Labour (Leadership) Pains

July 20, 2016 Leave a comment

Labour (Leadership) Pains

This lack of cohesion and alignment in philosophy and values is not that far from the mix that seems to have led to the aborted coup in Turkey last week

Jeremy Corbyn

Jeremy Corbyn

So, today the battle for the soul of the Labour party really begins. We now know that there will be only one challenger to the current leader Jeremy Corbyn, and that is Owen Smith.

Corbyn has been leader for less than a year, and his ascendancy to the role signalled a clear shift to the left for the Labour Party. Despite gaining more than 60% of the votes in last year’s leadership contest, Corbyn has failed to establish his credentials with the Parliamentary Labour Party (or MPs to you and I). Over 80% of MPs recently expressed no confidence in their leader, resulting in the upcoming leadership contest. Why is this? The key to the answer is in that “clear shift to the left”.  For many Labour MPs elected in or inspired by “New Labour” and the Blair Labour Government, this shift challenges their beliefs and, even the identity of the Labour Party. For all sitting Labour MPs the contest is not just for leader of the Labour Party. but for the very soul of the party.

For all sitting Labour MPs the contest is not just for leader of the Labour Party. but for the very soul of the party

It is worth remembering that the Labour party tried to go down this route once before. At the height of the Thatcher government in the early 1980s, the Labour leader was Michael Foot. His political beliefs were not that different to those of Jeremy Corbyn, and once again the Labour Party was solidly left wing. This resulted in a group of more centralist Labour MPs breaking away and forming the Social Democratic Party (SDP). After failing to gain any real traction on their own, the SDP amalgamated with the Liberal Party to form the Liberal Democrats. It is not difficult to imagine history repeating itself, if the “centralist” coup should fail.

By the 1990s, after a sustained period of being unelectable, the extreme left wing of the party (Militant) was banished and the party moved back to the centre-left under Blair. Their new identity built around social mobility and aspiration won over traditional Tory voters (as it was not that different from centre-right or liberal-conservatism). Labour won 3 elections with the Blairite approach.

But what of the left wing? Well, like Sauron in “Lord of The Rings”, they never really went away, just bided their time and re-built. And as we know, they resumed control of the party last year.

If the recent EU referendum has taught us anything, it has taught us not to be too certain in predicting anything where voting is concerned

Owen Smith

Owen Smith

This has resulted in a minority of left wing Labour MPs with hard core socialist views leading a group of MPs who are predominantly centre-left (Blairite) in beliefs. This lack of cohesion and alignment in philosophy and values is not that far from the mix that seems to have led to the aborted coup in Turkey last week. A different arena, and different political issues and, thankfully, a different approach to the solution, but be in no doubt, the result of this leadership challenge will have repercussions for the Labour Party and its aspirations to be in government. If a left wing, socialist Labour Party couldn’t get elected at the height of Thatcherism, is it more electable now? If the recent EU referendum has taught us anything, it has taught us not to be too certain in predicting anything where voting is concerned

Filed under Leadership, Uncategorized Tagged with , , ,

What May the future hold?

July 13, 2016 1 Comment

What May the future hold?

Theresa MayToday (July 13th 2017) The UK has a new Prime Minister. Theresa May has emerged as PM after the recent bloodletting in the Conservative party following the EU referendum.

It’s worth reflecting on the last few weeks in British politics. Now I know this has been done by many people in many ways, but I’m interested in looking at these events from a leadership perspective.

In this blog post, I will focus on the events in the Conservative party. Who is our new PM and what are her values? I will look at the Labour party in a separate post.

By definition, leadership is about persuading people to follow you. There is a debate about how our next PM was decided upon. In the end, May was the last woman standing, as previous candidates to lead the Conservative party fell by the wayside, either through their own choice or that of their party. So, actually, nobody has directly chosen May to be PM. That said, it is within the constitution and May feels she has sufficient mandate that she has stated she does not feel the need to call a general election to get one. Although May made a speech on Monday outlining her philosophy, nobody actually voted for it! All of this presents May with her first challenge; how to inspire people to follow her.

UK politics has undergone a seismic shift over the last few years

A profile in The Guardian describes May as “unpredictable and moralistic”. She  is also seen as a detail person and someone who struggles to delegate. Think micromanagement. This attention to detail is going to be important going forward, especially in leading the negotiations for “Brexit”. Don’t be surprised if May takes her time in appointing the cabinet; in common with many politicians, she displays the cautious low emoting analytical style. Relatively risk-averse, it is more important to get it right than it is to get it done quickly. In social types terms, May is definitely more task focused than people focused. She is described as hard to get to know, sharing little personal information. She is not interested in gossip. This could be either the driving style or analytical style. It is the measured delivery and softer tones that suggest the latter for me.

May has also given us some insights into her values.  One  analysis  reviewed her only campaign speech, last Monday, just before here last rival, Andrea Leadsom, dropped out of the contest. Three themes emerged;

  1. to govern for “everyone, not just the privileged few”
  2. to unite the party and the country
  3. to negotiate EU withdrawal successfully

All 3 points highlight May’s priorities, but it is point 1 that gives the most insight into her values. May is a believer in “One-Nation Conservatism”and point one is an effective definition of what that is. It will be interesting to see how this belief is translated into action, and this is vital if she is to meet the aspirations of points 2 and 3.

UK politics has undergone a seismic shift over the last few years. The surprise with which the Brexit win was received confirmed that large parts of the population have become disillusioned with the norm or the “establishment”. It started with the rise of UKIP and the coincidental fall of the labour party since 2010. This led to the first peace time coalition government in generations. Labour responded by moving more to the left. The two leading political parties are further apart in their philosophies than they have been for 40 years. In the 1990s they competed for the centre ground. Now, they fight from the flanks.

UKIP was mistakenly believed to appeal only to the right, but their rise in the last election and the success of Brexit (their only policy) has shown that actually they really appeal to frustrated blue collar workers in rural and northern areas, as well as the more hardline right.

If Theresa May is to unite the country, the government she leads will have to negotiate these shark infested waters. She appears to want to step into the void that was vacated by labour (the centre ground) but this will put her at odds with her own party.

Here is her first speech as PM

In the next part of this discussion, I will look at what is happening on the left, and how the civil war currently being fought in the Labour party will almost certainly see the party split in 2.

Filed under Leadership, Uncategorized Tagged with , , , ,

Films of my life – 1984

June 16, 2016 Leave a comment

“So, what is my favourite movie of 1984?  I’ve chosen possibly the greatest concert movie of all time -Jonathan Demme’s  film of Talking Heads in concert – “Stop Making Sense”.

Welcome to my blog, where I reflect on different years of my life through the films released in that year.

Having previously covered the first 2 years of my life, this post looks at 1984 – one of my favourite “film” years and a significant year in my life, as it was when I first met my wife, Gill.

In researching this year, it was immediately apparent that by the 1980s far more films were in production. That said, 1984 was an especially bumper year and some great movies were released. Here are a few that stand out:

  • Ghostbusters
  • Gremlins
  • Amadeus
  • Dune
  • Splash
  • This is Spinal Tap
  • Purple Rain
  • The Terminator
  • A Passage to India
  • The Killing Fields
  • Karate Kid
  • Romancing the Stone
  • Once Upon a Time in America
  • Beverley Hills Cop
  • Indian Jones and the Temple of Doom
  • Tightrope
  • 1984

GhostbustersPhew! What a list. Many of those fils are favourites of mine; Comedies like Ghostbusters, Gremlins, Spinal Tap and Beverley Hills Cop; Adventure movies such as Temple of Doom and the Indiana Jones-light “Romancing the Stone” and Karate Kid; “Once Upon a Time in America” – Sergio Leone’s last and possible greatest movie, doing for the gangster movie what he did for the Western with “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly”. The post-Vietnam war movie “The Killing fields” was a very affecting watch.

“Amadeus” has a special mention, as on the evening all of our student house went to see it we discovered a tiny kitten upon our return. We called it “Amadeus” (of course) but that only lasted a few weeks before we re-named him after one of our best friends – “George”. George went on to live with Gill and I, my family and eventually, Gill’s brother , Nigel.

stopmakingsense-1080x675So, what is my favourite movie of 1984?  I’ve chosen possibly the greatest concert movie of all time -Jonathan Demme’s  film of Talking Heads in concert – “Stop Making Sense”.

What I like about this movie is the concert itself is centre stage. The filming is very straight forward, because the amazing set and stage settings carry the film. This is a band at the peak of it’s powers, delivering their greatest hits in an unjust way – no shots of the audience, just the band, their music, David suits and great lighting.

Favourite scene

The concert and movie opens with David Byrne walking out to a empty stage, placing a ghetto blaster on the floor and playing an acoustic version of “Psycho Killer” whilst the stage is set around him.

Check it out

 

 

Filed under Films of my life, Uncategorized Tagged with , , ,

Films of My Life – 1964

June 12, 2016 Leave a comment

clapperboardThis blog charts my life through the films I love. Each post focuses on one year of my life and I choose my favourite film from that year.

In this post we are looking at 1964 – my first full year of life and probably best remembered for Beatlemania. In fact my mother always said that my first word was “Yeah” after the Beatle hit “She Loves You (Yeah, Yeah, Yeah)”. The Beatles capped this year of mega popularity with a movie of their own – “A Hard Day’s Night”. It’s a good movie, but not my favourite for that year.

“There were some absolute crackers released in 1964, and I found it hard to choose a favourite”

Again, I have to say that, of course, I was too young to remember seeing any movies in 1964 – my film memories of that year are based on movies I have seen subsequently, some may years after their release.

There were some absolute crackers released in 1964, and I found it hard to choose a favourite. Here are some of the other contenders; all great movies and anyone could have been my movie of the year;

  • Dr Strangelove – Kubrick’s satire on nuclear war, with outstanding performances (3) from Peter Sellers.
  • Fail-Safe – Dr Strangelove without the laughs. Truly terrifying
  • Marnie – Probably Hitchcock’s last great movie
  • Zulu – another bank holiday favourite
  • Mary Poppins – Probably my all time favourite Disney movie, with memorable songs and dodgy accents
  • A Shot In The Dark – more Pink Panther frolics, this time written by the man who would go on to write The Exorcist (William Peter Blatty)
  • A Fistful of Dollars – The first of the Leone “Man With No Name” trilogy

GoldfingerMy favourite movie of 1964 is “Goldfinger”. The third of the Bond series set the template for the next 30 years, until Daniel Craig took the role. Humour, gadgets (the (souped up Aston Martin DB5), great sets (Ken Adam imagining what the inside of Fort Knox might look like), a megalomaniac villain with a bonkers plan  (played by Gert Froebe, but dubbed throughout) and best of all – an outstanding score by John Barry and THAT title song, sung by Shirley Bassey.

I managed to see all of the Bond movies in the cinema. Bond movies didn’t make it onto TV until the late 1970s. Throughout the 1970s, they were often re-released as double headers, sometimes for only 3 or 4 days, which meant that some weeks I could see 4 Bond movies at the Classic cinema in Low Fell, or the Studios in Newcastle!

The first time I saw “Goldfinger”, I persuaded my cousin, Nigel Filby, to take me one Sunday afternoon, when his family were visiting us. The deal was that he kept the money we were given for sweets (which he used to buy fags). I didn’t care, I just wanted to see the movies!

1964_Corgi_Aston_Martin_DB5My other abiding memory of “Goldfinger” was having the Corgi replica of the Aston Martin (I think every young lad, and many lasses, had that car, with its working ejector seat). I had the car for so long before I got to see the movie, I remember that when  I did see it, I was amazed that it was silver -not gold like the toy!

In my opinion Goldfinger is not the best Bond (O.H.M.S.S. and Casino Royale are better) but it is the most famous. Connery was never better and the film was the top grossing movie of 1964. It also led to a plethora of copycat productions, from “Man from U.N.C.L.E.” and “Mission: Impossible” on TV to “Our Man Flint” in cinemas

Yes, 1964 was a great year for Britain – it started with Beatlemania and ended with Bondmania.

 

 

Filed under Films of my life, Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , ,

Films of my life – 1963

June 10, 2016 1 Comment

 

“I say attend, actually I didn’t see the movie, as my mother was pregnant with me and she went to see it!”

clapperboardWelcome to my blog! Each week I will be reviewing the movies released in a particular year of my life and identifying my favourite movie from that year.

It makes sense to start this journey with the year of my birth. My first cinema experience, and one that may explain my love of movies, was “attending” a showing of the Bond movie “From Russia With Love”. I say attend, actually I didn’t see the movie, as my mother was pregnant with me and she went to see it!

“From Russia With Love” is a favourite movie and one of the best Bond’s, but it is not my film of the year. Other contenders (obviously all seen later in life) include the following classics;

  • The Birds (Hitchcock classic)
  • Jason & the Argonauts (Iconic sword & sandals from Ray Harryhausen )
  • Its A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World (the very definition of madcap)
  • The Pink Panther (introducing Peter Sellers as Inspector Clouseau)
  • 81/2 (Fellini classic that I only saw for the first time in 2015)
  • Disney’s The Incredible Journey (household pets are lost and trying to get back home)
  • The Nutty Professor (as a child, I thought it was funny)
  • Move Over Darling (Doris Day and Rock Hudson (!) in a romantic comedy which is far funnier than I thought as a child)

Great EscapeNo,  my choice for 1963 is “The Great Escape”, a perennial bank holiday movie from my youth with a great true(ish) story, superb cast (Steve McQueen – “Cooler King”; Dicky Attenborough, James Garner, Donald Pleasence to name but a few) and one of the most familiar and iconic themes. I actually played the theme (badly) as part of my brief flirtation with the clarinet, playing in the St Cuthbert’s Grammar School Band in 1975-76.

I actually played the theme (badly) as part of my brief flirtation with the clarinet,

Why did I choose this movie over the others I mentioned? It is probably one of the best war movies and I was born at the tale end of the post-war baby boomer era (apparently it ended in 1964). As such,  we  grew up nourished on stories from the second world war, both those told by our families (Uncle Billy worked as a translator, possibly for British Intelligence during the war) and in the plethora of movies on the TV. Remember, this was in the era before video or DVD, when movies could only be seen by live transmission – at the cinema or on TV. So, I grew up on the heroism of WWII, playing “Japs and English” (I know, not PC).

Directed by John Sturges, The Great Escape is similar in tone and style to his previous movie “The Magnificent Seven”. It also includes 3 stars from that movie; McQueen, Charles Bronson and James Coburn. The contrast between the stiff upper lip and formality of the Brits and the more laid-back approach of the Yanks (James Garner as Hendley “The Scrounger” is particularly good fun).

Although it is remembered as light hearted, the ending of the film is bitter-sweet, as not everyone gets out. That said, the various storylines are beautifully played.

All in all, the perfect movie for a wet bank holiday.

Best Scene

Steve McQueen on a motorbike! Apparently it was not based on a real event, but was added in at the actor’s request!

What do you think of “The Great Escape”?

 

Filed under Films of my life, Uncategorized Tagged with , , , ,

The Apprentice 2015 – The Final

December 21, 2015 1 Comment

The Apprentice 2015 – The Final

Your firedIn the end, the Apprentice 2015 came down to a battle between the traditional and the new to acquire Lord Sugar as a business partner; either plumber Joseph Valente or dating app developer Varna Koutsomitis. To help Sugar make the decision, each finalist was asked to develop a digital billboard advert and promotional video before pitching their idea to a selected audience. They were assisted by a motley selection of 2015 ghosts of candidates past.

The two finalists seemed to adopt different strategies for selecting their teams; Varna prioritised going with individuals that she respected rather than liked (such as Richard Wood) selecting individuals with a good track record, whereas Joseph went with his mates, choosing relationships over past success. It didn’t seem to make too much of a difference, as it was obvious that neither candidate had a fully formed business strategy going into the final.

For Varna, the challenge was to persuade Lord Sugar to invest in a business that could be seen as speculative (there are apparently 15 new dating apps per week, and 15 failures) where the prize money could disappear within the first few weeks. Joseph wanted to transform his successful local business (in Peterborough) into a national brand. To do this he would need to identify a USP.

The promotional videos strayed into familiar territory. The addition of a juggling metaphor transformed what could have been a very traditional dating site advert into something resembling Cirque Du Soleil. Joseph only just avoided producing “Confessions of a Plumber’s Mate”. Neither was particularly inspiring. The issue was trying to get the essence of the brand each team was trying to sell. For Varna there was the challenge of selling the scientific profiling in the form of gaming. Joseph had based his idea on the “green” revolution, but was informed by focus group that this was not going to make money for the next 15 years (in a subtle dig at government policy). Credit to him, though, he latched onto the idea of investing in smart phone technology to control central heating and shifted his proposal accordingly. In doing so, he actually made the final a battle of the apps, at least on one level. Similarly, Varna realised from her focus group that the thorny issue of funding was not going to go away. She also repositioned her pitch to be an initial investment to prove her unique idea could win and use this to attract further venture capital.

Back in the boardroom with adverts, videos and pitches completed and past candidates dispensed with, it was decision time for Lord Sugar. It was here that Joseph played his trump card; he cited Sugar’s autobiography as a major inspiration and reminded him that he also came from humble roots. In other words, he showed Sugar how alike they are. It is true that Joseph has grown and evolved across the series, even down to his appearance. He has also shown himself as being prepared to listen and learn, two traits that Sugar values. Joseph was also able to dangle the carrot that a rival business in London had grown to a multimillion pound business.

Varna on the other hand has grown less through the process, having started from a high base. She remained focused and confident, with good knowledge of her business area. However, here business plan represented a riskier proposition.

p033wp3p

And the winner is…Joseph. Photo courtesy of BBC

In the end, Joseph and his plumbing business were the safer option.  To choose Varna, Sugar would have to speculate on new product that is untested and, crucially, he would not have control over unless he added significant extra funding. This fact, coupled to Joseph playing the “I’m just like you” card (Sugar’s achilles heal) secured the win. Sugar is going into the plumbing business.

It is interesting to note that Joseph represents the 5th business partner that Lord Sugar has taken on as a result of the revised format for The Apprentice. I remain unconvinced that this is the best format (see my earlier posts) and I am critical of the candidate selection this year, where good TV is more important than business credibility. I really hope that the production team give the format a real overhaul before series 12 next year. That said, good luck to Joseph Valence and his plumber’s mate, Lord Sugar.

 

Filed under Influential Communication, The Apprentice, Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , , , ,

The Apprentice 2015 Week 11 -Fail to plan and you plan to fail

December 17, 2015 2 Comments

The Apprentice 2015 Week 11 -Fail to plan and you plan to fail

The final of the Apprentice 2015 will be between social media entrepreneur Varna Koutsomitis and plumbing business owner Joseph Valente. The remaining three candidates were eliminated at the interview stage.

In the end, it comes down to the quality of the business plan; how well you sell it and how well it fits with Lord Sugar’s preferences. The truth is, however, that the semi-final makes a mockery of the previous 10 weeks.

p033wn8p-2

Varna will be in Sunday’s final. Photo courtesy of BBC

Take marketing agency director Richard Woods, for instance. He was many people’s favourite to win the series, as he had been on the winning team 8 times, twice as project manager. In the old format of the series, he would have been the perfect employee. Except he probably wouldn’t apply as he already runs his own business. Richard has played a shrewd game, keeping his cards close to his chest; just enough of a team player but always preferring his own judgement. I suspect there are as many viewers who hate him as like him, because there was something quite incongruent, bordering on manipulative, in his approach. For some, it will be fitting that it was this, and not the quality of plan, that ultimately cost him. Richard chose not to reveal that his plan for a marketing agency for Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) is a duplicate of his existing business. This could be seen as justice or even a vindication of the process.

Hairdresser Charleine Wain had a plan to turn her hair and beauty salon in to a franchise. Much as she impressed the panel with her work ethic (and I admit that I’ve grown to like her) it showed a naivety in business terms; you can’t  franchise until you have made a name. Sugar may be a big name, but he is not associated with hairdressing.

For Mr Corporate, Gary Poulton, his idea of a virtual meeting space for events confused Sugar and didn’t convince the panel.

Isn’t this just Skype?” asked Karren

So, Gary failed to sell his idea.

Varna is wanting to design a new dating / gaming app and though she was convincing, there is a nagging concern that she has underestimated the start-up costs.

p033wp3p

Varna will be in Sunday’s final. Photo courtesy of BBC

Joining Varna in the final is Joseph Valente. His plan to expand his plumbing business was realistic and, crucially, tangible. Sugar made his name in manufacturing, and he seems to err towards propositions that make things or at least involve real things. He has surprised us (Ricky Martin’s recruitment business proposal) in the past, but Joseph did a great job of selling his plan with passion and realism. Crucially, he has learned from the feedback he received on the property task, and he changed his appearance by shaving off his moustache. This visible sign said “I’ve leaned in this process” and was noted by Sugar.

So the choice this year is between a new app and a plumbing business. Who knows what better plans belonging to fired candidates may have been missed, and this is my main criticism of the series?

Who will win? Who cares! The whole thing has been rendered irrelevant and the format needs to be re-thought. There is a case for starting the series with the interview panel and identifying 12 business plans that are viable and that Sugar would invest in. Then the weekly contests have relevance, as the candidates are reduced to a single winner with a viable plan.

 

Filed under Influential Communication, The Apprentice, Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , , , ,

The Apprentice 2015 Week 10 – Last Orders

December 10, 2015 1 Comment

The Apprentice 2015 Week 10 – Last Orders

images-2In another first across 11 series of  The Apprentice, the result this week was a tie. Both teams failed to take any orders, so both teams lost.

The task was for each team to design and pitch a new healthy snack. In a battle of the ex-navy candidates, hair salon owner Charleine Wain took on the role of PM for Versatile, with Brett (the builder) Butler-Smythe assuming the role for Connexus. With only 3 people in each team, this inevitably meant that sub-teams could consist of only one person. Digital Marketer Richard Woods jumped at the chance to finally be in complete control of branding for Connexus. Charleine took sole responsibility for product design (ingredients and production). In reality, this was where the problems started for each team; the lack of a second person to counsel or challenge meant that both Richard and Charleine made mistakes that cost the their respective teams orders. For Charleine it was an anarchic approach to adding ingredients,  which meant that it was impossible to make any health claims about their health bar! For Richard, he chose to ignore the fundamental USP of their healthy alternative to crisps – they are raw and dehydrated, not cooked. It could be said that this is down to the PM, and in that situation, as PM, I would prefer to be able to move between the 2 sub teams to coordinate and implement the vision and strategy. I’m not sure if it is a practical or logistical problem, if it is not allowed in the rules, of if they never think of it, but it happens week after week.

In the end, both products were poor and rightly got no orders. The non-crisps were too oily (thanks to Varna) and the health bar too dry. Both teams had problems with their health claims, and Joseph even resorted to lying (though I think he missed the subtlety of ex- Tesco man Gary Poulton telling him that not mentioning facts was not same as misrepresenting them) in one pitch.

There are some interesting (and possibly controversial) points to be made about education in this series. Or at least communication skills. Richard is clever and seems to intimidate some of the more poorly educated colleagues. Stand up Brett, who effectively fell on his sword rather than blame Richard for a fundamental and arrogant decision NOT to include the term “raw” on the branding. Brett sounds like a TV copper from the 1960s giving evidence in court “on the evening of the 5th I was proceeding in a northerly direction…”. He is a very poor communicator, and comes across as poorly educated. Similarly, Charleine does not always communicate well, but she does have a fighting attitude. We saw the stress getting to her this week as she thought she was getting fired. Any other week she would have been. Joseph is nice but his lack of education or even intelligence led him to lying in the pitch. It is difficult to see these three surviving the interviews next week.

p03bcfz0

Brett preferred being fired to blaming Richard. Laudable or Naive?

One person who definitely won’t be there is Brett, who as PM took the bullet for his team’s failure. He left “with honour” but nothing else. I’m surprised he has survived this long.

My money is on Varna and Richard for the final, depending on their business plan of course, but they seem best equipped to survive cross examination. As for Gary, Lord Sugar keeps referring to him as “corporate”. I’m not sure why this is a problem for a man who runs a corporation, but it seems his card is marked.

 

Filed under Influential Communication, The Apprentice, Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

The Apprentice 2015 Week 9 – High (rise) Drama

December 3, 2015 1 Comment

The Apprentice 2015 Week 9 – High (rise) Drama

skyscraperWell, what an interesting and unusual week on The Apprentice 2015 this week proved to be! Two candidates left the process; one fired from the losing team in the usual manner and one who quit from the winning team. And, news of the quitting was leaked on the day of broadcast.

This leaves 6 candidates remaining for the final 3 weeks of the competition.

In another first for the series, the teams became estate agents selling luxury and mid-range properties in London. The team earning the highest commission would win.

To balance the teams, Selina Waterman-Smith was asked to move from Connexus to Versatile. This was preceded with clips of both Selina and Charlene Wain stating that they dreaded ending up in the same team. The level of tension between these two has risen to outright bitchiness in recent weeks. Joseph Valente was keen to take on the role of PM. Richard Woods successfully lobbied for role in Connexus.

After a bit of discussion and strategising, the 8 candidates effectively became 4 pairs for the rest of the programme. For Versatile, Joseph was sensible and kept Selina and Charleine apart. Joseph accepted Selina’s desire to sell the high-end properties, leaving Gary and an unhappy Charleine (she wanted to sell the high-end properties too) to sell the mid-range properties in south London. In Connexus, Richard and Varna took on the high end properties, leaving Scott and Brett to sell mid-range in south London.

For the high end properties, the first step was to secure the right to act on behalf off the developers. Richard and (especially) Varna Koutsomitis applied passion and enthusiasm to charm the developers. Joseph was more direct and practical, preferring to discuss commission. Selina added nothing. Not surprisingly, Richard and Varna had their choice of developers, and secured the Canary Wharf properties that both teams desired. Versatile were left with the Stratford properties; still high-end but in a more up and coming area. In terms of location, Canary Wharf is more desirable.

In terms of selling, the process is the same whatever the product you are selling.

  • You have to make a connection with the buyer. The buyer has to trust you and be able to identify with you. This is not just about introducing yourself, but also about establishing rapport. Joseph was instructed by the developer to dress in a way that the high end clients would expect; don’t wear braces!
  • Next you have to understand what the buyer is looking for, and this requires asking good questions, but also listening to what they say and how they say it. This will give you clues to what’s important to them.
  • If you know what they are looking for, you can position your product to match these needs. Scott Saunders made the cardinal error of not knowing his product. He had to be rescued several times by Brett because he was misleading the clients.
  • Having answered any remaining questions, the last step is to seek a commitment from the buyer. Charleine was especially good at this, not being afraid to ask for the business in a strong, assertive manner.

Richard & Varna managed to sell high end properties using the same approach that secured them the Canary Wharf location in the first place. Joseph manage to sell a high end property in Stratford, but Selina was more of an observer, constantly blaming everyone else for her lack of success. Yes again, there were scenes of Selina and Charleine arguing, back in the house or on the phone.

In the mid-range properties, Charleine proved to be formidable, selling several properties alongside Gary. Brett and especially Scott struggled. Scott didn’t manage to sell anything.

In the boardroom the sales and commissions were calculated and it was no surprise that Connexus won convincingly, predominantly from the high end sales of Richard & Varna. However, as part of the

Scott became the first candidate to quit from a winning team

Scott came the first candidate to quit from a winning team

review Lord Sugar had been in a particularly challenging mood, with Scott’s shortcomings this week coming in for special mention. Despite being in the winning team, Scott was told that he was lucky to be in the process. As his team mates left to celebrate victory, Scott remained seated and then shocked everyone by quitting. He said very little – thanking Lord Sugar for the opportunity, then departing without even saying goodbye to his team mates. Later, in the taxi and on “You’re Fired” he suggested that he had realised he was out of his depth and his heart wasn’t in it. He probably saw the writing on the wall. Whatever his reasons, this was a first for the series.

For Versatile, there was the post mortem in the cafe. Everyone agreed that Selina had added nothing to the process and that she was manipulative – finding ways to blame other people rather than accept responsibility for her own failings. It was no surprise that Selina was brought back into the boardroom by Joseph, with Gary making up the final three. His sales did not stack up to those of Charleine.

It was no surprise that Lord Sugar fired Selina – her lack of success alone made her vulnerable, but her lack of personal accountability and general bitchiness along with a tendency to sit on the side lines, sealed her fate. Where Selina has had success it has been as PM, but too often she has been poison in whichever team she as attached to.

p039x7vx

Selina – fired in week 9

Selina refused to honour her contract and appear on “You’re Fired”. Presumably, she preferred to stay in Dubai where she lives. Instead, in the run up to the day of broadcast, she tried to sell her story, have a go at the producers and (coincidentally) it was leaked that Scott had quit. Taken together, these events reinforce Selina’s lack of character and good riddance.

As for Scott, he did have a bad week, and the criticism was deserved, but I suspect that his was an emotional response. He seemed to lose his energy or enthusiasm in later weeks, as though his heart wasn’t in it. Possibly he lacked the emotional intelligence (resilience) to last the process. I’m sure that that is what LordSugar would say.

As for the remaining candidates, Richard remains strong, but Charleine may yet prove to be the dark horse. Her determination and resolve is formidable. Don’t rule out Varna either.

 

 

Filed under Influential Communication, The Apprentice, Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , , , ,

The Apprentice 2015 Week 8 – Party Party

November 26, 2015 1 Comment

The Apprentice 2015 Week 8 – Party Party

imagesAfter last week’s personality clashes, it appeared as though we may be in for more of the same at the start of this week’s programme, with candidates taking it in turn, Big Brother style, to slag each other off. Surprisingly, lessons appear to have been learned and almost everyone was on their best behaviour.

Lord Sugar selected the PMs for this week’s task, both based on their experience or interest in running events. Selina has experience in running events and headed up Connexus. She was allowed to bring Richard over as well. Gary was PM for a second successive week, running Versatile.

The task was to organise a children’s party with a budget of £2000. The team with the biggest profit would win, but the parents buying the party had the option to ask for money back if not fully satisfied.

Both teams met up with the parents of the children they were organising the party for. Both teams checked what the children were interested in. Gary was particularly  good at engaging both parents and child, and was sure to leave with the client’s telephone number. Selina, who admits to not liking kids, also got lots of information, but it came across as more mechanical. She also forgot to get contact details.

Having decided on their themes, both teams set off to find venues and games etc. Both teams had an eye on profit, but it became a recurring theme for Richard across the episode. Connexus settled for an Olympics theme at a leisure centre, Versatile went for an Outdoor Activity centre. David Stevenson was quick to point out that he is a qualified climbing instructor, so a few pounds were saved here. There is always a risk in taking this approach – David may be a qualified and competent teacher, but he is no entertainer! By way of contrast, Scott and Brett put personal differences aside and pulled out all of the stops to make their party, and the bus ride in particular, fun.

In the end, it was cost cutting that decided the task. Both teams had to offer refunds because of poor p03948syquality items, but Versatile suffered most. They eventually lost the task by over £200. Most of this was due to the idea of selling personalised tee shirts. They paid for the tee shirts, but had to write them off as the quality was poor. They also had to give back money for the lack of entertainment on the bus. David was implicated in both of these, so it was no surprise that he ended up fired. Gary managed to demonstrate his lack of decisiveness when he couldn’t separate Joseph & Charleine, so all 4 of the team was brought back by Lord Sugar. Charleine, Joseph and Gary survived to fight another week.

The key to success in this task is to listen to what the client wants and then find a cost effective way to deliver it. It’s good to be able to cross-sell or up-sell items (such as the party bags) but you have to make sure they represent value for money.

 

Cost effective is not the same as cheap

In the end, Versatile lost because they cut a few too many corners. If they had bought professionally printed tee shirts and gift bags, they would probably have still been able to make a profit, and maybe won the task.

 

 

Filed under Influential Communication, The Apprentice, Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →