Tonight millions of viewers will settle down for the dénouement of what has
become one of the most successful television series in recent years. Its
unlikely subject is the hitherto dull, dry world of business and its hero is
Sir Alan Sugar, who has achieved the unthinkable and made cost control and
just-in-time management respectable conversation in the pub.
This is despite the fact that SirAlan’s behaviour in the programme is the
opposite of almost every successful businessman in the country. Name any big
player of the moment – Terry Leahy of Tesco, John Varley of Barclays, Peter
Erskine of O2 – and put them alongside Sir Alan: what stands out is that his
style is different from theirs in almost every way.
He is aggressive, domineering and brash where they are calm, consensual and
low key. In addition, they all run massively successful businesses: Amstrad
is, at best, an almost-ran.
The measure of his success has been as an ambassador for business. Corporate
Britain should celebrate him for breathing life into the office – but no one
who hopes to have a successful business career should emulate his management
style on The Apprentice. It is a throwback, a relic not so much of a bygone
era in British business as an imaginary one. These days you are about as
likely to find a Newton’s Cradle of swinging steel balls on the desk of a
really successful chief executive as you are to find someone like Sugar
behind it.
And his company, the Amstrad Corporation, is the embodiment of the serial
disappointment of Britain’s high-tech industries. It was a business that in
the late 1980s boasted a quarter of the European personal computer market
and seemed poised to put a PC in every home (there was one in mine: the
Amstrad PCW 8512). Instead, it underinvested in research and development, it
struggled to keep pace with innovation and, when it stumbled in the early
1990s with the launch of the overpriced and underperforming Amstrad Pen-Pad
and then took a tilt at the games market with the GX 4000 – an 8-bit machine
that was promptly outgunned by the 16-bit Sega Mega Drive and Super Nintendo
– it failed the cardinal test of entrepreneurship: stamina.
It succumbed to the competition and scampered off, abandoning the computer
business to try to find quick wins by investing in other businesses
elsewhere.
In 2000 Sir Alan launched the equivalent of a Fisher Price toy for the
technologically challenged modern adult: the e-mailer, a stripped down phone
and text messaging machine.
It was a failure, because it grossly, even patronisingly, underestimated the
general public. It turned out that the mass market – the “truck driver and
his wife” whom Sir Alan claims to understand – wanted as much functionality
from their phones as “advertising tossers”.
The company he ran was once valued at £1.2 billion. Today it is broken in two,
each one estimated to be worth little over £100 million. His one truly
popular product – The Apprentice – is not an invention of his own, but a
knock-off from the States: the original Apprenticewas fronted by the New
York property developer Donald Trump, who, funnily enough, is also a
boardroom throwback: just a much more successful one.
To be sure, Sir Alan Sugar is a terrifically wealthy man, ranked 84th in the
Sunday Times Rich List with assets of £790 million. The vast bulk of this –
about £780 million – is tied up in property investments. The boy who left
school at 16 and started out selling car aerials was knighted in 2000 for
services to business. For all his mannered misanthropy, he is an enormously
generous donor to good causes such as Great Ormond Street Hospital and
Jewish Care. He has always been a politically engaged businessman, he is a
devoted family man and he remains one of Hackney’s most inspiring sons.
Also, let’s not get po-faced about this. The Apprentice is not real life, it’s
television. In fact, it’s a terrific show. The dialogue is hard to beat: Sir
Alan: “Tre, if you can’t see that you have cocked this up royal. . . ”
Tre: “I’ve cocked this up, but I don’t think I’ve cocked this up royal, as
such.”
Or Katie on the subject of Kristina: “I would relish taking Kristina down a
peg or two . . . she is sort of hunting alone as it were, but then snakes do
live alone and they live a solitary lifestyle. So it is completely
consistent with the sort of person she is.”
Anyone who cares about business should cheer the programme: it shows that life
does not end when you put on a shirt and tie. Archie Norman, who used to run
Asda, says: “It is not a thoughtful insight into business management or
business people. But so what? There are hardly any popular programmes on
entrepreneurship or business on television or radio. This is one of them. It
is captivating and draws people in to the idea that getting ahead in
business is something relatively normal people want to do.” The Apprentice’s
magic formula is that it finds the drama and comedy in business: a weekly
parade of shaky self-confidence and misplaced ambition.
There are, certainly, many businessmen who are much more successful than Sir
Alan, but do not have a fraction of his talent for television. Sir Terry
Leahy, the Tesco boss, really could teach the television-watching public a
thing or two about business, but, for all his extraordinary commercial
acumen, the measured, unflappable chief executive would have people
clamouring for a return of the test card. Willie Walsh, the British Airways
boss, has plenty to say about real issues of modern management – the unions,
the environment, the oil price, financial hedges and market liberalisaton –
but, frankly, he has enough troubles without the extra TV exposure.
And it does not matter that The Apprentice is a show about business set in the
1980s of a TV producer’s imagination, or that Sir Alan’s boardroom looks as
if it was designed by the makers of Blake’s 7, or that the modern manager is
about as likely to say “You’re fired!” as “Let’s do brunch!”.
The one point that is worth making is that Sir Alan as he appears on
television is a walking lesson in how not to do business.
Take, for example, the departure of Dr Sophie Kain.
Sophie: “I have a problem with selling something that I don’t think is worth
the money that it is being sold for.” Sir Alan: “This is the real world,
love. This is not your scientific protons and neutrons. This is what
retailers do, you know?” Never mind Sir Alan’s antiacademic bias and his
dismissal of precisely the kind of scientifically minded engineer that
Amstrad Corporation, not to mention the whole of British industry, so sorely
lacks: is he right that successful retailers sell products and value
propositions that even they don’t believe in? Didn’t Gerald Ratner give a
speech to the Institute of Directors in 1991, where he described one his
products as “total crap” and a pair of his earrings as “cheaper than an M&S
sandwich but probably wouldn’t last as long”, only to see half a billion
pounds wiped off the value of his company?
Or consider Sir Alan’s televisual management style, the intimidation, the
fomenting of internal intrigues, the punishment of anything that smacks of
humanity or sensitivity.
When the John Lewis Partnership distilled its business ethos, it ended up with
six phrases: “Be honest, show respect, recognise others, work together, show
enterprise and achieve more.” As one prominent British retailer says: “I
think it’s a pretty vacuous programme: it doesn’t send the right message
about business, it’s all the old-style business where people are shouting
and screaming at each other.” And in the words of another prominent British
businessman: “It’s much too confrontational – it’s not like the real world.”
And the tasks that the show sets the teams each week: making sweets, selling
British bangers in France, appearing on a TV shopping channel. They are fun,
funny and a decent test of salesmanship, but they are about as useful in
running most parts of a modern company as a daily game of Su Doku would be
in setting up a hedge fund. Sir Alan’s lessons of modern management, it
seems, could be written on the back of a business card: control costs, mind
your margins, sell products. And yet, you can’t help feeling that there has
been more to Stuart Rose’s turnaround of Marks & Spencer than
that.
For anyone who cares about or works in a company, the fascination of business
is, in large part, the choices that people make in enormously complex and
competitive situations. The marketplace is a reality show, but one that
plays out quite slowly over time and in all kinds of arcane but decisive
details. Unlike the Hobbesian business world that the show seems to
represent, where little Caesars humiliate their underlings and hawk cheap
gear to turn a quick profit, the reality of business is that the office
today strives to be an ethical, considerate and thoughtful place.
Tonight, Kristina Grimes will win – she should not, but, odds on, she will.
The coveted six-figure salary and a year at Amstrad will be hers. That’s
showbusiness.
SIR ALAN: THE VERDICT
Archie Norman, former chairman, Asda
It is not a thoughtful insight into business management or business people.
But so what? There are hardly any popular programmes on entrepreneurships or
business on television or radio. This is one of them. It is captivating and
draws people into the idea that getting ahead in business is something
relatively normal that people want to do.
Richard Lambert, Director-General, CBI
Say what you like about reality TV shows like The Apprentice. At least it may
suggest to young people that business doesn’t have to be terminally boring.
David Wolfson, former chairman, GUS
If you had all the time in the world, politeness would be a better way to go.
But Sir Alan is dealing with start-up companies, a much riskier business.
He’s basically employing an interview technique where belligerence separates
those who can’t take the heat from those who can. If you crumble at the
first hurdle in such high-risk business you’re not going to be much use.
When I employ people their experience generally speaks for itself. But The
Apprentice’s employment strategy is really high-risk, as well as the
business they’re going into, so the aggressive approach might actually make
more sense.
Sir Gerry Robinson, former chairman, Allied Domecq and Granada
Business seems to be fashionable at the moment, and it makes great TV. Alan
Sugar is brilliant in it. He’s an awkward bastard at the same time, but
interesting. You can learn business, but that nous to seize opportunities is
a rare talent.
Do we learn anything about business by turning it into a reality show?
timesonline.co.uk/debate
I would wholly disagree. Sugar's approach is bothj precise and succint. Too much today is business dominated with time-wasting and formalities, that a point is rarely ever made quickly. But Alan Sugar on the other hand shows that, even in business, one can cut to the chase and get to the point, thus improving efficiency.
Amarjit Singh, Strood, Kent
James Harding - '''you are fired'' - you wouldn't even get an interview with me. You haven't understood this programme on any level.
victor M., Malaga, Spain
I am afraid Arif of Redbridge is a little out of touch. If he comes to Cambridge he will find plenty of world-leading hi-tech firms, founded by British entrepreneurs. Two examples spring immediately to mind - ARM (world no. 1 in embedded microprocessor intellectual property) and CSR (world no.1 in Bluetooth silicon). That's before you start on biotech...
Martin Evans, Newmarket, Suffolk
You are too cruel - he'll be crying all the way to the bank.
Ben, York,
I once had the misfortune to watch the Apprentice and could not agree more that as far as any kind of role model let alone one for business - Alan Sugar really bottoms out .
He appears to have difficulty speaking English - or is there some kind of assertive macho element he is trying to convey . The half shaved look along with the carefully positioned glasses is one of the "poseur ". His contributions to Ormond Street Hospital I suspect owe more to a hoped for halo effect rather than any true selflessness.
Very sad also that his approach is meant to be one that should be emulated by others . Rich perhaps - but so what . He would want to be anything like him .
Jonathan Rodwell, Palaia , Italy
"the reality of business is that the office today strives to be an ethical, considerate and thoughtful place."
Hmm. Anyone who has any connection to the business world knows that the sentiments above are readily sacrificed on the altar of maximising profit.
The show is entertaining but it really resembles a freakshow with wild outlandish characters populating an unreal world of school level tasks.
Nick, London,
The whole style of the show is a cliched view of business from the 1980s. It amazes me each week how incapable any of the contestants are at working as a team and how blind they are to their own failings. Team work and self assessment are two key traits that are required to be successful at modern business.
Paul, London,
Whether Sir Alan is good or bad, you ain't EVER gonna pass him at a bus stop.
He must be sobbing over his bank statements.
Ken Wyatt, Todmorden, UK
I think Sugar comes across as a genuine man and does show kindness. Those who think he is brutal obviously don't work in middle management. Thats where the real viciousness takes place. I wouldn't get on with him but I like the guy. I think he is dead straight and honest ( in a buisnessy kind of way!)
dave B , york, n yorks
Well, well, so the Times Business Editor thinks there is more to modern business (whatever that is) than controlling costs, minding margins and selling products. Better hope that Rupert Murdoch doesn't read this.
That's all that business is, and ever has been. Everything else is a means to achieving these objectives. Get it right and 40 years after selling aerials in a market you can be worth £790m.
R Williams, Sudbury, England
It depends. I think I have learnt that most people in the world are total morons. I wouldn't employ anyone I have seen on the last two series. I recall one BBC3 show recently called The Ferocious Mr Fix It; basically a trouble shooter but it was brilliant the way he went into businesses and sorted them out. I actually did pick up some tips along the way. I would love another series of that. Forgot Badger Or Bust, this guy really knew his stuff.
Rob Yandell, Bedford, BEDS
The Apprentice means a learner , a beginner not someone that earns almost £ 100,000 and fully experienced. We need individuals from the streets who do not earn that much to be the next candidates and hopefully be the next apprentice for Sir Alan.
sorzen, london, uk
The truth is that to set up and run your own business, you do need to be aggressive like Alan Sugar. The "business big players" listed above all work for companies that were already set up. Not too difficult to sell Barclays to someone is it- "Hi John Varley of Barlcays here...."
Some of the tasks may be silly to some, actually provide interesting insights into our people function within an organisation. Only someone who has set up and run their own business can appreciate this.
It's easy to knock Sugar since his e-mailer idea, but name one other successful hi-tech tycoon that Britain has produced? It's no wonder that we don't have a business culture here.
Arif , Redbridge ,
There's nothing wrong with Sir Alan's - or Nick and Margaret's! - approach within the context of his OWN companies and their markets (they are not applying for a job at an ad agency after all, are they?). It's the candidates themselves who worry me! Most of them are actually clueless about basic business methods and how to devise and implement successful business strategies (and indeed how to persuade people - including Sir Alan - that their ideas and actions are sound). And, they are encouraged to focus on on their 'I did it my way' moments to create good television to the detriment of good business techniques. That is leaving aside the elephant in the living room question of their real motives in applying for The Apprentice - a majority are probably not in it to work for Sir Alan other than as part of a high profile stepping stone.
Still, we have ended up with one highly employable finalist in Kristina, whose success indicates that the system does work in sifting out the best.
James , Brussels,
I think to an extent we probably can learn something, even if it's the smallest thing. However the reality TV thing seems to be currently making more fools than heroes out of the contestants. Look at Big Brother and the recent actual firing of an Apprentice semi-finalist. The only person to really gain in all this is Alan Sugar because it's free advertising for the Amstrad brand as long as he doesn't do a Gerald Ratner. So as long as we don't winess the birth of a new Sugarist movement business reality should be taken and left for what it is really is - showbiz, nothing else.
Richard, Milan, Italy
Alan Sugar may break the rules sometimes, and should be told about it, but he definitely makes good TV.
I think The Apprentice should start a trend towards more business programmes for showcasing very young people's entrepreneurial skills - just juggle the format between The Apprentice and Dragon's Den. Maybe Peter Jones' new programme will do this.
Get rid of Big Brother (Big Bother) it has become tedious in the extreme.
Annie, Bath, UK
Sralan is certainly an amusing throwback, and it's interesting to read about just how much of his fortune has been made from the property market rather than selling stuff, but I can't agree with your views about the modern workplace being cuddly, inclusive places. Success is still very much results driven, and it's the ruthlessly political snake in the grass who pretends to 'live the values' whilst in fact doing no such thing who often get ahead.
Great TV, though.
Timbo, London,
The Apprentince isn't really about business, it's more of a voyeuristic game show which is loosely based on business. Sugar is simply superb in this role - it matters not that he isn't running 02 - in the context of this game show that is largely irrelevant. The Apprentice wouldn't be half as popular without Sugar and that is testament to the man and his ways.
James Ryddel, stockport, uk
I like his style. Business needs to be more frank - it's the people poncing around who won't debate properly that are the problem. His style of questioning, though confrontational, gets to the truth. The contestants go into auto-response and deny everything and make excuses. He carefully listens then fires back evidence which shows how empty their claim is. Sounds great business sense to me.
He doesn't shout, he doesn't talk over, he doesn't interrupt. He listens, he questions, he takes no crap. Sounds perfect business sense to me.
Laura Roberts, London, UK
I`m pretty sure that all you "silk-tie-bedecked" University graduates, who spend your weekends schmoozing and brown nosing on the golf course to work your way up the grossly overpaid "executive work ladder" hate this show. Why? because it provides a window into a world of exclusivity and bloated superiority of lifestyle that you dont want the plebeans thinking for one second, is within their reach. Of course Sugar is a throwback... Of course he isnta paragon of virtue, either in the world of success (Amstrad computers? Ha!) or in the sanitised, clinically disingenuous world of PC (and no..I dont mean personal computers).
The Apprentice is "Big Brother" for those of us with more than 23 Brain cells. It`s a dangled carrot for every 15k per annum wannabe, it isnt meant to be a lesson in 21st century business ettiquette. Its about helicopters, sycophants dramas and dreams. For goodness sake, just chill and enjoy. If Hooray Henry wins, THEN complain.!
Phil Noonan, Liverpool,
Get a grasp of reality people. This is entertainment, on TV. You have the choice to switch to another channel, or simply turn off and do something more important.
David, Prague, CZ
Yes fire the apprentice it is just loud mouthed claptrap where performance makes up for substance. Success is painstaking and requires diligence I'm afraid, and this is misleading. There are loads of young people probably thinking now that you have to be rude/ruthless to get on and that isn't the case.
Rob, Reading, UK
It's entertainment pure and simple. Nothing more.
Leaving aside why anyone is so desperate to work for Amstrad that they would put themselves through this selection process, as a business model, it sums up everything that is wrong with many UK companies.
They hire people on a whim without really assessing their overall suitability; put them in jobs that they were not recruited to do and fire them when they can't do them.
In those circumstances it's the recruiting Manager that's the problem : if anyone should be fired it's him/her.
john, Oxford,
I would not work for him if he paid me a million quid a week.I do however enjoy the freak show on TV
M McGregor, Tunbridge Wells, Kent
Alan Sugar? Great guy! Family man and succesfull at a personal level. Well done. However, look at the awfull Amstrad telephone on the receptionist's desk and behind it lurks a dinosaur, all that is typical of a control freak, dictatorial manager embroiled in his own world and surrounded by brown noses. I bet a pound to a pinch of salt that all he hears is good news, bad news from the shop floor is filtered out and sanitised on the way up to the boardroom - USA style. How do these companies survive? Shell, Merck and Monsanto, I worked hard for them in the 80's and 90's. In the oil industry, a chap called Watts was christened "the Undertaker," desperate to get anything at any cost, a far cry from the ethical company and working practices that he worked for. What happened to him? On the outside he did well, he led Shell for a long time and then the SEC caught him out. All the apprentices are just like him. Personally, I would not employ a single one of them. That's TV, that's Alan Sugar.
Peter Wright, West Kilbride, UK
Dr, Who is not in the real either .
Though people think it is good entertainment.
It takes all sorts.
Bernard Parke, GUILDFORD,
Sure it's all about telly. But you have misread AS, the media et al. Kristina most certainly will not win so perhaps this show is not so rooted in the 80's as you suggest.
David, Reading,
I recall a Peanuts cartoon in which Charlie Brown remarks that it would take Linus years in school to "unlearn" everything Lucy had taught him. And I think that's the problem.
Audiences have no trouble recognising that people who live together in houses don't behave like they do on Big Brother.
They probably don't realise that if you're stranded on a desert island, you don't live like they do on Survivor, but this is a harmless deception.
X Factor and The Apprentice, however, "teach" people fantasies about situations that they will meet in real life, and what they teach is that you can only succeed by doing all the wrong things.
That some people aren't able to distinguish between these fantasies and real life was demonstrated by BBC 2 last year with its hilariously funny and extremely sad documentary about a double-glazing retailer in Coventry. Shows like The Apprentice will reinforce the view of people like these that what's wrong with their businesses isn't their fault.
Ian Kemmish, Biggleswade, UK