Boardroom Behaviour Boasts Best Chance of Survival !


By Michael Sophocles
November 3, 2010
Share

Wow what an episode. The Apprentice works so fabulously because there are two components to it. If the task does not supply enough inflammatory moments or turbulent tantrums then you can always rely on the boardroom for unadulterated entertainment.

This week was testament to this fact. The actual task I thought was a little repetitious from previous sales tasks on the show and it reminded me of the wedding task I participated in where I could not sell a cake for love nor money.

The secret to success was all about picking the correct product and engaging that product with the appropriate cliental.

Both teams were headed by Apprenti hotties in the shape of the impossibly sexy Liz Locke and the exotically beautiful Paloma Vivanco.

It would be problematic to turn down either of these two ladies if they invited me out for a steak dinner but I have a feeling I would lose my appetite rather quickly in the presence of the rather heartless Paloma.

Paloma gave future Apprentice wannabes a good portrayal of how not to conduct ones self in the boardroom. An obnoxious woman, she chose to belittle her competitors to the point where she displayed herself as an individual with little compassion of humility.

There is no doubt in my mind that Paloma would have stayed in the competition had she have played the game correctly in the boardroom and focused on her own ability rather than verbally assaulting the very clueless Alex Epstein.

Mr Epstein may be a fellow Jew but I struggle to find anything positive to say about my bewildered brethren. He has a voice that could cause serious brain damage and has given me no cause so far to consider him a worthy challenger.

Sandeesh has made no impact whatsoever. Again she would have been fired purely on the basis of not being outstanding in any way if it weren’t for the tactless Paloma.

Neither Alex nor Sandeesh have a cotton picking chance of winning this year but I am still impressed with Jamie. He will get far and I hope he goes from strength to strength.

Please comment if you disagree with my blog, I do welcome a fierce debate.

Apprentice Watch with Michael Sophocles: episode five

COMMENTS

DLeigh-Ellis

Sat, 11/06/2010 - 13:00

Rate this:

0 points

I would be interested to know you opinion on something that happened in an earlier episode.

In the very same episode that Karen Brady criticised the all-female team for badly representing businesswomen in the UK there was a moment of incredible sexism that was never commented on.

The lady (I forget her name) who led the male team was asked if she would model the product in some tiny beachwear... She clearly felt uncomfortable doing this and at first refused, despite this the boys went ahead and bought some items of clothing which they perceived to be 'modest enough.' The group then basically ganged up on the woman and used peer pressure to make her model the product for the task.

Perhaps it was because they won the task but no criticism of this heavy-handed approach was made in the boardroom... We found this quite surprising given the later criticism of the female team. Does this mean that whilst women are not allowed to make themselves look bad, men are still entitled to force them into appropriately deemed niches.

I would be incredibly interested in you POV, maybe it is a peculiarity of the business world that no matter the particular females credentials they are still perceived primarily according to their appearance. Your blog felt the need to imply the dominant character traits of the two team leaders this week were 'impossibly sexy' and 'exotically beautiful.' I wouldn't completely deny these descriptions but I find it very interesting that women are criticised for reinforcing sexist stereotypes of their own gender whilst it is apparently perfectly acceptable for men to promote attitudes of indifferent sexism towards women.

POST A COMMENT

You must be logged in to post a comment.