One Simple Change to Fix Exit Interviews

Exit interviews are useful. To understand why people are leaving, get direct feedback from those departing.

There’s just one problem - don’t wait until people leave to have these conversations.

Understand and discuss frustrations before people leave, not after they’ve made their decision.

These discussions don’t have to be formal. Nor does it have to be a high-pressure, high-stakes conversation.  Just ask people about their issues and what they would like changed, especially as it compares to outside opportunities.

It’s perplexing for leaders to wait until someone is walking out the door to learn. Learn while people are there. Make it a fluid, ongoing process. Exit interviews shouldn’t be a one-time thing but a continuous dialogue over a person’s career.

When employees feel like they must wait until they leave to voice issues, that’s a problem. Many employees and employers don’t want to talk about the obvious truth: people leave jobs. It’s not uncommon, so get over it. Don’t pretend it doesn’t exist.

Read more below…

Read More

Organizations Advance One Retirement at a Time

A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.

                                                                                                                        -German Physicist Max Planck

 

As Planck states, it’s not the superiority of new ideas that replaces bad ideas. Instead, it’s when those people with outdated ideas are no longer around, which allows fresh ideas to flourish and take hold.

Organizations advance the same way. The best ideas don’t win because of logic, rationality, or evidenced-based merit. The best ideas win when the old guard is no longer in the way. For companies, that means change happens one retirement at a time.

I remember attending a Berkshire Hathaway annual meeting around 2010.

Someone asked Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger: “I’m at a company and I want to change the culture. How do I do it?

Warren or Charlie responded something to the effect of: “You don’t. You just leave. You’ll never change the culture.”

And that stuck with me. Thinking you can go in and just revamp a company’s culture is noble, but foolhardy. Changing a group’s mindset is impossible, as most people prefer consistency and predictability vs. changing deep-held belief.

Continue reading…

Read More

The Best Way to Hire

I recently came across the most powerful yet underappreciated hiring mindset.

In a 2014 Manual of Ideas interview, Seth Alexander, current CIO of MIT’s endowment, explains how they hire:

We do not try and hire someone every year or anything like that. Instead, we hire opportunistically. If two great people came along in the same week who would both be a great fit, we would hire them. We are always looking to hear from passionate investors about working here and really encourage people to reach out to us.

This seems obvious, but rarely practiced. Hire when you find great investors. Not when you need or have budgeted for them.

Organizations have it backwards. They hide behind self-imposed budget and planning processes. Only then after several rounds of approval and justification can they begin the search.

Here’s the problem: great candidates don’t just magically appear when your budget process is done. Or when the planning committee finally submits approval.

If you wait to hire until you have a need, then you begin a forced process of settling for people as the great people have already moved on. It’s ensured mediocrity.

Click on the title to continue reading…

Read More

On Effort and Holiday Cards

I’ve been flooded by electronic holiday cards wishing happy holidays and a prosperous 2023.

But the senders are forgetting one major thing. Effort matters. An electronic holiday card means nothing when it’s blasted out of a CRM with no human touch or effort. It’s the meaning and effort behind the message that matters. Not the message itself.

I’m not looking for facts. I’m not looking for information. I’m looking for someone who cares enough to craft a note to me personally, even if it’s just a few sentences. I’m looking for someone who took time out of their busy day. That time is costly, and therefore, it means a lot.

Here’s the bigger lesson: if you want to send something valuable, it needs to have some cost. That may be monetary or it may be time. But expending a cost shows you care.

It’s the same thing with rubber-stamped signatures – if you are a leader, sign the damn card/letter/note yourself. And yes, we can tell if your assistant signs it for you. If you are too busy for this simple act, what message does that send? No one’s asking for you to write a book, but just make it personal.

Read More

Key Person Language and GP Removal

People are the key variable in private markets investing, so when issues come up relating to the actions of the GP, it’s important to understand what options LP’s have. In addition, because the assets are private, there’s very little clarity and insight on what’s really going on inside the GP. Investors place a lot of trust in the GP, which is why they want to ensure they operate in a manner that is aligned with LP’s.

LP’s need to ensure that the key principals remain at the fund and focused on the strategy. If this does not occur, or there are issues with the GP, then LP’s should understand what options they have, including suspending the investment period or removal of the GP, if necessary.

These are my collected notes over several years of private markets investing. Each LP should think about what is important to their firm and make sure the fund agreements reflect those priorities. These are principles and concepts to think about and discuss, not explicit legal advice.

Read More

Arguing to Win vs. Arguing to Understand

Most people are worried about looking good rather than making the right decision. This is one reason teams struggle to have vigorous, yet healthy debates.

One of the greatest communication superpowers is the ability to argue forcefully and honestly, while still showing respect and admiration for the other side. This is rare. It’s not a natural occurrence. Most people are either too aggressive and harsh or too passive and soft. There’s a balance you need to find.  

That balance comes down to “Arguing to Understand” rather than “Arguing to Win.”

Understanding this difference enables honest disagreement while still enhancing relationships.

It’s a shift in perspective that allows teams to debate forcefully yet calmly versus arguing with unrestrained emotion and ego.

Everyone likes to feed their egos. Any discussion, whether between 2 people or 20, gives us the chance to boost our ego by showing how smart we are. Wise decisions are not made by showing off. Instead, they are made after honest, deliberate, and disagreeable discussions. The only way to do that is to stop worrying about how smart you look and start worrying about how much you can learn.

Read More

Subscription Lines and Other Fund Lending facilities

The following are my notes collected over several years of working with subscription lines within alternative assets. While not always the most critical issue, understanding sub lines and other lending facilities can help improve LP fund governance, performance reporting, and enable the LP to ask better questions during due diligence and throughout the fund life.

Overview

• Subscription lines are not a new phenomenon in private markets as they’ve been used for decades. They allow managers to borrow to fund bridge financings and then eventually call the capital from limited partners

• The ability to delay calling capital enhances the manager’s flexibility to execute deals and shortens the J-curve, enhancing the fund’s Internal Rate of Return (IRR), particularly early in a fund’s life, and therefore its competitiveness on a quartile basis

• Funds use credit lines to boost Net IRR's and accelerate carried interest, particularly in funds with European style waterfalls

• From an LP perspective, the use of these lines helps smooth cash flows and eases the administrative burden of responding to capital calls.

• Improves capital call logistics – small investment outlays more conveniently aggregated

Read More

Accuracy Not Confidence

Confidence and hubris are abundant in the investment world, especially in bull markets. Everyone claims to know where the market is going, what the Fed will or should do, and what the next great idea is. Just ask, and you’ll have plenty of people talking about their can’t-miss ideas.

Confidence is infectious. We all want to know what the market is going to do. We all want to know when the next big crash is coming. We hate uncertainty. So anyone that can remove that uncertainty has our attention.

But it’s not confidence that we want. It’s accuracy. Accuracy in the sense of actually making investment decisions that succeed long term.

Confidence is about predicting success. Accuracy is actually delivering it. That’s a big difference.

Confidence doesn’t improve accuracy; it only appears too. Confidence has no bearing on whether a decision is good or bad. Decision quality depends on your diligence, research, understanding, and timing.

Read More

Identity Investing

Identities create comfort and order in a messy world. Identity politics is the best example. Political affiliations shortcut thinking. As soon as we realize an idea is Republican or Democrat, our mind is made up without even evaluating the idea itself.

No need to consider the merits.

No need to examine the nuances.

No need to learn from the other side.

Just let the identity decide for you.

This happens in the investment world too. Investors form identities which hinder the ability to learn from opposing views. We are suckers for identities because it saves us time and energy. And it fuels our ego when we hear nothing but things we already agree with. But it also creates defensive rigidity, mindless groupthink, and destroys the ability to adapt. For example,

· Bullish investors dismiss all bears as doomsayers

· Bearish investors dismiss all bulls as naïve optimists

· Value investors dismiss all growth stocks as expensive/unsustainable

· Growth investors dismiss all value stocks as falling knives

· Fundamental investors dismiss quants as opaque black boxes

· Bottom-up investors scoff at the futility of a macro investor’s economic views

· Active investors dismiss passive investing as lazy and boring

· Passive investors dismiss active strategies as paying high fees for underperformance

· Public market investors dismiss alternative investors paying 2 and 20

· And on and on…

It’s easy to dismiss strategies that conflict with our identity. Why spend time on other strategies when our strategy is superior?

Read More

Organizational Scar Tissue: Stop Creating Rules for Every Problem

When things go wrong, companies implement rules to solve them.

· Employees booking overly expensive hotels? – Devise multi-level pricing matrices (with different versions based on location and/or employee seniority) that must be followed

· Someone overpay for computer hardware? – Require multiple approvals for mousepads, keyboards, and webcams

· Booking expensive flights? Mandate the cheapest economy flights, require receipts, and a copy of your boarding pass to ensure the flight was taken

· And of course, make sure you submit a copy of your conference badge or agenda, because we need to make sure you attended what you said you were going to attend

These policies are common reactions to employee abuses and honest mistakes.

And it seems reasonable – identify the abuse and create a rule.

This works in the short term but creates a drag on a company’s long-term success. It drives a culture of compliance and rule following, prioritizing adherence vs. doing what’s best for the company. Rules take away freedom and autonomy. On the field judgment is replaced with behind the desk directives. Rules can’t adapt quickly to the real world. Creating endless exceptions just expands already monstrous rulebooks, adding confusion and frustration to employees who are looking to get things done.

All of this because a select few people took advantage of the system.

Read More

Checklists Gone Wrong

Checklists are simple yet powerful tools. A wide array of industries have succeeded with checklists. Pilots use them to improve flight safety. Hospitals use them to improve patient care. Nuclear power plants use them to ensure safe operations.

Atul Gawande, famed surgeon and New York Times best-selling author, wrote the book on checklists – The Checklist Manifesto. It’s an insightful, practical look at how organizations use checklists to succeed in pressure-filled environments.

Checklist implementation is very popular. Organizations enthusiastically publicize how checklists have counteracted human and organizational flaws.

But like most good things, checklists have been misconstrued and distorted to become a headache, not a help, to an organization.

Organizations require mindless checklist completion instead of using them as a tool to improve understanding. It’s not the finishing of a checklist that drives value. It’s the thinking that occurs along the way that otherwise would not have happened. Checklists have become another mandated task to get out of the way. After all, bureaucratic organizations love nothing more than adding additional documentation and compliance tasks.

Read More

Stop Trying to Achieve Consensus

Many investment firms strive to achieve consensus group decisions. The desire to have unanimous agreement is understandable. There’s a certain comfort level when everyone agrees.

But seeking consensus is a mistake, even though it feels right.

Investment markets are too uncertain and unpredictable to expect unanimous agreement. The goal is not comfortability. The goal is to make the right decision. And that means getting every idea out on the table, debating and disagreeing, and then making a probability-based decision, knowing that 100% certainty is unachievable.

Disagreement is a necessary condition because no one knows the investment future. Opinions and ideas will differ.

Read More

Enough with Credentials

Like most professions, the investment industry is obsessed with credentials. It’s rare that a month goes by without another announcement of a new designation to add behind your name.

Investors have lost focus on what matters. Results matter. Good decisions matter. Long-term performance matters.

Credentials do not.

I’m sure I appear hypocritical given I’ve completed several credentials (CFA, CAIA, CPA, etc). But in my experience, it’s the rigor and thoughtfulness behind a decision that delivers value, not the credentials. We conflate credentials with competence because it’s an easy shortcut. But it’s a mistake and its incentivizing investors and their organizations to look good (more letters behind their name) rather than be good (deliver outperformance).

Can these programs have value? Absolutely. There’s useful information learned in these programs. But the question is, how do you judge who can apply that knowledge in the real world? It’s not by looking at credentials. It’s the application of knowledge that matters. And to judge that, you need to do something different.

Read More

9 Ideas I Learned from The Death of Expertise: The Campaign Against Established Knowledge and Why It Matters

Tom Nichol’s The Death of Expertise: The Campaign Against Established Knowledge and Why It Matters provides valuable insight on how ordinary humans can dismiss experts by believing they know more than people who have spent decades studying a topic. The ease of information access has caused many people to believe they know more than they really do. Confidence is now substituted for actual knowledge. Egos have grown so large that people are conditioned to attack those they disagree with, rather than try to learn from them. Individuals are becoming more convinced they are right even as their ignorance grows. The book covers several reasons why this occurs. While you can’t prevent others from behaving this way, this book is a helpful guide to help yourself identify and correct overconfidence in your knowledge.

The 9 Best Ideas

o We Prioritize Egos and Emotions Over Rationality and Humility

o We Love Information That Confirms Our Beliefs

o Bad Information Crowds Out Knowledge

o It’s Not That Experts Are Never Wrong, Just Wrong Less Often Than You

o The Illusion of Explanatory Depth: Knowing Random Facts Doesn’t Equal Knowledge

o We Struggle with Uncertainty and Unpredictability and Will Do/Believe Almost Anything to Remove These Feelings

o Objectivity

o We’ve Conflated Getting a Degree with Being Educated

o We No Longer Want to Do the Deep Work

Read More

12 Ideas I Learned This Week From High Output Management

Intel’s Andy Grove is considered a must-read in the tech and business world. Grove’s High Output Management provides several lessons for both organizations and individuals, even for those outside the tech industry. Grove was a visionary not only on the technology side, but on the organizational and leadership side. His ideas span big picture strategy considerations to practical advice on running meetings and employee feedback. Every organization makes decisions. Grove’s advice improves the decision-making process. Grove’s insistence on the importance of writing and removing interruptions are even more relevant today than when he wrote his books.

The 12 Best Ideas

o Take control your career and skills – no one else will do it for you

o Be a micro-CEO: even as a middle manager, you still have control over certain decisions, regardless of what the organization has done

o How writing improves thinking and decisions

o Make a tough call; don’t waffle

o Following rules and procedures isn’t valuable unless people understand the purpose

o Interruption destroys the ability to create meaningful work

o Make one-on-one meetings worthwhile

o How to structure employee reviews

o How to run a meeting

o Stop trying to get consensus

o Negate Peer-Group Syndrome

Read More

10 Ideas I Learned This Week From Being Wrong: Adventures in the Margin of Error

Kathryn Schulz’s Being Wrong: Adventures in the Margin of Error provides numerous examples of how we fail in our decisions and why we habitually repeat the same mistakes. There are several practical ideas that will improve decision making at the personal and organizational level. The challenge, as with any type of change, is with the implementation. Sure, it’s easy to say you’ll seek out ideas you don’t agree with, but how many of us actually do that? The key is putting ideas into practice and treating these like a skill that can be developed. Reading about these ideas without using them doesn’t improve your ability. These ideas are especially useful for those in knowledge-based fields, where you don’t always get the tangible feedback like you would in a physical trade.

Read More

The Jungle is Neutral

Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.1

In his book, The Jungle is Neutral, Freddy Spencer Chapman describes his experience as a World War II British soldier fighting in the Malaysian jungles. The fighting was intense, but the effect on the soldiers’ mindset was even more unsettling:

My experience is that the length of life of the British private soldier accidentally left behind in the Malayan [modern day Malaysia] jungle was only a few months…to them the jungle seemed predominantly hostile, being full of man-eating tigers, deadly fevers, venomous snakes and scorpions, natives with poison darts, and a host of half-imagined nameless terrors. They were unable to adapt themselves to a new way of life and a diet of rice and vegetables; in this green hell they expected to be dead within a few weeks – and as a rule they were…

It’s not surprising how the terror of jungle warfighting took a toll on soldiers.

However, not all soldiers capitulated. Some soldiers viewed the jungle opportunistically, with supplies and cover available for all:

The other school of thought, that the jungle teems with wild animals, fowls, and fish which are simply there for the taking, and the luscious tropical fruits-pawpaw, yams, bread-fruit and all that, drop from the trees, is equally misleading. The truth is that the jungle is neutral. It provides any amount of fresh water, and unlimited cover for friend as well as foe – an armed neutrality, if you like, but neutrality nevertheless. It is the attitude of mind that determines whether you go under or survive. There is nothing good or bad, but thinking makes it so. The jungle itself is neutral.

The jungle was neither for nor against any soldier. Neither good nor bad. Just neutral. How soldiers responded to this neutral environment determined the “good” or “bad” outcomes.

Read More

Consistency as the Hidden Driver of Investment Success

Many factors contribute to investment success, but consistency is too often underappreciated.

Consistency isn’t exciting. And consistency doesn’t get headlines. But consistency does allow an organization’s investments and people to compound and grow over time.

Consistency means showing up, day after day, improving little by little.

Consistency lacks the excitement of the next big thing, but it’s not the big things that generate durable returns.

Instead, it’s the consistent improvement in your people and the consistent value added by your portfolio over long periods of time.

Consistency in investing is like consistency in athletics, music, or art. It’s the constant grind of consistently pushing yourself towards a common goal. But, it’s a slow and invisible process – you don’t see improvement every day. You have to trust your process.

Investors lack the staying power to build impressive results. People want variety and stimulation. Sticking with the same thing can be monotonous, even if valuable. It’s during the boring stage that we get the itch to do something more and make a big change. But doing something more is often used as an excuse to do something flashy, something that excites us. It’s not excitement that drives returns, it’s consistency.

Read More

The Illusion of Explanatory Depth: Why We Know Less Than We Think We Do

We know less than we think we do.

Most of the time, it’s not a big deal. We can navigate our days just fine.

In many areas, however, it’s critical to acknowledge what we know vs. what we don’t know.

We need to be well-calibrated. That is, we need to make sure our confidence matches our actual knowledge. When we think we know more than we do, we make bad decisions, even though we remain supremely confident in our decisions. This mismatch has real consequences:

· Thinking you know more about money and investments than you really do means you will lose money

· Thinking you know more about leadership and management than you really do means you will lose good people

· Thinking you know more about communication than you really do means strained relationships

· Thinking you know more about parenting than you really do means you will struggle to raise good kids

Read More

Security Theater

Security theater is a concept that you’ll experience everywhere once you know what it is.

Bruce Schneier, a security expert who created the phrase, explains:

Security theater refers to security measures that make people feel more secure without doing anything to actually improve their security.1

Here’s how Schneier describes the concept:

An example: the photo ID checks that have sprung up in office buildings. No-one has ever explained why verifying that someone has a photo ID provides any actual security, but it looks like security to have a uniformed guard-for-hire looking at ID cards. Airport-security examples include the National Guard troops stationed at US airports in the months after 9/11 — their guns had no bullets. The US colour-coded system of threat levels, the pervasive harassment of photographers, and the metal detectors that are increasingly common in hotels and office buildings since the Mumbai terrorist attacks, are additional examples.

Read More