well, at least he got some frequent flyer miles for his efforts.judihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15415067631504911897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-71959669284156333562007-04-06T23:03:00.000-07:002007-04-06T23:03:00.000-07:00anonymous said...“The ones who play the politics t...anonymous said...<BR/>“The ones who play the politics the most are the ones most of the Disney theme park fans like to idolize. Their first names start with the letter "T"”<BR/><BR/>and<BR/><BR/>/bsdb said...<BR/> ”I believe that the WED of Walt's Era still lies dormant beneath this political snake pit, waiting for the leaders in Burbank and Emeryville to listen with those discerning ears”<BR/><BR/>Well, while the fact of political BS is indeed running rampant at Imagineering, the “T” you are referring to is a puzzle. The only “T” that I know of that has reached fan idolization level in NO WAY deals with the politics of the company and that’s why he’s been effectively rendered powerless. <BR/><BR/>Those who do play the politics, schmooze up to the other “T (F)” and work with him to butter up the one (“L”) who is supposed to be breaking down the political stranglehold at WDI. Unfortunately, their efforts appear to be working and the politics are as strong as ever.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-23471274159946709952007-04-06T07:57:00.000-07:002007-04-06T07:57:00.000-07:00The ones who play the politics the most are the on...<I>The ones who play the politics the most are the ones most of the Disney theme park fans like to idolize. Their first names start with the letter "T"</I><BR/><BR/>Truer words were never written on this blog, anon. <BR/><BR/>It's an ongoing battle for ultimate control of Imagineering that's been waged for decades. And all the Travel Channel Disney theme park specials in the galaxy will never change this fact. The inherent nature of these executives is to maintain power and control and the adulation of fans who kiss the park pavers they walk upon. I know. I used to be one of those fans, long ago. <BR/><BR/>Back in the day when I couldn't discern between significant, relevant Disney history and self-promotional hype, I worshipped the "T" Imagineers. And unfortunately for many fans, it's not always easy to distinguish between the true history and the hype. <BR/><BR/>It takes time and dedication and reading -- lots of reading -- to catch the fairy tales and personal stories that somehow are never told the same way twice. It takes a willingness to smash those pedestals and listen with a discerning ear, to sift the BS from the brilliance. And that goes triple for the Burbank and Emeryville leadership.<BR/><BR/>This is why I appreciate blogs such as these. <I>Sifting the BS from the brilliance</I> is how Disney will return Imagineering to its roots of being the standard, the premiere design institution which all others were once measured against. <BR/><BR/>I believe that the WED of Walt's Era still lies dormant beneath this political snake pit, waiting for the leaders in Burbank and Emeryville to listen with those discerning ears, sift the BS from the brilliance, and make the tough choices to put this company back on track. Even if those choices involve the removal of personal friends.<BR/><BR/>Self-serving politics have slowly killed this company. It's time to finally end the executive duels and fire anyone -- ANYONE -- who cannot set aside their desire for power and monetary gain and fan adulation at the expense of Imagineering's future.judihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15415067631504911897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-29416055891214347992007-04-05T22:22:00.000-07:002007-04-05T22:22:00.000-07:00The ones who play the politics the most are the on...The ones who play the politics the most are the ones most of the Disney theme park fans like to idolize. Their first names start with the letter "T"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-25407476287176004132007-04-04T14:58:00.000-07:002007-04-04T14:58:00.000-07:00pariartspaul opined:And now there’s Lasseter, actu...pariartspaul opined:<BR/><BR/><I>And now there’s Lasseter, actually a creative guy, sort of in charge over there, supposedly breathing new life into WDI. What’s really happening is the same old schmoozers are courting him with more Pixar based attractions. (Ah yes, I have visions of conference rooms chock-full of storyboards filled with Pixar characters!)</I><BR/><BR/>Are those conference rooms in Glendale or Emeryville? My vision is a bit fuzzy from all the Year of a Million Schemes marketing haze.<BR/><BR/><I>And guess what? He loves it. My guess is that the Lasseter legacy at Disney will be a bunch of Pixar themed dark rides. Hey, it could be worse right?</I><BR/><BR/>The mere fact that Laugh Floor received the green light calls the whole "Pixar themed dark rides" strategy into question.<BR/><BR/>If too many "please the boss" execs and managers from the old regime remain, it won't matter if Lasseter or Pressler is in charge. Seems that anything John loves will keep the WDI stewpot from boiling over. And any exec at this point, no matter how sincere, no matter how imbued with Walt's Legacy™ they appear, should be carefully scrutinized.<BR/><BR/>Not every Imagineer with their lips firmly attached to Lasseter's butt is thinking about "creating the best Disney product" they can. If they've lasted this long, they're in it for themselves. Period.<BR/><BR/><I>Maybe the next one in charge will have more of a clue.</I><BR/><BR/>You mean like, I dunno, Pete Docter?<BR/><BR/>See comments above.<BR/><BR/>Wash. Rinse. Repeat.judihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15415067631504911897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-4956059095560862302007-04-04T13:43:00.000-07:002007-04-04T13:43:00.000-07:00http://www.theonion.com/content/news/new_disney_ri...http://www.theonion.com/content/news/new_disney_ride_simulates_disneyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1206686797754483182007-04-04T10:43:00.000-07:002007-04-04T10:43:00.000-07:00Fix WDI? WDI will never be fixed until whoever is...Fix WDI? WDI will never be fixed until whoever is in charge of it thinks it is broken. And that will be a tough one since WDI is so good at pleasing whoever is in charge.<BR/><BR/>When Walt was in charge, he made sure the place was staffed with people who ‘got it’… his vision. Since then none of the subsequent bosses had even a trace of the kind of talent or vision Walt had. So over the years, legions of managers and muck mucks that ran the place caused a gradual shift in WDI’s day to day operating philosophy from ‘creating the best Disney product you can’, to ‘survive at all costs’. And the best way to survive in business is to please your boss. <BR/><BR/>The worst example of what happened with this philosophy was the Pressler era. Here was someone who had absolutely no business being in charge of WDI (or any creative company). His business philosophies were in every way opposite of Walt Disney’s. But WDI’s job was to please him….<BR/><BR/>And now there’s Lasseter, actually a creative guy, sort of in charge over there, supposedly breathing new life into WDI. What’s really happening is the same old schmoozers are courting him with more Pixar based attractions. (Ah yes, I have visions of conference rooms chock-full of storyboards filled with Pixar characters!) And guess what? He loves it. My guess is that the Lasseter legacy at Disney will be a bunch of Pixar themed dark rides. Hey, it could be worse right?<BR/><BR/>Maybe the next one in charge will have more of a clue.pariartspaulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14327281259443510085noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-71842714085441828202007-03-29T08:21:00.000-07:002007-03-29T08:21:00.000-07:00I read your blog for almost a year.... And I find ...I read your blog for almost a year.... And I find your oppinios very interesting....<BR/><BR/>I wonder what do you think about the recent work Disneyland Resort Paris is currently doing because of it's 15th Aniversary.<BR/>You can check it out (only a small part of the extensive work its being done) at:<BR/>http://www.dlrp.fr/news.php<BR/><BR/>This work includes rehabs, new atractions and areas, a castle makeover and, most of all, the reborn of some minimal details that made the resort so especial back in 1992...<BR/>Check this out:<BR/>http://www.dlrp.fr/actu_rehabilitation_disneyland_1066.html<BR/><BR/>After the deception of WaltDisney Studios, I think DisneyLand Paris is actually working on it's redeption...<BR/><BR/>Continue with the good work,<BR/>Henrique Delfina<BR/>(sorry my bad english...)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-46516085141360591982007-03-29T00:51:00.000-07:002007-03-29T00:51:00.000-07:00This site is fascinating. From what I have read el...This site is fascinating. From what I have read elsewhere, it seems that Iger wants to change things in the near future. A smart business person should know to hire people that can do things that they cannot. It should be management's job to put people in a position to be successful. The contestants on "The Apprentice" seem to know more about this than Disney's upper management. YOU HIRE CREATIVE PEOPLE TO MAKE CREATIVE DECSISIONS! Let the managers manage, the accountants to account and so forth. This is business 101. How could they let it get so out of control? There has been so much damage done to the parks in the past 10 years, it is not even funny. The good news is that most of it is easily reversible. I could go in to great detail here, but most of you already know what I am talking about. This is not just a shameless plug, but I run the "Amateur Imagineer" website and I implore all of you creative people who read and participate in this blog to also come participate in mine. If you do not like my ideas, then please write your own and submit them. I honestly would rather have more reader content on my site than my own. I just think that the people who write with the passion that you all do should use it as a creative outlet to help further the cause of making the Disney parks as great as they could be.blueskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13481663761338257429noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-41562336979831314722007-03-27T14:25:00.000-07:002007-03-27T14:25:00.000-07:00>>Lately, I was getting the impression that no one...>><I>Lately, I was getting the impression that no one would speak out about the problems of the company they work for, for fear of sudden unemployment...That is a sad state of affairs for any company, when your own people are threatened for publicly declaring their desire to see improvement</I><<<BR/><BR/>This statement is so true. Disney has almost taken a Communist approach to their employees, not letting them speak out against the government. <BR/><BR/>Maybe what Disney needs is a "Constitution"- a document governing everything that Disney does. It would bestow each department of Disney with certain "powers", but not ultimate authority, sort of how the US government works. The Big Wigs would be the "executive" branch, while representatives from the other divisions, as well as the workers, would make up a Legislature of sorts. A separate "judicial" branch would be a neutral group, used to govern money disputes as well as troubles of other kinds that arise.<BR/><BR/>This is probably a stupis idea, as I have about zero knowledge of politics. But I do know this: there needs to be a balance of power.Foy Lyndstromhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15181132285467143880noreply@blogger.com