It was, as you say, a minor "Faux pas", to address her in that manner.

What got me was the "reaction" shot of Margaret and made me wonder if it was "live" at the time, or a cutaway shot done later?.

He apparently expects all his staff to use that title, too, though I'm sure that senior staff like Margaret, Nick and Borden are excused!

He knew the score - this was a formal interview. Inappropriate, as was his feeble attempts at patronsing Claude with an explanation of what a brand is!



Excellent point this - her reaction was too quick, people almost always react "internally" and assimilate before showing emotions.

That was a typical deflective question. Baggs was trying to change the direction of the interview because he didn't like the way the he was being forced into a corner.

As for calling an interviewer by their first name it's just bad manners, unless you have been introduced by that person to do so.
Baggs was a victim to that old adage 'familiarity breeds contempt'

I have worked with many knights of the realm - and not one of them has ever insisted on the "Sir" title being used when addressing them- unless in a VERY formal meeting with outsiders present..... but then as they were mostly military officers they were called plain "Sir" by underlings in line with the military etiquette anyway.....

Heck - even when dealing with the Royals you just call them Sir or Ma'am after using their titles the first time... says a lot about Sugar's inferiority complex that he insists on it!

Stuart was wrong to presume to call the interviewer by her first name without being invited to do so - but he did correct himself after being prompted, and as has been pointed out - he has probably never attended a formal interview in his life!

Exactly.. I just love Gordons face, Gordon is smiling like, "Look I'll make u feel ok as u try and change the subject but belive you me the moment your done Ill ask if its a lie in black and white .. cackle cackle cackle "


))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

I'm sure you're correct but whilst I was watching it it sounded to me as if he was, after he'd got the name, going to say: "Right, I'm reporting you ..."

Not that I though he was going to do it, of course, but that was the fleeting impression I got.

Er...address them by their full name? No, you wouldn't!

Stuart has made me cringe several times during the course of this series, in fact he has probably cringed a little himself watching it back.


Of course, in interview, you should always address a person formally on first meeting them until they tell you otherwise but i think Stuart was so taken aback to see margaret sitting there, mixed with maybe a little relief that it was a familiar face that he just blurted out 'Hello Margaret'...she is such a familiar face on tv that he probably, fleetingly, felt he already knew her and let his guard slip a little.

I agree with you that the man who didn't shake hands was rude, however, it is just plain stupid to address someone you have never met, who is about to interview you, in such an informal manner. Had she introduced herself by saying something like "I'm Margaret Mountford, but you can call me Margaret" then that is the only case where Stuarts familiarity could have been acceptable and only after the introduction.

It has been documented that the first 30-45 seconds or so is crucial to sucess in an interview. In the current economic climate, where dozens of people are applying for one position, a faux pas similar to Stuarts could be the difference between getting the job or not.

Those who believe that Margaret was wrong to pull Stuart up on that, clearly have no respect for the power an interviewer holds.

Karen Brady referrred to him as Alan several times in the "You're fired" programme.

Who has said Stuart wasn't wrong?

It would be like seeing a famous female singer in the street and saying "Ooh look, there's Mrs Ritchie".

More likely you say "Ooh look, it's Madonna"

As has been said before it was a mistake in that situation which was quickly corrected.


Maybe it was a mistake / unfair to have someone so familiar, and well known to Apprentice fans, come back as an interviewer?

Last year, or whenever, one of the interviewers was Ms Karen Brady. Now she is becoming known as Karen off the Apprentice, just as Nick is.

Perhaps now that she is no longer performing an informal task we should, out of respect, stop calling her Margaret?

That's quite right, but Karren isn't on his staff, the others are (or were!) employed by one or more of AS's companies.

He has said that de does not expect people he knows well to call him LS.

He just doesn't like people who don't know him calling him Alan.

If you don't want to be called by your first name then it has to be 'Lord Sugar' as 'Mr Sugar' or 'Sir Alan' are incorrect.

I think the key cog in this situation is that normally an interviewee would not have seen the interviewer on TV mutliple times before they entered the interview room. In real life, you'd seldom know your interviewer before, and if you did, it would be because you'd met them before and not because you'd seen them on the telly.

Therefore, it was not as easy for Stuart to gauge what to do immediately.

That's true but there was no need to use a name at all.

I suppose, like Joanna, he'd never attended such an interview before.

Is this (BIB) a particular key cog? What is a key cog? It doesnt meeean anything, key cog, what do you mean, key cog etc etc

Are you jamie in disguise???

OMG, PMSL, joke of the week !!!

agree completely.

Oh and before I walked out and stick my finger up at him!

I loved Alan Sugars greeting to Margaret the best.

"Welcome back to the boardroom Margaret, one of my best observers in this process..."

There were only 3 observers in the whole show, and the other two are sat beside him. LOL

Quite frankly I would have done the same. When I have bumped into actors or people in the public eye I have referred to them by their first name (not many admittedly). I though that faux pas of Stuart's was totally understandable.

Margaret and Nick were never employees of Sugar or his companies. They were professional people, in one case a City lawyer and the other one with a PR firm, both of whom provided professional services to Sugar's business.

I think he has said before that anyone who worked for him before he got the title's and called him Alan, still call him Alan. New employe's are expected to call him by his title.

I think he meant that new employees are not expected to call him 'Alan' until he knows them well rather than that there is some cut-off point.

Bumping into someone in the street is a bit different to walking into a room where you know you are going to be interviewed by someone for a reasonably well paid job.

Even if you know the interviewing panel (for example internal interview) you are still expected to treat the panel as you would an external panel and vice versa, therefore you wait for introductions etc. Over familiarity can hurt you in an interview process, it makes you comfortable and you don't 'sell' yourself as well as you would to an external panel.

When I introduce myself to new doctors in my job or when doing interviews, my first email/greeting is always Dr So-n-so and my name is Orangesmartie. After that I revert to using their given (or preferred) name. I've never yet (touch wood) been corrected.

Interestingly, when introducing themselves to me, I am never referred to as Ms Orangesmartie. I always introduce my CEO as CEO, rather than Mr CEO.....but only because his surname is Wright and I'd die laughing introducing Mr Wright