Why Dirty Harry wouldn't win a Gold Medal

by Tony Vidler.

One of the great movie lines spoken by the character Dirty Harry was "a man's got to know his limitations".  A line which always seems to apply to financial advisers.

But this doesn't apply to Olympians does it?  

I am captivated by the incredible achievements of humans that is demonstrated at the Olympics, and their ability to continually re-define their (apparent) limitations.  

You cannot help watching them, admiring them, and then wondering how you can apply what they know and do, to the non-Olympic and mere-mortal world we live in.

At the London 2012 games 2 athletes standout for me personally, on the basis of how they continually have re-defined their own expectations (or self-limitations).  

Michael Phelps must be considered one of the greatest athletes of all time, and his record is remarkable.  The second athlete to stand out for me is also a swimmer - who did not win a medal.

Lauren Boyle, from New Zealand. What a remarkable young lady - and the epitome of a "champion".

She came 4th in the 800m freestyle final.  But to get there she had to continue, race by race, to swim faster than she had ever swum in her life.  Breaking her own national records to get to the final, and then under the immense pressure of the final of an Olympic glamor event, she lifted another notch again.   And at the end of the race, was she upset at getting 4th?  Not on your life...she recognized that she had challenged her own beliefs, re-defined her apparent limitations, and found a new confidence and performance level.

So what do Lauren & Michael Phelps have in common?

Well, they both have a coach that they listen to and learn from.  They apply process and systems to enhance their training and "professional development".  They take advice from their mentors.  It is up to them to put that advice into action and performance though.

According to a study of Olympic Champions here are their common denominators for success:

Characteristics of Champions

  An ability to cope with and control anxiety.

  Confidence

  Mental toughness/resiliency

  Sport intelligence

  An ability to focus and block distractions

  Competitiveness

  A hard-work ethic

  An ability to set and achieve goals

  Coachability

  High levels of dispositional hope

  Optimism

  Adaptive perfectionism

Source:  Psychological characteristics and their development in Olympic champions.

Gould, D., Diffenback, K., & Moffett, A.

If you want a self-improvement checklist of things to work upon, you will not find a much better list than this one.

On this basis, would that excellent pistol shooting Dirty Harry have got a gold medal?  

I don't think so...at the very least because he wasn't too "coachable", or open to learning.  There are a couple of other attributes that he didn't share with the Olympians either, and we can't overlook his tendency to adopt a cynical "me versus the world" attitude combined with a mindset of "my way is the only way, and winning is everything".  Brute force as a method of problem solving also has its limitations too I guess.

What led me down this line of thought in recent days is the realisation that there are more business owners like Dirty Harry than there are business people thinking and behaving like Olympians.

Champions challenge themselves, and are continually focused on incremental improvement, open to new ideas and learning, and reinforce all they learn with sheer hard work.  

Any professional advisers or professional service firms looking to develop or just get business ideas and inspiration should think about adopting the mindset of an Olympian rather than Dirty Harry. 

You don't have to actually get a gold medal or be first in the world to be a champion.  You only have to have seen Lauren immediately after NOT winning a medal to realise that.

 http://www.3news.co.nz/No-medal-but-still-glory-for-record-breaking-Boyle/tabid/1706/articleID/264158/Default.aspx


Like this?  Then share it with others...or visit www.strictlybiz.co.nz for loads more useful and interesting information.

The price of professionalism

 by Tony Vidler.

It has been fascinating watching and following some industry debate recently regarding the outcome of a recent court case against a NZ adviser.  

By all accounts the adviser had largely done the job expected of him, though the office paperwork was a bit footloose some years ago.  Then upshot was that a client sued, the adviser was partially found against, in essence (it seems) because his documentation didn't substantiate his recollection of the client instructions.  Nothing terribly surprising in all of that, and most NZ advisers if they were honest about it would say "there but for the grace of god, go I" at some point in their own careers.

What has been remarkable to hear and occasionally see in print is the ill-informed commentary from some other industry participants, who clearly do not recognize what professionalism is, or at what price it comes.

The adviser in question had a complaint laid against him with his professional association by the same client, in addition to the civil proceedings.  The professional body upheld that complaint also, for essentially the same reasons it seems - he hadn't followed the expected process.

Now the idiots enter the fray....bashing the professional body for upholding its own standards.  I note that most of the bashers do not actually appear to be members of the professional association, nor have any clear understanding of what the professional body holds its members to account for.  I note also that the adviser on the receiving end of the verdict (and subsequent public dissemination of it) made a public statement endorsing the actions of his professional association.  He went further by also publicly stating that he would remain a member for the duration of his career as he believed that strongly in the goals and aspirations of professionalism.  So, a ringing endorsement for the professional association by the affected professional.

He is a man of principles, integrity and strength of character it seems.

He is also a man who understands the price of professionalism.

There are many elements that must combine to eventually form a profession, one of which is the ability to self-regulate to high standards.  Regulate beyond the minimum standards of behavior prescribed by law, and apply the higher duties of care and objective process that is expected of a professional.  It follows then that the professional, who voluntarily subscribes to higher ethical standards than the law demands, is a person willing to pay a price for the betterment of society.

The NZ financial advisory industry largely does not understand what a profession is.  Apparently, many of today's advisers simply don't care about it either.  Those people have no future in the long term as financial advisers.  They may well have a future as product salespeople - but may just as well be selling cleaning products as financial products.

I would suggest that for those who value their existing businesses, and either want a future working within them or to exit at a healthy price, then some thought needs to go into whether they are willing to pay the price of becoming professional financial advisers, rather than mere sales people.  There is already sufficient critical mass inside the industry for the profession to evolve.  Perhaps 20% of the financial advisers out there are willing to pay a price for the privilege of becoming respected professionals in their field.  Those who will enter the industry in coming years with an eye on carving out long careers are already people motivated by professional ideals.  Perhaps one of the barriers to recruiting business successors is the very lack of professional standards and reputation by some of those advisers looking to exit in the short to medium term?

There are laws governing what medical professionals can and cannot do.  For example, it is illegal for them to willingly assist intentional suicide.  Whether one believe that is something society should allow or not is a moot point here.  Of relevance is that those professionals impose standards of behavior upon themselves that are higher duties of care than prescribed by law, and then police and enforce those standards themselves.  And the laws of the land also apply.

If as a profession they have sufficient doubt as to the merit of those standards, or laws pertaining to them, they debate vigorously and rigorously within until they find the right balance of ethics & legal standards, and consumer (or market) demands.  Paramount though, is what is best for the profession and its consumers.  Then the process is that they seek to change the rules relating to their entire profession within the boundaries of, and working with, the laws of the land as required.  If society wants euthanasia, and the medical profession collectively believe it to be beneficial to society, then they work to change the law relating to it.  In the meantime, despite their own belief as to what is right, they maintain standards internally that reflect the minimum expectations of the law at the very least.

The provision of financial advice within New Zealand remains an "industry" today.  It is evolving and moving down the path of professionalism slowly.  You can sense the momentum will accelerate in the next few years though, as more incumbents and new entrants understand what the price of being a professional is, and are willing to pay it.



Like this?  Then share it with others...or visit www.strictlybiz.co.nz for loads more useful and interesting information.