Another mantra at Andersen was quality. It was instilled in us — standards could not be too high. Anything with the firm’s name on it had to be perfect. The term “good enough” was not part of our lexicon. I realize that still, when every time I review a product from our team at my current job, I’m running through the Andersen quality checklist in my mind. Correct spelling, grammar, and consistency are obviously required. But I’m also asking myself, Is the product the result of critical thinking? Does it pass the “So what?” test? Is there sufficient data for the conclusions? Did it follow established processes in its creation? Most important, does it address the client’s pain? If we weren’t truly invested in solving the client’s problems, that would show. It seems trite to say that we were taught to care, but, in a way, we were. We were taught to appreciate the management and economic challenges faced by our clients so that we could truly partner with them to help.

We also learned very early how to conduct ourselves to instill confidence in our clients. We had guidance in how to dress and communicate. There was the coaching and quality review to help keep us from making mistakes in our products before they got to clients. As a result, we learned to be mature and professional very early in our careers.

The firm also believed in meritocracy. The “up or out” culture seemed harsh from the outside. What it meant, however, was that there were known standards for what skills and abilities you needed to move up to the next level. There was tremendous positive energy in an environment like this. Your supervisors continuously gave you opportunities to practice new tasks and coached you. If you succeeded against the standards, you were promoted. If not, you knew why and what to work on for the next promotion cycle. It sounds simple, but I have since seen many organizations where employees are demoralized because they don’t know specifically what they need to do to be promoted, and the process descends into management “playing favorites.”

When the firm dissolved, I was consumed with anger, frustration, and sadness. I tried to focus on the work at hand, which for me was at a large, publicly traded company — about as far away from the energetic partnership in which I had grown up as you can get. After a couple of years, I went to a small, private firm where I have more latitude and more collaboration with others on the management team. Now, when I think about Andersen, I often find myself reflecting on what I learned in those formative years. I try to live up to the values with which I was raised in business. That, to me, is the legacy of Arthur Andersen.