It might have made a difference

You mean Helen ........ the one who had no plan herself. The one who had all that time during the day and up till they walked into the boardroom to 'come up with the plan she would have used' and still had none.

Then when she did open her mouth her plan was to sell to 'bigger retailers.'

Helen had NO clue, what part of that do most people not catch on about?

She was told by Lord Alan in the boardroom, 'DONT SELL TO RETAILERS'. Yet even after he said it, she still said her plan was to sell to bigger retailers. She clearly just didnt get it.

Melody should have asked Helen about her ideas for a better strategy and based on those ideas and input make a decision AS projectmanager whether to adapt her strategy or not.

In stead all she said was: no, I'm projectmanager.

Agreed, Melody's orders to Helen to get the duvets wasted half the day when she could have been selling. She was definately the right candidate to be fired as all her blabbing on about her 'past' in the boardroom was extremely annoying. There was no such explanation for why she should stay based on her performance in the task in question.

If anyone else but Helen had done that, you would have all been seeing red. The hypocrisy on this forum makes me laugh.

They should have said - we both want it so much that Jim should do it - the reluctant leader who accepts responsibility and only does what needs to be done is better than the one who wants it.

The Tao Te Ching supports my view. (Sorry, enlightened me to that fact years ago!)

The Tao and Mushashi's 'Book of Five Rings' are great leadership primers.

I agree. I think Melody did well not to let the vote of no confidence totally throw her, but if she had been really cool, she could have asked Helen to bring her ideas into the open and used them or shot them down as she saw fit.

But unfortunately for Melody, she was less on top of this task than Helen was so there was no chance of this happening.

Why they are all so keen to push themselves as PM at this stage, I don't know. It would seem a safer option to take a back seat - as Jim well knows!

Melody would have been dead in the water if she let Helen take over. I agreed with the person on Your Fired that LA would never have forgiven her, and I'm sure none of the other candidates would have taken her seriously afterwards either. She was right to stick it out.

No one had a clue last night, then again, the final 5 are rubbish. LS start saying goodbye to your investment.

it's a pity she didn't, then Sugar could have sacked the pair of 'em.

When Helen was asked in the boardroom what she'd have done if she had replaced Melody as PM, she showed that she had understood nothing, as she had intended to follow the same bollocks plan that Melody had been and which was doomed. They'd still have lost.

Hmm... I think that Helen's success may have gone to her head. Having been on the winning team (mostly by luck) for so many weeks, it seems like she now thinks she can do anything. When in all likelihood she would have messed things up worse than Melody.

Do you mean Tom? It would be a pretty radical thing if it was Jim considering he was on the opposing team!

helen knew (as all the candidates did) that melody was a bs merchant and did not want to lose the task. I admire her balls, she wants to win.

And Helen should have requested that they have a serious discussion about strategy, rather than asking to take over as PM (which was clearly not going to go down well).

I agree. Helen shouldn't have undermined Melody. Not even when on a sinking ship.

That would definitely have been the better approach.

I don't think Helen was deliberately trying to undermine Melody. She clearly wanted to continue her unbeaten run and that would not have accomplished that aim.

She recognised that Melody is an excellent seller and reasoned - deep into the night if she is to be believed - that it was ineffective having neither herself nor the PM playing to their strengths.

So reverse the roles .. Melody sees the team is sinking so tells Helen she's taking over ....... and you're response would be the same would it? Errr ok.

Seems to me St Helen, patron saint of boring people gets special dispensation that is not open to everyone else.

So, you're saying that Helen was being self-centred and selfish?

That does not sensibly relate to what you quoted.

Firstly, I just agreed with someone that she should not have offered to take over.

Secondly, she offered to take over. She didn't 'tell her she's taking over'.

Try not to let your hatred of women blind you to what has actually been written.

What is this?

Read something and then respond as if it says something else.

Read it again and try to understand the simple English used. It doesn't say that at all.

You said Helen was worried about her own track record, did you not?

Sorry. I've obviously confused you here. I thought it was very simple.

Helen wanted to win the task. So did Melody. So did Tom.

So doing what she thought was best for the task (whether she was right or wrong) was no more selfish or self centred that any other candidates in the entire history of the programme, ever.

The only way you could realistically accuse her of that would be if there was some way in which she could win the task herself but have her team mates lose it. And that is not possible so your suggestion is plain stupid.

Sigh. You believe I'm thick-headed and I believe you don't understand what I was getting at, so I'll let this go.

Well, if you actually said what you meant instead of using weasel words like: "So, you're saying that Helen was being self-centred and selfish?" when, of course, I wasn't, you might get your message across.