Nevin's Data "Points"

When you see a headline that confirms your sense of the world, you’re naturally predisposed to embrace, remember (and these days “share”) it as a validation of what you already perceive reality to be. Indeed, as human beings, we’re drawn to perspectives, surveys, and studies that validate our sense of the world. This “confirmation bias,” as it’s called, is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms our preexisting beliefs or hypotheses. It also tends to make us discount or dismiss findings that run afoul of our existing beliefs—even if the grounds supporting that premise are shaky, sketchy, or (shudder) downright scurrilous. Here are some things to look for—likely in the fine print or footnotes—as you evaluate those findings. There can be a difference between what people say they will (or might) do and what they actually will. No matter how well targeted they are, surveys (and studies that incorporate the outcome

This is the time of year when the nation’s graduates line up for accolades (and their diplomas). It is, for them, a beginning—a commencement of a new phase in their life.  But ahead of that, most are given the “opportunity” to hear some words of wisdom and inspiration from an individual that they have likely never heard of (though their parents may have). In that spirit, I’d like to offer the graduates of 2023 some lessons I’ve picked up along the way: Your first job can be like your first love—it will either bring a smile for years to come—or it can break your heart. And sometimes both.  Just because you’re young(er), people are going to assume you know things you don’t—and assume you don’t know things you do. Everything you’ve heard about your elders isn’t true. But some of it is. There actually ARE stupid questions. If your current boss doesn’t want to hear the truth, it may be time to look for a new one. There can be a “bad” time even for good ideas. Your wo

Resistance to retirement plan innovations (like automatic enrollment) have long been excused as being “too paternalistic” – but there might be a better standard. We’ve all heard it – concerns that imposing certain default choices on participants (and sometimes plan sponsors) are, however well-intentioned, intrusive and demeaning. Generally speaking, such concerns aren’t challenged – we “get it,” after all – most of “us” are do-it-for-myself types. Of course, most participants aren’t – and there’s plenty of anecdotal evidence that workers, and particularly younger workers, WANT that kind of proactive support from their employer. All of which calls to mind a new standard – one first (to my ears, anyway) articulated in the Nevin & Fred podcast by none other than Fred Reish. See, Fred was talking about explaining to his daughter what a fiduciary was – and she quickly grasped the concept, applying it to her mother and her support for her kids in looking out for them