The Apprentice, like Parliament, is taking a break. I, like the 9.5 million who watched the last episode, eagerly await the next series. This is reality television at its best and it makes a welcome change from the countless programmes that fall into the “worst” bin. As The Daily Telegraph said: it is “the most addictive show in years”.
But does The Apprentice offer us reality? I am uncomfortable with its false connection between success and materialistic greed. Does the ruthless selfishness shown in the previous programmes accurately reflect life in the business world? Is it the key to success?
Certainly, ambition, self-promotion and strategic thinking are characteristic of successful business men but an apprenticeship works both ways. Sir Alan should be nurturing and encouraging his possible apprentices – how else are they to develop for the better? Former contestant Saira Khan reportedly complained that the show promotes bullying in the workplace. Steve Carter, the head of recruitment firm Nigel Lynn, likewise described the “brutality” of The Apprentice as being unrealistic.
I applaud Sir Alan for promoting apprenticeships. It concerns me that the British Government are promoting only one apparent option for young people who want to be successful: a university education. When The Economic Affairs Report on Apprenticeship was presented to the House, I made it clear that apprenticeship, where people’s talents are supported and skills are developed, is vital to our future. But there is a danger that the BBC, in their quest to push viewing figures, will forget that nurturing is at the heart of all successful apprenticeships.
Sir Alan reportedly expressed concerns that the program was becoming another mindless Big Brother. He needs to convince the BBC that the show needs to reach a balance between sugar and spice.
I know this is probably not a new factoid, but I feel that the prevalence of bachelor degrees now limits their value. I myself went from university to a call centre, and then a security guard, and now in a pretty humble office. Aren’t degrees supposed to get you somewhere?
I think people would appreciate it more if there were fewer graduates and degrees were tougher to achieve, as they would be more valuable.
As a recent Cambridge graduate (I graduated three years ago) still living in Cambridge, sometimes I am asked to help out with recruitment/admissions/access events, and I have learned two interesting facts.
The first is that today’s school leavers are more concerned about doing “fluffy” courses that don’t directly lead to a job. Because of the increasing awareness of the cost of doing a degree, many feel that it will only be a worthwhile investment if they study a subject that leads to a particular profession at the end, like physics or engineering. Even of undergraduates, I have heard from several who would have gone into academia but don’t even apply for postgraduate courses because of financial concerns.
The second is that the course whose graduates have the highest salaries (for Cambridge, anyway) is Classics. This mystified me for a while, until I heard the explanation. Classics graduates find it quite hard to get a job, so they spend six months stacking shelves or flipping burgers while they decide what to do about it. After that, most of them decide to do six-month- or year-long conversion courses for law, after which they become legal practitioners for big companies, where salaries are higher than for recently-graduated solicitors or barristers in small practices.
I don’t watch The Apprentice, but I do not think its connection between material wealth and success is entirely false. I’m not very materialistic, but at work I am concerned with salaries, share options, and similar monetary matters. It’s not about the money itself – I already earn more than I know what to do with – but about the respect that it commands within the company. Alan Sugar notwithstanding, managers will treat a £40k employee a lot differently than a £20k employee, simply because the time of the former is worth twice as much to the company.