Pension Problem Solving - Building the Team
In an effort to expand my horizons and better understand the dynamics of team-building, I recently spent several hours with an expert in PI. Also known as the Predictive Index, this self-described "unique, in-house management tool" is used to "effectively motivate, lead and leverage a person's strengths to achieve company goals." (Click here for more information.)
I started off as somewhat of a skeptic. (I am after all a Ph.D. in finance with a minor in math.) By the end of the meeting, I think I came away with a much better understanding of how I can improve my communication and leadership skills, something that no doubt is well worth the cost of time and money.
While each individual needs to seek counsel from behavioral experts as they deem appropriate, anything that enhances team-building may merit more than a peek. A wide variety of other tools include Myers Brigg, Raymond Cattell's 16 personality factors, Strong Interest Inventory and Johnson O'Connor aptitude analysis.
This topic is broad and well beyond the scope of any blog post. An interesting takeaway is the extent to which effective team-building can help pension decision-makers in 2007 and beyond. After all, how do we characterize the benefits situation in modern times? A few thoughts follow.
1. Responsibilities involve multiple departments such as Human Resources, Operations, Compliance, Treasury, Accounting and Investor Relations.
2. The need to contain costs while trying to attract, retain and motivate productive workers is often seen as mutually exclusive and is therefore a possible cause for intra-organizational friction.
3. Competing and often disparate compensation rewards for benefit plan decision-makers exist and vary across functions and titles.
4. Penalties for getting the benefits mix "wrong" vary across functions and titles.
5. There is an alarming increase in personal and professional fiduciary liability that could encourage a counter-productive "blame game" unless everyone understands and adheres to a unified set of goals.
Team-building is tough, especially for complex issues. While critics disparage assessment tools as "warm and fuzzy," the reality is that "we're all in this thing together" when it comes to benefit plan decision-making.
Behavioral science and the bottom line? Not such an odd couple after all.
