Episode 12 –The Apprentice is like a box of chocolates...

Basil and strawberry? You've got to be kidding.

Perhaps in one of Heston Blumenthal's snail porridge-induced nightmares that combination may occur, but please leave it out of our Milk Tray.

And yet, Yasmina’s "Cocoa Electric" 'shockolates' contained this particular depth charge, as well as some other unsavoury-sounding combinations. Adult-oriented chocolates represent indulgence: they are eaten for pleasure. While some of us here at OPP Towers may admit occasionally to playing Russian roulette with a packet of Revels, it's usually only kids that eat things like Bertie Bott's stinky jellybeans for grossout tittilation.

By contrast, Kate's 'Choc d'Amour' represented an innovative idea, high-quality products, and impressive brand strength (apart from the condom-packet-like box artwork). Sadly, it was let down by an unrealistic price. As the advertising executive in the presentation noted, establishment of a new brand requires a level of impulsivity from potential consumers, and in a crowded marketplace during a recession, thirteen quid was just too much.

Although the show is about one person getting the job, having a good team proved to be tremendously important. In the final task, both candidates were able to make the most of their team's strengths. And they both looked hugely pleased to get the feedback from their teams that they were 'good leaders': without their teams, and the teams’ respect, they wouldn't have been able to compete.

One of the ways in which a leader relates to his or her team can be seen in the 'control' measure revealed by the FIRO-B instrument. It indicates how much influence and responsibility a person desires, and expresses. Kate and Yasmina clearly both exhibited the need to influence, and both wanted responsibility - but there were also key delegated tasks in this week’s episode.

In 'taking charge', Kate didn't really quiz Debra on the detailed cost breakdown, accepting a verbal "commercially viable" - and was left with a retail price that was out of kilter with the market.

Yasmina, however, did much better - she made sure her costs were under control, and created a retail price that would tempt the uninitiated (whether they'd create repeat business, who knows?).

Most impressively, she ably fielded the bizarre and maverick Philip ("One day the world will understand Pantsman. They called me mad! Mad, I tell you! But I'll show them, I'll show them all, bwa ha ha haa!"), and she was able to pacify his aggressive and blinkered ideas into producing a tack-tacular dance routine that actually fitted an admittedly naff brand.

We still wonder if there genuinely would be any appeal for a supposedly luxury item that might leave the consumer, as it did one of the actors, gagging and wanting to spit it out.

But if the shockolates left something to be desired, let us not forget the reputation that Amstrad products had, which never stood in the way the vastness of the Sugar empire... Sir- sorry: LORDalan is successful due to his business acumen, matching price to product to market, and not necessarily his attempt to produce the highest quality product possible.

We agree that both candidates were very strong indeed; the most impressive ever in the final. At the final reckoning, though, what was Lordalan looking for?

Kate would make a great corporate animal: she handles teams well (even in her final summation in the boardroom, she referred to herself as a team player, not an individual), is charming, creative, competent, unflappable and winsome. She oozes extraversion and confidence, which is important in managing others' perceptions of her.

Yasmina, by contrast, is somewhat rougher around the edges. She had many successes throughout the series, but also made a lot of mistakes, particularly at the interview stage. However, she was an entrepreneur at a young age, and already runs her own business in the real world. This is something Lordalan clearly admired, evidenced by his spirited defence of her borrowing money from her mother to kick off the business, in the previous episode. She showed that she could listen, and learn important business lessons - and put the learning into practice quickly and deftly - which is something that most pundits agree is a key indicator of potential.

We suspect that Lordalan picked someone who reminded him of himself when younger: someone that resembled his own personality type - which is not necessarily always an error. However, when putting teams together, we believe that diversity is something that should be considered: it takes all sorts to make a business, and large numbers of boss clones can lead to dangerous 'groupthink'.

That old codger 'gut instinct' reared his familiar head again. We think Lordalan's use of that term is misleading, because the specific and quite data-driven reasons for his decisions is just his shorthand for 40 years' experience, and the good judgement that comes from it. For us lesser mortals, however, let's not be lured into the 'gut' decision when psychometrics are so inexpensive, quick and easy to use as a basis for more objective people calls..!

You never know which Apprentice you're going to get - and it was delightful to see a pair of potential winners who represent modern management in all its participative, empowering, and collaborative glory. Despite this being the closest competition ever, we think he chose well from two exceptional contestants, by rejecting the smooth, but perhaps a little cloying, Kate, in favour of the more textured and bittersweet Yasmina.

OPP

P.S. There were no muppets this week – we were genuinely tremendously impressed - and sadly nor shall there be for another year.

We have very much enjoyed putting together this blog over the past eleven weeks, and hope that you have enjoyed reading it as much as we've enjoyed writing it. Come back next season for more!

Episode 11 - This is a job interview from Hell...

We are sure that getting an executive position at Siralan's empire is no walk in the park, but we find it difficult to believe that any interview process would be quite so harsh in the real world. Making Nick and Margaret seem positively benign, Siralan cried havoc and let slip the dogs of war: a Bulldog, a She-Wolf, a Silver Fox and a Rottweiler. And attack they did, reducing all but Kate to stammering puddles of jelly, or sweating buffoons. 

We are unsure that the exhibited techniques would genuinely work in the real world. There are harsh interviews, of course, and then there's good telly, and we are fairly sure which of the two things here the producers were aiming for. Certainly were we to be subjected to the insults flying at the candidates in the interviews, we would think twice about joining the company, regardless of the position. 

Selection for recruitment is one of our core areas of expertise. We were disturbed to see how much gut feel and intuition there was in the discussions in the boardroom. The attack dogs are all highly successful businesspeople in their own right, and have no doubt recruited hundreds of people over the years – yet at the end of the day, they had more hunches than the annual Notre Dame bellringers' convention. 

How much better for them to have a more objective viewpoint of the candidates.

Put it this way: even for an entry-level position, you are looking at an investment of around £20,000 per annum; for managers and senior managers, multiples of this. For a similar investment in a business service or a piece of equipment, executives would expect an extreme amount of due diligence. And yet OPP research reveals that 4 out of 10 managers rely on nothing but face-to-face chats and gut feeling, despite the large amounts of money that is tied up in the decision.

The "robotic" Kate is a case in point. Claude the Bulldog said, accurately, that she is an "excellent candidate" – implying that excellence in candidacy is a learnt skill. How is it that someone who does everything right is criticised for that very ability? "Maybe she hasn't got a personality", said the Silver Fox, illogically. Clearly the interviewers are floundering here: their gut instinct does not reveal the true Kate. This is a perfect illustration of why psychometrics in recruitment is tremendously valuable. The 16PF is the ideal tool to reveal the underlying traits of a candidate. It would show if she is "contrived or controlled", or whether she is genuinely as perfect as her teeth (her stated gender bias aside).

The other candidates appeared easier to read: while their personalities may have been overlooked, due diligence was certainly performed regarding their CVs, and one by one their "spin" was revealed. Yasmina's embarrassing gaffes regarding the difference between net and gross profit and the public nature of her company accounts certainly gave the Bulldog misgivings; Lorraine's "mistake" regarding her length of employment made the She-Wolf prick up her ears, and her near-supernatural explanations of her intuitive nature (the MBTI 'N' preference); James's overreliance on telecoms jargon did not go down well (though we would have expected the Bulldog to know what an SLA is...) and his sweaty brow sent him off with his tail between his legs.

With Debra, again, we see how the hunch-based interview technique proved ineffective. Was Debra using her not-inconsiderable self-promotional skills to pull the wool over the She-Wolf's eyes about how much she had developed, or was she telling the truth? They couldn't tell. How valuable, then, was the 360-degree feedback solicited from her former colleagues: and how tragic for Debra that "telling colleagues to F-off" is not one of the prerequisites for an apprenticeship with Siralan.

Finally there's a definition problem: where is it writ what the mystical role of Apprentice shall comprise? It's not helpful to be recruiting as if it was a dark art, rather than a question of defining a target and trying to hit it with as many bullets as possible. We always advise our clients to pin down exactly what they want the ideal person in that role to do, to know and to be capable of – then to ask questions and to deploy psychometric instruments designed to measure candidates against this model. Precision – rather than persecution - is everything.

Despite all this, we feel very strongly that the right two candidates were retained. Will Yasmina's error-prone entrepreneurial spirit be enough to counteract Kate's unflappability? It's a dog-eat-dog world at the Apprentice, and only Sunday will tell.

OPP

At least we know who the muppet of the week isn't: James told us plainly, "Siralan is no muppet" – sadly, James's flustered bluster, proudly bringing ignorance to the table, awarded him that coveted spot.