Latest / The Perfect RIA / Hire or Fire?

Transcript

Hire or Fire? · The Perfect RIA

0:25
Jamie Shilanski: Lessons were learned this week at Shilanski
0:29
and Associates, our RIA up in Anchorage, Alaska. Welcome back
0:33
TPR nation.
0:34
This is Jamie Shilanski in an episode of Worlds to Conquer,
0:37
and I am going to share with you today about the hard knock
0:40
lessons that our CEO got to learn and chief operating
0:43
capacity. So we, we use the EOS, the Entrepreneurial Operating
0:47
system, within most of the framework of what we do in the C
0:50
suite, I always think of the integrator as the CEO. That's
0:53
the chief operations officer, and it really, you know, the EOS
0:57
suite likes to use that the integrator is the one that goes
1:00
in and get things done. Well, so does the COO. So the CEO is
1:04
normally the person that's responded with the brand, the
1:07
image, the design, the plan of where we're going. They're the
1:10
ones that come in and rally the troops. They get client
1:13
contracts in place, you know, brand awareness. But at the end
1:17
of the day, it's that Chief operation officer that really
1:20
does the grunt of the work. And so in this last year, we've been
1:24
training our COO to take over more of what I would have
1:27
previously considered a lot of my responsibilities. So even as
1:30
Co-CEO to our RIA up in Anchorage, Alaska, I was
1:33
empowering. I'm trying to teach her and empower her to take over
1:36
a lot of the roles and responsibilities that I have
1:39
been doing in that capacity. And the reason that we're doing that
1:43
is, you know, one of the combat roles under jocko's leadership
1:47
program, and that's on the Echelon front, is to
1:49
decentralize command, and that makes sure that you're not
1:52
becoming the bottleneck of your organization. And so what we
1:56
found my brother, my baby brother, Micah Shilanski and I
1:59
is that a lot of things were hinging on our decision making.
2:02
And so the team would get to a certain point, and then they
2:06
would stop, because they would need Micah or I's input on what
2:09
to do and how to get things done. And that really wasn't
2:12
creating a strategy in which we can continue to empower grow our
2:16
team. And by the way, as I've shared with you several times,
2:19
we only want a level team members in our organization, and
2:23
in order to have that, that means that we can't be the only
2:26
ones calling the shots. We want a level team members that are
2:29
empowered and capable of making decisions and executing the
2:33
business plan, so that we can drive the company forward. And
2:36
if that is 100% dependent on Micah and I being there in all
2:40
capacities to answer every single question, then we weren't
2:43
going to be able to scale. We're not going to be able to grow.
2:46
And the reason that we are so gosh darn passionate about
2:50
growing Shilanski and Associates is because we know there are
2:53
three Shilanski advisors. There's Floyd, myself and Micah,
2:56
and together, we can only impact so many heartbeats. Bill
2:59
Bachrach back in the 1990s he used to talk about your top 100
3:03
get to 100 ideal clients, and then you're done. Well, we
3:06
couldn't help ourselves. We can't be done. We think our top
3:09
book is really a little bit more than that. We think most
3:13
financial advisors have capacity to meet with around 150 clients.
3:16
If you have more than 150 clients, I bet if you took a
3:19
real long, hard look in the mirror, you're going to find
3:23
that you're only servicing about 75 to 100 of those. You're not
3:26
fully servicing all of them. Instead, it's as needed. You're
3:29
not having regular appointments. You're not doing regular
3:33
financial planning with them. What you're doing is you're
3:36
saying, hey, if they have a question, if they've got a
3:39
concern, of course they can call into my office and I'll meet
3:42
with them, and I'll go over whatever. So we know that
3:45
ashalan skis, we can only impact so many heartbeats, and then
3:49
we're capped out where we are at the capacity point that we want
3:52
to be, that we choose to be at as a family, because our family
3:56
unity is so important to us. So what we love to do is we love to
4:00
bring on other financial advisors. We are actively,
4:02
constantly recruiting for the right type of advisor to join
4:06
our practice. And in order to join our practice, you got to be
4:09
committed to the intensity. You got to want to change those
4:13
lives of the heartbeats the clients that we service. But we
4:16
also have to empower team members that are able to believe
4:19
that mission so it lives on long beyond us. My legacy is not the
4:23
name Shilanski, though I'm often very proud of it. Rather, it is
4:27
the ability to believe in people to achieve what they thought
4:30
previously was impossible to achieve. That is what I want to
4:33
do. That is the legend I want to leave behind. And I believe that
4:37
when you hire a team members and you bring them onto the
4:40
organization, and they buy into the intensity of what you're
4:44
doing, you're going to be able to perpetuate that type of
4:47
legacy. And that is what motivates me. That's what makes
4:50
me spring out of bed every single morning ready to freaking
4:53
conquer the world. So when I talk to my team members, and I
4:57
find that decisions hinge on me constantly, then I know I'm not
5:00
doing a good job empowering people, and so I've always made
5:04
the hiring and firing decisions for the firm. And you know, we
5:07
go through a group interview process. I of course want to get
5:10
everyone's buy in, because we are a small firm. We have 15
5:14
employees, but that's a small firm compared to other companies
5:17
that I work with, and having the wrong person can cost you the
5:21
good employees. And so I really, really careful about doing so,
5:24
and that means I've always made the hiring and firing decisions.
5:28
But if I always have to make the hiring and firing decisions,
5:31
guess what? Then I have to hand select every single team member.
5:35
So I've got to start training my coo to come up into this
5:38
capacity and be able to do this. So this last year, we've been
5:42
looking for, we call it, a relationship manager. This is
5:45
the receptionist, and it's not just a receptionist, because you
5:48
may be answering the phone, you may be greeting the door, but
5:52
make no mistake, that is the person that makes the first and
5:55
last impression with your firm. And oftentimes what I see
5:58
businesses do and they fail in this over and over and over
6:02
again. Think about every practice you've ever been in.
6:05
Think about a medical office. Think about a Walgreens cashier.
6:08
Think about going up to get your truck serviced. Think about
6:12
anything in a retail client, customer capacity, and that
6:15
receptionist, that person that's answering the phone. They are
6:18
oftentimes the lowest person on the totem pole, and the lowest
6:22
person that earns an income in that capacity, in that job
6:25
environment. And when that happens, what you're getting is
6:28
someone's minimum and they're looking to stay in that role for
6:32
a year or two so they can gain office experiences, and then
6:35
they can bounce off to something else. I think that receptionist
6:39
is critical. I think they make or break the client experience.
6:42
And, you know, we have an office in downtown Anchorage, and if a
6:46
client comes in and they're super, super frustrated, they
6:49
couldn't find parking, but that reception is that relationship
6:53
manager has the ability to turn that around. They're not
6:56
disgruntled and upset by the time I get there, or they
6:59
continue to inflate that experience. And so the client
7:02
continues agitated. When we get in this conference room, we got
7:05
to talk about tough financial matters, then they're already
7:09
coming in agitated. And so they really can make or break a
7:12
company, and it is the one that we give the least amount of
7:15
dedication financial resources towards. So Shilanski and
7:19
Associates, we do that bit differently. I'm not looking for
7:22
somebody that can just smile and answer the phone and answer the
7:26
door. I want somebody that can really foster and build
7:29
relationships that is a very specific type of person. And so
7:32
we use the DISC profile. There's Colby, there's all these
7:35
different ones out there. And what I'm really looking for when
7:39
I use discs, so you have D, I S, C, so you have drivers. Those
7:42
are, be bold, be brief, be gone. If you couldn't tell I'm a
7:46
driver, I'm definitely a driver. The I stands for influential.
7:49
These are a lot of your real estate people. These are people
7:52
that sell houses, oftentimes, because they have never entered
7:56
an elevator and exited without friends, they strike up a
7:59
conversation with absolutely everyone. And then you have your
8:02
steady people, the ones that don't like disruption. They
8:06
don't like change. Oftentimes they have a poker face. Can't
8:09
really tell what's going on. They might have a lot of
8:12
personal things that they're contending with, and it won't
8:15
come out until later, till they have a massive breakdown. And
8:19
you have a C as a very highly compliance person. And those are
8:22
great operational people, because they check their they
8:25
grammar proof all of your material. They make sure that
8:28
everything is done down to the penny. If I call a highly
8:32
compliant person, I see and I say, Hey, you owe us about $100
8:35
and it was 9076 guess what they're going to tell me. The
8:38
difference was they're going to say, actually, what I show is
8:42
that I owe you blah, blah, blah, and that's my appointment.
8:45
That's the kind of person I want involved in the movement of
8:48
money within my firm. But that is not the kind of person I want
8:52
answering the door or the phone or having 1000 out of the day.
8:55
They will become really, really annoyed. So what I look for when
8:59
I'm hiring relationship manager, there's, I'm looking to somebody
9:03
that has a really strong ask, because I need them to be
9:06
steady. I need them to be focused. I need them to track.
9:09
And then right behind that, I'm looking for the I the
9:12
influential, the charismatic part of them. Now you may be
9:15
thinking, but Jamie, this is a person that's going to have so
9:19
many conversations with clients when they come in. Don't you
9:22
want it? I first and I don't, and this is why, typically, high
9:26
I people lack any type of detail. They're not nitty
9:28
gritty, they're not going to follow the process, but they're
9:32
good at troubleshooting and but they fizz out really, really
9:35
quick, so they bring high intensity to something. So think
9:39
about real estate agents. They love showing you the house, but
9:42
once it gets into the weeds of actually like going through the
9:46
process, they run off to somebody else because the fun
9:49
part is done. So if I have a really strong, high, really
9:52
influential person that normally doesn't mean that they're going
9:55
to follow the processes we have in place in order for that to be
9:59
a successful experience for everyone in the office, in the
10:02
organization, and they're also really disruptive. They are
10:06
almost never at their desk. They are always somebody else's desk,
10:09
because they get energy from other people. So I'm looking
10:12
somebody that has a really high s, and just below it, I mean
10:16
below it, a really high I as well. Now on this D, i, s, c, we
10:19
have all of those components inside of us. We have all those
10:23
characteristics inside of us, but we lead with one. We have a
10:26
close second, and we have the ones that we least like. Now we
10:30
can also have a natural style and an adapted style. A natural
10:33
style is who you are on Sunday morning with the people you love
10:37
the most, and the adapted is who you show up Monday morning,
10:40
because that's the role you've been put in and that you think
10:43
you have to be. So I really want to make sure that their natural
10:47
and adaptive style are still those strong s and a strong I in
10:50
that capacity. So as I'm training my coo to come up,
10:53
anyone that's ever hired, anyone knows that
10:56
it is a nightmare to post a job and go through that experience.
11:00
And you would think technology has made this easier. I make the
11:04
argument that technology say far worse experience, and the reason
11:09
why, and I didn't realize this until my good friend Stephen
11:12
Jarvis over at retirement tax services, he told me one day he
11:14
said, Jamie, I hate looking at indeed resumes, because I don't
11:18
know who's really looking for a job and who's marking the box
11:21
for unemployment so they can show that they applied to a job.
11:25
And I was like, Oh, my goodness, I never even thought of that. Of
11:28
course, they're doing that. So I look at a date, and you're going
11:32
to get, you know, hundreds of applicants flood in for a job,
11:36
but you're going to get a handful that are actually
11:39
looking for a job and haven't bounced around 1000 times and
11:44
might be good fits for you, and the algorithms are showing your
11:47
job to who they think is appropriate. So it used to be
11:50
back in the 90s, early 2000s when you posted a job, it was
11:54
posted, it was open to everyone in the world, and your human
11:58
resources or front desk would be flooded with resumes as they
12:01
came in from different individuals, but now the
12:05
algorithms tell you which one of those candidates might be the
12:09
most appropriate for you, and you think you have some control
12:12
in the matter, but I'm going to make a strong argument you don't
12:15
have as much as you think you do, and so it doesn't matter how
12:18
much money you give, indeed, to run An advertisement and to
12:21
highlight your ad and to do all the boosting and the posting for
12:24
it, it's not going to get in front of everyone. It's going to
12:27
get in front of who indeed thinks is appropriate to see
12:31
your job. And you can monster zip recruiter. I mean, you can
12:34
use 1000 different programs. They're all using algorithms,
12:37
and they're all doing this process, so it's really hard to
12:40
get the resumes that would have come in in the 90s and the 2000s
12:45
into your office today. Instead, they're being filtered by the
12:48
machine, by the algorithms. So you know, it is, it is labor
12:53
some to try to find someone, but it's also the most important
12:56
task you will undergo. And so I'm going to share with you an
13:00
epic fail that we had at Shilanski and Associates. And I
13:03
hope, as I do so, you're going to derive why it failed and why
13:07
it cannot fail in the future. So as I'm instructing, my CEO, and
13:11
she's been with us, you know, 30 years in the organization, so
13:15
there's not one aspect of the job she doesn't know inside out,
13:19
because you don't stay around that long and not see all parts
13:22
of it. And so when she started, you know, posting the job, and
13:26
she said, You know, I'm getting all of these candidates, and I'm
13:29
just overwhelmed because I can have one of our team members
13:32
begin to screen them. And I said, Yeah, I think that's a
13:34
great idea. And she said, so the way that that was going to look
13:37
like was that they were going to pull out the resumes that they
13:39
thought were best suited. They were going to get them on the
13:41
phone, make sure they had a pleasant phone voice, right? You
13:44
don't want to call somebody that submitted a resume and they
13:46
answer who this. So she wanted to call them, screen them, ask
13:50
them a couple of questions, and then the next stage in our
13:54
process is to schedule an in person interview with ever who
13:58
the interviewee is. And then that gives us the ability to
14:01
see, did the person show up on time? Did they find parking, or
14:04
did they make that our problem? How was their dress appearance?
14:07
How was their mannerisms? Were they too polished? If somebody
14:11
interviews really well, guess what? They've been on a lot of
14:13
interviews. I don't like to hire people that interview super
14:16
well. In fact, I want you to be a little bit nervous. I want you
14:20
me to be able to say, Hey, I know interviews can be really
14:23
intimidating. I don't want that experience for you. Let's just
14:25
have a conversation, because that means that you're really
14:28
caring about what's happening. So what I learned after this had
14:32
happened, I was having her hire the front desk person the
14:35
reception, and so she had the person screening was the person
14:39
that had given their their notice, so they were on their
14:41
way out of the firm. They were beautiful person. They
14:44
absolutely loved our mission. We wish we could have kept working
14:47
with her longer. She was called by Christ to lead her church in
14:50
a more permanent capacity, and so felt, you know, that that was
14:53
where she needed to go. Totally fine. So the CEO said, hey, you
14:57
know what this job is. We're replacing your role. Why don't
15:00
you screen all the candidates? And here's where it went wrong.
15:04
So she goes through and she screens the candidate. And what
15:07
is she probably looking for? She's looking for a replica of
15:11
herself, potentially, and that's really hard. And what our CEO,
15:15
the first mistake that she did is she never asked the question,
15:18
Hey, have you ever been responsible for hiring by firing
15:20
someone, hiring and firing someone, both of those are
15:25
important, and this individual has zero experience in it, so
15:28
she strike number one, failed to ask that question, have you ever
15:31
hired and fired someone? All right? Two, you didn't sit down
15:35
and given the parameters of what you're looking for, what
15:37
questions should you ask? What questions can you not ask in an
15:40
interview which are equally important, what are the
15:43
appropriate answers? What are we really trying to gage here? So
15:46
we didn't have those type of screen questions. And then what
15:49
I found out later, only after the event, was that the
15:53
candidate that ended up getting hired needed to reschedule their
15:57
interview because they had a conflict, and it was on a day
16:00
that the COO wasn't going to be in the office. And so the CEO
16:04
said, You know what? That's fine to the person leading the
16:07
organization. Why don't you just have the interview and let me
16:09
know if you want to, if you would hire her or not? Red flag
16:13
galore. And so the gal comes in for the interview with a
16:18
candidate, and she does a wonderful job. She's really,
16:20
she's super nice. And they decide, hey, this is this a good
16:24
person. So it got up to me. Said, Hey, we made our decision.
16:27
This is who I want to hire. And I said, Okay, great. And I said,
16:30
Well, have you met with her before? Yep, I've met with her.
16:32
It's, you know, she presented herself nice, etc. So my CEO did
16:36
meet with her, but she met with her over zoom. She didn't meet
16:39
with her in person. And so the first day that the girl arrives
16:42
in person, my CEO is at the office and is like, I don't know
16:46
if this is who I would have hired. And I said, Okay, well,
16:50
she's in that role now. So what are you going to do about it?
16:54
And when the gal started, she had a really legitimate reason
16:58
why to miss her third day of work, and she was trying to hold
17:02
it together. They had an unfortunate thing happen, and
17:05
she said, Hey, I'm going to need to take this time off. I
17:07
understand, you know, if that means you guys can't keep me.
17:11
And my CEO was like, no, no, she's really sweet. She's just
17:14
had a really tragic thing happen, so we're going to have,
17:17
we're going to give her this one day off. And so because the
17:19
intensity of what had happened. I told my CEO. I said, Hey, this
17:23
is not a one day request. And if they think it is a one day
17:26
request, they are grossly underestimating the recovery
17:29
that this person is going to need, and the hands on of
17:32
shuffling around to different appointments, being able to take
17:35
care of themselves, the cognitive skills that have to
17:38
come back, all of these different motor functions. And I
17:41
said, this will be more day. How do you want to handle it? And
17:43
she's like, No, no, they have a big support system. They've
17:45
already thought through a lot of this. It's going to be okay. And
17:48
I said, All right, so in six weeks, the gal called out nine
17:52
different times, nine different times in a six week period. And
17:57
so when I was sitting there with my CEO, I said, Hey, I don't
18:01
think after the third week, she'd already been missed three
18:04
days of work. I said, I don't think this is the right person.
18:07
They don't understand the intensity of what we're doing.
18:10
And she advocated and said, No, no, I
18:11
think she is really good, because when she was doing work,
18:15
the work product was good. And here's what my coo was really
18:20
solving for. My CEO was really solving for. I hate
18:24
interviewing. I need somebody up front, and here's a person
18:29
that's willing to be in that role. That is what they were
18:32
solving for. And one of the lessons that I learned early,
18:35
early on from my mom, who always sat in the practice management
18:40
role or organization, or I her, my dad started the company back
18:43
in 1981 and she was the CEO. She ran all the operational aspects
18:48
of the company. And as I began to come up, and she began to
18:52
train me, she said, making the right hiring decision is the
18:56
most important task you have, because firing the wrong person
19:02
is demoralizing. It sucks. It takes the life right out of you.
19:07
That is why it is so important to get it right the first time.
19:10
So this candidate, we were in our mini surge. So our mini
19:14
surge happens once a month, for a week, we all end up going
19:18
through all the advisors. We have five advisors in her
19:20
office. We all go through and have appointments outside of our
19:23
big surges. Our big surges are in March and April and October,
19:26
November. And so during this mini surge, she got a phone call
19:30
she felt it was an emergency. Said, I have to step out. We've
19:33
got clients coming in and out. And here's what she did. She
19:36
left her team members and she asked permission. She got
19:40
permission, but she left her team members, and then the next
19:43
day, she called out because she was still way too distraught.
19:46
Had too much stuff personally going on to contend with that.
19:49
Now, did she have real things going on? Yep, sure. Did 100%
19:53
guess who else had real things going on? Everybody else,
19:58
everybody else had real things going on, and when she decided
20:02
to leave a mini surge in the middle of the day and then not
20:05
show up the next day, what she showed me was that she did team.
20:09
She didn't care about her team, and second of all, she didn't
20:12
care about the clients. The Job did not seem so important that
20:16
she needed to compartmentalize whatever she was going through
20:19
and protect her team, and protecting the team is one of
20:23
the most paramount virtues I must have in every single one of
20:30
my team members, because there is no pyramid at our
20:33
organization. It is a circle, and we are all interdependent.
20:37
So when the receptionist steps out, what I have is an
20:41
operations person needing to come up and greet clients. That
20:44
operations person then can't transfer money for clients. They
20:48
can't do trade, can't fill out paperwork for appointments. They
20:52
can't do all the rest of their job. Rather, they're covering
20:55
two positions. No job in our organization is small or
21:00
insignificant, because if it was, it wouldn't be a job. We
21:04
would just get rid of that position. It's not fun for me to
21:07
allocate money towards payroll. If I didn't depend and need on
21:11
you for your role, then you are obsolete and must go. You must
21:17
go. And so what I had was a cardinal sin in my rules of
21:22
running an organization. And so then I went to my COO and I
21:27
said, Hey, I suggested that you get rid of this person. You
21:32
advocated for the reasons that they should stay. Now I'm
21:35
telling you, let them go. And she had to go in, and she said,
21:40
Okay, well, can I let them go until we find a new person?
21:42
Nope, sure, can't. Sure, can't. Why? Because if you keep the
21:47
wrong people in your organization, you keep those B
21:51
and C team members because you have so much going on that you
21:55
don't have time or want to dedicate time to replacing that
21:59
person. Guess what's going to happen? You're going to lose the
22:03
wrong person. You're going to lose the wrong person. You're
22:07
going to lose the a team member that you really didn't want to
22:10
go anywhere because at members don't want to work with B and C
22:15
team members. It makes them feel taken advantage of. And so what
22:19
happens by keeping the wrong person in that role is you lose
22:24
all of the right ones, and I get it guys.
22:27
I'm struggling right now because I know I've got team members
22:31
I've got to replace in different organizations. But guess what
22:35
that means? I've got to go through that interview process.
22:39
I've got to get more hands on because clearly there was a
22:43
massive, failure in my leadership when I handed over of
22:46
hiring the front desk person, I don't articulate enough the
22:50
importance of making that decision. And so guess what I
22:53
had to do? I had to put my CEO in the position of and I asked
22:57
her, I said, Hey, you know it's my name on the door. Do you want
23:01
me to come in and do this? Are you going to let her go? And she
23:05
said, Nope, I'm going to take care of it. I'll let her go. And
23:09
this is not the first person fired. It's not but here was the
23:13
difference, before, when she let people go, she let them go for
23:17
cause, and when you fire someone for cause, you don't lose a wink
23:21
of sleep at night, because you know that they were an absolute
23:25
tool to your organization, and they were hurting everyone else,
23:29
and they needed to go. But when you fire a good person who's
23:33
going through some stuff and is down on their luck, it sucks,
23:37
and the day it stops hurting you, the day it feels good, the
23:41
day you're okay with it, you shouldn't be leading people,
23:44
because then you forgot what we're in this for in the first
23:48
place. Now, when she got done with it, and I told her to get
23:52
rid of her immediately, because I can't afford to lose my good
23:56
team members, and to me, she violated that cardinal sin of
23:59
not protecting her team and and I kept her, I feel strongly. I
24:03
could have lost a team member. Maybe they would have stayed.
24:07
Maybe they wouldn't have they really wasn't on the line. I
24:11
wasn't given an ultimatum, but it was my integrity that was on
24:15
the line. It was How dare I preach how important every
24:18
single person's role is, and then allow someone to dump on
24:22
someone else allow that to happen. And I'm not talking
24:25
about pinching in because somebody's going through
24:29
something that's not at all the conversation, the conversation
24:32
is that it shouldn't have happened so many times,
24:36
repetitively, and she didn't care about the team. When she
24:39
decided to walk out, what she cared about was what she was
24:43
personally going through. She didn't care about the clients.
24:47
She cared about what was happening in her world. And
24:50
that's okay. That's just not a part of my organization. It
24:54
can't be. After the work day was done, she calls me up and she
24:58
says, Hey, I'm just, you know, I can't do anything tonight. I'm
25:02
just totally wiped emotionally from this event, because it is
25:06
an ordeal. It does hurt. It does make you feel something for that
25:10
other person. And so when she got done, you know, I said, Hey,
25:14
listen, I know this is a really sucky thing to go through, but
25:18
there's some really great takeaways from this. There's
25:21
some really good lessons. And the first lesson is, you have to
25:25
be so, so selective in that hiring decision, so that you're
25:29
never put in this position again. That is a lesson that my
25:32
mother taught me, and a lesson I want to impart to you. It
25:36
doesn't feel good to fire good people, and if you want to avoid
25:40
that, then you've got to make sure that those people are the
25:44
right ones for that right position at the right time. Now,
25:48
a couple of other things that we learned from this. One was the
25:52
handoff on the hiring. Clearly, before she began the interview
25:56
process, I should have been stressing over and over and over
25:59
again the importance of making the right decision, and just
26:03
because we had an immediate need and she felt the pressure of the
26:07
former employees last day coming up, doesn't mean we should have
26:11
acted hastily, because we act hastily, we put the wrong people
26:15
in the roles. And that's what happened here. We took somebody
26:19
that that we needed to fill position. It was the best of
26:23
what we had to look at at the time he put them in there. And
26:26
to make it even worse, you didn't even physically interview
26:30
that person. Rather, you outsource that. You delegated it
26:34
to somebody else that may not have been qualified to make
26:37
those decisions, and certainly didn't have the instructions in
26:41
front of her, and gone through the scrutiny you would have,
26:45
because after 30 years of being in your organization, you know
26:49
what you're looking for. You know who you're looking for. And
26:53
so we did a lot of things wrong there, and unfortunately it cost
26:57
somebody their job. Now I can sleep at night because I also
27:01
know that person played a role in that. They played a role in
27:05
deciding not to come to work. They played a role in calling
27:08
out so often. They played a role in choosing to go home versus
27:12
looking at the day, and by the way, we're not talking about
27:16
they went home because, you know, somebody had severed their
27:20
leg and they're bleeding all over the kitchen. They chose to
27:24
go home because they emotionally distraught and they couldn't
27:28
handle that. And that ended up meaning that everything got
27:31
dumped on another team member. Now, at that particular time, we
27:35
had people out of the office, and we had all the advisors in
27:39
the office. You know, we had something on their honeymoon,
27:43
someone on vacation. We had work, remote employees. We had
27:46
different things. And so you consciously made a decision
27:50
during that time period to leave your other team members high and
27:54
dry. And that's what you did. It wasn't a big deal to you. So you
27:58
made it a really big deal to them, and it cost her her job,
28:02
and I think she played a role in that. Now I think we did things
28:06
wrong, starting top down, starting with me, but we
28:09
certainly didn't help the situation, nor did she, and all
28:13
we can do from this moment forward is to get better. We can
28:17
get better. And so instead of thinking about these lessons,
28:20
we're going to go back and we're going to revisit our hiring
28:24
ethos. We're going to go back to those procedures, and we're
28:28
going to put down why each one of these is important. We're
28:32
going to go over the rules of when somebody starts their
28:35
employment. And one of the things I told me CEO, I said,
28:39
Hey, listen, what starts in the beginning lasts until the end.
28:43
And when you hire somebody during those first 90 days, they
28:47
should be showing up in their absolute best. They should be so
28:50
excited about that job. They should be so nervous about not
28:54
being able to keep that job that they are going above and beyond.
28:58
And when you don't have somebody doing that, when you have
29:02
somebody immediately showing that job as a second priority to
29:06
them, or not very important to them at all, then you've got to
29:10
immediately address it with them, and you've got to set an
29:14
example so that the rest of your team members know that for them,
29:18
yet alone, we haven't even tapped into the client
29:21
experience of seeing multiple people change in and out of your
29:25
office, and what that does to your social reputation. Because
29:29
there is a cost. We pay a price for everything, and so when that
29:33
happens, our clients are seeing a new phase around says all of
29:37
the time. That's not the right the right decision. We need to
29:40
be very, very selective about who we put in that particular
29:44
role. It is one of the most important roles within our
29:48
office, TPR nation. This is Jamie Shilanski, an episode of
29:51
Worlds to Conquer. Go find people who share your values and
29:55
change the world.