Hire with Your Head: Building Top-Performing Teams in Wealth Management with Performance-Based Hiring

In this episode of The Advisor Blueprint, hosts Jim Atkinson, Managing Partner at Avidian Wealth Solutions, and Jordan Christa, The Wealth Management Matchmaker™, sit down with Rachel Daniels, Director of Operations at Avidian Wealth Solutions, to discuss a game-changing approach to hiring.

Most firms rely on traditional job descriptions full of tasks, years of experience, and credentials—only to end up with average or mismatched hires. Rachel shares how Avidian transformed its hiring process by adopting Lou Adler’s Performance-based Hiring methodology from the book Hire with Your Head. Learn how to replace gut feelings and bias with clear success metrics, attract high-performers who are motivated by outcomes and growth, improve retention, speed up onboarding, and build stronger, more accountable teams.

Key topics include:

• Why task-based job descriptions attract maintainers instead of builders
• How to create performance profiles focused on results and impact
• Structured interviewing techniques that predict future performance
• Practical steps firms can take today to shift from reactive, desperate hiring to a disciplined growth strategy

Whether you're a wealth management leader struggling with costly mis-hires or looking to scale your team with the right talent, this conversation delivers actionable insights you can implement immediately.

Disclaimer: 

Avidian Wealth Solutions is a registered investment adviser. Information presented is for educational purposes only and does not intend to make an offer or solicitation for the sale or purchase of any specific securities, investments, or investment strategies. Investments involve risk and, unless otherwise stated, are not guaranteed. 

Avidian is neither a law firm nor an accounting firm, and no portion of its services should be construed as legal or accounting advice. 

Be sure to first consult with a qualified financial adviser and/or tax professional before implementing any strategy discussed herein. Past performance is not indicative of future performance.

This information contained herein may be dated.

Transcript

SPEAKER_02 0:05

Jordan, we've talked to a lot of firms, and I think one of the most important things is their staff. Who you have on, if you've got a lot of top performers, I think the firm is naturally going to perform well. And today we're talking about how to hire and maybe even providing some guidelines and a book that they might want to read as to how you can hire top performers and hopefully ultimately get better results as a firm.

SPEAKER_01 0:29

Yeah, absolutely. I think if your hiring process is built on job descriptions, you know, don't be surprised when you hire average employees or even the wrong employees, really. You know, most leaders say that they want high performers, growth drivers, people just who get it and they own it, right? But if their hiring process is more based around do you have the right experience and essentially a task list instead of can you really deliver the outcomes that we actually need, that's gonna give you a mediocre employee, if not the wrong one, every time. So Lou Adler is the author of Hire with Your Head. He spent decades proving that top performers aren't defined by the credentials that you usually see on resumes. They're defined by results. And companies that adopt this performance-based hiring consistently improve the quality of the hire, reduce mishires, and build stronger, more accountable teams. This isn't a tweak. It's a fundamental shift on how you think about talent.

SPEAKER_02 1:25

Most hire processes today are optimized for filtering for candidates, not actually identifying top performers.

SPEAKER_01 1:30

And so I am so very excited that we have with us today Rachel Daniels. You've been with us before. Thanks for coming back. So I'm excited for you to kind of break this down. You know, I've said in the past, you're the one that actually introduced me to Lou Adler and Hire with Your Head. And it was something that I immediately fell in love with. It was, you know, following a lot of the processes that I did follow, but putting it into an actual process really has helped me not only build, you know, the my team within, but helped my clients really build theirs. So I would love to just have you break this down. So again, Rachel Daniels, Director of Operations with Avidian. Welcome, Rachel.

SPEAKER_00 2:05

Uh thanks, Jim. Thanks, Jordan. It's great to be here. I'm happy to be here to talk to you guys about this topic today. I think it's something that has fundamentally changed our firm, um, not just the way we hire, but the quality of the staff that we have, the retention rate, even, and uh the speed in which they adopt and adapt to the firm and create impact. So I think the key problem with what firms are focusing on today is attracting the wrong candidates. You know, traditional job descriptions focus on skills, years of experience, credentials, like you mentioned, but top performers don't really search for jobs that way. You know, they're they're looking for how they can make an impact, how they can grow, how they can be challenged, um, what is what that all looks like. And when you put a performance-based hiring job description in front of them, you're focusing on outcomes rather than maybe their qualifications.

SPEAKER_02 3:00

You know, it's interesting. I think most of the job descriptions that I've seen over the years are really taskless. Um, they describe activity, not outcomes. I think that's probably very common. Um, Rachel, when you look at uh the shift, uh, what has changed for your team?

SPEAKER_00 3:18

I think that you're really actually getting more of a little bit of an enthused candidate when you're looking for individuals. It's removing the biases, you know, because at first glance, when you're looking at their resume, you might be really excited about their credentials and their qualifications. And on paper, you might be saying, Oh yeah, there's there's no doubt in my mind that this person can do this job. But when you shift your mindset to focus on what success looks like, you're focusing on not just what success looks like for the firm, but what success looks like for that individual, how they're going to have an impact in the department. And I think that that really excites candidates.

SPEAKER_01 3:53

You know, it's interesting because we talk a lot about following a process to make sure we're hiring the right candidate. And I love that you've taken it a step back and said, well, let's talk about how to attract the right candidate first. Right. And so when you do define that role by tasks instead of outcomes, essentially you're attracting the people who want to do the job, want to do the job, but also own that result and become a top performer and to see in a job description what success looks like, then you're taking it not just, hey, we need this specific person to do these tasks, but somebody who's motivated by seeing that that success outlined and be more excited to apply to your role versus maybe a very identical job description at another firm.

SPEAKER_00 4:35

Yeah, that's exactly right. So I think that it creates a true partnership where the candidate and you know ultimate employee is aligned and feels that partnership and connection with the position and that they're actually making a difference. They're not just coming on to be a taskmaster. Um, you know, when you as an employer take the responsibility of focusing on what your intentions are behind the role and replacing job descriptions with performance profiles. So I would highly encourage each, you know, your department leaders, your leadership to really sit down and build these performance profiles out and look at what their um definitions of outcomes are for success. So, for example, if you define maybe five to six key outcomes that you expect in a role for the first 12 months, and you focus on what does success look like? Those specific KPIs or success metrics, not necessarily what their responsibilities are going to be. Because again, looking at the resume, you can probably fairly quickly see that someone's capable of doing something, but showing them in a way that um removes the bias and focusing on what the qualifications are isn't always the best thing.

SPEAKER_02 5:48

So I think um what you're saying is kind of a a good example might be instead of five plus years of sales experience, you would say build and close two million pipeline in 12 months. Is that kind of an example of what you might be describing?

SPEAKER_00 6:01

I think that that's a really good example. So for example, um taking you know our client service associate role, um, are you comfortable with moving money? And they just say yes, versus what does the process look like for you to move money without any error? What it you know, just focusing on the outcome and what the client experience is gonna be versus yes, I can input a cashiering request.

SPEAKER_01 6:25

And so instead of checking the boxes, it's more of defining the the outcome and the result from doing the day-to-day activities. That's right. So the shift alone changes who applies. I think that's something that I'm so grateful that you took that step back. Um, and you start really attracting builders instead of maintainers. So even when companies upgrade job descriptions, why do you feel that they may still be missing top performers?

SPEAKER_00 6:50

I think that you have to have the right people in the room and you want to see the candidate from a lot of different viewpoints and personalities. So when you're building out these performance profiles and you're looking at the role that you're trying to fill, you bring a candidate in and you have the performance profile in front of each individual who's kind of assessing. You're gonna get a different point of view, but it's gonna be based on those outcomes and success metrics, not just feelings and impressions. So they could be qualified, they could be well dressed, they could look the part, um, they could speak the part, but when you truly define the performance outcomes, you're gonna get a non-biased result where you're gonna ultimately have better success and alignment.

SPEAKER_02 7:36

I think most interviews, from what I've seen, measure comfort is what you're saying, not capability. I've been in a lot of these, but you know, it's the areas that they're they're comfortable, not necessarily capable. And somehow you're trying to tease that out. What are the true capabilities of the employee?

SPEAKER_00 7:50

Yeah, I think that, you know, what's the first thing you say after an interview when you're discussing it with a colleague? Oh yeah, they were nice. You know, that would that was pleasant. They I think that they spoke well and they were articulate, but how does that really help you in making a decision, especially if it's a very high-up role? You know, maybe you're looking for a new department head or somebody who's gonna have a significant impact to the firm. It's so important not to go on those gut feelings or biases when you're looking at um, you know, just a sharp dressed man or woman.

SPEAKER_02 8:19

Right.

SPEAKER_01 8:20

I think, you know, you touched on a good point there. Whenever I work with REAs that are hiring and we talk about their last hiring mistake, you know, or their most costly hiring mistake, it's often the answer that I get with, you know, what was why did you decide to hire this person, right? Oh, but they interviewed really well. They had a ton of confidence. I just had a gut feeling. And so I think one of the things that performance-based hiring does is take away that gut feeling and really put, you know, call to action with everything you do. And like you said, I mean, interviews typically evaluate the communication style of the candidate, if it's a personality fit, the confidence. But ultimately, you know, there's a lot of people that can do the job, but do they fit into the culture? Are they excited? And, you know, let's talk a little bit about results, like to your point, or you know, how how did you if you've had an error in the past, what did you do to correct it and make sure that it doesn't happen again? Or really defining more of those interview questions to pull out the quality not only of work that that candidate did, but how they're essentially motivated, what motivates them to show up and be a top performer.

SPEAKER_02 9:24

So when you're doing these interviews, Rachel, like if you someone's listening right now, what would be some action steps that they might be able to take?

SPEAKER_00 9:30

Yeah, so I would say get those right people in the room, the people that are going to be um conducting the interviews and use those structured chronological interviews, you know, schedule a cadence of how you want those to go in a flow. Ask the candidates to walk you through specific accomplishments. You know, you really want to drill down into what was the goal, what did they actually do, and what were the measurable results. So it's you're really getting a lot of information when you're framing the questions in that way.

SPEAKER_01 10:00

You know, I think Lou Adler touches on that too. And um, one of the things he he said from his book is the best predictor of future performance is past comparable performance. And I think that that's essentially you just nailed that right on the head there. So, you know, it really does remove that bias and replaces that gut fill with evidence from what they've done and and you know what motivates them to continue to you know be top performers. So, what does this actually look like in a practice inside a growing company?

SPEAKER_00 10:28

Well, you see this firsthand, you know, where do companies get this wrong? And I think the biggest hiring mistake that we see in companies hiring for someone today is instead of what they're capable of becoming, uh, focusing on what they're doing now instead of what they're capable of becoming in the role. You know, you don't want to just focus on what does today look like, what does tomorrow look like? What does it look like for them in 30 days, in 60 days, in 90 days, in 12 months, and how does that ultimately impact the greater vision of your firm?

SPEAKER_02 10:58

That seems like that can be challenging as well because you're trying to predict where your firm's going, right? The demands and the needs. I assume that you're keeping a pretty good eye on your own pro forma and trajectory. I know in your role, you know, we look out three years and the firm looks very different in three years. It's probably hard to really predict where it's going, but maybe you can predict some volumes and what they might be seeing and as the role changes. And also Orcchart, I assume that's gonna evolve as well.

SPEAKER_00 11:26

I think it actually really helps in alliance with organizations who are focusing on budgets, right? You know, sometimes you just understand, like, well, you know, if we reach this target, we're probably gonna have to hire two or three more people. But utilizing this method is really gonna actually help you hone in on those projections and calculations of when you may need to hire a specific person versus focusing on efficiencies or things of that nature. So I think it's gonna actually give you better clarity on how to make those hiring decisions in the future and build for your growth.

SPEAKER_01 11:55

You know, and I think it does go back to hiring the right candidate in terms of if, you know, there's there's not to say I always say there's some, there's a right candidate for every job, right? And so I think when you're specifically talking about companies that are growing and scaling, when you do have this type of interview process and hiring process in place, it does motivate those driven individuals. So it goes back to again, somebody who's attracted to this job is gonna look at this and say, Okay, this is where I'm coming into the company, but this is where I can go, this is where I can grow. And Jim, you and I have talked about this in past podcasts about an actual active org chart versus you know what it looks like today and just people in certain seats. And so I think, you know, to go back to that point, it does hire the right culture fit for a growing company that is looking to hire not just you know a CSA today, but maybe a future advisor that wants, you know, CSA that wants to grow into an advisor or an uh investment analyst or whatever that may be. But having those career trajectories built into the interview process is really key.

SPEAKER_00 12:55

I think that that's a really good point. You know, you really want to position the roles as career-defining opportunities, um, specifically highlighting the growth, not just the stability. Um, this really this process really enables you to evaluate candidates on the trajectory and their their learning speed. You know, you really want to focus on um the platform, you know, what the offering is, not just that they're enthusiastic about taking the job, but the impact they can make, not just now, but in the future.

SPEAKER_02 13:24

I've got a question for you, Jordan. You've consulted with a lot of companies. And the question is, I think a lot of this maybe is a little obvious. There's books out there, of course. Lou wrote this book, Harvey Hyde. Why aren't there more firms using this? If the answer is obvious, why do they not employ these tactics? Why are we still stuck with task lists and really sort of just evaluating based on whether we like the person or not?

SPEAKER_01 13:50

Yeah, so I think there's a a couple of reasons, but I think the most obvious one is that a lot of times, especially in smaller RAs that I work with, by the time that they actually call me because they need somebody, they needed them six months ago. So it's all about they're hiring based on urgency and based on desperation. And essentially what has already happened by the time they get to me is I hired the wrong person for this role. It cost me X amount of money because of a trading error or because of just the costly hire itself being the wrong, the wrong hire. And ultimately, what I see happen is then they then they come to me and they say, you know, Jordan, how can we ensure that this doesn't happen again? Um and I always say, Well, when your EQ is up, your IQ is down, so you're making gut, quote unquote, gut-based decisions with no hiring process, because the reality is you just need to fill the role. So I think what the performance-based hiring actually requires is the clarity, the structure, the discipline, and really the consistency to continue to do this process. And sometimes that's uncomfortable, and sometimes it's there's not a a certain person in the seat that's helping them do this job. And as we know, if we're looking at a firm that's 12 people, and you're essentially have this whole interview processes with an owner or two owners, who who's actually running the process because they're trying to run a business. So, you know, I think it's really coming up with that structure and and sticking to the the structured process so that in the end they're gonna hire the right people that help grow and scale the business instead of hiring the wrong people that are taking money and and really it's not just money. Uh a wrong hire is more than just costly from a financial perspective, it's costly from a growth perspective.

SPEAKER_02 15:34

So I think what you're saying is the firms that um avoid uh making the mistake you mentioned, you know, where they should have hired somebody six months ago and hired the right person, they have clarity, structure, and discipline is what I heard.

SPEAKER_01 15:45

Absolutely. So I think it ultimately I would I would say, Jim, you know, most hiring mistakes aren't it's not a talent problem, it's a process problem.

SPEAKER_02 15:54

Yeah. And uh Rachel, do you want to comment on that? Because I think you are really good with processes, sometimes a little too good. Um seems like I get in trouble on occasion for not perfectly following your processes. But I do know that it drives efficiency and it's improved things around here quite a bit. Most folks don't want to do it probably because it's a little uncomfortable to stick to a careful process, but you've been really good at that.

unknown 16:15

Right.

SPEAKER_00 16:15

Yeah, I think specifically in this instant, the investment in time and really um purchasing higher with your head, reading it, studying it, evaluating it, and then ultimately presenting it to the individuals who make these very key hiring decisions from uh, you know, maybe a front desk operator all the way up to a a a department head or a C-suite. Um, I think that the investment is certainly worth it when you're saving, um, like Jordan mentioned, the time and the um just the investment uh of these people. So I think, you know, for us specifically when we shifted um to defining success upfront and aligning our interviews to it, everything really changed. You know, we've had better hires, better retention, faster onboardings, and clearer accountability. So I really feel like for individuals who are seeing this as an issue, which even if you're not seeing it as an issue, I I caution you to take a step back and evaluate because it it likely is, and and this process um can kind of work across the board. I feel like hiring managers really need to align on what success looks like before sourcing. Like Jordan mentioned, get ahead of it, invest some time into this book, into this process, standardizing your interview questions across candidates because that's how you're gonna clearly benchmark one candidate versus another. And you know, when you debrief with your internal team, it's really important to utilize those performance profiles that you built out to debrief on evidence and not opinions, like we talked about.

SPEAKER_01 17:44

You make a couple of really great points. So, Rachel, anybody who's listening to this podcast today, um, you know, I always say it, even if you're not in this situation today, start it today, get to know about the process, start implementing things. Um, but that could be, you know, anywhere between three to six months to really implement this. So anybody who's listening today that, you know, may be experiencing this and they're listening and they're saying, oh my gosh, if I only knew, it would have saved me X amount of time and money. But essentially, what would you say is the first move that you would recommend a firm make to start hiring true top performers?

SPEAKER_00 18:19

Well, I think the best thing that we did here at AVIDIN is we actually looked internally first. We looked at all of our current job descriptions for all of the staff on board and really thought about, you know, are they performance-based? Are they based on metrics? Are they based on success? And do our current staff members understand what success looks like for them in their roles? So we asked all of our department heads to get together and clearly um rework those job descriptions. And I think that we've seen meaningful benefit benefit from that with our current staff. So I would encourage people to kind of start there. You know, that that's maybe a less daunting place to start. But when it comes to hiring um and if you're looking to start sourcing, the first thing I would do is stop writing job descriptions. Start defining outcomes. You're gonna clearly understand and know I have a problem. What is the problem? And what is the solution? So when you start with a solution and work backwards, you're gonna get a much better outcome from that. Um, you know, so from there, I would say just you you really need to own this process and dive into it and really understand it and replace that gut feeling with a structured performance interview, um, utilizing those performance profiles that you've built out and hire for growth, not just for fit. You really need to focus on the longevity of what this role is gonna look like in the future for the firm, as well as, you know, building this repeatable, disciplined hiring process so you don't have to think about it. You and anyone else who might be on a hiring committee is gonna go into it with honestly very little prep.

SPEAKER_02 19:53

Well, so what I'm hearing is if you want to hire top performers, you have to build a system that actually identifies who these folks are.

SPEAKER_01 20:01

Absolutely. I think if you want to hire the top performers, you really have to hire for performance instead of tasks. So hiring really isn't an HR function. It's a growth strategy for a firm.

SPEAKER_02 20:12

If you got value from this podcast, I hope you did, um, I would recommend look up Lou Adler, get his book, Hire with Your Head, and uh share this podcast with somebody who's building a team.

SPEAKER_01 20:22

You know, Jim, I've got great news. Lou Adler is actually making an appearance not only in Houston, but in Dallas too. So if you're listening to this podcast and you're wanting to know more about it, definitely buy the book. But also, you know, check out the event that we have if you're interested, reach out to us today. I am super excited to meet Lou in person. He's been a mentor ever since I started, you know, doing this performance-based hiring myself. And I'm also really excited because I'll be a guest panelist.

SPEAKER_02 20:47

That's awesome. What are the dates on that again?

SPEAKER_01 20:49

We've got our Dallas luncheon in um Park House, Dallas, and that's April 29th from 11 30 to 2. And then we'll be in Houston the very next day, Thursday the 30th, Park House, Houston, and um again, 11 30 to 2. So make sure you follow the podcast for more, share it with others, and we'll see you next time.