Complexity as Disqualifier

“A key part of the research model was the firm's Friday lunch meetings, where ideas were presented. The analysts would gather around the table and go through ideas one story at a time, picking apart every little aspect and reviewing every angle of a potential investment opportunity to determine if it was wor- thy of being in the portfolio. "It was quite an exchange," said one former analyst. "It was the type of thing that you had to be prepared for and one that if you were not, you would surely get caught." The Friday lunch was not a place to be unprepared or long- winded. Robertson likes hearing stories quickly and efficiently. "Get to the point or don't bother," was the way one former an- alyst put it. And the time limit was short—five minutes or so, sum it up, get it out, and move on. That was the nature of the meetings, and they worked. If something was too complicated, he would not like the idea. Analysts were expected to sum up their investment ideas in four sentences. The four sentences may have consisted of six months of work, but that was all the time they were given to make their case and get the information in front of Robertson.”

“so well built, made of the finest oak, break? Robertson would say that more than the table is broken. The credibility of the re- search is now called into question. The story is broken; it is time to move on to something else.”