Best sabotage ever!

Si_CreweSi_Crewe Posts: 40,202
Forum Member
So, just got around to watching the latest episode and, I gotta say, Daniel enacted the most blatant, obvious and catastrophic bit of sabotage ever. :D

Can't stand the guy but it really was superb.
The only way it could have been better would have been if he was part of the team who went to the focus group.

Thing is, it was kinda working on two levels.
On the surface, you had the whole "pantomime villain" thing going on whereby evil Daniel made an epic job of ruining poor little Pamela's chance for glory but, underneath all that, the simple fact is that Pamela did absolutely nothing to stop it happening.
She just carried on "managing" the team while he turned the exercise into a train-wreck.

Comments

  • slouchingthatchslouchingthatch Posts: 2,351
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Si_Crewe wrote: »
    So, just got around to watching the latest episode and, I gotta say, Daniel enacted the most blatant, obvious and catastrophic bit of sabotage ever. :D

    Can't stand the guy but it really was superb.
    The only way it could have been better would have been if he was part of the team who went to the focus group.

    Thing is, it was kinda working on two levels.
    On the surface, you had the whole "pantomime villain" thing going on whereby evil Daniel made an epic job of ruining poor little Pamela's chance for glory but, underneath all that, the simple fact is that Pamela did absolutely nothing to stop it happening.
    She just carried on "managing" the team while he turned the exercise into a train-wreck.
    Hmm, not sure about that, to be honest. I don't think Daniel would have sabotaged the task deliberately, not least because he knew that he was on shaky ground given his recent performances if he did end up back in the boardroom. In the event, he did help seal Pamela's fate but I don't see that it was a deliberate act.
  • Philip WalesPhilip Wales Posts: 6,373
    Forum Member
    Not forgetting that Pamela was one of the people mostly having a go at him along with Mark, so she deserved it. And TBF he did run the questions past her, and she let him carry on.
  • Si_CreweSi_Crewe Posts: 40,202
    Forum Member
    Well, I'd be willing to concede that it might not have been "deliberate" insofar as that Daniel might really be an ignorant, sexist, offensive moron but, judging from the interview segments, he seemed aware that the questions he was writing were ignorant, sexist, offensive and moronic - but he wrote them anyway.

    And she didn't have the authority or the guts to tell him to do any of it again, but better.

    *EDIT*

    Don't get me wrong. She deserved to go for failing to manage the people working for her.
    Simple fact is that, in business, you are likely to encounter people who're either clueless or are being wilfully subversive and you have to deal with that.

    If it'd been me, after listening to the shite Daniel was coming up with, I would have told him to do it again and then, if there was no improvement, I would have given him the task of counting how many bristles there are on a hairbrush and done it myself.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,273
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Si_Crewe wrote: »
    Well, I'd be willing to concede that it might not have been "deliberate" insofar as that Daniel might really be an ignorant, sexist, offensive moron but, judging from the interview segments, he seemed aware that the questions he was writing were ignorant, sexist, offensive and moronic - but he wrote them anyway.

    And she didn't have the authority or the guts to tell him to do any of it again, but better.

    I would point out the Pamela admitted to have only read about a couple or so (I can't remember if that was on the show or your fired but she definitely did admit to not reading them all on the show) so she couldn't have known how bad they all were. It was an oversight on her part and she deserved to be fired on that alone. As for Daniel he has absolutely no leg to stand on either way and is going to be out shortly. He's going to have to have a massive redemptive arc with Mark either coming round or getting fired if he's to win or even making the final 5 and I just don't see that happening at all.
  • slouchingthatchslouchingthatch Posts: 2,351
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    In fairness to Daniel (me? defending Daniel? Whatever next?) he was given a crappy job. "Go sit in a corner and write 48 questions for our game, with no access to actual research data."

    Absolutely, the questions he came up with were ridiculous and insulting in many cases. But, given that particular task, what would any of us have done in his situation. I'd wager that some of his questions were okay, and we only got shown the really silly ones.

    Completely Pamela's fault for not ensuring her vision for the game was properly executed, just as she should have provided a clearer brief for the photo shoot and not left Mark's sub-team to their own devices.
  • teagenieteagenie Posts: 146
    Forum Member
    I would point out the Pamela admitted to have only read about a couple or so (I can't remember if that was on the show or your fired but she definitely did admit to not reading them all on the show) so she couldn't have known how bad they all were. It was an oversight on her part and she deserved to be fired on that alone..


    I agree with the above. Id not hold Daniel 100% responsible because the PM should have absolutely looked over all the questions.

    awful error on Pamela's part imo
  • Philip WalesPhilip Wales Posts: 6,373
    Forum Member
    Especially as the week before she was accusing him of taking all the credit. But this week after loosing seemed quite happy to lay the blame all at Daniels feet.
  • ShrikeShrike Posts: 16,606
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Pamela sabotaged herself by not putting a man and a woman on the question writing. Even better would've been to find time to brainstorm the questions from the whole group as they were fundamental to the product.
  • slouchingthatchslouchingthatch Posts: 2,351
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Shrike wrote: »
    Pamela sabotaged herself by not putting a man and a woman on the question writing. Even better would've been to find time to brainstorm the questions from the whole group as they were fundamental to the product.
    Oddly enough, I can understand why Pamela didn't do that.

    There's a lot to do on the tasks and not much time, so deciding not to put two-thirds of her sub-team on writing the questions (important in the context of real-life gameplay, much less so in the context of the task) and having them focus on more important elements such as the look and feel of the product actually makes sense.
  • Philip WalesPhilip Wales Posts: 6,373
    Forum Member
    The whole things a bit crap. In the real world, the buyers would turn around and say "we love the game, concepts great but the questions need re-working" if they were at all interested. This happens all the time in the apprentice selling tasks, where you often hear, Karen or Nick say team A sold 500 items providing changes were made.

    The buyers just didn't like the concept or the game and used the questions as a "get out of jail card".
Sign In or Register to comment.