|
|
#26 | |
|
Mega Loafer
![]() Join Date: 07.02.2003
Location:
Posts: 8,101
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 Users Like This Post. |
|
|
#27 |
|
Monstro helps me spell things...
![]() Join Date: 05.01.2007
Location:
Posts: 9,105
|
Its such a great finale. I like it even better then john Rich vs Marlee matlin (even though we all know it felt like John Rich vs Meat Loaf cause Marlee doesnt know how to lead and Meat lead the team for her)
|
|
|
|
| 1 User Dislikes This Post. |
| 1 User Likes This Post. |
|
|
#28 |
|
Mega Loafer
![]() Join Date: 09.02.2010
Location:
Posts: 1,934
|
I was watching the UK apprenticce the other day and was thinking about the range of tasks on this show compared to the range of tasks on the US apprentice and I think the tasks given on the UK apprentice are far more testing and involved doing a variety of things whereas the ones that I saw on the US Celebrity Apprentice seemed to be very focused to marketing events.
Personally I'd have liked to have seen less of the marketing type tasks on the US Celebrity Apprentice and perhaps if the tasks had been less focused on this, perhaps the outcome would have been different? When I watch the US Celebrity Apprentice back, part of me feels that it was decided very early on who the finalists were going to be and regardless of how hard the others worked, they wouldn't have realistically been in with a chance. I don't necessarily think that either finalist stood that far above some of the others when it came down to the actual work but they were the favourites. |
|
|
|
| 1 User Likes This Post. |
|
|
#29 | |||
|
Mega Loafer
![]() Join Date: 16.04.2003
Location: Sheffield UK
Posts: 5,910
|
Quote:
If you compare each country's Celebrity Apprentice, the US version is longer and more robust/testing. The only 2 UK versions both consisted of one task; the first was primarily about sales and marketing .. the second about product design and sales & marketing (and the design element was so dismally performed it was the kiss of death on the programme's future). Quote:
It's a business reality show, so ultimately a team's success is judged on what they achieve rather than through a series of management games, and the best way to test a team's output that is to either sell a product or idea direct, or pitch it to the organisation it's been designed for. It's much more tricky trying to assess ability to provide a service rather than a product. You could test for eg a team's ability to design or effect change in an organisation, but only by putting them into it, and either having them present a proposal to the board, or letting them effect the change and assessing the result. I've been able to organise the first, but never the latter However, you couldn't put a team of "celebrities" into a real life organisational situation to even investigate and formulate proposals, because that very status would screw the dynamics of their original investigation Quote:
Ultimately it's a reality show. The CA version raises funds for worthy charities rather than recruiting anyone to work for Trump, (and doubtless makes him a considerable amount of money, some of which I think he could add to the amounts donated by participating organisations). It's successful in that respect .. and for some contestants, like Meat, it's a valuable learning experience. Like the odious Celebrity Big Brother for others it can be a way of reviving a flagging career .. or sometimes damaging it! But that's another story Caryl |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
#30 | |
|
Super Loafer
![]() Join Date: 23.03.2012
Location:
Posts: 232
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|