Buzzwords are for Pikers

Communicating with clarity, free of the tyranny of cliches

First a little housekeeping … John Mauldin asked me to write his weekly Thoughts from the Frontline newsletter (which I have faithfully read every week for 25 years) a few months back and I wanted to share my thoughts with you on a “philosophy of investing.” I happen to believe many financial advisors do not really have an investment strategy as I define the term, but I know many advisors who do not even have an investment philosophy. I hope you’ll find this piece thought-provoking.

Second, because so many of you use the TBG Dividend Growth ETF in your own investment allocations (reach out if you want more information or need help getting it approved at your firm’s platform), I thought some of you may want our take on the dividend implications (and more) of what appears to be new government policy on owning U.S. public companies.

For those who asked about the event I will be doing with Nick Murray in New York City in 2026, the date is set for Friday, October 30. The event will be totally free for advisors (TBG is picking up all event expenses) and will include both breakfast and lunch. The venue will be confirmed in a week or so and I will keep you posted on how to register when we are ready. It will be first-come, first-serve and more information will be forthcoming very soon.

Finally, if you subscribed to B2Bahnsen because you found me on Substack and had an interest in what I would be writing here, just know that this substack (my only one) is fully devoted to writing to other members of the financial advisory profession. I won’t be offended at all if you unsubscribe upon discovering what this is about, as it really is meant to be a “B2B” offering (business perspective for those within this business). My various investment and market commentary is always and forever at Dividend Cafe, and my various cultural and political ruminations are at Bahnsen.com. Thanks so much!

**********************

I actually have strong opinions about this week’s topic even beyond the wealth advisory profession. I serve on a couple not-for-profit boards, one corporate board, and, of course, am in conversation with various people about various business deals, all the time. In the course of these organic events and occurrences, one encounters a certain vocabulary and engages with folks who believe that certain phrases or “key words” mean something much more than they do. The reason I am bringing up the subject of buzzwords in B2Bahnsen is because I consider it a major red flag for those of us in the wealth advisory profession - a tell, if you will. And I want to offer a loving exhortation to not do it.

Non-profit folks fall prey to using the sort of language I am referring to more than regular people whose careers ought to subject them to market discipline. I have come to believe that this is because so many in the non-profit space are cosplaying - they over-compensating (for reasons I will resist the temptation to diagnose) and find themselves in a make-believe world where they talk the way they imagine “MBA types” talk in a “business setting.” It is kind of repulsive, if you want my honest opinion. I think the word I have heard some younger people us is “cringe.”

Entire Instagram accounts exist to make fun of this “corporate speak” and “MBA buzzword” universe wherein people talk a lot and yet say nothing, so really I am pretty late to the party here. If all I were doing was serving as an Amen Chorus to those who make fun of people who say things like “synergy” and “strategic alignment” than my piece would not be particularly useful (or to be ironic, it would not be “low-hanging fruit” that helps to "move the needle” or capture a “blue ocean strategy.”) But I want to apply a more particular exhortation around this topic to those of us in the advisory profession, because some of us may be guilty of it without knowing we are guilty of it, and I have an out-of-consensus theory as to where it comes from that I hope will be useful.

First, let’s make a distinction: Internal jargon - different from - buzzword cliche gobbledygook. Both can be real problems in the way advisors communicate with the outside world, but they are two different categories. I’ll start with “internal jargon.”

I am not suggesting that advisors stop talking like advisors. When we consider an SMA for a client, and talk about pricing in terms of basis points, and make reference to spreads in assessing credit risk, and refer to the IRR of an investment, I have to think we are mostly using terminology that is reasonably unavoidable in our line of work. In fact, I think we talk to our fellow team members (and other B2B talk) this way much more than we realize. I catch myself all the time moving into an almost different language when I am speaking with our portfolio management partners - both the jargon, the acronyms, and the implied understanding of certain concepts. And I do not think there is anything wrong with this … as long as you realize that your clients think you sound like an alien when you talk this way to them. Normal human beings do not know what SMA’s, IRR’s, or basis points are, and they thinks spreads are for a tailgate, not a measurement of credit risk. The use of jargon in front of clients does not make us sound smart - it makes us sound arrogant or aloof. And worse - it doesn’t communicate anything to the people who pay us to clearly communicate with them, because it gets lost in translation. I have heard some suggest that the remedy to this is for advisors, themselves, to not ever talk like financial advisors. I do not agree. When I talk to my Investment Solutions team I have to be liberated to talk like, you know, someone in the investment business. But advisors have to, and I mean have to, develop the muscle that turns it on and off when we are talking to our clients. Clarity, purposeful communication, and defined terms are so much more impactful to our relationships than words and figures of speech that cause the listener to tune out either because they don’t want to say that they got lost, or because they just think we sound like idiots.

But the second category, very distinct from the first, is what I affectionately referred to above as buzzword cliche gobbledygook. This is not specific to financial services or the reality of investment/financial vocabulary - but rather more generic talk that has become prevalent in our society. I believe it is a mask used by insecure people to cover up their own intellectual or professional deficiencies. It is not a very good mask. And while I do not like it when anyone does it, there is less excuse for competent, best-in-class advisors to do it than anyone else.

Our words have meaning. Postmodernism gave birth to deconstructionism and deconstructionism attempted to teach us that words lack meaning - that they are inherently ambiguous and fluid. This would be news to people who rely on words for information. Words matter, and if we have something to say, we have the ability to say it clearly, and if we are doing our jobs well, succinctly. When we use words that can mean anything, we have said something that means nothing. The modern business vocabulary that hides behind buzzwords and cliches and pop psycho babble speak does so because too many people are trying to justify their own existence. This, sadly, seems to include the MBA douche train establishment, or more charitably, the bureaucrat industrial complex (wait, is that more charitable?).

“Scale” actually has a meaning in a certain context. Do you know how many times I hear someone use the word “scale” when it doesn’t mean “scale” whatsoever? It is horrifying. I have considered ending friendships over it. If what you mean to say is, “we can do this easier,” that is a different sentiment than “scale.” Now, I can turn this essay into fifty other examples, or I can just leave it there and hope you get my point. We have a society of people using figures of speech that don’t make sense, that lack specificity, and primarily reflect ignorance and under-achievement, not sophistication and accomplishment.

Why am I bringing this up?

At the core of my philosophy of what a successful wealth advisory career looks like is the concept of deserved self-confidence. I do not believe one should be self-confident if they don’t know what they are doing, but where someone is capable, competent, and proficient, I believe their success as an advisor comes out of their own self-assurance. They do not fear the outcome of a prospective client turning them down. They do not fear a client wondering why their portfolio was up less than the market last month. And they do not feel the need to sound like a bad McKinsey consultant - or worse, a professor who teaches future McKinsey consultants! I will dedicate a future B2Bahnsen issue to my philosophy of referrals, but one of the reasons I disagree with nearly everything I have ever heard in our industry about receiving referrals from clients is because it all defies what any one of us would want or expect from a top-tier lawyer or heart surgeon. I believe the most successful advisors see themselves for what they ought to be - truly valuable professionals who create solutions for clients who need solutions - and that point of view ought to feed a self-confidence that puts down the path of the piker, and invites a communication style of clarity, brevity, and true meaning.

Buzzwords are a substitute for communication used by people looking for a substitute to real value. My encouragement of the day is to hold yourself and your work in such high regard that you can let your yes be yes and your no be no.

That will generate really strong KPI’s for you … (sometimes I crack myself up).