1 ECIC Collective Evaluation Structure
1.1 Overview
ECIC’s client strategy determination combines three data sources into a holistic client assessment: onboarding form responses, discovery/onboarding call transcripts, and structured advisor notes. This collective evaluation maps client psychology to appropriate portfolio strategy allocations rather than generating numerical risk scores.
1.2 Dual-Track Evaluation System
1.2.1 Track 1: Client Psychology → Strategy Allocation
Maps client behavioral profile to Growth/Income/Diversification mix based on psychological readiness and life circumstances.
1.2.2 Track 2: Internal Investment Research (Tick System) → Security Selection
Proprietary scoring system for individual securities that determines holdings and weights within chosen strategies. Operates independently of client risk assessment.
1.3 Data Integration Architecture
1.3.1 Input Sources
{
"data_sources": {
"onboarding_form": {
"behavioral_responses": "7 psychological questions (raw responses)",
"financial_context": "net worth, liquidity, experience level",
"ethical_priorities": "values alignment and novel concerns",
"logistics": "account types, coordination needs"
},
"call_transcript": {
"discovery_call": "initial conversation transcript via Workers AI",
"onboarding_call": "strategy design conversation transcript",
"duration_and_participants": "meeting metadata"
},
"advisor_notes": {
"google_doc_structured_notes": "advisor observations and decisions",
"key_discussion_points": "manual advisor input during calls",
"action_items": "next steps and follow-up requirements"
}
}
}1.3.2 Collective Evaluation Framework
{
"evaluation_synthesis": {
"psychological_profile": {
"anxiety_indicators": {
"sleep_stress_patterns": "extracted from behavioral Q4",
"general_risk_avoidance": "extracted from behavioral Q3",
"conversation_cues": "advisor observations from transcript",
"preparedness_flag": "$1k liquidity question response"
},
"values_prioritization": {
"ethics_vs_volatility": "behavioral Q7 + conversation context",
"understanding_importance": "how much they want to know holdings",
"framework_evolution_comfort": "acceptance of changing exclusions"
},
"time_horizon_indicators": {
"long_term_commitment": "behavioral Q5 + life circumstances",
"cash_flow_needs": "current vs future liquidity requirements",
"life_stage_context": "from conversation and additional context"
}
},
"strategy_mapping": {
"growth_allocation": {
"primary_driver": "long-term commitment + low anxiety + ethical prioritization",
"typical_range": "60-100% for psychologically prepared clients",
"exclusion_criteria": "high anxiety, near-term cash needs"
},
"income_allocation": {
"primary_driver": "cash flow needs + yield prioritization",
"typical_range": "0-40% based on financial circumstances",
"inclusion_triggers": "retirement, living expenses, psychological comfort"
},
"diversification_allocation": {
"primary_driver": "need for index-like performance + volatility sensitivity",
"typical_range": "0-30% for tracking error comfort",
"inclusion_rationale": "emotional difficulty with concentrated strategies"
}
},
"decision_framework": {
"aggressive_structure": {
"profile_match": "high ethical conviction + low volatility anxiety + long horizon",
"typical_allocation": "80-100% Growth, 0-20% Income/Diversification",
"client_characteristics": "younger, high risk tolerance, values-first mindset"
},
"moderate_structure": {
"profile_match": "balanced ethical/predictability needs",
"typical_allocation": "40-70% Growth, 20-40% Income, 10-30% Diversification",
"client_characteristics": "mixed priorities, some volatility sensitivity"
},
"custom_blends": {
"rationale": "unique life circumstances requiring tailored approach",
"examples": "trust accounts, complex coordination needs, unusual risk factors"
}
}
}
}1.4 Critical Assessment Questions
1.4.1 Financial Preparedness Flags
{
"red_flags": {
"liquidity_concern": "$1k access question = No/Unsure",
"over_investment_risk": "investable amount approaches liquid net worth",
"debt_indicators": "employment instability + high investment enthusiasm"
},
"green_flags": {
"financial_stability": "emergency fund + steady income + realistic expectations",
"appropriate_risk_taking": "understands volatility tradeoffs for ethical alignment"
}
}1.4.2 Psychological Readiness Indicators
{
"anxiety_assessment": {
"conversation_stress_cues": "extracted from transcript analysis",
"self_reported_patterns": "sleep/stress behavioral responses",
"volatility_tolerance": "Q1 (missed gains) + Q7 (ethics vs volatility)",
"advisor_judgment": "professional assessment of client emotional readiness"
},
"values_conviction": {
"ethical_prioritization": "willingness to accept tracking error for values alignment",
"understanding_desire": "importance of knowing individual holdings",
"community_participation": "comfort with evolving ethical framework"
}
}1.5 Evaluation Workflow
1.5.1 Phase 1: Data Collection Complete
graph TB
A[Onboarding Form Submitted] --> B[Discovery Call Recorded]
B --> C[Onboarding Call Scheduled]
C --> D[All Data Sources Available]
D --> E[Collective Evaluation Process]1.5.2 Phase 2: Synthesis Process
{
"synthesis_steps": {
"step_1_flag_assessment": {
"financial_preparedness": "review $1k question + net worth context",
"complexity_flags": "trust accounts, coordination needs, unusual circumstances"
},
"step_2_psychological_mapping": {
"anxiety_profiling": "behavioral responses + conversation observations",
"values_prioritization": "ethics vs predictability balance assessment"
},
"step_3_strategy_recommendation": {
"portfolio_mix_design": "Growth/Income/Diversification percentages",
"implementation_timeline": "immediate vs phased approach",
"monitoring_plan": "anxiety tracking and adjustment triggers"
},
"step_4_documentation": {
"rationale_recording": "why this specific allocation was chosen",
"risk_acknowledgment": "client understanding confirmation",
"future_adjustment_criteria": "triggers for rebalancing psychology/allocation"
}
}
}1.5.3 Phase 3: Strategy Implementation
{
"implementation_data": {
"final_allocation": {
"growth_percentage": "integer (0-100)",
"income_percentage": "integer (0-100)",
"diversification_percentage": "integer (0-100)",
"rationale": "text explanation of psychology → allocation mapping"
},
"account_setup": {
"account_types": "from form logistics section",
"transfer_coordination": "existing account consolidation plan",
"special_requirements": "trust management, beneficiary setup, etc."
},
"ongoing_monitoring": {
"anxiety_check_schedule": "quarterly or as-needed basis",
"allocation_adjustment_triggers": "life changes, market stress, values evolution",
"communication_preferences": "how client wants updates and check-ins"
}
}
}1.6 Distinction: Client Assessment vs Internal Tick System
1.6.1 Client Psychology Assessment (This Document)
- Purpose: Match client behavioral profile to appropriate strategy allocation
- Output: Growth/Income/Diversification percentage mix
- Data Sources: Form responses, conversation transcripts, advisor judgment
- Update Frequency: Major life changes or psychological shifts
1.6.2 Internal Tick Rating System (Separate Process)
- Purpose: Evaluate individual securities for inclusion and weighting
- Output: Numerical rating determining holdings within strategies
- Data Sources: Financial metrics, ESG analysis, management execution, market position
- Update Frequency: Continuous research-driven updates
1.7 Storage and Retrieval
1.7.1 Evaluation Archive Structure
{
"client_evaluation_record": {
"client_id": "unique_identifier",
"evaluation_date": "timestamp",
"data_sources": {
"form_submission": "link_to_structured_data",
"call_transcripts": "array_of_transcript_urls",
"advisor_notes": "google_doc_link"
},
"synthesis_results": {
"psychological_profile": "structured_assessment_output",
"strategy_recommendation": "final_allocation_with_rationale",
"implementation_notes": "special_considerations_and_flags"
},
"advisor_signature": "sloane_approval_timestamp"
}
}This collective evaluation structure ensures no client receives a strategy allocation without comprehensive psychological assessment while maintaining the systematic approach needed for delegation and quality consistency.