Comments on: The Apprentice 2012, Episode 3: Attention to Detail

By: Tim

Tim — Thu, 12 Apr 2012 06:25:28 +0000

I completely agree, Mike. I think it’s easy for people to forget that Sugar is making a genuine investment here. It’s what made Tom Pellereau such an obvious candidate last year despite his poor performance in the tasks. Indeed task performance, while it does assess general project management and business skills, is not really an accurate test of a candidate’s business plan. You can be a brilliant PM or team member, but if your business plan is poor – like Helen Milligan’s last year – Sugar will never invest in you.

It also strikes me that many of the skills you need to be successful in the tasks aren’t necessarily the skills you need to be a successful entrepreneur. Good people skills are generally vital in the tasks, but many entrepreneurs are unreasonable, petulant, demanding and make unconventional decisions that fly in the face of accepted business logic – Richard Branson and Steve Jobs would fall into this category, for instance.

Ultimately, The Apprentice is an entertainment show. And while it does teach us some basic business lessons, it doesn’t necessarily mean that the best performers on the task will win the investment under this new format. As in real life, good ideas are ultimately what matter the most.

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 09:18:48 +0000

Tim,
Lord Sugar did say at the start of Episode 1 that he had seen the candidates’ business plans so yes, I think he is happy to clear out obvious “dead wood” early in the process. Too many people berate this show for not being true to real life business, as if someone promised it would be: it’s a TV show first and foremost. Any chance that people like me get to draw a serious conclusion is a bonus.

But Lord Sugar is offering to invest a lot of his own cash, so it must also work as a means for him to identify and isolate the person he considers the best opportunity/risk. Michael clearly wasn’t it.

By: Tim

Tim — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 08:24:23 +0000

Apologies for posting a double link. I was a bit keen with the ‘paste’ button!

By: Tim

Tim — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 08:23:26 +0000

I agree Michael wasn’t responsible for the failure of the task, and you make a good point about it being his first call of the day. In the world of The Apprentice, though, I think he should have taken the initiative, made the sale anyway (or at least contacted Katie for authorisation) and demonstrate that his sub-team had done something. It’s the old market trader’s maxim: better a quick win to start the day on a high than no win at all.

Fundamentally, given the low volume the trade team had to sell, their performance had no influence on the outcome of the task anyway – the gap to Sterling was simply insurmountable. No matter what Phoenix did, their low production volume meant Sterling only had to be vaguely competent in selling to ensure a win.

I’m in broad agreement with you about your assessment of the candidates too, although for now I rate Duane above Nick. Adam, Stephen and Jane are no-hopers, for sure.

I’m intrigued by Tom and Jade. We have seen comparatively little of each, but both have been quietly painted in a positive light (unlike, say, Jenna). In particular, we were shown Tom’s accurate dissection of Phoenix’s failure here – reminiscent of Tom Pellereau last year, who we saw week after week identifying his team’s errors and being completely ignore by his teammates.

Finally, I’ve long since given up on expecting Sugar to fire the person most responsible for a task’s failure. It’s clear he decides on instinct, but I also wonder whether he has already had sight of the candidates’ business plans, and has already formed an idea on which ones are credible investments and which ones are dispensible. It would certainly help explain why Tom P was never really in danger of being fired last year, despite his habit of alwyas being on the losing team.

http://slouchingtowardsthatcham.com/2012/04/05/the-apprentice-season-8-episode-3-condiments/