The process starts with our hiring managers, Jeremy and Megan. When they feel comfortable with a possible future member of staff, they invite other people in the organization to meet this person and offer feedback. Once others feel comfortable, we move the candidate to the psychologist. This costs us money up front, but I guarantee it saves us far more in the future.
The psychologist tests all applicants for skills and cultural fit. For wealth management positions, he also conducts face-to-face interviews. The process is far more expensive than the Kolbe personality test (which we used to use), but we have found it to be more effective.
Once we hire people, they go out to meet with the entire company. It is only then that I meet them. Not only does the psychologist help screen out those who are unlikely to succeed, but his report also helps us understand where the people we hire are most likely to face challenges. All our hires are invited to sit down with the psychologist to go through their test results.
We’ve also been influenced in our thinking by Adam Grant’s book Think Again: The Power of Knowing What You Don’t Know. He writes: “When you form an opinion, ask yourself what would have to happen to prove it false. Then keep track of your views so you can see when you were right, when you were wrong, and how your thinking has evolved.”
I think one reason Wil and I have been successful with our firm, in spite of numerous mistakes and missteps, is that we fixed things before they destroyed us. In other words, we generally were not so proud as to deny that we were doing something stupid or for the wrong reasons. While it probably would have been helpful to act more quickly in certain cases, we generally still acted. But we had to accept new facts that contradicted those we had originally acted on.
It’s useful for us in other areas. In portfolio decisions, you might have less conviction in strategic calls if you ask, “Can we prove we’re wrong?” If you have less conviction, you will also have the humility necessary to deal with uncertainty in a complex system.
Our company now has 11 shareholders. All of us represent the firm both inside our walls and out. And all of us are flawed in some way. So the staff sees evidence of how great we are and how great we aren’t. Each employee weighs evidence independently, using the same incomplete information we have as well as various criteria they prioritize in their own way. That may lead them to a number of different conclusions.
The point is not to try to change these, but to understand so that we can improve our behavior and make sure our actions and values are aligned. It isn’t enough to say you care about your colleagues if you are always showing them something different. If you have a bad interaction with a colleague, what new evidence can you offer them that they can weigh differently? Remember that it’s up to them to determine whether they are willing to weigh the new information. After a bad incident, you need several good ones to tip the scales back.
There are almost no binary decisions in business, so it’s essential to understand what a variety of evidence shows—not just the evidence you want to see. And there is no need to regret incorrectly weighing that evidence as long as you learn from it.
Ross Levin is the chief executive officer and founder of Accredited Investors Wealth Management in Edina, Minn.