Young Apprentice Week 5 – Something smelly in the boardroom.

November 22, 2011 5 Comments

Young Apprentice Week 5 – Something smelly in the boardroom.

So, we enter the second half of this series of Young Apprentice. This week’s episode started with 8 candidates, so with only 3 weeks left we may be due a week of double firing. Either that or the final could be a busy affair. It didn’t happen this week, but one survivor in the programme came out looking decidedly dodgy – Lord Sugar.

The task this week was a familiar one; create a brand, package it, make an advert to promote it and pitch it to an advertising agency. The product was a new anti-perspirant deodorant for the young adult market. No profits or sales to worry about, this week’s task was about creativity and leadership.

The leaders were Zara for Atomic (with resident mouse Hayley, Haya and Harry H) and Harry M for Kinetic (with Gbemi, James and Lizzie). Neither were role models for good leadership. Last week James demonstrated that you can be clear, focused, even opinionated, and yet be a democratic leader. Both Harry and Zara were very clear what they wanted, but demonstrated leadership styles slightly to the right of Atilla the Hun. Neither were popular with their teams. Of the 2, Zara was at least prepared to listen to feedback (eg from the focus group) and make adjustments, and gave some degree of structure and process. Harry M just gave orders and expected everyone to follow them, not question them. Neither PM is a good advert for a priviledged upbringomg and public school eductation.

Leadership is about getting the balance right between task, team and individual (see Adair). Zara concentrated on the first 2. Harry was only interested in the task. Not surprisingly, the result is unhappy teams, with individuals feeling frustrated and outside of the task. For Harry he did manage to create a team – one that was united against him. Never before has it been clearer watching the programme that losing the task could have dire consequences for the PM.

And so it proved to be. The programme followed the usual rollercoaster for each team, with the viewer’s expectations of who will win switching as the editing showed us potential disasters on either side. For Kinetic, Zara’s structure gave a good focus to the 3 components of the task (agree a brand and name, produce the advert and pitch it) with everyone contributing. At each stage, Zara showed she was prepared to make adjustments; the brand values were tweaked through a focus group, the advert storyboard was adjusted accordingly. In contrast, Harry kept everything in his head and was not for being deflected from his chosen path; no structure, no plan, no storyboarding. He did, however, allow the subgroup (including Gbemi who counts design as one of her specialist areas) to design the packaging.

When it came to pitching the 2 brands, both came across as resonably creative. Atomic went with Raw, offering a coherent link between advert and pitch. On completion, Zara told her team she was “dead proud” of them. There may have been some irony lost on Harry M with Kinetic’s brand. It was called Vanity, but was unclear what its brand values were. The product pitch suggested confident, the advert fun (think a poorer version of the Lynx commercials designed by two 17 year old lads for the female market). Harry never thought to thank his team after the pitch. They didn’t seem to expect him to.

After reviewing the commericals in the boardroom, Lord Sugar went with the more coherent Atomic product Raw. In the cafe it became clear that the Kinetic team laid the blame squarely at Harry as PM. He was going to have his work cut out to survive as his leadership had been a disaster. Surely he had to go?

Back in the boardroom again, the feedback for Lizzie on her pitch was good enough for even Harry M to realise that he shouldn’t bring her back. And then there were 3. Gbemi went straight for Harry M, but was vulnerable because Sugar identified the packaging as a major factor in Kinetic losing the task. James also criticised Harry’s leadership and it was here that I expected Nick Hewer to reveal just how poor a leader Harry H had been. It never really happened. Instead, our esteemed Emperor Sugar turned his attention to Gbemi. After all, she is a design specialist. James tried a half hearted rescue, suggesting (correctly) that if Harry had been a better PM the product design would have taken care of itself. This had little impact on Sugar, and despite Harry having lost all 5 tasks, Harry survived (again) and Gbemi was fired. This did not go down well back in the house.

Once again, Sugar proved himself to be consitently inconsistent. Even in this series, individual PMs have been fired because of leadership at least (think Hannah). Crucially, this task was a subjective one; the outcome was not decided by £s. Sugar clearly likes Harry M, as he forgave his crass leadership because he sees talent as a salesman. His drive and single-mindedness, with an instinct for a profit probably mirrors what Sugar is looking for (a junior version of himself). He is not looking for a democratic team player who is well liked (again just like himself). As a commentator on leadership, sales and marketing, this left a nasty smell in the boardroom, one that no amount of deodorant can mask. It’s the smell of hypocracy. It’s hard not to conclude that there was nothing Harry M could have got wrong this week which would have got him fired, even losing all 5 tasks to date. This must be hard for the others to take. I wonder how they will learn from this. Makes great telly, though.

Filed under Influential Communication, Leadership, 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 , , , , , ,

Young Apprentice – Britain’s Future Entrepreneurs Revealed

October 25, 2011 2 Comments

Apprentice – Britain’s Future Entrepreneurs Revealed.

If the motley crew revealed in part one of BBC’s Young Apprentice represents the cream of the UK’s future Entrepreneurs, it may be time to emigrate. Over the next 8 weeks we will get to know these individuals a bit better, but on last night’s showing I thought I was watching the wrong show; more Big Brother than The Apprentice. The title’s changed from the last series (Junior Apprentice), and in my mind at least Young Apprentice has connotations of Star Wars. It was the Emperor (Lord Sugar?) who used the term when trying to persuage ambitious Jedis to The Dark Side. Maybe the change is deliberate…

The editing may have been cruel, but the personalities on show last night were, for the most part, not attractive (hence the Big Brother reference);  James, Northern Irish, economist. Gbemi, gobby fashion designer; Zara, film mogul; Ben – Richard Branson fan; Harry Maxwell, pushy and Harry Hitchens, nice guy; Mahamed, small but with a great line in sharp suits; Lizzie and Lewis, scousers; Hannah, nice girl; and Hayley and Haya, mostly anonymous.

And so to the first task, which involved making ice cream and selling it. The teams were set up along gender lines, but who would stand up to be the first Project Manager (PM). It is interesting to hear all the aggressive sound bites from each candidate; you could reasonably expect everyone to want to be the leader. But no, it fell to “nice guys” Hannah and Harry H to step forward in the absence of any other volunteers.

Both PMs attempted to be democratic and good listeners, but it was like herding cats. The real personalities immediately started to emerge amongst the teams. James made an immediate impact – as highly opinionated and annoying to everyone else. Having agreed on team names (Kinetic for the girls; Atomic for the boys) they set about making frozen products. The girls came to a consensus quite quickly, but the boys descended to bickering. Harry did a good job of remaining calm, especially as James disagreed with everything! James came up with a pirate theme, with a contribution from Mahamed. Harry M was good with the numbers and came up with profit targets and aiming to make 60 litres of ice cream. Meanwhile, the girls demonstrated an inability to do basic maths (“Three fours are twenty eight”) and guessed at an amount to make. They then instructed the other half of the team to buy specific amounts of the fresh fruit (through dubious negotiation). Suffice to say, the girls got the wrong amount of fruit (didn’t listen) and the team had to write off 3o litres of product. Gbemi refused to go back to get more fruit and Hannah was unable to assert her authority.

The boys chose Southend to sell their product, but economist James suggested selling well below the market prices. The price they chose was still too low, and this was to prove to be a crucial mistake. The girls went to Chessington World of Adventures, and were forced to mark the prices up, and include some built-in upselling (sprinkles, cones), to compensate for the material they had to throw away.

In the board room, it was revealed that the girls had made the better profit and won the challenge. Harry was forced into deciding who to bring back. It did not prove to be a difficult decision, with Mahamed and James competing to take full credit for the failed task. It was tough for Lord Sugar to decide which of these prats should go. In the end it was sharp dressed man Mahamed who was fired, but it was a close thing. in fact,  James was warned by Lord Sugar that he was on the radar. I can’t see him lasting long.

So, who are the early favourites? Both PMs did well under trying conditions, and Harry M, despite some horrendous sound bites, showed good business sense. He also managed to avoid any obvious mistakes and is my early favourite. He certainly impressed Lord Sugar

Filed under Leadership 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 , , , , , ,

Negotiating with Dragons

September 29, 2011 Leave a comment

Negotiating with Dragons

Last night the BBC showed their latest guide to how to succeed on Dragon’s Den. The focus this week was on Negotiation, and a 5 point plan for success.

Here is the 5 point plan, with some sound theory behind it. Unfortunately, the programme presented the points out of sequence. I’ve re-ordered them so they are in chronological order;

1. Have a strategy

Presented last on the programme, the most crucial aspect of any negotiation is to plan  ahead and be clear on  your strategy and the tactics you may choose to use (don’t forget  to allow yourself to react to what happens in the negotiation, rather than be dogmatic). The programme showed Kate Castle as an example and her bold step of revealing her preferred Dragon (Theo). This was a high risk strategy as it effectively ruled out the other Dragons, but it paid off and she got a successful outcome. But was it pre-planned or reactive?

Good planning includes deciding what your choice of negotiating style is (competitive, relationship, collaborative or compromise).

2. Know your bottom line

This is part of point 1 really. Always be clear what your “walk-away” point is and stick to it. You need to know this before you go into the negotiation or you are likely to be disapppinted in the outcome.

3. Don’t be greedy

This starts in the planning phase, but carries on during the negotiation when you need to have flexibility. Look for a sensible level of investment and know what your WIN position is (what do I WANT? what is an IDEAL result? what do I NEED?). The example in the programme was Chinese entrepreneur Ling and her car leasing business. Ling’s expectations were unrealistic and she lost out.

4. Take (or keep) control

This is about keeping on top of your emotions and (if possible) your body language. Experienced tough negotiators will be looking for any opportunity to exploit your weaknesses, so you need to keep cool and detatched. the pitch for the mobile water refreshing unit managed to secure all 5 Dragons on board by using this tactic.

5. Know how to haggle

A crucial skill in negotiation that only works if you have clearly identified your WIN positions and you stick to them. The key thing here is that it is about give and take; don’t be inflexible, unless you stand to lose out, and never give something away for free. Know your “tradeables” in advance – those things that can get a deal moving. The ideal tradeable is something that is valued by the other side, but is of low value to you. Aim to identify tradeable that are valued by the other side as you go through back and forth negotiation (haggling).

So there you have it, a 5 point plan for successful negotiation, this time presented in the right, chronological order.

Filed under Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , ,

The Psychology behind Pitching to Dragons

September 24, 2011 3 Comments

The Psychology behind Pitching to Dragons

This week the BBC aired an insider’s guide to successful pitching on Dragon’s Den. They came up with a six point plan for success. Here’s the psychology behind each of the points;

  1. Create an impression. It has been shown that we make a judgement within 30 seconds of meeting someone for the first time. So we have to get it right. We need to grab their attention, and our dress, poise, and confidence rather than gimmicks are needed to create the right impression.
  2. Practice makes Perfect. There is no substitute for practice, and the more you can simulate the environment you will present in the better prepared you will be.  Practice prepares the subconscious mind for what to do, as well as the conscious. This is crucial for “programming success”, a crucial NLP technique.
  3. Keep your nerve. When teaching presentation skills, I always emphasise that the audience will not know you have made a mistake unless you let on. If things don’t go as planned, so long as you are prepared (see point 2), you can adapt what is going on into your presentation.
  4. Don’t offend your audience. Obvious really, but it is easy to react to a challenge from the audience. Remember the first rule of good customer service – the customer is always right (even when they are wrong)! Acknowledge what the audience has said, but don’t disagree. After all they have a right to their point of view even if you don’t agree with it. Lose the battle, win the war.
  5. Be Passionate. Remember Mehrabian. People look to our body language and tone of voice to determine whether to believe us or not. It may not come naturally to us, but if we can’t get passionate about our message, product or service, why should our audience?
  6. Be honest and credible. See point 5 regarding body language, but this is also about not making claims you can’t back up. It also takes us back to point 2 – practice. Good preparation means anticipating what your audience will want to know and how to give it to them.

So, there it is! All you have to do to be successful with your pitch. On the programme Kirsty Henshaw was identified as having give na master class pitch.

This first clip (about 3 minutes in) shows Kirsty’s pitch.

The next clip shows how Kirsty used the Q&A to get  positive outcome

Filed under NLP Tagged with , , , , , , ,

How referee body language affects the perception of performance

August 27, 2011 3 Comments

How referee body language affects the perception of performance.

I recently watched the new documentary “The Referees” which follows a number of FIFA referees through the Euro 2008 finals. The film is a great record of the stresses and pressures put on the top officials in the modern game at the highest level. It also reveals some mighty large egos!

As a referee at a local level, I can identify with the challenges of getting it right in every game. The film gives some insights into what is in the minds of the officials at key moments in games as we can here their miked up conversations. Yet the top officials keep their doubts (for the most part) hidden. How do they do this? Through confident non-verbal communication.

In the Empire Magazine review of the film, the reviewer says the defining shot in the movie is “an Italian linesman practising his flag-waving in front of a dressing room mirror. Absolutely priceless.” The reviewer has got it completely wrong. The assistant referee is actually checking that his flag technique is clear, unambiguous and, most importantly, delivered with confidence. Every decision that assistant gives is going to be scrutinised. He has to convey that he is absolutely sure of the decision (even if some of the conversation we hear suggests he is not).

Check out this clip of research into what footballers want from a referee;

 

The research confirms that players want the referee to be;

  • competent
  • dependable
  • respectful

Notice how players decide on this based on a number of verbal and non-verbal (mostly visual) clues. This is consistent with the work of Albert Mehrabian, who showed that body language and tone of voice are the most important factors in someone hearing the right message and,crucially, believing, it.

So, how do we do this? Here are a few tips to help;

  1. Make strong eye contact when you are speaking to a player.
  2. Once you have made a decision, be quick and clear with your flag or hand signals.
  3. Talk to players as you expect them to talk to you – be firm but respectful. Never swear. Use your tone of voice to convey authority, not arrogance.
  4. Where you can, give players clarification on your decisions, but state this as fact from your point of view. Don’t allow your doubts to surface. Then move on, whatever you have decided it has gone.

Follow these few rules and we can all be perceived as more competent, dependable and respectful referees. Whether we are or not depends upon accurately knowing and applying the Laws of the game.

Filed under Influential Communication Tagged with , , , , , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →