Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Walt disney world history essay
Walt disney world history essay
Walt disney world history essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Walt disney world history essay
Boje (1995) investigated Walt Disney World and the storied accounts based on the organisation. The storied accounts reveal a darker side of the organisation, in comparison to the “artful and managed construction of Disney” (Boje, 1995:997). Walt Disney portrayed the organisation to be “one, big happy family”, however, this is falsely portrayed as Boje revealed that Walt Disney was an authoritative figure who “rarely allowed any voice other than his own to be heard” (1995:1020). One storied account portrays the negative image of working at Disney world, when 1000 workers picketed against the working conditions, due to the “unfair salaries, poor working conditions and a parochial code of behaviours” (1995:1014). In order to maintain the positive image of the company, Walt fired 20 strikers in an attempt to scare other workers; this had a negative effect with employee engagement. This strike is not recorded in the official Walt Disney World documents, which emphasises the dominant role Walt Disney had in silencing the voices of employees. Hiley (2004) argues that organisations exclude the voices of some individuals, which allows them to maintain the idealised identity of the organisation.
However, organisational change communication should be polyphonic (Langer and Thorup, 2006); whereby all employees’ voices are heard. By facilitating and coordinating all employees’ voices into a harmonic environment, enables a positive change process, as all employees are involved. By adopting a hegemonic narrative, organisations create an “invisible prison to those who are subject to it, which restricts their ability to voice alter-narrative accounts to define their existence” (Browns and Humphreys, 2003:137-138), thus the ideal reality is mai...
... middle of paper ...
...isation can be revealed, compared to the idealised portrayal of the organisation from a corporate stories perspective. Stories have always been a part a human life, it is an important way in which we make sense of situations, and therefore it could be questionable as to the extent storytelling can be ignored within organisations. Through using storytelling a connection between management and employees can be achieved, leading to increased levels of motivation and engagement which in turn will allow the organisation to implement changes without resistance due to employees feeling engaged with the organisation, thus higher motivation from employees impacting upon higher productivity. To conclude storied accounts from employees and organisation enable a deeper insight into how individuals make sense of their world, through which the complex identities can be explored.
problems. In a study done on the role of the Walt Disney Company, Vincent Faherty explains
Change affects more than just a program or a process within an organization, change affects employees, collecting data on employee’s readiness and willingness to accept a change will help leaders know if the organization is socially ready for change (Cole, Harris, and Bernerth, 2006). A change might be positive for an organization but if the employees who will be affect by the change are lost in the process then it could create a greater issue than not making the change. Leadership needs to communicate and inspire the employees to be positive toward the change, seeking to enhance their job satisfaction not make changes that will increase their desire to leave. This data is best collected early in the change initiative allowing leadership to properly cast the vision while addressing concerns. This requires leadership to create platforms for employees to engage in the change initiative freely (Ford, 2006). Employee attitudes can be measured through these dialogues providing leadership with necessary measureable data (Hughes, 2007).
S, Rawat 2001, Organisational Change and Forces Prompting Change, Academic Paper Review, Shovoong viewed on 2nd April 2011, on http://imgs.shvoongstatic.com/images/2011/_v_070420111027/scp.PNG">
The Disney corporation is easily the greatest empire of entertainment in the world thanks to the creator Walt Disney and his brother. Disney’s influence has been great within culture and society and I learned how much of an influence Disney has had through our course this semester. This influence is reflected and broadcasted through the many works and readings that we examined in class. The articles gave me new knowledge about Disney that I was previously unaware of.
This paper will assess the corporate culture of Walt Disney, addressing the background of the organization, training and teaching, stories, legends and myths associated with the company, philosophy, values, mission statement and the organizational goals of the company.
Change is the only constant in life. And therefore it should be understood as part of a continuing work in progress that calls for a much broader canvas that seeks out competing voices, and works with the resulting ambiguities, contradictions and tensions of messy reality (Graetz, F. & Smith, A., 2010). In this submission I try to show that organizational change is majorly based on the environment surrounding it much more than the desire of the members or change agents working in that organization. This view diverts from that of Lippitt, (1958) who suggests that implementing planned organizational changes successfully depends on premeditated interventions intended to modify the functioning of an organization. It also diverts from the traditional approaches to organizational change that generally follow a linear, rational model in which the focus is on controllability under the stewardship of a strong leader or ‘guiding coalition (Collis, 1998). In this discussion therefore, comparison made between the different philosophies of change and I try to show that successful change implantation largely depends on an organizations appreciation of what goes on around it rather than what they have planned as a strategic direction.
This case provides a brief history of management conflict and change at Walt Disney Company. Former CEO Michael Eisner was considered to be controversial because of his abrasive style and tendencies toward micromanagement. It was this style that strained several important relationships to the Disney Company. Though his reign as CEO during the 80’s and 90’s helped advance Disney Company, it was his conflicting management style that led to his demise and the beginning of Robert Iger’s epoch at Disney. Since Iger has taken the helm as CEO Disney was ranked 67th in the Fortune 500 list for largest companies, it has become the largest media conglomerate in the world, and relationships and disputes stemming from Eisner have been reconciled.
Dennings, Stephen. The Springboard: How Storytelling Ignites Action in Knowledge-Era Organizations. Boston, London, Butterworth Heinemann, October 2000.
Walt would work at Disney often ’till midnight and demanded the same of his employees (JustDisney.org). (what does this say about him, as a person?) In grueling “sweatbox” sessions he could fire an animator for a poorly drawn dwarf’s thumb (JustDisney.org). But Walt also had a nice side, he built a corporate campus with airy rooms, air-conditioning and top furniture, in the manner of today’s coolest ad agencies or software firms. Dress, led by Walt, was casual and he also encouraged pranks among the staff (Forbes.com). I appreciate how Walt was rough at times but also nice and happy at times. There are not many bosses who can do that so I idolize Walt for that. But In 1941 Disney studio animators went on strike because they were promised a reward after they spent long hours and hardly ever left the Disney studio while they were working on the film “Snow White” (SaysDigitalCommons.ric.edu). But what set the workers off was when 17 workers were fired for “pro-union activity (SaysDigitalCommons.ric.edu). Later on fellow outraged employes made stirring speeches in support of their colleagues and the next day three hundred workers went on strike (SaysDigitalCommons.ric.edu). Walt was shattered (Forbes.com). He would never again feel the same passion for cartoons
They include: excellence in leadership, excellence in casting, guest satisfaction, financial results, and repeat business (Coverly, 2013). As it pertains to leadership excellence, Walt Disney is cognizant of the fact that communication is indeed the key driver and foundation for a collaborative culture within the company. Therefore, in this regard, the company encourages the cultivation of collaboration by essentially creating an enabling environment where ideas are spoken without fear of favoritism. Hence, Walt Disney promotes the use of positive language as part of its strategy of fostering leadership and collaboration. The use of positive language lays a basis for the realization of excellence in casting as one of the company’s policies. It is necessary to note that according to Coverly (2013), Walt Disney does not refer to its staff as employees; rather, the company classifies them as casts within the whole business arena. This concept, as Coverly (2013) continues to elaborate, emanates from the cognizance by the company that each employee has an intrinsic and unique role to pay within the company. As such, it is more natural to refer to them as casts, rather than the traditional “employee” notation. This strategy is very influential in generating and sustaining employee motivation which stems
Change is a fundamental element of individuals, groups and all sorts of organizations. As it is the case for individuals, groups and societies, where change is a continuous process, composed of an indefinite amount of smaller sub-changes that vary in effect and length, and is affected by all sorts of aspects and events, many of which cyclic are anticipated ones. It is also the case for organizations, where change occurs repeatedly during the life cycle of organizations. Yet change in organizations is not as anticipated nor as predictable, with unexpected internal and external variables and political forces that can further complicate the management of change (Andriopoulos, C. and P. Dawson, 2009), which is by itself, the focus of many scholars in their pursuit to shed light on and facilitate the change process (Kotter 1996; Levin 1947; et al).
How would you feel if a company that you buy products from frequently is found to be exploiting workers in developing nations for their own profit? Furthermore, since the creation of modern-day corporations, their main priority has been to generate revenue over any other goal. This is an absolutely terrible model to base business on as they often neglect other extremely important factors that companies must abide to. Frustratingly, these firms neglect, without question, the single most important factor: ethics. The Walt Disney Company may in fact be conducting these same vile actions in emergent nations to their workers.
However, Lewin’s central model centres on unfreezing, effecting change and then refreezing, starting from the status quo, then moving things and then continuing with the new status quo (Green, 2007). Kotter’s change model focuses on establishing urgency, guiding coalition, developing strategy, communication, empowerment, short-term wins, consolidation of gains to produce and anchor new changes (Sabri et al, 2007). Kotter does not engage with the complexity of organisational systems and potential clashing, he sees change being systematic, architectural, political and doesn’t engage strongly with the less deterministic metaphors in the latter steps (Smith et al, 2015). However, Kotter does highlight the importance of communicating the vision and keeping the communication high throughout the process although this starts with a burst of energy and in later stages its followed by delegation and distance (Cameron and green, 2009). Lewin’s change model focuses on people with the collaboration, contribution creating a force field approach to change including the power holders socially, culturally and behaviourally to drive change (Smith et al, 2015). However, Lewin’s approach ignores the metaphor of groups of people only willing to change if there is a need to do so, the model is more of a planning tool rather than an organisational development process (Cameron and green,
Unfortunately, most change managers may feel reluctant in sharing information with employees as they fear the unexpected events that may occur and threaten outcomes. Change managers are also apprehensive in communicating as they are scared their competitions be on alert or employees may leave due to fear. Hayes (2014), advises change managers to develop a communication strategy in order to better communication with employees. He identifies steps to take in order to create a communication
Transformational leaders and managers who have strong lines of open communication with their employees have been shown to lessen stress and resistance during organisational change (Nging & Yazdanifard, 2015). Heckelman (2017) outlines four tools that best equip managers for dealing with organisational change: