A chip off Sir Alan’s block?
Watching ‘The Apprentice’ last night on catch up TV, I had to ask myself of Sir Alan Sugar’s faithful colleagues - “Is this the way professional people interview potential candidates”? I was appalled (or was it a case of manipulative editing) at some of the interviewers’ lack of listening skills and empathy, little attempt to put interviewees at ease, and a certain disdain for the success of the candidates in overcoming personal adversity. Were the interviewers just a chip off the old ‘Sir Alan’ Block? I have a healthy admiration for Sir Alan’s forthrightness (but in contravention of many of today’s good practice guides), but I’m sure many HR departments are horrified at his behaviour (for the cameras?).
Would you expect your staff to call you ‘Sir X’ or ‘Madam Y’ if you were honoured? What kind of interview style do you respond to? Can you make up your mind within 2 minutes of meeting an interviewer whether you consider your prospects favourable with the company?
I couldn’t agree more … I felt the interviewers aim was to make their canditates feel embarrassed (with the exception of Karen Bradey)- it was cringe worthy TV and uncomfortable viewing. You don’t see the best in people by making them squirm and their true personality will not come through. So how can you make a qualified judgement?
It makes you wonder how these people actually do business on behalf of Sir Alan Sugar (who I do like despite his persona). I have watched the last 3 series of The Apprentice and thankfully the finalists don’t fall into the category of these interviewers. I think Lee was a worthy winner last night but I personally wished that Raef made it!