Round in Circles

The Adviser’s Dilemma

A monthly column where Emma unpacks real-life situations from across the profession and shares a fresh perspective.
Each month you'll find the latest column published here and also featured in Money Marketing Magazine.
To submit a question anonymously click here

Dear Emma,

I have a client whom I inherited from a retiring adviser a few years ago, and with whom the same issue arises at every annual review.

The previous adviser recommended that he open a new personal pension with us and transfer his final salary pension CETV into here rather than the workplace pension he already held. The client recalls being told that the new pension would perform better. However, when he compares the two plans, the original workplace pension appears to have performed more strongly.

At each review, he pulls up the performance charts, puts them side by side and asks me to explain the difference. I talk him through the investments, the charges and the fact that a comparison based on headline performance alone may not tell the whole story. There is no advice fee deducted from his workplace pension, but there is from the pension we manage so this is not a like for like comparison. I go over all the extra value add we provide for this advice fee including his lifetime cashflow planning, IHT advice, general tax advice etc. He generally seems satisfied with the explanation and is happy to leave things as they are.

But the following year, he raises exactly the same challenge again.

I’m beginning to feel frustrated, particularly as I wasn’t responsible for the original recommendation and don’t know precisely what was said at the time. I also wonder whether continuing to explain the figures in different ways is actually helping.

I've seen this pattern more widely amongst other advisers in my firm too, as if there's some clients who always need to start the meeting with a challenge the adviser must rise to to prove their mettle.

How should I handle a question that appears to have been answered, but keeps returning? Any advice?

Yours, Round in Circles

Dear Round in Circles,

I understand the frustration completely. Every year you answer what seems to be the same question, apparently to your client's satisfaction. You get back on track and then next time they ask it again. On top of that, you're being asked to defend a recommendation you didn't make, from conversations you were never part of.

At the same time, I wonder whether the recurring question is actually providing some very useful information.

Because when a good answer doesn't make a question go away, it's often a sign that there's another disguised question sitting underneath it.

Here's a hunch - I’m speculating wildly and so I might be wide of the mark - but I've done enough research with clients to see that in financial planning, we often underestimate the impact of a handover on our clients. Even when it's handled with real care, clients often feel a whole host of feelings. Some experience a genuine sense of loss. Some feel something closer to abandonment, or even betrayal. Some clients feel irritated or slighted. Most feel unsettled to some degree.

And yet I rarely see those feelings addressed out loud. In fact, usually the client is left to manage them alone, or not at all. And when that happens, I think even the most caring adviser faces a bit of an uphill battle to build a trusted, connected, meaningful relationship. Frustratingly, excellence and care isn’t always the antidote either, because sometimes the excellence makes it even harder for clients to talk about it, because ‘what on earth is there to complain about’?

Yet not being explicit about these feelings is such a missed opportunity to demonstrate your benevolence and integrity. You also show you are willing to talk about hard things and you position yourself as an ally and an advocate.

So what would it be like to find your own words for something like this next time the question comes up?

“When we compare performance, even when it’s not a like for like comparision, maybe we aren’t getting to the real question?”

That might be enough to surface it, but otherwise you might go on…

“Is there something in your question about comparing performances that my answer isn’t reaching? Maybe something about your previous adviser leaving? Or about our work together?”

You’re asking the question behind the question.

One last thought. In psychotherapy, there's a concept called object constancy. Put simply: some people find it harder than others to hold on to a felt sense of us - and our support - across a year between meetings. They need to warm up to us again each time, especially when there are unresolved handover feelings in the mix. Your client might actually be using the recurring question as a means with which to re-establish a connection.

This might speak to your astute observation of a pattern, which may be less about asking advisers to prove their mettle and more about checking - are you still on my side? Perhaps as a firm you could consider building in some extra touch points or reminders of the relationships you hold between annual reviews.

Warmly, Emma

Rabbit in the Headlights

Too Close to Home