Poor Communication Dents Profitability

Failure to communicate effectively with clients and their families will likely damage a financial adviser’s long-term business success, according to the Financial Planning Association (FPA).

A new study from the FPA Research and Practice Institute suggests the financial advice industry has become increasingly competitive in recent years, putting more pressure on advisers to answer client questions and service demands quickly. Advisers who are not differentiating themselves in their client communications are not reinforcing their value proposition, warns Lauren Schadle, executive director and CEO of FPA. This can mean losing out on business not just from an existing client, but from that client’s spouse, children and other family members.

The study suggests the most successful advisers communicate with clients on a daily basis (see “Investors Want Responsive and Transparent Advisers”). It can challenge many independent advisory firms to meet such rigorous communication demands, FPA researchers admit, so it is increasingly critical for advisers to be efficient in communications and service delivery efforts.

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANADVISERdash daily newsletter.

Key findings suggest that many advisers are not making a big enough effort to communicate with clients’ spouses and partners, or with their adult children. FPA researchers say both of these potential client segments can have a major impact on the long-term profitability of advisers’ businesses. The study shows that currently, about half of all advisers (48%) say that fewer than three-quarters of their clients meet with them as a couple. Advisers may be doing themselves a disservice by not insisting on meeting with their clients and their spouses/partners, the research suggests.

A mere 42% of advisers are proactively trying to attract younger prospects, the research suggests, and even fewer (34%) are proactively working to build relationships with the children of existing clients. Without a focus on building relationships with the younger family members of existing clients, many advisers are going to fall short on building profitable businesses for the long-term, FPA says.

“To offset client and asset attrition inherent in [older client] group, advisers would be wise to build relationships with that group's survivors, and to diversify their practices with younger clients to ensure the long-term viability of their businesses,” says Valerie Porter, director of the FPA Research and Practice Institute.

Researchers find 68% of advisers gather feedback from clients in some form, with “informal feedback” being the primary method. Female advisers and younger advisers (under age 40) are somewhat more likely to gather feedback from clients (77%) compared with male advisers (65%). Another 71% of advisers say that they segment their clients for communications purposes.  A vast majority (82%) of advisers who segment their clients also tier their service levels.

According to FPA, 56% of advisers have formally defined service standards in place, which may include frequency of contact provisions or limits on response times for client queries. Female advisers are more likely to define service standards (66%) compared with men (53%). At the same time, only 30% of all advisers indicate that they review and reinforce service standards on a regular basis, and another 44% say they communicate service standards when a client starts to work with the firm.

A full copy of the “2014 Trends in Client Communication Study” is available here.

GAO Finds Questionable Pension Advance Practices

An investigation by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) recently identified questionable practices of companies that offer retirees pension advances.

As part of its investigation, the GAO identified at least 38 companies that offered individuals lump-sum payments or advances in exchange for receiving part or all of their pension payment streams. These companies used multistep pension advance processes that included various other parties. The GAO investigation report says at least 21 of the 38 companies were affiliated with each other in ways that were not apparent to consumers. Findings also show that all of the companies operated primarily as web-based companies, and that some targeted financially vulnerable consumers with poor or bad credit nationwide.

According to the report, the GAO received offers from six out of 19 pension advance companies. These offers did not compare favorably with other financial products or offerings, such as loans and lump-sum options through pension plans. For example, the effective interest rates on pension advances offered to GAO during its undercover investigation typically ranged from approximately 27% to 46%, which were at times close to two to three times higher than the legal limits set by the related states on the interest rates assessed for various types of personal credit.

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan adviser news.

As a result of its findings, the GAO recommends that the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, as well as the Federal Trade Commission, review the pension advance practices identified in the report and exercise oversight as needed. The Federal Trade Commission reports it has not taken any public enforcement actions due in part to not receiving many complaints related to this topic. The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection says its oversight has been limited to instances where the products met certain characteristics.

The GAO also notes that consumers who are vulnerable to financial exploitation may lack the information needed to make sound decisions when it comes to pension advance transactions. The report recommends that since the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection facilitates coordinating federal financial education, it could help ensure that information reaches relevant pensioners.

The report documenting the results of the GAO investigation:

  • Describes the number and characteristics of pension advance companies and marketing practices;
  • Evaluates how pension advance terms compare with those of other products; and
  • Evaluates the extent to which there is related federal oversight.

Report highlights, as well as the full version, can be found here.

«

 

You’re viewing the third of three free articles.

  This is your final free article. 

Subscribe to a free PW newsletter - get free online access!

 Don’t leave before subscribing! 

If you’re a subscriber, please login.

Close