Invisible Threat
The moment arrives when someone realizes the safest answer isn't the right answer. When the document technically allows something, but your gut tells you it shouldn't. That tension—that pause before collapsing into a decision—is where fiduciary judgment actually lives. In this episode of Invisible Threat, discover what separates competence from excellence in trust work. You'll explore how exceptional fiduciaries learn to interpret the human reality underneath a beneficiary's request, why institutional systems can inadvertently reward procedural safety over sound judgment, and how the industrialization of fiduciary work poses an invisible threat to the profession itself. The conversation reveals the crucial distinction between "Can we?" and "Should we?"—and why that gap is where judgment truly develops, not through mechanical process, but through mentorship, disagreement, and relational learning. Host Carter Wilcoxson returns to unpack themes from a previous conversation, this time alongside Dr. Matthew Eby and Joanne Eby, who together authored groundbreaking research on fiduciary judgment. Their discussion centers on how institutions shape the judgment cultures within which fiduciaries operate—examining the ROE process, discretionary decision-making standards, and the tension between institutional risk management and genuine fiduciary duty. This is a conversation for anyone in trust work who has felt that pause before deciding. About the Guest: Dr. Matthew Eby and Joanne Eby are researchers and thought leaders examining fiduciary judgment, institutional culture, and the future of trust work in an age of increasing automation and standardization.
18 Episoder
Kommentarer
0Vær den første til å kommentere
Registrer deg nå og bli medlem av Invisible Threat sitt community!