Okay, I'd like all three of you (including Mitchell if you're still here) to tell me what exactly you contributed to this task and why I shouldn't fire you?
You shouldn't fire me, because I think I did a good job as Project Manager. If you look back at the opening boardroom and the other team's criticisms of Arran, none of those things can be aimed at me. I was organised, made decisions when I needed to but was also fair and took everyone's viewpoints on board. Everyone knew what they were doing at all times. I was very approachable; everyone respected me, I never had an argument with anyone and I think I got the team together well, which is obviously quite difficult in the first task when you're all starting out.
I will accept that possibly some of my decisions could have been better, but I made those based on what seemed logical to me and what I felt the team wanted. I made sure that everyone had a voice. And to be honest, I think I contributed a lot more to this task than both of the other people sitting here. I think I have a hell of a lot of potential in this process, and I'd really like the opportunity to show you more of my capabilities.
I think that Mitch should be fired, because I feel that he was the weakest member of the team, and also when talking to him I feel that he possibly does not have enough time to contribute to further tasks.
I'll be entirely happy to let both yourself and Lord Sugar know who said that, and what was said. However, I think as a Project Manager, it would be irresponsible of me to tell my team members what has been said to me on a confidential basis. I think when you're on a team, you should be able to go to your leader with concerns, and trust them not to blab about that to the people that they have concerns about.
I must admit I was surprised to see Stacey brought back into the boardroom, from what I've heard from my advisor she seems to have put a lot into the task and done a fair amount of work, even offering to do extra work and help out with other areas that she was not delegated. Whilst she may not have contributed the most creative ideas, one that she did bring up (the vegetarian idea) may very well have saved you the task if you had decided to go with it. Stacey, overall I'm happy with your performance of this task and you are not in danger of being fired, you may leave the boardroom.
I apologise for not writing loads, I'm on an iPhone round my friends, although given the essay I pm'd you last night lord sugar, I'm sure you've heard enough
I'd like to keep you two in here for a bit longer before I make my decision.
Mitchell, I gather you were perhaps most against the idea out of the team members, and judging by the task result you may have been right on a few points. That's all well and good, but what alternatives did you actually offer? Why did you not push these harder if you feel that going with the 'ethical foods' idea was a mistake?
I came up with the dessert recipe/ingredients and prices, also offered to help out Mitchell with his extras list pricings which I did do then to discover that George that changed some of them and contradicted himself by putting them even LOWER that I did in the beginning. I also offered to upload the pictures which George couldn't upload himself (god knows why) and didn't even have them saved (being PM you should probably do simple things like that). I don't think I should be fired because I clearly had the best idea but it wasn't approved of by everybody else, so maybe in future they should all listen to me more. :cool:
I'd just like to point out with regards to the bit in bold that Stacey is mistaken here. I did not contradict myself; I said when Stacey had done her pricing that some of the prices were too expensive, so I lowered them.
George, I think it's fair to say that your stint as PM was not as successful as it could have been. I think the biggest issue you seemed to have was delegation and organisation, way too much focus was put on the menu which was just one sixth of the task brief. Also, lots of your organisational decisions seem illogical, such as pushing the best part of the pitch to the last day when you had the whole weekend to work on it. In hindsight, would you have acted differently in this task if you had the chance to?
I'd like to keep you two in here for a bit longer before I make my decision.
Mitchell, I gather you were perhaps most against the idea out of the team members, and judging by the task result you may have been right on a few points. That's all well and good, but what alternatives did you actually offer? Why did you not push these harder if you feel that going with the 'ethical foods' idea was a mistake?
I offered an idea where you can customise your own burger, may not be the strongest idea, but I feel like it would have brand identity and I feel that it could be turned into a successful franchise.
I didn't feel this idea was as strong, however I'm sure that as a collective we could've worked on a stronger idea had George listened to the feedback.
I feel like this task has brought up George's weaknesses, he's lost this task due to these, I haven't really shown any weaknesses if I'm honest, I have a lot of potential, this task was one where I was unable to spend a long amount of time on, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be in this position in the boardroom had I been free this weekend.
George, I think it's fair to say that your stint as PM was not as successful as it could have been. I think the biggest issue you seemed to have was delegation and organisation, way too much focus was put on the menu which was just one sixth of the task brief. Also, lots of your organisational decisions seem illogical, such as pushing the best part of the pitch to the last day when you had the whole weekend to work on it. In hindsight, would you have acted differently in this task if you had the chance to?
In some areas I would. I would certainly not have focussed as much on the menu, and concentrated more on the theme. I think I thought a lot about what sort of food we'd serve and what the experience would be for the customer, and that possibly did cause the detriment of the creativity behind the theme. What can I say? I'm not perfect. But I take on board the fact that I focussed too much on one aspect of this task, and I'll bear that in mind for the rest of the competition should you see fit to put me through.
In other areas, I wouldn't though. As I said, I felt that quite a lot of my leadership went pretty well. I was organised, approachable, everyone knew what they were doing and at the end of the day, we may have lost but you yourself said that it was very close between us and the other team, and in terms of management style the other PM was criticised a whole lot more than I was. I did frequently ask over the days if everyone was happy, and the only complaints that I got were for quite minor things. As for the pitch, as I said I feel that the reason it was rushed was mainly due to Steve's technical issues. In previous incarnations of this game, I have prepared pitches at quite short notice and they have often gone quite well - and as you pointed out in your assessment, it may have been rushed behind the scenes but it still showed how much thought had been put into it. I don't actually think that the pitch cost us the task at all; the focussing on menu over creativity did, but not the pitch. Generally I think I did quite a good job, and it would seem that that opinion is shared by my teammates if you look over their assessments of me earlier.
I've been reading the viewers opinions, undoubtedbly George has displayed great work in previous series, but I have to ask, if he is so good, why was our output in this task that bad?
I agree with George being approachable, he is a genuinely nice guy.
However stopping the chat for 20 minutes because one team member can't be there seemed a strange decision, as was saying at the end of Friday that we should next meet up on Sunday.
George, despite the clear issues with your performance as project manager it does seem that the majority of the team feel that you did a good job. However, there are still further issues in terms of you clearly being the main driving force of the idea that cost you the task, and if I'm basing this firing on who was responsible for the failure of the task, surely you should be the one to go? On the other hand, it seems like you put in by far the most amount of work out of your team, coming up with most of the ideas (which despite not being great, the majority of the team did go with) as well as completing a large proportion of the pitch and almost single handedly answering the questions. It may appear foolish to fire someone who puts in so much effort at such an early date...
Mitchell, whilst many of your complaints against the idea were completely valid, it doesn't appear that you contributed a lot in terms of alternatives. I have asked my advisor and he has shown me chat logs of the only two visible alternatives you offered, and to be completely honest I didn't think they were up to much either and probably even weaker than the ethical foods idea. You were not responsible for th failure of the task, but at the same time should I fire you for your lack of contribution and lack of ability to provide acceptable alternatives, despite constant moaning?
It's a hard decision as you both have lots going for you and against you, but weighin everything up, I've made a decision...
I've been reading the viewers opinions, undoubtedbly George has displayed great work in previous series, but I have to ask, if he is so good, why was our output in this task that bad?
Mitch, can I just point out that yesterday when we were talking, I did ask for feedback on my leadership qualities, and the only issue that you raised was that on the first night I paused the discussion for a few minutes whilst we waited for Steve to get back? You seem to have a lot more issues with me now than you did then - which of course is only natural because one of us has to go, but it does seem a little bit as though you're exaggerating all these bad points that I apparently have.
Mitch, can I just point out that yesterday when we were talking, I did ask for feedback on my leadership qualities, and the only issue that you raised was that on the first night I paused the discussion for a few minutes whilst we waited for Steve to get back? You seem to have a lot more issues with me now than you did then - which of course is only natural because one of us has to go, but it does seem a little bit as though you're exaggerating all these bad points that I apparently have.
Yes I said that, but also you already knew that I wasn't happy with you turning round and telling me that it was decided that we were using the ethical idea.
I wish I didn't have to fire you at this point as I understand that personal issues prevented you from contributing as much as you could have, however unfortunately I cannot see any alternative. Despite coming up with the losing idea, I do not feel that the idea was bad enough to warrant an instant firing for George, especially when you consider the sheer amount of work George put in - I was particularly impressed with his handling of the viewers questions on his own. I feel there is no way I can fire George based on this, in terms of effort he possibly put in the most out of every single person in this time, and particularly in the long term we need people who are going to be completely dedicated to the process and contribute as much as possible.
Mitchell, unfortunately I have not seen anything from you to suggest that you would have been able to come up with a better idea than the one that the team went with, and that paired with your lack of contribution is the reason I'm firing you. I must stress that this is not based on any past performances or anything, this is based on both your performances on this task and both me and my advisor's agreed that there was not any alternative result to this boardroom.
I personally disagree with your decision, but I appreciate your decision and take it on board. It's just a shame as I felt I had much more to give.
You always "just have more to give" and NEVER show it. Actions > words. You also very conveniently always seem to have "personal problems". If you know you can't give your all, there's no point in even entering the game.
I think this was probably the right decision but neither going would have been a loss.
Comments
You shouldn't fire me, because I think I did a good job as Project Manager. If you look back at the opening boardroom and the other team's criticisms of Arran, none of those things can be aimed at me. I was organised, made decisions when I needed to but was also fair and took everyone's viewpoints on board. Everyone knew what they were doing at all times. I was very approachable; everyone respected me, I never had an argument with anyone and I think I got the team together well, which is obviously quite difficult in the first task when you're all starting out.
I will accept that possibly some of my decisions could have been better, but I made those based on what seemed logical to me and what I felt the team wanted. I made sure that everyone had a voice. And to be honest, I think I contributed a lot more to this task than both of the other people sitting here. I think I have a hell of a lot of potential in this process, and I'd really like the opportunity to show you more of my capabilities.
I think that Mitch should be fired, because I feel that he was the weakest member of the team, and also when talking to him I feel that he possibly does not have enough time to contribute to further tasks.
I'll be entirely happy to let both yourself and Lord Sugar know who said that, and what was said. However, I think as a Project Manager, it would be irresponsible of me to tell my team members what has been said to me on a confidential basis. I think when you're on a team, you should be able to go to your leader with concerns, and trust them not to blab about that to the people that they have concerns about.
I wish there was a double elimination now.
Mitchell, I gather you were perhaps most against the idea out of the team members, and judging by the task result you may have been right on a few points. That's all well and good, but what alternatives did you actually offer? Why did you not push these harder if you feel that going with the 'ethical foods' idea was a mistake?
I'd just like to point out with regards to the bit in bold that Stacey is mistaken here. I did not contradict myself; I said when Stacey had done her pricing that some of the prices were too expensive, so I lowered them.
I offered an idea where you can customise your own burger, may not be the strongest idea, but I feel like it would have brand identity and I feel that it could be turned into a successful franchise.
I didn't feel this idea was as strong, however I'm sure that as a collective we could've worked on a stronger idea had George listened to the feedback.
I feel like this task has brought up George's weaknesses, he's lost this task due to these, I haven't really shown any weaknesses if I'm honest, I have a lot of potential, this task was one where I was unable to spend a long amount of time on, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be in this position in the boardroom had I been free this weekend.
In some areas I would. I would certainly not have focussed as much on the menu, and concentrated more on the theme. I think I thought a lot about what sort of food we'd serve and what the experience would be for the customer, and that possibly did cause the detriment of the creativity behind the theme. What can I say? I'm not perfect. But I take on board the fact that I focussed too much on one aspect of this task, and I'll bear that in mind for the rest of the competition should you see fit to put me through.
In other areas, I wouldn't though. As I said, I felt that quite a lot of my leadership went pretty well. I was organised, approachable, everyone knew what they were doing and at the end of the day, we may have lost but you yourself said that it was very close between us and the other team, and in terms of management style the other PM was criticised a whole lot more than I was. I did frequently ask over the days if everyone was happy, and the only complaints that I got were for quite minor things. As for the pitch, as I said I feel that the reason it was rushed was mainly due to Steve's technical issues. In previous incarnations of this game, I have prepared pitches at quite short notice and they have often gone quite well - and as you pointed out in your assessment, it may have been rushed behind the scenes but it still showed how much thought had been put into it. I don't actually think that the pitch cost us the task at all; the focussing on menu over creativity did, but not the pitch. Generally I think I did quite a good job, and it would seem that that opinion is shared by my teammates if you look over their assessments of me earlier.
However stopping the chat for 20 minutes because one team member can't be there seemed a strange decision, as was saying at the end of Friday that we should next meet up on Sunday.
George, despite the clear issues with your performance as project manager it does seem that the majority of the team feel that you did a good job. However, there are still further issues in terms of you clearly being the main driving force of the idea that cost you the task, and if I'm basing this firing on who was responsible for the failure of the task, surely you should be the one to go? On the other hand, it seems like you put in by far the most amount of work out of your team, coming up with most of the ideas (which despite not being great, the majority of the team did go with) as well as completing a large proportion of the pitch and almost single handedly answering the questions. It may appear foolish to fire someone who puts in so much effort at such an early date...
Mitchell, whilst many of your complaints against the idea were completely valid, it doesn't appear that you contributed a lot in terms of alternatives. I have asked my advisor and he has shown me chat logs of the only two visible alternatives you offered, and to be completely honest I didn't think they were up to much either and probably even weaker than the ethical foods idea. You were not responsible for th failure of the task, but at the same time should I fire you for your lack of contribution and lack of ability to provide acceptable alternatives, despite constant moaning?
It's a hard decision as you both have lots going for you and against you, but weighin everything up, I've made a decision...
Mitch, can I just point out that yesterday when we were talking, I did ask for feedback on my leadership qualities, and the only issue that you raised was that on the first night I paused the discussion for a few minutes whilst we waited for Steve to get back? You seem to have a lot more issues with me now than you did then - which of course is only natural because one of us has to go, but it does seem a little bit as though you're exaggerating all these bad points that I apparently have.
Yes I said that, but also you already knew that I wasn't happy with you turning round and telling me that it was decided that we were using the ethical idea.
I wish I didn't have to fire you at this point as I understand that personal issues prevented you from contributing as much as you could have, however unfortunately I cannot see any alternative. Despite coming up with the losing idea, I do not feel that the idea was bad enough to warrant an instant firing for George, especially when you consider the sheer amount of work George put in - I was particularly impressed with his handling of the viewers questions on his own. I feel there is no way I can fire George based on this, in terms of effort he possibly put in the most out of every single person in this time, and particularly in the long term we need people who are going to be completely dedicated to the process and contribute as much as possible.
Mitchell, unfortunately I have not seen anything from you to suggest that you would have been able to come up with a better idea than the one that the team went with, and that paired with your lack of contribution is the reason I'm firing you. I must stress that this is not based on any past performances or anything, this is based on both your performances on this task and both me and my advisor's agreed that there was not any alternative result to this boardroom.
I think this was probably the right decision but neither going would have been a loss.