Over the past decade or so, the financial planning profession has continued to shift away from its transactional business model roots – where a client is a “client” simply because you’ve done business with them at some point in the past – to a model driven by long-term planning relationships (where a client is a client because they’re actually in an ongoing client relationship). As such, many advisors are making that same transition themselves, as they expand their expertise and introduce additional services for their long-standing clients to round out an ongoing service model. Along the way, though (and often due to the performance-centric nature of the transactional relationship), advisors may not have formed a full and complete understanding of all of their clients’ circumstances (beyond what was necessary to know to implement the original product recommendation). In turn, those same clients may themselves be accustomed to a certain cadence and routine of annual meetings. The net result is that advisors may sometimes struggle when trying to figure out the best way to introduce those clients to a more holistic planning-centric relationship, and gain a clearer picture of what’s most important to them beyond the original product need (that the advisor may not have really delved deeply into in the past).
In our 46th episode of Kitces & Carl, Michael Kitces and client communication expert Carl Richards explore best practices for transitioning longer-term transactional clients to a more planning-centric relationship, how to introduce the concept during regular meetings (particularly when the advisor may need to gather additional information that they hadn’t asked for along the way), and why a gradual (and possibly interactive) transition may be better than making any big “now we’re doing financial planning!” announcements.
As a starting point, it’s important to understand that there’s no shame in needing to learn more about long-term clients. One approach to introducing the conversation is simply to include some initial discovery questions as part of a ‘normal’ agenda, which in turn would provide the advisor a reason to start spending more time on deeper questions in subsequent meetings, as a means of going beyond the ‘traditional’ client review meeting that’s so often just focused on portfolio performance reviews.
From there, advisors can start filling in information gaps that may have opened up over the year, not by shoving a thick intake questionnaire in front of the client (which could prompt clients to wonder if their advisor shouldn’t already have asked for that information years ago), but by using modern interactive planning software where the pertinent information can be populated live (and collaboratively) in the meetings themselves. The important thing again, though, is that these things don’t have to happen all at once, and instead can happen iteratively over time.
Ultimately, the key takeaway is that advisors don’t need to make any drastic changes in the way they interact with their clients to introduce a more planning-based approach. Rather, by making the process more conversational, interactive, and gradual, advisors can start by asking deeper questions to find out more about their clients’ long-term goals, gather any missing data by using interactive planning tools available in various planning software applications, build more financial planning depth from there in subsequent meetings, and foster a deeper relationship with a more engaging process of real financial planning.