The Apprentice 2012 – been these, done that, got the tee shirt

March 22, 2012 2 Comments

The Apprentice 2012 – been these, done that, got the tee shirt.

Its back! The Apprentice returned to our screens last night, and will be with us for the next 12 weeks. Sixteen candidates, described as amongst Britain’s biggest and best would-be entrepreneurs joined battle in the House and the Boardroom.

The programme has now completed its own makeover/evolution to reflect the changed political environment. Under the previous government, individuals were given sponsored jobs to keep them off the dole. It was the same with The Apprentice. The current government prefers to partner Business and encourage a more entrepreneurial approach to growing jobs. The (New) Apprentice reflects this, with Lord Sugar trying to identify a business partner (and idea) to invest £250K into. Under the Trades Descriptions Act it probably should be renamed, and there isn’t much apprenticeship involved. Interestingly, although the programme has evolved, the format has remained more or less the same. This is to be praised, as it makes for great TV.

In this blog, I will review each episode and give my thoughts on any lessons we can take from a business process or influential communication perspective.

Last night we were introduced to the 16 individuals (8 male, 8 female). I won’t go into their bios, if you want to get to know them in more detail I recomment the BBC website .

Week 1 is all about meeting the candidates, forming first impressions and wondering how people can make some of the outrageous self declarations on show.

Lord Sugar introduced his own version of the Gremlin rules;

  1. The biggest profit (prophet?) wins
  2. Don’t hide
  3. Don’t feed after midnight (i think he said that…)

So, both we, and the candidates know what to do and what not to do. Do they listen? Of course not. Perhaps they should be called Muppet Rules.

The group was split into the now traditional boy v girl teams and given then the task to design, print and market their own range of printed goods.

But first the all important team names. For the girls we have Sterling (strong, traditional etc) andfor the boys Phoenix (are they expecting to fail and have to rise from the ashes? Given last year’s early performances by the boys team they could be right).

Next, who will be the first Project Managers (PM)? For the boys everyone took a step back and technology geek Nick Holzherr was slowest, so got the role. For the girls, architect and  print store owner Gabrielle(“I’m a bit quirky”)  Omar volunteered.

One definition of marketing is getting the right product to the right people at the right price. Immediately, the differences in style and approach between the teams that were to prove crucial became evident. Phoenix went for cheap and cheerful London souveniers (a tee shirt with a red bus and a “large” cuddly bear) and went for the tourist market down by the Thames. Sterling lived up to their name and created a quality tee shirt jigsaw and bag aimed at the parent and toddler market. These had the added option of being personalised with names printed upon request and at extra cost. The girls decided to target Greenwich Market (fixed stall) and London Zoo. Thanks to Gabrielle’s knowledge of printing the product featuring cuddly animals designed by Jade looked good and was produced without a hitch.

Unfortunately, the same can’t be said for the boys, and they had many reject items and a good few that should have been rejected but got through the non-existent QA. What they did have, was a clear plan of action, general agreement on how to approach it (if you ignore Sales Manager Stephen Brady’s pep talk and sales training) and clear roles. Stephen correctly pointed out that the bears were over priced and got the items reduced from £15 to £10. This is still a huge mark-up on the production costs.

Sterling had a great product, but no clear strategy and no clear roles. The sub-group sent to the zoo got stuck in traffic (surely one of the most easily predicted obstacles in London) and resorted to bitching and working against, rather than with eachother. Aggressive sales techniques and poor planning once they decided to try their luck selling to retailers (they chose Primrose Hill instead of Camden) and a general lack of leadership would ultimately cost the girls the task.

And so it proved. Despite the programme editors trying their best to convince us the poor product being sold by the boys wouldn’t win, it did. The moral of the story goes back to Lord Sugar’s rules – biggest profit wins. The boys got the right product (poor quality) at the right price (massive mark-up) for the right people (tourists).

Once it was revealed that the girls had lost, we enter the Blame Game. PM Gabrielle was vulnerable due to her poor leadership. Katie Wright had been highlighed as making little or no contribution and alongside Bilyana Apostolova (of Bulgarian extraction) was part of the ill fated, and poorly performing “Zoo Team”.  These were the 3 who ended up back in fornt of Lord Sugar.

Bilyana had come across as domineering, selfish, driven and opinionated. Katie had sat quietly in the background, she contributed little other than to point out mistakes others had made. Remember Sugar’s second rule “Don’t Hide”? On that basis, Katie should have walked. But instead Bilyana talked, and talked and talked. In the end she did such a good job she talked herself out of the competition. Lord Sugar declared the he “couldn’t work with her”.

Now 16 become 15 and the first candidate leaves the programme. The girls lost because their quality  product did not make enouhg profit. Katie should have lost  as she was hidden in plain sight. The girls will have to learn.

More next week. Comment welcome

Filed under Influential Communication, Leadership, Sales & Marketing, The Apprentice, Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

Young Apprentice Week 7 Shock – Nobody Fired

December 6, 2011 1 Comment

Carnage in the Boardroom - who would survive?

Young Apprentice Week 7 Shock – Nobody Fired.

It was a brave attempt at a new approach to a tried and tested formula, but it failed to grab the imagination and is not likely to be repeated. I’m not talking about how teams Atomic and Kinetic approached designing and marketing a new brand of popcorn in this week’s task, but rather the producer’s idea to fire the whole losing team . Did I say fire? Well that’s more than Lord Sugar said. Possibly revealing his lack of comfort with the new format, Sugar described each of the 4 candidates who did not make it to the final as “leaving the process”.

With 6 candidates left this was a big “semi-final”, and the need to get down to 2 for next week’s final something new had to be tried. Was this the first evidence of cutbacks in the BBC? Did the producers suddenly find themselves with 3 fewer weeks than they had planned for? You can imagine the conversation the producers had;

“Sorry, Guys, the budget’s been cut. We only have 2 episodes left. Let’s brainstorm ideas for how we can make this look like innovation”

With hindsight, it would have been better to have had double firings over a couple of weeks, as this format left the viewer knowing in advance that several of their preferred candidates were likely to go.

The teams were (yet again) re-booted;

Atomic – Lizzie, and the Harry twins, with Harry H getting the nod to be PM.

Kinetic – Zara, Haya, and James, with James as PM.

Notice that each team had a mix of male and female. It was my belief from the outset that whichever team won, the final 2 candidates would prove to be one male and one female. And so it proved to be. Sugar spread his bets by keeping James and Harry M apart, either to avoid civil war, or because they have been 2 of the best performers this season. Similarly Zara and Lizzie, the 2 strongest girls left.

Sugar made it clear that to win the popcorn task  would require “teamwork”. Is that irony in the choice of product, as the task was popcorn compared to the real issue? This was particularly challenging for some of the candidates, who have had to learn what a team is (Harry M, James and Haya come to mind). Not only that, but being a good team was not enough to secure a final slot, as having won the task, one of the successful team would be fired (sorry, leave the process). In summary, you have to be a good team to win, then a complete b**tard in the boardroom and stab your team mates in the back to get promoted. Sounds just like the corporate world I used to work in, but does it help us to find an outstanding Entrepreneur? At last, the true formula for success in (Young) Apprentice was stated for all future candidates.

The mechanics of the task involved opportunities for individuals to shine, as apart from the PM, there were tasks around designing new flavours of popcorn and ot’s packaging, as well as pitching to would-be buyers.

Kinetic won, beating Atomic with more orders from; a Cinema chain, a Lo-cost airline and a Supermarket chain by 115K to 90K. It wasn’t that Atomic bombed, but rather that Kinetic moved (geddit?) more stock, despite the airline not ordering any from them.

So, goodbye the Harry Twins and Lizzie. They didn’t even get an epitaph to camera as they presumably shared a taxi to the station. Harry M left without a single win to his name.

We still needed to lose one more from the process, and if my theory was correct, James was safe as he was the only boy (as well as the successful PM). That left a straight choice between Haya and Zara. Zara did all of the 3 pitches, and was excellent, persuading 2 outlets to buy their poorly branded La Popcorn. She must have been good, as even James the PM hated the flavours (a forgettable mix of mediterranean veg and Feta cheese). Haya contributed least to this task and couldn’t give a good enough reason why she should stay in the process, focusing on what she had learned, rather than what she had achieved. Haya left the building and, the process.

So, next week’s final is between James and Haya. At least the format is back to the traditional series finale, with the ghosts of  candidates past returning to the process.  It’s too close to call, but as there is pitching involved, maybe Zara just has the edge.

Filed under Influential Communication, Leadership, Sales & Marketing, Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , , ,

Atomic Bomb With Flawed Over 50’s Plan in Week 4 of Young Apprentice

November 15, 2011 2 Comments

Atomic Bomb With Flawed Over 50’s Plan in week 4 of Young Apprentice

It has to be said that the kids in Young Apprentice are learning. Unfortunately, just as some of the candidates learn one lesson, their character flaws became exposed in this week’s task. Week 4 of Young Apprentice gave us some clear insights into most of the candidates and, maybe, some indications as to who can win it.

The task this week was to identify 2 products (from 8 ) to sell to the over 50’s market (worth over £250 bn per year) at an exhibition at Olympia. Lord Sugar mixed up the teams again; Atomic consisted of Haya, Hayley, Lewis and (mister popular) Harry M. Just to reinforce how unpopular Harry M is no-one supported his bid for PM, and Haya got the job.

Kinetic had Gbemi, Zara, James, Lizzie and Harry H, and James was given near-unanimous support to be PM.

Lord Sugar gave his now customary hint about how to succeed – “You’ll be judged on sales volume, so you need to get your pricing and products right”. Simple as that, so get a good product at a reasonable price and you have the formula for success.

Immediately we saw the different styles of leadership on show; James adopted a more consultative approach but showed real leadership by reminding his team to get the cheapest price, but be confident and enthusiastic about each product, even if you don’t like it! Oh, how we’ve seen teams come a cropper before by not following this simple advice. James went on to demonstrate this perfectly across the task, even revealing that he blatantly lied about liking the pie maker. It proved to be a sound tactic, but I hope his future girl/boy friends and customers weren’t watching, as no-one will believe anything he says ever again!

Haya, no doubt buoyed by having trounced Harry M to become PM, was very direct in her style, making it clear who was in charge. Listening was not to be her strong point, and she partnered with Lewis, who seemed happy just to be away from Harry.

As usual, the task hinged on a couple of decisions. The first involved a colourful shopping trolley that both teams had their eye on, but James’ (now trade-marked) charm and good haggling skills secured it for Kinetic. Atomic went with Harry M’s enthusiasm for the camera-bird-box, which for most of the task was to prove to be a bit of an albatross. Haya reinforced her no nonsense style of leadership (read: not listening to Harry) by opting for the pie maker over his preferred cushion.

At the exhibition, Haya took on the role of sales leader, with Lewis happy to demonstrate “who makes all the pies”; whilst Harry and Hayley battled gamely to sell box-camera, with no success. Haya had obviously been listening to Lord Sugar last week as she attempted to sell the pie-maker ABOVE the manufacturer’s recommended price, and quickly dropped the price when she realised it wasn’t selling, eventually dropping to the reserve price of £14.99. By the end of the day, the pie maker had sold steadily and the high ticket item bird-camera-box (£125-£150) had sold preceisely NONE until Harry took the initiative and sold 5 to one of the the other exhibitors for £80 a go. Hayley finally sold one before the close of the exhibition.

For Kinetic the much desired trolly was not moving many items, but their other choice, a hand held vacuum cleaner, failed to cleanup sales as Harry H and Zara had ignored James’ advice and not haggled a discounted price to sell it. Eventually, necessity is the mother of invention and they started demonstrating the cleaner and sales started to come in. This task was proving hard to read in terms of the likely outcome, but a few things had become obvious:

For Atomic – Harry had pulled one out of the bag again at the end of the day; Haya was a single-minded leader; Lewis is a liability who prefers to follow; and Hayley did… what?

For Kinetic – James was a revelation as a leader, equally adept at playing the game to manipulate his team as he is at manipulating customers / clients; Harry H failed to negotiate prices with clients. but has the personality to sell; Zara was also at fault for the poor negotiations, but lacks any personality; we saw very little of Gbemi, Lizzie, so they’ll probably go on to win it.

In the boardroom it became apparent that even Harry M’s last minute sale of the camera-box-bird thing couldn’t save Atomic as they were trounced by Kinetic. With only 4 in the team, it was more a case of who wouldn’t come back with Haya, and, once again, she demonstrated that she had been listening last week. Wisely, Haya chose not to bring Harry M back and instead brought in the weaker performers of Hayley and perennial side-kick Lewis. The only question was whether Haya’s poor leadership outweighed the lack of contribution from Lewis and Hayley. In the end, Lewis was fired, probably for being the regular fall guy and always owning up to his mistakes (bless). Hayley knows that she has to be more assertive to survive beyond next week.

So this week the unpopular boys James and Harry M looked good. They are single minded, ruthless, but able to adapt to different situations. Hayley, Zara and Haya look weaker and Gbemi & Lizzie could be the stalking horses.

Filed under Influential Communication, Leadership, Sales & Marketing, Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , , ,

Flower Power – poor decisions and poorer tactics in Young Apprentice

November 8, 2011 2 Comments

Flower Power – poor decisions and poorer tactics in Young Apprentice.

Week 3, and for the first time the teams were mixed up;

Kinetic – Lizzie PM with James, Harry H, Haya and Hayley.

Atomic – Hannah PM with Harry M, Gbemi,  Lewis  and Zara, a team of strong personalities.

The task this week was to arrange and sell flowers to both corporate clients and the general public. Both PMs were from the previously unbeaten girls team, and there was a clear contrast in styles. Lizzie’s more direct, no nonsense style with the quieter team Kinetic, and Hannah’s more democratic listening style for the egos of team Atomic.

Lord Sugar once again reiterated the key point “The team with the biggest profit will win”

For Atomic, Zara and Lewis did the Corporate pitches. Zara interpreted Hannah’s instructions on pricing as a minimum and put the prices up. They still won 2/3 pitches, but did lose out on the Hotel because of this tactic. The Kinetic sub team of Harry H and James lost out because of poor pitching (Harry talking and not listening, James and his “Rainforest Chic” pitch to the Salon). Not having a girl in the sub team probably cost them the Salon pitch. Although they did win the Hotel pitch, they ended up having to reduce their profit because the product was so poor.

In selling to the public the advice both teams had been given was to double or triple their costs when setting prices. Hannah adopted a strategy of doubling their prices to general agreement, with the vocal exception of Harry M who declared to camera “we only doubled prices, could have tripled them. We’ll see in the boardroom.” Lizzie and Kinetic went for the tripling of costs at Hayley’s suggestion.

Out on the street it was the usual dynamic action with both teams selling frantically. Gbemi and Harry M of Atomic went door-to-door in Spitalfields, with Harry desperate to sell the trifid-like (but high profit) Heliconia. He succeeeded at the last minute by bullying a bar owner into taking the monstrosity, and immediately made sure the team knew it was his success.

In the boardroom, amazingly (only if you’ve never watched the programme) Kinetic came from behind (with the corporate pitches) to win by £12. The failure of Atomic seemed to rest on Hannah’s choice to double not triple costs and on Zara’s Rouge Trader costing the team the hotel. Seizing on Harry’s claiming the Heliconia for himself, Hannah decided to bring back the 2 strongest performers; Zara and Harry M; Zara for ignoring her instructions and losing the Hotel pitch; Harry for being himself. This proved to be a crucial, and another poor, decison. Tactically it was also risky, as she targeted Harry and his selfish approach to teamwork. This tactic backfired spectacularly as Sugar listened with a bemused expression to Hannah’s reasoning.  Not surprisingly, she was fired.

The lesson here is that this is not a Team prgoramme. Perhaps Harry M has it right, being open and honest about his ambition. Nice guys (and gals) finish last, they say. This was true for Hannah who was a decent PM , but put team loyalty (and friendship?) over a desire to win. Hannah could have brought Lewis in with her; he admitted that he made mistakes, but she got her tactics completely wrong. This is reflective of many corporate environments, especially  sales, where people play at being a team to further their own ambition. Given an opportuinty to take the credit, these individuals will take it. It may  not seem fair to good team players, but it is this drive that often makes entrepreneurs successful. Good team players can always work for a charity.

In the house, there was general disappopintment that Harry M had survived at the expense of Hannah. Lewis ran out of the room (guilt? anger? romance?) and everyone else looked shocked, especially the previously unassailable girls. In truth Harry M and Zara may be annoying but they are emerging as the strongest candidates so far. For me, Hayley continues to impress in a quiet way, and she may prove to be the dark (or stalking) horse.

Filed under Sales & Marketing, Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , , ,

Young Apprentice Week 2 – Pitched into a Sea of Troubles

November 1, 2011 3 Comments

Young Apprentice Week 2 – Pitched into a Sea of Troubles.

Having lost out last week, the boys went into week 2 no doubt hoping for more success. There are strong personalities in both camps, but the boys in particular have some egos to contend with.

This week our Dark Lord of the Sith (or Alan Sugar to you and me) continued on his quest to identify his “Young Apprentice” and get them to join him on The Dark Side (no, not banking; BUSINESS ENTREPRENEUR). Remember, in the Sith there are only ever 2; Master and Apprentice. This is worth remembering when we watch this competition as the candidates (to quote voice over man) “must work as teams, but shine as individuals”. Sugar tells us that this is “not a talent show” and this week, the majority of the candidates went some way to proving him right. There was very little talent on show.

So, to this week’s task. The teams remained the same as last week, split along gender lines. The task? To design a new product for the lucrative parent and baby market and pitch it to 3 large retailers. The winning team would be the one that gets the most orders. As usual, the task is a Macguffin (to quote Hitchcock) and almost incidental to what really matters – entertaining TV.

From an influential communication perspective there was a lot to learn here. If we focus on the task as a whole we saw two poor PMs; Gbemi (“I’m quite in your face”) Okunlola for the girls and Lewis “Cocktail of Success” Roman for the boys.

Roman was completely out of his comfort zone and was unable to control the bigger egos in the boys team (Harry M and James). He was also a poor delegator and effectively cost the boys the task by his decision to pitch to the first 2 customers (told you the task isn’t what really matters).

Gbemi (a younger version of Edna from last season’s Approentice, sort of Anakin Skywalker on the road to becoming Darth Vader) was a poor listener and control freak who also made the erroneous decision to pitch. The girls would have lost if a coup d’etat hadn’t resulted in Gbemi being replaced for the final crucial pitch by Haya. This resulted in a large order which rescued the girls and won them the challenge, as it was to the largest retailer.

So, the boys lost, despite taking orders from two retailers to the girl’s one. Their product was a hippo cover to carry baby drinks bottles in. The girls idea of a sleeve with a cushion to help support a baby’s head comfortably won the day, but only in the final pitch.

For some top tips on how to pitch, check out my previous post from Dragon’s Den. The tips about creating the right impression a practice makes perfect seem most apt here. What you don’t want to do is read it out (Lewis) or be unclear about what your product does (Gbemi).

In the boardroom both PMs got muted support, but once it was clear the boys had lost, Lewis had to decide who to bring in with him. He played a political game, bringing back opinionated Harry M and the anonymous Ben, both of whom had been singled out in the boardroom by Lord Sith, I mean Sugar.

Any one of the three could have gone;

  • Lewis for being generally useless as PM and putting himself forward to do the pitching. I mean, they have a whole evening to decide and prepare for this and decide the best person (probably Harry H on the basis of his rescue pitch).
  •  Harry M could have gone for his appalling attitude. He does have good things to say, but no idea how to go about doing it.
  • And what about Ben? Well, what about Ben.?We have seen nothing of him, and he was there because he made so little a contribution. Was this real or editing? Everyone agreed that it was real, and he was fired.

The take home message this week? In Young Apprentice it is better to be obnoxious and disliked but occasionally correct (Harry M) than to be the strong silent type. Ben was fired because he did nothing. One suspects that Lord Sith sees something of himself in terms of Harry M’s attitude, and that has held sway. However, Harry was warned that he needs to change. This isn’t a team competition, but you need teamwork to survive it. Most telling was the reaction of everyone back at the house.  Lewis was greeted and hugged by everyone, except the unfortunate Lizzie. Harry M cornered Lizzie and she seemed reluctant to congratulate / hug him. The final shot was of Harry M declaring that he must change. And change he will, as he has the ruthless determination to go on and win the competition.

Filed under Influential Communication, Leadership, Sales & Marketing, Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , , ,

The Dragon’s guide to writing a Business Plan

October 13, 2011 Leave a comment

The Dragon’s guide to writing a Business Plan

Six simple steps from the Dragons Den.

There is an old saying in business;

“Fail to Plan or Plan to Fail”

This week, The BBC broadcast the Dragon’s Den guide to writing a Business Plan. This 6 point guide offers some top tips to getting investment for your business idea. Here they are;

1. Set Realisitc Targets

Don’t just pick a number at random as your sales or turnover target. There needs to be some evidence of the financial targets you are suggesting. Do your research, and look at the trend over the last year, 3 years, 5 years, both for the market you operate in and your own company. This should give some indication of future opportunites in your market.  In the programme the 2 guys behind The Wand Company (a remote control shaped as a magic wand) presented solid evidence of future orders as well as their current success, and were able to negotiate a great deal with Duncan Bannatyne. The pitch was spot on, as they were able to present targets with confidence and backed by evidence. In fact, their research was so good that they were able to choose not to take up Duncan’s offer.

2. You make it happen

Commercial acumen is important, but your self belief is key

“Once they like you the Dragon’s will view everything you say positively”

If you don’t believe in your product, why would the Dragon’s? The example given – Masque-Erade showed that confidence and belief, coupled to good forecasting (see 1 above) can be a recipe for success.

3. Get the numbers right

An extension of point 1.

“Turnover is vanity, profit is sanity”

Know your business essentials. These figures need to be at hand, and delivered confidently. Deborah Meaden is particularly hot on this, and has torn apart many an entrant to the den. Any decent bank manager would do the same.

You need to understand the Balance sheet, and Profit & Loss as these are the fundamentals of the business, or no one will want to invest in you.

The example of the camper duvet company showed that not knowing your numbers can cost you. They secured a Dragon (Hilary), but they had to give up 26% equity, rather than the 10% they wanted. Had they been better prepared they could have got a better deal.

4. Price it right

This is the opposite problem to that above- over estimating the value of their business, so you look deluded. The example given was Applied Language online translation services. Success came because they had got the value of their organisation spot on.

5. Timing is everything

“The right idea, the right product at the right time”

Obvious really, but hard to get right. The example in the show – online antiques valuation site “Value my Stuff” secured investment from Theo and Deborah because they reasoned that in a recession, people will want to sell their antiques. One year on this proved to be shrewd. The timing was right. The explosion of good quality camers on phones made uploading photos to the internet easier than it was even 5 years ago.

6. Know when to give up

Back to being realistic. A dud is a dud, recognise it and move on. It is good to have self belief, but not to delude yourself. Look at the evidence objectively, and know when to move away. Example of the Zigo baby cycle – massive previous investment of over a million and losing massive amounts. Dead in the water. One year on, they still have the businesss, but one of the partners, Steven,  now has an online price comparison site for funerals.

So there you have it, the Dragon’s guide to Business Planning.

The best example of a Business Plan from Dragon’s Den is Imran’s ITeddy. Imran knew his margins, and had a sustainable business model with opportunities to innovate. He secured a deal with Peter and Theo and is now busy developing new ideas for his ITeddy company. That is the final lesson;

“Don’t stand still – innovate or die”

Filed under Sales & Marketing, Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , , ,

Selling ideas to Dragons

October 6, 2011 Leave a comment

Selling ideas to Dragons

The latest 5 point guide from Dragon’s Den to succeeding in getting a product to market was presented on BBC last night. Here’s what they say, with a few thoughts of my own added in.

1. Keep your ideas coming

Put simply, the more you ideas come up with, the more chances you have to succeed. Basically, don’t put all of your eggs in one basket. Alternatively, if you are not prolific, it helps to be creative.

In the programme, the example given was Mark Chapkins; the stereotypical mad inventor. Mark presented lots of ideas at his Dragon’s Den pitch. Only Peter Jones was interested and with his help Mark has now achieved a turnover of £250 in 3 years. He now writes books on celebrity inventors and is employed by the Science Museum “inventor in residence”.

Of course, to  have a “good” idea, you need to be able to identify s problem and come up with the steps to solve it. See point 5 below.

2. Don’t forget to dream

Be optimistic. Brainstorm all of the positives about your idea before you pull it apart. A good technique to do this is to use  “second position” to see how realistic your idea is. That is, look at it from the perspective of end users or potential investors.

3. Do the paperwork

Protect your idea. Register the patent, if possible, but remember “patent pending” is not yet a patent. Can you get copyright on your idea? Deborah Meaden is particularly keen on this, and has pulled apart many a good idea because the paperwork is not right. Next week they are looking at Business Planning, so more on this topic then.

4. Think outside the box

Frame the problem you are trying to solve in a different way to come up with a unique way to solve it. Again, use “second person” perspective to aid this. The programme gave the example of “mad inventor”  Rupert Sweet-Escott. He invented a wind turbine chimney pot. This has proved successful in Japan, achieving £270K turnover.

However, Duncan Bannatyne disagrees – he prefers a more pragmatic, realistic approach saying  improving on an existing idea is a safer option for those not gifted with original thinking. The example given was the Magic Whiteboard Series, which improved on flip charts as a portable self adhesive alternative, achieving  £2M turnover in last 3 years.

5. Be your own worst critic

Your product needs to solve a problem (this is the opportunity) worth solving (this converts it to a need) See my FREE e-book for more information.

Your idea needs to work and there needs to be  a market for it.  Bad examples presented to the Dragons included; edible greetings cards for dogs, anti-wrinkle cap, and Derek Cousins Flow Signals – traffic signal safety light. Each of these were either difficult concepts to understand, and were not taken up by the Dragons. The Flow Signals were described as  “the worst invention to be brought to Dragon’s Den”.

So, there we have it a 5 point plan to get your ideas to product and to market.

The best example of meeting all of the above criteria (missed by the Dragons) was Tangle Teeze (to fix Tangled, Knotted , Hair). Poor presentation ( especially the demonstration) combined with a lack of market research scared the Dragons off. . The inventor took their advice and was approached by many distributors following the programme. The product has now sold over 1.6 M items, wirth £2.3M turnover with international sales. Now that is success to be modelled.

Filed under Influential Communication, NLP, Sales & Marketing Tagged with , , , , , ,

The Apprentice Week 12 – The Final

July 17, 2011 3 Comments

The Apprentice Week 12 – The Final.

Its the traditional interviews for the final of the Apprentice, but with a twist – this time the candidates also have to     present their business plans. Helen starts with the best record in the series, followed by Susan, Jim and Tom.

The four interviewers heaped pressure on the candidates, and the excerpts shown showed each of them floundering at times; Jim’s cliches (using AMS in the title of his plan); Tom’s numbers (did not cost manuafacture of chairs); Helen’s idea (Home assistant); Susan’s flannel (economics degree, but employed people without paying tax and to make £1M profit in year 1). At one point it was difficult to see anyone winning!

Of course, the aim of the process is to put the candidates under pressure. Gradually we were allowed to see each candidate having some (small) success.  So who came out on top? It was hard to judge the business plans, but Helen’s seemed weakest. Interviewer feedback highlighted a lack of entrepreneurial flair in Helen. Jim was described as “slippery” and his market research was lacking. Claude liked his idea, though. Tom was seen as unlikely to see things through as he lacks focus. Susan has business skills but is naive and made too  many assumptions. She is an entrepreneur though, according to Margaret.

Sugar got the candidates into the boardroom and took each of them apart. He started with Susan and her assumptions; this is something that has been shown clearly throughout the series; Susan is naive. Sugar was disappointed with Helen’s idea, and her lack of experience in the area of  home “concierge”.  For Tom, Sugar was unsure about the idea, not seeing “back pain” as a major issue., but part of a bigger issue; staff absence. The plan is flawed. Jim was described as selling the Sugar brand and he was unsure where the profits would come from.

In the end Tom was criticised for not focsuing on the chair. Jim showed a lack of business acumen and was the first to go. No real surprise there. Next up, Helen’s idea was highlighted as poor, and Sugar expressed his disappointment. Susan’s costs were suspect, but she tried to defend herself and she was next to go.

Helen or Tom? Sugar wanted Helen for her performance, but Tom had better, if flawed ideas. Could they make a team? Helen made a late pitch for a chain of bakery stores, her core area. Tom highlighted his creativity to get to see a major buyer. Sugar was impressed and Tom carried the day but the current idea needs tweaking. Tom was hired!

So, as predicted for the last few weeks Tom got it. Helen would have made a employee, but lacked the flair of the entrepreneur. The right person won.

Filed under Sales & Marketing Tagged with , ,

The Apprentice Week 11 – Fast Food Firing

July 14, 2011 4 Comments

And so we reach the penultimate week of The Apprentice 2011. Last week I predicted that Jim, Natasha and Helen couldn’t win. After this week’s task I have revised my opinion of one of those 3, another only just survived and the third got fired.

This week’s task involved setting up a new “fast food” franchise. Tom and Helen were paired, and Helen volunteered to be PM, no doubt to ensure she could lead from the front rather than be the back seat driver she apeared to be last week. Tom was happy to be led by the most successful candidate this series. Over in Venture, Jim took the lead, despite Nat having told us several times that she has a degree in Hotel and Management.

Both teams had 2 days to set up a franchise from idea to shop design to menu, ultimately serving to a group of industry experts who would assess their idea.

The difference between the 2 teams was evident from the start. Its arguable that Logic even needed a PM with only 2 members, but they divided the task evenly; Tom doing the creativity and branding and Helen the recipe., and having the final say. Not surprisingly, Helen went for pies (is it Greggs that she worked for?) and a british food theme. Helen was nervous about giving some control to Tom, but let him have his own space.

Over in Venture, Jim went off to do research  and design recipes for a “new” Mexican franchise (is there need or room for one?) and left the bickering Nat and Susan to work on the branding. Jim learned that “the system is key”. Its all about getting people through as quickly as possible (as many as 85 orders per hour). Having learned this, he then went on to forget it.

Logic went with My-Py as the name and a British theme Drake, Nightingale and er Colombus who apparently discovered potatoes). Venture went with Caracas  because it sounded Mexican, but they thought they had invented it (Its a place in Venezuela).

Day 1 ended with trial runs and learnings. Logic got good feedback; they had a system for 3 minute turnaround of orders and that eating out of a box is hard. Venture learned that they had no system, poor quality food (cold) and some people left without being served. Enter Susan, who identified that changes were needed. Jim agreed.

Onto Day 2, and the expert panel. The teams were asessed against 4 criteria: customer service; quality of food; restaurant branding; demonstrating a long term plan. At the pitch, Jim got his sums wrong, and failed to demonstrate any clear business plan. Logic had a tight analysis of figures and calaculated margins on each item, as well as profits based on expected throughput.

In the Boardroom, it was no surprise that Logic won, scoring 7/10 against 4/10  for Venture. Tom and Helen are through to the final, and Helen had redeemed herself. She and Tom were a good team, complementing each other’s skills set and working well together. Venture was described as having no business plan (Logic had even produced a document).

For Venture, let the fighting begin. We knew that Jim wouldn’t give in without a fight, as he has shown himself to be a  real street fighter in these situations. Susan emerged last week as having real backbone.  The girls ganged up on Jim and he blamed both of the girls, but gave a bit more emphasis to Nat. Susan blamed Jim’s poor research. Natasha looked vulnerable. In truth Natasha had done very little on this task, one that she should have taken a leading role on. I think she was still bruised from last week.  In the end it was no surprise she got fired. Natasha has become the weakest candidate.

So, the final will be between Tom, Helen, Jim and Susan. Tom continued his late strong performances and contributed at least as much as Helen, who put herself back in contention. Susan may not be popular, bur Sugar likes something about her, especially her strong character, which has come to the fore in recent weeks. Jim got through by the skin on his teeth, but again, Sugar likes his “spirit”.

Next week we have the interviews and possibly something else? Will Jim be found out for the manipulator he is? Will Helen be able to break out of the “corporate” image she has? Can Susan avoid annoying the interviewers? Will Tom show he is more than a nodding dog? Remember, we have yet to hear their business ideas.

My money is still on Tom or Susan. Who do you think will win?

Filed under Leadership, Sales & Marketing Tagged with , , ,

The Apprentice Week 10 – Sorting out the wheat from the chaff

July 7, 2011 2 Comments

The Apprentice Week 10 – Sorting out the wheat from the chaff

This week we were down to the last 6 candidates. By the end of this episode, only 3 candidates are still in with a realistic chance of winning.

Tom, Helen and Melody made up team Logic, with Natasha, Jim and Susan in Venture. For Logic, Melody insisted on being PM, something she hadn’t done since week 1, and no one seemed prepared to argue. In Venture, Susan and Natasha vied to be team leader, with Jim eventually siding with Natasha as she had more passion. Yet again, Susan appeared to be dismissed. For many people it is amazing that Susan is still in the programme, and yet many “stronger” candidates have gone by the way.

The task was interesting, as it duplicated how Lord Sugar got started – buying items and selling them. The aim is to see what sells and keep replenishing stocks to keep the product moving. Neither team seemed to grasp this, despite being told.

“Strategy” such as it was involved deciding where to find suitable punters to sell to. Natasha packed Susan off to sell door to door in Knightsbridge, whilst she and Jim worked a market. Not surprisingly they had the greater success, but were they just trying to get Susan out of the way?

In Logic, Melody & Helen targeted retailers, surely a flawed plan, as they will want to make a margin of their own? Tom (also sidelined?) was sent off to the South Bank, selling “nodding dogs”, with good results.

So here is where the teams lost track of the tasks, with both Jim and Tom telling their PMs they needed to replenish the fast moving items and being rebuffed by their conservative PMs. Chaos ensued.

By the end of Day 1, Susan was off doing her own thing, buying jewellery she knew would sell, but without permission. Over in Logic, things were even worse, with Helen attempting a coup early on Day 2 suggesting that Melody step aside as she had no “strategy”. Helen’s alternative was to target retailers and to try and sell larger volumes. This completely missed the point and the brief that Lord Sugar had given the teams! True to her character Melody refused to step aside. The lady is not for turning.

It was noticeable that both teams were fractured, with people looking out for themselves. Remember my favoured leadership model (Adair – Action Centred Leadership) is about getting the balance ringht between the Task, the Team and the Individual. Both Natasha and Melody were found wanting. It seemed this week’s challenge would be decided by which team lost least.

In terms of individuals, Jim came back in to contention. The man is a natural salesman, and performed best on this task. Helen, who had previously not lost a task, looked out of her depth. Susan and Tom performed well on Day 2. Susan’s jewellery sold well. Natasha appeared to do very little, and Melody too much, as is her style. Neither PM were good at listening, and in terms of “influential communication” scored zero.

So, to the Borardroom.

Neither team endorsed their PMs, with Helen in particualr laying in to Melody and Tom finally fighting his corner and laying the blame on both of his colleagues for not listening to him.

For Venture, Jim blamed Natasha for not reinvesting in stock. Lord Sugar agreed and promptly fined the team £100. The thing to remember here is that Sugar is looking for an entrepreneur. He has this belief, clearly stated in his autobiography “What you see is what you get” that entrepreneurs are born, not made. This task is one that allows Sugar to find someone who has the same instincts as himself; able to “smell the sell”.

In many ways, this task has helped sort out the wheat from the chaff. The result was almost immaterial, it was how individuals rose to the challenge. In this respect, only Jim, Susan and Tom, came out well. Helen was shown to be lacking the instinct for the role, and almost being too “corporate”, something Sugar detests. So far, she has done well on tasks that required good planning, coordination and leadership. I thought at one point Sugar was going to describe her as a secretary, but he stuck with “executive assistant”. Helen has been found out and won’t win. Similarly Natasha. She was completely clueless.

In the end, despite the fine, Venture still won, so Natasha was saved. She surely would have gone otherwise. However, her card is marked, and the team were denied a reward because of Natasha’s decision not to replenish items. Back in the house, Susan bared her teeth and rounded on Natasha. The girl finally became the woman, or maybe a man she certainly showed that she has balls! Susan is one to watch.

Meanwhile back in the boardroom, Sugar focused on the losing team. Once again he reminded Tom that he had been told to be more assertive in backing his ideas. Yet Tom survived. Tom is slowly getting stronger in this process. Sugar sees something in him that he likes, but seems to fear that as a business partner he would be hard work.

It was Melody who eventually went, mostly because no one has any idea what she does. As a consultant myself, I know that you have to be able to reduce what you do to “tangibles”. Clients might like the idea of a “bespoke” solution to their problems, but they like to see evidence of how you operate. Melody couldn’t do this and coupled to her appalling interpersonal skills (she works in communication?) she was fired “with regret”. I’m sure Sugar likes her drive, and if it could be bottled in, say, Tom we’d have the perfect Apprentice. The rest of the nation let out a collective cheer to see Melody go.

So, the winner will likely come from Jim, Tom or Susan. In my opinion, Natasha and Helen are out of it. My money is on Tom or Susan now, as they already have businesses and in the end this may be the deciding factor.

Filed under Leadership, Sales & Marketing Tagged with , , , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →