1. The university staff were mostly sullen at a culture workshop, enthusiasm was low.
2. Disney is an entertainment world leader.
3. Disney attributes its leadership position to its corporate culture, evidenced at Disney sites which are in a world of their own compared to other entertainment sites - if you've ever been to a Six Flags (USA) or Alton Towers (UK) you'll know that they don't compare to the all around experience at Disneyland.
4. Disney is selling a consulting service to other enterprises to improve cultural coherence, it costs millions.
5. The author objects to the suggested focus of culture. In their words:
> We were introduced at the beginning of the workshop to the university’s brand new slogan: “Only at GW, we change the world, one life at a time.” Hold on. We change the world only at GW? And we achieve this absurd ambition how? The answer, it turns out, is pretty vacuous—by being nice. “Care,” we were told, is one of our three “Service Priorities.”
The author shows no evidence of understanding the purpose of a mission statement, which is a guiding principle that cuts across all aspects of an organization's basic deliverables, to help guide all staff on what service delivery would look like if more than the bare minimum service were to be offered. "Only at GW, we change the world, one life at a time". How is this not vacuous? i) it helps you understand you are looking to create change that is remarkable and identifiable to GW, not just any old university, ii) it reminds you the changes being made are to change a young student's life, it's not just to teach them factoids, iii) it reminds you that the goal of GW is to change the world through it's teaching, not train people to pass exams and get certificates.
6. The author is combating the university's efforts to get a common aspirational purpose, instead they are trying to create a common rebellion against leadership, so they must want something else that leadership is offering. Because no alternative aspirational purpose was offered, the author is de facto trying to rally people behind ... nothing, inaction, rebellion for rebellion's sake.