Never be the Smartest Person in the Room

Water Cooler
#1

Hey guys!

I was reading an article where I saw Micheal Dell’s quote to never be the smartest person in a room. Since graduating college and taking my current job instead of an equity research position, I’ve been told by my peers I am too smart and driven for where I’m at. I try to blow it off, but it is rather a consistent theme that comes from even my bosses, bosses bosses, etc when I work with them. At first I thought it was just because of the level I’m working at being new going through the training process – but I’ve been recently working with some of the people at the very top of the area I’m specializing in (modeling, derivatives, and other capital markets stuff) and even they make the same comments.

The good thing is I have name reconigition nationally for the area I’m specializing in. I’ve already been scouted by other divisions and outside companies, because I stand out so much compared to my peers with a combination of the technical abilities and people skills. The bad thing is that I keep getting told this same thing at fairly regular intervals, which makes me wonder about Micheal Dell’s comment.

So what would the BSD’s on AF do? Would you want to stay the biggest fish in a small pond or would you aim to switch ponds at some point?

#2

All you did was make me wonder what is it that you do? national name recognition? That’s odd to me if you are not in the typical BSD revenue generating areas.

And it’s not exactly the same anyway. You can be stellar in say a back office job, but can definitely stumble in the front office job. I knew people who sucked in the private sector, went to the public sector and became rock starts because their peers were utter morons.

Lastly, the trick to being the smartest and having everyone like you without making any enemies or jealousy is another skill in itself. That’s real talent.

#3

Rawraw, your post appealed to me because I have found myself in similar situations from time to time throughout my career.

When I entered the corporate world of investments years and years ago, I think initially I was a little blown away by how protective certain people were about their little empires of nothingness, and how they preferred to fight to keep what they had supposedly “established” (a process, being “known” for something, etc.), even when it wasn’t really the best thing to do for the group or the firm. And it isn’t even just the really old dogs in the office, either. Sometimes you’ll find 20- and 30-somethings with insecurity about some even younger buck coming in, and they’ll pretend like their value-add propositions as workers are unassailable.

I always believed in the spirit of “you help me, I’ll help you” with regard to career growth and peers and I have never felt like I wanted to encroach on anybody else’s power base or process that they were known for. Because of that, I, like you, have felt resentful towards people who don’t reciprocate, who feel threatened by innovation, and who don’t really want to find intellectual satisfaction from their jobs but merely want “job security” and some inflated sense of importance-without-doing from their positions.

My advice would be that, despite feeling angry towards these small-minded, protective stagnators, that you remain the bigger person and work to compromise with them on whatever issues arise. You may feel that it is unfair (especially if they don’t reciprocate), but in matters of how other peers or managers judge you, you will be seen in the better light. But for this to work, you have to double-check your own game and make sure that what you are bringing to the table is what the firm actually needs, as seen by your boss and your boss’s boss. If those conditions are met, and you just keep doing your thing, 9 times out of 10, the cream should rise to the top in the long run. Good luck.

#4

“Never” is a strong word, “smartest” is as well. Depends which room as well haha

I don’t really like that quote… To me, I guess it means, have some humility and don’t perceive yourself as the smartest person in the room. If you believe you are the smartest, you will feel like the smartest, act like the smartest, and that will turn people away from you, especially smart people.

#5

Lots of ways to interpret this. One is that if you are the smartest person in the room, you should be looking for a different room, so you can continue to learn and grow. Another is that if you are a leader, you want your advisors to be smarter than you or you would do better just advising yourself.

Finally, it doesn’t say “be the dumbest person in the room,” it just means make sure at some people are smarter than you. Many of your employees don’t need to be brilliant, just competent, but if you are going to prosper, at least some of them should be smarter than you.

#6

You probably are too smart and driven for your workplace. Some companies don’t necessarily value people like that because they are less dynamic and have a rigid structure in a place, and by you appearing like you are trying to get ahead of things, it just makes you look like less of a fit. It can so be intimidating to other colleagues which is also bad. So either you need a change of scenery or have to tailor yourself to your environment. Intelligence can be intimidating and what your colleagues are saying is probably an underhanded compliment. What you shouId really be doing is whatever you can to make your *manager* feel like the smartest person in the room. If you can do that you will be rewarded. Otherwise you just look like a smart person with a lot of initiative just out for yourself. This is where your EQ matters more than your IQ. People that have less IQ but are a better organizational fit may get promoted ahead of you if that’s the case. Took me a while to figure this out and I was in your shoes till I was like 25 then I figured out that what often mattered more was having the EQ to make everyone else around me feel like they had more IQ than I did, and when my manager saw what I was doing in terms of making my teammates feel good about themselves and how I really tried to mentor and make my peers around me ‘smarter’, it was then that they took a closer look at me and figured I should be the one that got promoted. (Disclaimer: this only works if you have competent managers. All bets are off if everyone around you really is an idiot.)

#7

By the way, here are some things I picked up while I was working private equity / leveraged buyouts. Surely my colleagues then were way above average in terms of academic and analytical intelligence, but where they really shined in my opinion was in their emotional intelligence, especially at the VP+ level. They were the most polished and finessed people I have ever worked with in finance (and I’ve spent time in banking, research, hedge funds, and PE so that is saying a lot).

Some examples I remember were things like VP presenting complex information to the partners, and saying things like “You probably know this already, but…” and then proceed to explain that piece of information. It was obvious that the partner would NOT know it because the information was too in the weeds, but the partner appreciated that the VP made them look smart, and in turn the partner took the idea to the investment committee to make our deal research look like it was incredibly well researched and ultimately it was very well received.

Another example might be when we were talking with a potential portfolio company that we were thinking about buying. We had done a lot of industry research upfront and so the execs we were meeting with could clearly tell we were well-prepared, but when we asked questions about the industry we might preface it something with like “I was wondering if you could just tell us a bit more about X, Y, and Z – we’re just ‘dumb finance guys’ so we really want to make sure we understand what your company’s most urgent issues are and figure out how we can help best by investing with you.”

These are some suggestions, but the key thing is to put the people you’re speaking with at ease, make them seem like they have the upper hand, be willing to share your wisdom, and make everyone else around you look like they’re the ones that are smart. In many cases you will be the one that will be rewarded most handsomely.

I talk about some of this other stuff in my M&I articles about navigating a career in sell-side research (which is VERY similar in the sense that to get ahead, it’s about making your clients/salespeople/traders look smart, etc.) and you can read some more of those articles here --> www.linkedin.com/in/numicareerconsulting

Good luck - I think you’re on the right track. Most people your age wouldn’t even think about asking these questions, but they should. The fact that you’re self-aware enough to realize how important they are is a good thing. But do also be open to looking at other options, especially equity research if that’s what you want to do – it does sound like perhaps you have outgrown your current work environment and need something more challenging.

#8

Thanks for the feedback guys!

I want to clarify that no one really hates me, I hate them, or make my bosses look bad – the same people who make the comments also have asked what they can respectively do to keep me around. At the end of the day, they all think I’ll leave and go work for either one of the various management teams I interface with or some other player in the industry.

And it isn’t that I’m a genius by any stretch – just pick things up quicker than my peers and have a better technical mind. But if I was stuck in a room full of MIT quants or BChads, I’m certain I’d be at the bottom of the barrel :slight_smile: Hence the room and pond analogy.

Emotional intelligence is actually what I view as my biggest strength, which of course helps because I’m working alongside with who have been around for many years. But good points Numi, they are very helpful.

Very true and definitely applies. Thanks for the feedback :slight_smile:

#9

Good post gents. At the onset you sounded arrogant, but the follow ups were useful and made me assume you’re not. Just something to watch for depending on who you’re interacting with (something I’ve been guilty of and try to monitor - not a dig).

Im im rarely the smartest guy in the room when I’m around our big dogs, but numi gave me something to watch for on topics I’m serving as the expert on and when I’m interacting with others I need to help execute strategy.

#10

emotional intelligence is pretty much everything when you move to VP+ level. In many situation one unnecessary comment and bad posturing can set your career back 6 moths+.

Numi suggestions are spot on, and i worked with people who are natural at being able to negotiate and make other party feel comfortable. I am still working on it

#11

As I’m rarely the smartest person in the conversation – much less the room – I can follow this advice without breathing hard.

#12

I actually hate when people say things like “we’re just dumb finance guys” or “you probably know more about this than me” when it’s obvious that they are highly successful, smart and know a ton about the subject at hand. To me it seems heavy handed and is actually kind of an insult since they’re assuming I’m dumb enough to not realize what they’re doing.

I did read a study recently in the FT that said it doesn’t matter if complements are genuine or insincere, even if the subject know they are insincere they still get an ego boost.

On not seeming like a smart a-hole at work, my advice is to really listen to everyone around you and to not cut them off or talk over them even if you think you know what they are going to say. A lot of smart people struggle with this.

#13

I agree. If I feel like i’m being “brokered” on a deal, I will immediately not like it and it won’t see my investment committee. easy when dealing with jv partners. difficult when it’s your boss.

I guess this is a little different situation than the OP is talking about, but I think it also happens a lot when you’re dealing with people trying to sell you something.

Any buy siders out there - how do you handle things when you and your boss don’t see eye to eye on an investment? especially when it’s obvious that there’s not much to like about a deal???

#14

Brain same study came up in a class I’m taking (not top 2 and pt but no hacksaw I had kids before the af threshold for scrotal retention was designed and I’m getting the big v in December so were covered on further population deterioration - I also am overinsured, have a well funded 529, and am very specific with my boys on what it takes to keep there giblets).

The last paragraph in brains post is spot on and was also covered in the course.

#15

Different world turd but my team does the forward projections for our sales forecast (and well probably go ipo in the next 12-24 so a miss in the first 8 quarters would send institutional money scrambling and be a 75% valuation hit). Too low and we could be leaving 100’s of millions on the table at offering.

One of the hardest things is saying “that # isn’t right”. I don’t have the right answer but id assume its dependent on the culture. Were data driven and confrontation (the right way) is encouraged, so debate with #'s behind it is acceptable. ill scenario it with a #'s driven baseline and then an opinion based forecast and we defend both and let senior management decide where they want to end up at.

#16

I don’t work out in buy side but I’ve been in many situations in the past where say, a client and I don’t agree. There’s a good saying you can use in such situations, it’s from How to Win Friends and Influence People by Dale Carnegie (I highly recommend that book for anyone.) You start out by saying, “I may be wrong, lets look at the facts.” You both present the facts and if you are right, he’ll likely agree with you, which works out better than a stand off.

Also it’s better than starting out sounding like a “dumb finance guy”; its possible for anyone to make a mistake, even a really smart person.

#17

^funny, my boss loves to take a similar approach where he’ll hit me at all angles with seemingly unrelated questions to try to get me to agree with him on a certain point. i know he’s doing it, and it’s kind of fun to go through the back and forth. we have a good working relationship so it works.

but he will never tell me why he is at a certain conclusion. his game is to try and make you feel like you’ve gotten there yourself. but since i know how he operates i have no problem challenging his logic on the steps to his (unspoken) conclusion. the guy is a master at getting other people to his conclusion and i see the value in this approach. on the other hand i think this is really only needed because people are too fucking sensitive/emotional.

i prefer the direct route: here is my conclusion, here is my logic in getting there. if you disagree, prove to me why I’m wrong and i’ll change my mind.

#18

I think the “dumb finance guy” is tongue and cheek. This would be unambiguous if you heard that in normal dialogue with me.

Separately, good suggestion on the Dale Carnegie Book --> http://www.therapysites.com/userfiles/2188465/file/Dale%20Carnegie%20PDF%20Book.pdf

There is also an excellent book called “Influence” by Robert Cialdini which I have read and would also strongly recommend. There’s some overlap with the Carnegie book but this is much more grounded in empirical data, which I like.

#19

The easiest way to resolve this is to build credibility, and you build credibility by making millions for your fund :slight_smile:

But at the risk of stating the obvious, this happens all the time. Even if you follow the same investment process and style, people naturally have different investment sensibilities. It really comes down to whether there is a truly fundamental difference, or if there is a misunderstood thesis. For example, there are certain types of companies that I like to invest in that my PM won’t touch. I like patent licensing companies because I think I have some pretty strong connections in the channel that can help me understand what’s going on. My portfolio manager doesn’t want to touch them because they’re too opaque. In this case, it doesn’t make sense for me to pitch them because he’ll just never come around. These situations aren’t things he’s interested in investing in, so I’m barking up the wrong tree if I’m trying to pitch him these ideas.

In other cases, we may not see eye to eye on a potential opportunity. If I’m strongly convicted in my idea, I’ll ask him to explain to me what gives him reservations about the investment. If he can’t articulate the bear thesis clearly, then at least he’ll hear himself talk and perhaps come to the realization that some of his concerns may be unfounded. If he does have a strong handle of the bear thesis, I’ll go item by item to present a fact-based argument why his concerns may be unfounded. I’ll then wrap things up with my interpretation of those facts, but I always prefer to lead by facts rather than evidence. That way, we’re both looking at the same set of issues and nobody has concerns that I’m trying to data-mine or whatever.

But yeah, at the end of the day, the buy-side really IS about making it rain. If the fund makes money, nobody’s feelings get hurt and everyone is happy.

#20

This is why quotes from rich people are stupid and useless.