Not all of Minor's management practices were good. The commentary made it clear that that was intended....they just wanted to explore how they could pull in a different element of Jim's character by placing Minor there as a distractor. They did it cleverly by inserting the unnecessary slights and jabs almost seamlessly into what might otherwise be seen as good management interactions.
The whole thing with the tuxedo. Maybe it would be odd to have someone show up at work thus dressed, but beyond a raised eyebrow by Charles, no other comment was necessary by a "good manager." A smooth Jim would have simply said he was trying to plan a special meeting with a client later and that outfit was part of it. But since they wanted to make if an awkward exchange, they had Charles make too much of it...why should he care if Jim wore a tuxedo one day to work? And they made Jim deal with the situation awkwardly.
As to the rundown skit. I've worked in offices all my life and never heard anyone call "make a list of...something" simply providing a "rundown." No good manager would be so obtuse and unclear unless he had been in the habit of calling such a list a "rundown." A good manager would simply say give me a list of your clients with names and addresses...or whatever he expected to see in such a list. It was obvious to me the script writers intentionally made it a vague request so they could script and direct Jim to respond awkwardly.
Watch the Dunder Mifflin picnic episode. Minor continually needled and harassed Jim quite unnecessarily and completely unrelated to any proper management. No "good manager" would do that. Sorry it just wouldn't have happened in the "real world." Again, they wanted to continue to explore Jim's awkward and uncertain side at dealing with some of the things he'd dealt Dwight.
Watch Charles bungle in the buy out episode. He allows Jim to distract him from Dwight's new secret info thus costing the company thousands of dollars. Good management? Not really.
And as others pointed out, the soccer debacle which, BTW, no good manager would ever host on company property for the very reason of what might happen...and what did happen. Charles kicked the ball into Meredith's face. Yes! Charles was the boos and HE kicked the ball. So in any sensible "real world" situation it would have been his fault not only because he kicked it, but he was the manager in charge so even IF some blame could be laid on Jim for ducking, Charles was still at fault for orchestrating such an activity. But it was the script writers intention to make it yet another awkward situation for Jim.
It seems you might be critical of Jim's character for his lax attitude and pranks. That's fine, I agree he is depicted that way. And maybe you enjoyed their scripting him to be annoyed and uncertain at not being a favorite. That's fine too, I'm sure others enjoyed it too. They portray the character of Jim as a slack-off and often wasting time pranking so that aspect of his character was ripe for picking (on).
In another response you mentioned something about Michael being a worse manager. As another poster responded something to the effect that yes...that seems to be the whole point of the series, including the original UK version. Michael Scott was a terrible manager who paradoxically managed to endear himself to much of the viewer audience. Charles Minor was not a terrible manager even though I think they had him do some things that were unnecessary. But, as you comment, "People give him flack for being so mean to Jim but..." which means the script writers and director cleverly made him not nearly as bad as Michael but it seems they kept him from being endearing to much the viewer audience. They managed to make a much worse person (Michael) better liked than the better person (Charles). I think they did a good job of it too.
I don't think they specifically had in mind that Charles was a "good guy" or a "bad guy." They simply scripted him to be a bit sharp with Jim to, as the commentary alluded to, explore those awkward situations with Jim's otherwise smooth character. And I think they wanted to give the viewers something to ponder...was Charles scripted to be a good or bad manager? You seem to think he was good, others think he was horrible. I think he did a few unnecessary things that weren't appropriate and didn't further the goal of getting the most work out of his staff. But in some ways, he's what the office needed.
reply
share
bodwayaischeap
9 years ago
As for as rundown list maybe they did not research what rundown really is . so that could be chalked off bad writing. The office might need hire business graduate as consultant. Had minor said said rundown of clients name he would not know what is is anyways. forget scott incompetence he has treated co workers much worse then minor ever did. Minor is probably not use to goofy things which is why tuxedo thing threw him off. Seeing jim making 2 way petting zoo did not help. besides the soccer thing he was not bad he just was use to running office differently . No complains when jim stars thing with dwight. its funny how people view dwight as bad guy jim as good but jim could have hurt people while doing pranks on jim someone could get in crossfire. dwight usualy minds his own buisness jim wants take advantage of dwight Nativity .
reply
share
rizdek
9 years ago
The "rundown" list was not bad writing. It was perfect writing. As I said, in the commentary, BJ Novak (plays Ryan and is also a writer for the show) indicated they were trying to focus on making Jim feel awkward. Exploring how they could get him to react to a boss who didn't seem to like him. The rundown list was specifically included TO be vague and to make Jim sweat.
The other thing they had Minor do that would be inappropriate is managing the employees directly while Michael was still there. That would not be good management practice in real life. In real life, they'd have Minor call Scott on the carpet for employee performance and conduct. Of course, they needed to create a situation where Michael is left out of the loop just to stage the "quitting and starting a new business" series of episodes.
Of course Scott treated workers worse than Minor.
They specifically had Minor over react to the Tuxedo AND the two-way petting zoo, again, to bring out reactions from Jim that hadn't been explored yet. They could have just as easily had Minor laugh at the idea as be critical of it.
As for the soccer thing, for The Office, it wasn't outlandish, but "in real life" a boss who orchestrated such an event on company property in a parking lot full of cars with folks ill-equipped to actually play the way Minor was playing...kicking hard and which ended up in an injury would be held accountable...doubly so because HE kicked the ball. So as to it "being all that bad"...No! It was beautiful writing, again to draw out awkwardness from Jim. But in real life it was "all that bad."
Lots of folks on IMDB have complained about Jim's pranks against Dwight. I supposed a few might view Dwight as a "bad guy," but I bet not all that many. I certainly don't see him as a bad guy, but to be honest "in real life" if someone acted that way in an office, he'd be annoying as hell and likely get the brunt of many practical jokes and criticisms. I'm not saying it would be right, but it would happen. The writers were simply capitalizing on that aspect of office life. I don't think the writers wanted us to think of Dwight as either a "bad guy" or a "mind his own business" kind of guy. He was always in the forefront trying to manage others. From a personal perspective, Dwight is by far the funniest and best character on the show. I am glad to see his name listed first in IMDB reflecting my own view that he makes the series much funnier.
reply
share
bodwayaischeap
9 years ago
jim could have asked more about rundown he was in wrong too. some people would laugh at two way petting zoo but again minor is not use to people acting this way in his last job the two way petting zoo was kind of second odd thing he saw jim do. plus if u remember minor and jim conversation he even told minor originally the position was fake position appointed to dwight to make him feel better. but saying that made minor not take it seriously he even asked jim what a person in the position he is in does jim could not answer. yes he could have talked to michael directly to work things out seeing the overboard things m ichael does i might do same thingl. the company is in tight budget and michael is using money to throw a party. Minor line this is office not made for your vanity is perfect way to describe michale he uses office to make him center of attention.He also talked coworkers sexual history in front of charles which was irrelevant so i can see why minor did things he did he became uneasy around michael anyone who first met him would . the soccer thing he should taken responsibility. As for dwight yes in rela life he makes himself easy target but these are adults in office they have still have to keep decorum. Sometimes jim uses michael gullibility to make dwight look bad so yes i can not say I have have empthay for jim.
reply
share