If true this is really bizarre, in large part because the "four keys" aren't used as an expression of values or whatever, but as a tool to remember how to rank priorities in customer service https://prospectivepixiedust.com/2020/09/24/disney-adds-5th-key-to-cast-member-training/

So they're in order, safety > courtesy > show > efficiency and you can apply it to different customer service situations. Like you can be rude/curt to enforce a safety rule, or ruin the "story" to bring out a fire extinguisher, because safety is above courtesy, and above show.

If someone has a question and you have to break "character" or tell a kid a scary effect isn't real, you do that because courtesy is above show. And efficiency is last because, at least in theoretical training, providing good service is supposed to rank above saving time/money.

So adding "inclusivity" into a section of training that's only used as a shorthand for ranking priorities is weird because it forces you to quantify how important inclusivity is. Which uhhh... I guess they'll put it 2nd, after safety? But optics-wise isn't is weird to put it 2nd?

Also, at least within the context of theme park customer service I can't imagine how inclusivity would specifically apply to any situation not covered by courtesy. This feels like a concept suggested and then announced before it was fully thought through.

But finally my main issue is that putting it in employee training suggests that it falls to employees to make a workplace or a larger customer experience inclusive, when the significant power to make that change belongs to the upper management.