"Our Guests"

[PragmaticIdealist]

The constant use of this term is both unprofessional and creepy.

Instead of using the third-person, objective voice to refer to Disneyland guests, and to the guests of Disney's other international-travel destinations, everyone inside the organization now religiously adheres to the "our guests" construction and speaks as though they are appearing in a hostage video in which any deviation from that language will be met with a swift and unpleasant dispatch.

The armies of industrial-organizational psychologists in the human-resources development departments try to have personnel feel a sense of ownership over Disneyland, the other international-travel destinations, and the company, as a whole, but these unspoken rules are counterproductive to that end. Moreover, they are off-putting to the general public and to the people who, in fact, comprise the guests.

At the very least, the term should be confined to internal use only.

[Mr Wiggins]

Historically, the term "guest" derived from the Walt-era management groupthink that Disneyland's front-line employees were, in practice as well as in philosophy, the Company's representatives to the public; that they were to see themselves as hosts and treat every customer as their guest. As old-timer CMs will testify, "every Disneyland visitor is a V.I.P." wasn't PR-babble -- it was taught in the Disneyland University training program and enforced inside the berm. The result was Disneyland's famous reputation of world-class customer service.

Beginning with the Eisner regime in the mid-80s, Disneyland's standards of employee selection, pay and training were reduced as a method of raising profits. As employee morale declined and customer service diminished, Eisner's new DL management began the conspicuous use of terms like "guest" and "Cast Member" -- not just for public consumption, but in-house, in a sort of corporate groupspeak.

The increase in employee-and customer-honoring groupspeak paralleled the transition in management philosophy from that of Walt's customer-centric traditions, to the new "maximum profits" of the Eisner regime -- a transition that was accompanied by an increase in the honoring of Walt in Disneyland publications and Company PR.

[Jesser-pie]

I love the external use of the word guest. Little touches like this are part of the magic. Keeping it internal is arbitrary. I checked the date to see if it was April 1st. With the quarantine, dates have been as irrelevant as this complaint.

This reminds me of a thread a while back discussing whether girls/women should be called princess at Disneyland. It’s just a way of making someone feel a little more special (even if it’s said to everyone). Since princess is aimed only at females, guest is comparatively more innocent and innocuous. Thus, it just feels like objections to it are just trying to flame Disney rather than point out an issue. Removing guest from the CM vocabulary wouldn’t improve the customer experience overall and thus I don’t think it can be called valid criticism.

[Mr Wiggins]

I love the external use of the word guest. Little touches like this are part of the magic. Keeping it internal is arbitrary. I checked the date to see if it was April 1st. With the quarantine, dates have been as irrelevant as this complaint.

What Prag's OP addresses is the blatant disconnect between Disney's embarrassingly forced PR-speak and its practice.

[Jesser-pie]

What Prag's OP addresses is the blatant disconnect between Disney's embarrassingly forced PR-speak and its practice.

With all due respect to the OP and you, I feel this is reaching. Blatant is also assuming we all feel the same way. Is Disney’s PR sickeningly sweet? Yes. Are Disney practices always welcoming? No. However, the term guest is not the problem. In this scenario, removing the the term wouldn’t change Disney’s poor practices.

[Mr Wiggins]

With all due respect to the OP and you, I feel this is reaching. Blatant is also assuming we all feel the same way.

Not at all. Although many have the same viewpoint that I do about Disney's use of "guest" and the stark difference between what Disney says and what they practice in that regard, not all do -- nor do I assume that they do.

It's true that many DL fans will feel it is reaching. It's also true that many with experience on the inside during the transition to the Eisner regime feel it barely describes the tip of the iceberg.

...In this scenario, removing the the term wouldn’t change Disney’s poor practices.

I couldn't agree more, sad to say.

[Pips]

I like being referred to as a guest, rather than as a customer. I hope that never changes.

[Mr Wiggins]

I like being referred to as a guest, rather than as a customer. I hope that never changes.

I agree. My wish is that Disney some day returns to a management philosophy in which they really mean it, rather than use it as a PR buzzword.

[sailor310]

Perhaps we should be referred to as "marks".

[Eagleman]

"Be Our Guest"
Should be Disney motto , to there theme parks.
IMO

[monster heck]

i remember that time I charged $200 p/guest for a thanksgiving dinner at my house last year.

[Westsider]

Calling a Disneyland visitor a "guest" was ground breaking and unique in the 1950's, 60's and 70's.

But now you go to Target to buy toothpaste and they call you a "guest". The word has lost all its meaning in the last 30 years, it's now just a replacement word for customer. I don't feel like a guest at Target, do you?

You can call me an astronaut or a philharmonic conductor, but if you are just scanning my toothpaste and asking if I want to apply for the Target Card, it doesn't actually make me feel like an astronaut or the conductor of the LA philharmonic. Nor does simply calling me a guest make me feel like a guest.

The word has been cheapened into meaningless drivel.

[Mr Wiggins]

i remember that time I charged $200 p/guest for a thanksgiving dinner at my house last year.

And upcharged them $5 for gravy.

[Stormy]

It's a word. And words only have the amount of power that WE give them. Personally, I don't give it any 'real' power at all.

I like it better than 'customer' or 'client' neither of which really describes the relationship between us and the CMs that spend a day or more interacting with each other. Those interactions normally entail much more than just throwing food on a tray or bagging a purchase. Or even swabbing the restroom floor.

To the majority of front line CMs, I think we ARE guests. As far as 'corporate' goes, some of them do care, some could care less. Those that care do consider us guests. As for the rest, they can take a hike.

[Spongeocto4]

Disney is part of the Tourism industry, where no matter the locale, each Tourist is referred to as a 'guests'. Even if you think the term has become hollow, it would be unprofessional to drop it. What do you replace it with?
-People
-Customers
-Clients
-Disney Fanatics
-Impassioned MiceChatters & other people
-YOU(with heavy emphasis on 2nd person language)
-Shmucks or $hmuck$ (depending on your current opinions of Disney)
-IT(with heavy emphasis on 3rd person language)
-WE (All encompassing, coming together, group think.........wait, this language is for a CULT!)



-Our Cult

[PragmaticIdealist]

I love the external use of the word guest. Little touches like this are part of the magic. Keeping it internal is arbitrary. I checked the date to see if it was April 1st. With the quarantine, dates have been as irrelevant as this complaint.

This reminds me of a thread a while back discussing whether girls/women should be called princess at Disneyland. It’s just a way of making someone feel a little more special (even if it’s said to everyone). Since princess is aimed only at females, guest is comparatively more innocent and innocuous. Thus, it just feels like objections to it are just trying to flame Disney rather than point out an issue. Removing guest from the CM vocabulary wouldn’t improve the customer experience overall and thus I don’t think it can be called valid criticism.

The phrase being discussed is "our guests," not "guests."

[PragmaticIdealist]

Here is one of the most recent examples of the unprofessional, creepy, and near-religious use of "our guests."

[Mr Wiggins]

Here is one of the most recent examples of the unprofessional, creepy, and near-religious use of "our guests."

Good Lord. What part of "social distance" and "wear a mask" do those two people not understand?!

[Spongeocto4]

Here is one of the most recent examples of the unprofessional, creepy, and near-religious use of "our guests."

I wouldn't call it creepy. I feel like it's more bad grammar and repetitive word choice, than anything. "Ours" can be swapped out with "The". Or "They" can be used, when referring to guests.

[Lighthope]

To the majority of front line CMs, I think we ARE guests. As far as 'corporate' goes, some of them do care, some could care less. Those that care do consider us guests. As for the rest, they can take a hike.

Having been initiated when Disney University was a real thing and not just a label, you were "our guests". As others have mentioned, it was a real, groundbreaking thing, and has absolutely been cheapened by Target and others co-opting the phrase.

Today, however, to Corporate, you are not a guest. You are a wallet. And Cast Members are not family but a Liability.

When Eisner was in charge, the joke was that Eisner's ultimate goal was to just put a box on Habor Blvd and have people toss money into it as they drove by. Not far from the truth.