Business

The Fixed Mindset vs. The Growth Mindset

Published

5 years ago

October 7, 2020

Sales is a tricky business to succeed at; anyone in the industry will tell you that the idea behind sales is much more difficult in execution than you might initially think. Being successful can be achieved, but these days there are so many different ways to be successful that it’s challenging to pick one road that works the best. Brandon Harris, the Sales VP at Otter PR, has a wealth of experience in sales and has pinpointed a major limiting factor for many sales groups. He’s seen both sides of this debate’s effects with multiple companies and has since been trying to educate the sales community on this very subject.

The Fixed Mindset versus the Growth Mindset is a rather interesting choice to make as both sides have their pros and cons; however, statistical evidence suggests the idea that one might perhaps more often yield results over the other. Before we discuss that, first, each mindset must be laid out and explained.

THE FIXED MINDSET

The Fixed Mindset is a more precise and secure state of mind and practice in sales. Often, this approach focuses heavily on what works rather than merely improving. It could be argued that it doesn’t tend to heavily involve the more personal influence of sales and the value of individual strengths and weaknesses. Fixed Mindsets tend to look at cold hard facts without considering the margin of error for these facts. More often than not, you’ll see examples of leaders in a Fixed Mindset being heavily focused on having a secondary education but perhaps less work experience.

In addition, the Fixed Mindset tends to have less belief & efficacy of their employees. There needs to be a detailed set of requirements met by each individual for them to be considered qualified, and the Fixed Mindset follows them to a near tee. Perhaps the most distinguishing feature of the Fixed Mindset is a risk-averse approach to sales. There isn’t much venturing outside of the formulaic nature of how it operates and, as a result, tends to yield low-risk based results.

This is not to say there’s no value in the Fixed Mindset; the Fixed approach doesn’t tend to err on the side of risk-taking. Depending on the individual industry, this could be a good thing as risk-reward analysis can be an invaluable tool for a sales group if the market is right for it. However, the fact remains that Fixed Mindset is a far more rigid approach to sales that is more circumstantial in the way of success.

THE GROWTH MINDSET

The Growth Mindset is a more fluid approach to sales. The idea involves more risk-taking, but also more results-based decision-making. The belief that employees’ records show more of their capabilities than what they look like through the traditional ‘on paper’ lens. The Growth Mindset takes the time to teach the employees and future leaders instead of going out of business to seek new members to fill those roles.

It is a mindset heavy in the investment of existing company members rather than investing in new members who might not perform according to specifications. A growth mindset is frequently one that takes a more direct look at employees under the umbrella of the company and invests in those who have yielded the most results or show the most promise and teach them how to fill the roles they’re expected to occupy rather than leaving them at where they are already excelling.

This mindset has a far less rigid approach, focusing heavily on promoting and using resources to invest in their team. This grants employees more efficiency and empowerment to make the right decisions for the company and their department as a whole.

WHY DOES IT MATTER?

Harris believes that these two mindsets, while both yield some semblance of benefits, have a superior mix. He believes that the growth mindset is far more lucrative for the future of sales as it promotes a more genuine approach to sales and goes based on performance rather than what employees look like on paper. The risk-taking involved in Growth Mindset is also something that can be attributed to further success for companies who choose the Growth Mindset and take educated risks.

These decisions ultimately help the health of the company and the sales industry at large as they help set the precedent of the growth mindset as the norm. It creates a more lucrative business in terms of the revenue, and the health of the sales industry is evolving with the changing times. Whether it’s practiced effectively or not across the board, the future of sales is the growth mindset.

As leaders in the sales industry, it is your responsibility to ensure that these are things that are taken account of when in the process of moving forward with large decisions. These individual mindsets must be chosen carefully and with a great deal of thought beforehand, and if it is not done successfully it can be detrimental to the health of the company’s success.

Business

Click for Counsel: YesLawyer Wants to Make Lawyers as Accessible as Wi-Fi

Published

5 days ago

April 1, 2026

Matthew Wiles

Photo Courtesy of: YesLawyer

Byline: Andi Stark

For many people facing a legal problem, the most difficult part is not understanding their rights but finding a lawyer willing to speak with them in the first place. Long wait times, unclear pricing, and administrative hurdles often delay even the most basic consultations. YesLawyer, an AI-enabled plaintiff firm operating across all 50 states, is testing whether technology can shorten that gap.

Founded in 2024 by 25-year-old entrepreneur Rob Epstein, the platform offers free intake, automated screening, and, in many cases, same-day conversations with licensed attorneys. The idea is simple: reduce the friction between a client’s first request for help and an actual legal discussion. In this interview, Epstein explains how the system works, where artificial intelligence fits into the process, and what problems the company is trying to address in the broader legal system

Q: When you say you want lawyers to be “as accessible as Wi-Fi,” what does that mean in practical terms?

A: It’s a way of describing speed and availability. Someone dealing with a workplace dispute, a serious injury, or an immigration issue should be able to move from an online form or phone call to a real conversation with counsel in hours, not weeks. YesLawyer is structured so that a client begins with a free case evaluation, goes through automated conflict checks and basic screening, and, in many instances, speaks with a lawyer the same day.

Q: How does the process work once someone contacts the platform?

A: We use a structured workflow. It starts with a short questionnaire and an initial conversation to capture basic facts. That information feeds into conflict checks and internal review. The system then proposes a match with a licensed attorney and provides a calendar link for a virtual consultation, often within 24 hours. After the meeting, the client receives a written legal plan outlining next steps, deadlines, and estimated fees.

Q: Where does artificial intelligence fit into that process, and where does it stop?

A: AI is used for organizing and routing information, not for giving legal advice. It helps with conflict checks at scale, case categorization, and structured summaries so attorneys can focus on the substance of the matter. Every consultation is conducted by a licensed lawyer, and all decisions about strategy or next steps are made by humans.

Q: What problem is this model trying to solve in the current legal system?

A: Delay and cost are still major barriers. Many civil plaintiffs face long waits just to get a first appointment, along with high retainers and hourly billing that make early legal advice risky. We try to respond with faster consultations, flat-fee options, and financing. The idea is to remove administrative friction so lawyers spend less time on logistics and more time speaking with clients.

Q: Some critics say platforms like this blur the line between a technology company and a law firm. How do you describe YesLawyer?

A: We describe ourselves as a national, AI-enabled plaintiff firm that connects clients with independent attorneys. That structure does raise regulatory questions, especially around responsibility and oversight. We focus on licensing verification, attorney-written case plans, and clear communication about fees and services.

Q: You’ve said the main bottleneck is “systems” rather than people. What do you mean by that?

A: The issue isn’t that lawyers don’t want to help more people. It’s that the systems around them make it hard to scale their time. Intake, scheduling, and document handling take hours. Automating those parts means attorneys can handle more matters without being overwhelmed by repetitive tasks.

Q: Does this model risk favoring only the most profitable cases?

A: That’s a real concern in legal technology. Automation often works best for repeatable, high-volume disputes. Our view is that lowering administrative cost can actually make it easier to take on smaller or more complex cases that might otherwise be turned away. Whether that holds over time depends on the data.

Measuring Impact Over Time

YesLawyer’s attempt to compress the timeline between inquiry and consultation reflects broader changes in how legal services are being delivered. As artificial intelligence becomes more common in administrative work, firms are experimenting with new ways to reduce wait times and clarify costs.

The company’s early growth suggests that many clients value faster access to an initial conversation, even before considering long-term representation. Whether this platform-based model becomes widely adopted or remains one of several emerging approaches will depend on regulatory developments, lawyer participation, and measurable outcomes for clients. For now, YesLawyer’s experiment highlights a central question in modern legal practice: how quickly can help realistically be made available to the people who need it.