Listen "Misunderstood"
Episode Synopsis
I knew I wanted to be a financial advisor, but I just couldn’t figure out a way to get my foot in the door. There were not any job postings stating, “Looking for Financial Advisor, No Experience Required.” It was that chicken-or-egg problem, I needed the job to get the experience, and I needed the experience to get the job. So, I settled. I broadened my search from the specific role [financial advisor] to just getting a “resume builder” entry-level position within the finance industry. This is the backstory of why my career journey started in retail banking.
Just being honest here, I despised working at the bank. As a banker, the incentives didn’t put the client’s interest first, and the incentives were designed based on an inaccurate assumption.
Here’s my guess, at some point research was conducted that concluded that these banking customers who had more products with the bank had lower attrition rates. Another way of saying, a more engaged customer was more likely to stick around. So, an incentive plan was designed to get bankers to “sell more stuff” with the thought that this would be a profitable endeavor, both on the new product sales side and the customer retention side. Economics 101 tells us that incentives drive behavior – both good and bad – so a culture was born of bankers pitching superfluous products to clients who didn’t want, need, or even sometimes know they were sold these products. A practice that was antithetical to what you’d assume or desire from someone stewarding your finances.
Although I look back at this experience with frustration and disbelief, the fact pattern does make sense to me. Leadership thought they were rolling out a strategy to drive profitability and retention. In the end, this was just a classic case of confusing correlation and causation.
Links mentioned in this episode:
http://thoughtsonmoney.com
http://thebahnsengroup.com
Just being honest here, I despised working at the bank. As a banker, the incentives didn’t put the client’s interest first, and the incentives were designed based on an inaccurate assumption.
Here’s my guess, at some point research was conducted that concluded that these banking customers who had more products with the bank had lower attrition rates. Another way of saying, a more engaged customer was more likely to stick around. So, an incentive plan was designed to get bankers to “sell more stuff” with the thought that this would be a profitable endeavor, both on the new product sales side and the customer retention side. Economics 101 tells us that incentives drive behavior – both good and bad – so a culture was born of bankers pitching superfluous products to clients who didn’t want, need, or even sometimes know they were sold these products. A practice that was antithetical to what you’d assume or desire from someone stewarding your finances.
Although I look back at this experience with frustration and disbelief, the fact pattern does make sense to me. Leadership thought they were rolling out a strategy to drive profitability and retention. In the end, this was just a classic case of confusing correlation and causation.
Links mentioned in this episode:
http://thoughtsonmoney.com
http://thebahnsengroup.com
More episodes of the podcast Thoughts On Money [TOM]
You Need to Be Bored
19/12/2025
An Overview on Credit Scores
05/12/2025
Kyle Busch v. Pacific Life
21/11/2025
Long-Term Care...Get It, or Forget It?
14/11/2025
Be a Tell-Me-More Investor
24/10/2025
Three Unrelated Pieces of Advice
17/10/2025
The Mirror We Don’t Like to Look In
10/10/2025
Abnormal Returns
03/10/2025
ZARZA We are Zarza, the prestigious firm behind major projects in information technology.