+ Reply to Thread
Page 14 of 15 FirstFirst ... 456789101112131415 LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 141

Thread: 10/19 Show Discussion **Spoilers**

  1. #131
    FORT Newbie TechMom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    36
    I agree that they kept Jim this week only because he makes for interesting TV. Does anyone honestly think that Martha Stewart would hire him? Jim is the anti-Martha.

    Also, what were those things on the conference table this week? They took away those mini grass gardens and replaced them with some white objects. I couldn't get a close look.

  2. #132
    Read The Clue Bearcata's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Edge of the Beltway
    Posts
    15,679
    Quote Originally Posted by Broadway
    Everyone has seen Jim fly off of the handle and go absolutely berserk in the condo. That is the scene that Jennifer was afraid would happen if she pulled Jim.

    If Jim had created a scene like that it would have been infinitely more dangerous and detrimental than his slightly toned down sales technique. Jennifer was damned if she did and damned if she didn't. Is that her fault, or Jim's for putting her in that position?

    I vote for his, hands-down. It's not always possible to control a PEER that doesn't want to be controlled. I still maintain that that wasn't the sign of a bad Program Manager... it's the sign of a bad teammember.
    I think if Jim had flown off the handle Jen would have been in her rights to fire him. That would have shown she was a strong manager and not afraid to back down. She let a subordinate intimidate her. Jim is good at that. I wouldn't want him to work for me either as he is a loose cannon. In his confessionals he seems to bring up the fact that he has a family as an excuse for his behavior, which I think is a bunch of BS. I bet he has been fired alot of times from a lot of jobs, probably goes through 2 or 3 a year.

  3. #133
    FORT Fanatic Violetgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    514
    When I saw Jim's sales "technique" of mocking and insulting the customers, I didn't think it could get any worse--until I saw Leslie trying to force 2 and 3 bottles of salad dressing at a time onto each prospective customer. I would have LOVED to have seen the show do a total twist and have had Martha fire LESLIE last night. It not only would have been a total shocker, but it would also have been a firing that was completely and totally earned.

    ETA: Is there something in the water that people named Howie are drinking???

  4. #134
    Fort Fan chesara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    497
    As someone said, these contestants do not think of their PM as their boss, they still think of them as one of their peers. So even when they have tasks, loose wires like Jim are never going to give their peer the same respect they would give a real manager. I don't know if it's in the rules or not, but the PM should be able to "fire" someone from a task, not just move them to a different location.

    So it's really not a fair assessment to fire Jennifer because she couldn't "handle" Jim since she will have to handle people like him if she was hired. If she truly was a real manager, I can't see an employee behaving as badly as Jim, and if he did, he would be fired. And I can't see Jim behaving as badly as he does if he was working for a real manager. He does it because he can, and because he doesn't respect his peers. If he was doing a task under one of Martha's employees, I don't think he would ever act the way he does.

    That being said, I still can't stand him. His selling tactics WERE offensive. As PM, Jennifer should have had the guts to pull him off. If he acted out, then she could have banned him from the store and let Martha know he was making a scene, etc. and I think Martha would have fired him instead. You can't manage someone that doesn't want to be managed and the only thing that can be done is to fire them. That is Jennifers only fault in this. She should have took the chance to see how he would have behaved. If he acted as bad as she predicted he would, she could have "fired" him for insubordination.

    This whole "need to control your teammate" reason for firing people is going too far. These are grown adults, how much managing should one person have to do? In the real world, an unmanageable person is fired, not coddled and put on another task. Nobody should have to spend all day dealing with a loose cannon and trying to keep them calm and quiet. In the real working world, managers don't spend that kind of energy on an employee. Either the employee does what they are told or they are written up or fired.

    I wish Howie would have stomped Jim's ass when Jim was threatening him. How Jim's wife tolerates him is beyond me. Maybe he's different when he's at home.

  5. #135
    Scrappy Spartan Broadway's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    18,963
    Great post, chesara. Very well said.
    Never let the things you want make you forget about the things you have.

  6. #136
    FORT Fogey
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    2,053
    I agree Chesara and add that in real life managers are not faced with going back to a communal living situation and working under the loose cannon in a future task. They are all trying to win a game, no matter what Martha says; this is not a job interview.

    On Donalds show it is possible to "put someone on the bench" as Bill reminded everyone last night. Jen had a very solid reason and would be absolved of having sole responsibility since the orders came from above her, so to speak. This option was never formally discussed on Trump or Martha but seems to be an unspoken possibility. I think it should be added to the formal rules. It could be misused, of course, but that would be ironed out before the fireing process.

  7. #137
    FORT Fogey
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    4,302
    Often, you can't just fire people right off in a real job, and no worthwhile manager would. The hiring and training process is too expensive to go through employees like water. You need to discuss it with them and go through at least verbal warnings, if not written ones. In some companies, it could take a year no matter how incompetent someone is. Where I work, unless you do something illegal, you need to do the same thing wrong 3 times and be written up each of those times. During that time, you as a manager would need to behave appropriately for your company, which may mean shuffling that person to somewhere they will be useful if you believe they are being a detriment.

  8. #138
    FORT Fogey Harvest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    California Wine Country. Cheers!
    Posts
    1,466
    Quote Originally Posted by chesara
    This whole "need to control your teammate" reason for firing people is going too far. These are grown adults, how much managing should one person have to do?
    The problem is most of them are not true adults, just overgrown children. Someone like Jim could use extensive therapy. These teams only have a couple of days to complete a task. They don't have the time to get their problem employees into some type of treatment program to prevent them from "acting out" all over the project.

    On another topic, am I the only one who wants to discuss the dressing recipes? (See my post above).

    Cheers!


    Quote Originally Posted by user name
    Often, you can't just fire people right off in a real job, and no worthwhile manager would. The hiring and training process is too expensive to go through employees like water. You need to discuss it with them and go through at least verbal warnings, if not written ones. In some companies, it could take a year no matter how incompetent someone is. Where I work, unless you do something illegal, you need to do the same thing wrong 3 times and be written up each of those times. During that time, you as a manager would need to behave appropriately for your company, which may mean shuffling that person to somewhere they will be useful if you believe they are being a detriment.
    That's why temp-to-hire is a good strategy. See if problems surface before making that huge commitment.
    Last edited by Harvest; 10-21-2005 at 07:33 PM.

  9. #139
    FORT Fanatic Violetgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    514
    Quote Originally Posted by chesara

    I wish Howie would have stomped Jim's ass when Jim was threatening him. How Jim's wife tolerates him is beyond me. Maybe he's different when he's at home.
    I'll bet any amount of money that his wife totally rules the house. I'll bet anything that all she has to do is just LOOK at Jim and he shuts up [just like he does when Martha looks at him ]

  10. #140
    Ms Ambusher dberk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Age
    56
    Posts
    4,461
    Quote Originally Posted by user name
    Often, you can't just fire people right off in a real job, and no worthwhile manager would. ...you as a manager would need to behave appropriately for your company, which may mean shuffling that person to somewhere they will be useful if you believe they are being a detriment.
    Good points. Firing Jim during the task would have been unfair. He did a great job with the label and sold a lot of dressing. As soon as he started saying inappropriate stuff she should have cornered him and told him to tone down his sales pitch. After the store manager complained he should have been benched refilling samples. If he continued to be a disruption from there she should have sent him back to the loft.
    Quote Originally Posted by chesara
    As someone said, these contestants do not think of their PM as their boss, they still think of them as one of their peers. So even when they have tasks, loose wires like Jim are never going to give their peer the same respect they would give a real manager.
    We've seen this time and time again on this and Trump's show. I don't consider the PM's bosses until we're down to the final two. (ex: Omarosa should have been fired during the final task.) The PM's delegate, oversee and guide the tasks, but aren't really "the boss"; hence PROJECT Manager. In business you may be put in charge of a task force made up of your peers which is very similar on paper to the PM job, but you are right about the reality of it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harvest
    That's why temp-to-hire is a good strategy. See if problems surface before making that huge commitment.
    This seems to be a good business practice. It doesn't take long to see if someone is competent in the job and a dependable employee. Taking your employee for a "test drive" makes sense. Even people who are good BSers during an interview can't maintain the facade over time.

    (I can't find where I originally read this so I can't provide the quote, but want to respond anyway.) Trump's show may be a game, but Martha has given every indication that she considers her show to be an interview and plans to treat the winner like a true apprentice.
    Last edited by dberk; 10-21-2005 at 10:29 PM.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.