There is a mentality in most management that structured and disciplined is the best approach. Too often, a department will be doing well, then some ambitious management sort will come through and figure that he/she can make it even better by riding the staff harder than they have been. Unfortunately, I've seen that numerous times lead to lower morale and a drop in production.

Exactly. Also, the higher-ups want to share in the credit of an already successful venture. I've seen it many times, too.

Remember stage 5 of the 5 stages for a project in a large corporation:
1. Euphoria
2. Disenchantment
3. Search for the Guilty
4. Persecution of the Innocent
5. Rewarding of the Uninvolved

I thought this was a pretty good episode. The monsters.com thing and Stanley as "Productivity Czar" both made me laugh out loud. Although I was initially surprised at Pam's choice, it does kind of make sense. She was stuck in a dead-end job that she would no longer enjoy (nor would anyone else, now that Michael is gone), so she didn't have much to lose. In real life, things would get bad for Jim since he's "married" to someone working for a rival company. They'll probably explore that in a future episode.

First deleted scene is up:

<object type="application/x-shockwave-flash" data="http://widgets.nbc.com/o/4727a250e66f9723/49ccec717a522697/49cc65bef749a155/3b95393d/-cpid/d8ac7cf87b91b9ac" id="W4727a250e66f972349ccec717a522697" width="384" height="283"><param name="movie" value="http://widgets.nbc.com/o/4727a250e66f9723/49ccec717a522697/49cc65bef749a155/3b95393d/-cpid/d8ac7cf87b91b9ac" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><param name="allowNetworking" value="all" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /></object>

I feel the same way actually. There is great potential to shake things up in a good way, but there is also potential to complety ruin the show too. I have enjoyed these last few episodes tremendously however and am looking forward to see how all of this plays out.

I think it's obvious that everyone is going to miss Michael (maybe not Toby!). Perhaps their success had to do with the fact they HAD to overcompensate to make up for all the time wasting they did as a result of his unorthodox methods.

I tried looking as well.

I like that things are being shaken up a bit in the Office. Michael leaving (for however long), could result in some interesting stuff.

Pam's taken a total 180. I buy that she'd be somewhat more self-assured but not so much she'd quit and follow Micheal. Its especially unfair to be in a relationship and quit your job to go with someone you know is a total, unbalanced, immature loser. But nope, she dropped her job just like that and Jim was hunky dory with it.

Whatever.

I think maybe the writers have been writing for Micheal so long, wrapped in that mindset, they've become as retarded as he is.

It was a split second decision she made because of what had gone on the entire day. I don't blame her. Its kinda like Jerry Maguire...right?

My prediction... It's clear Charles sees employees as resources and not as people. To him, they are interchangeable blank slates, as witnessed by his assignments to Kevin and Stanley. The way he's blindly micromanaging is going to sink the Scranton branch, and DM will realize how badly they've screwed up and begrudgingly kiss Michael's butt to bring him back.

Loved Toby's line about Michael being like a movie on an airplane. Only funny part of the entire episode.

This episode sucked for me. This whole storyline sucks for me, actually.

Pam leaving with Michael was more believable than Angela being interested in Charles. I also liked The Graduate type ending with Michael and Pam.

I hope they really shake things up by Pam sleeping with Michael. I want to see that happen.

It's about time they get Pam out from behind the receptionists desk and if this storyline is what it takes for that to happen, I am fine with it. I like the direction this is going.

Good take, I agree.

I reallly don't have a problem with Pam's move. Of course she knows this is a long shot, but she also knows that she is in a dead-end job at DM, so why not take the opportunity to get into sales?

FWIW, I have seen this same story line play out in real life and the result was pretty much the same as is being forecast here:

1. New Manager cracks whip to "improve productivity"
2. Subordinate middle manager doesn't like the new rules and quits.
3. Ex-manager recruits 1 or more employees from former employer.
4. Productivity and morale both plummet.
5. Upper management fires the new guy that created the mess.
6. Ex-manager returns for a big pay raise.

It is also worth remembering that the Scranton branch was named the most productive in the company earlier in the season and they sent Michael out on a speaking tour to motivate the other branches.

Is that pic in reference to Toby's trip to Costa Rica?

You don't watch Lost do you?

I really enjoyed this episode. I really don't think it's out of character for Pam to go with Michael at all. Pam always has always had a soft spot for Michael especially when no one else is supporting him. My guess is the office ends up rebelling against Charles and DM hires Michael back.

I don't really get the whole outside hire thing though, even though Charles is doing the interviews you have to figure that Wallace would at least mention Jim as a possibility. I mean he was up for regional manager which is a higher up job. Even with Charles hate of Jim I just can't see how Wallace wouldn't step in and at least make Jim a candidate.

He made it pretty clear, although I guess he did it in very few words. Basicaly to ensure the shananigans that have become a given at this branch cease, he is hiring someone from the outside who has not been corrupted.

Trust me on this one, if anyone has EVER had someone promoted from within their company to management, they will be able to tell you about the nonsense that will sometimes ensue (things like blatent favortism and a lack of respect for your one-time-coworker such or "That's just Jim" not "that's the boss.") In this case its a "business as usual" model that this guy certainly is not kosher with and wants to avoid.

I think what most people are missing is that Michael's role on The Office is as the embodiment of the Peter Principle. This new job will force Michael into a sales role, where he excels.

I don't think there is any way he fails. Although it will be interesting to see Pam have to try to manage him in order to keep him on-task. She might be put into the David Wallace role.

Both her and Michael did

I think Pam realized that her job is so unimportant that she can spend a whole day setting up and reading the copier manual cover to cover. It was the perfect storm for her, a pointless day and a chance to get out and she took it.

Pam leaving with Michael was an obvious 'Jerry Maguire/Graduate' homage.

No question that the producer/writers did it on purpose.

There's no way the show leaves the 'Dunder/Mifflin' world for Michael's new company's world.

Michael will be back. Its not 'if', its 'when'.

Otherwise, the name of the show will change to 'Charles in Charge'.

What was she thinking, that was crazy.

And I don't think it's debatable at all that both will back in the show.

In this economy Pam is going to leave a secure job for a job with Michael?
Michael crawling around on the floor was not funny, just pitiful.