Beverly Flaxington is a practice management consultant. She answers questions from advisors facing human resource issues. To submit yours, email us here.
Advisor Perspectives welcomes guest contributions. The views presented here do not necessarily represent those of Advisor Perspectives.
Dear Bev,
We have a number of very successful advisors who have never obtained full credentials such as the CFP® or CFA®. They have a finance background and learned the business from what I refer to as “the inside out.” As we bring on younger advisors, the discussion comes up about whether someone without credentials is as authentic as someone who has worked hard to pass one of these hurdles.
If clients are happy and my advisors are doing what they need to do, credentials are not necessary. But as the founder of the firm, I need a response for my younger advisors. I respect their commitment and the time they have put in and I don’t dismiss or discourage higher learning.
What’s an appropriate response that acknowledges their work but protects my existing advisors who are doing fine with their background and experience?
E.W.
Dear E.W.,
Are the younger advisors on the team bringing this up because they see a problem with the approach your non-credentialed advisors have taken? Do they connect the observation to an issue specifically? Or are they uncomfortable because they have gone through the “hurdles” and believe, given the knowledge they have gained, it is important to do so to serve clients well?
When we disagree with another person’s position, rather than try and argue or help them to see the error of their ways, try and understand what’s underneath the concern. Perhaps there is something your younger advisors are considering or observing that you have not noticed yourself. It’s best, when in disagreement, to go into curiosity mode. Why do they have this concern? What’s prompting them to raise this issue? If you can approach them with an open-mind and seek to understand, you might hear a different viewpoint.
This said, even if your younger advisors do have a reasonable viewpoint and help you to see something you might not see now, it doesn’t mean you have to insist your existing advisors gain credentials. It allows you to share more information with your younger advisors about what they might be missing. They likely don’t understand the full extent of the older advisors’ backgrounds or the journey they have taken to get where they are. However, trying to share this before you understand what’s underneath the concern will seem defensive and as if you aren’t listening to the younger team members.
It’s a relevant discussion to have and once you learn more, it could serve for an entire team roundtable to talk about philosophies on investing and planning, the client experience for your firm and how everyone could improve their approach.
Having discussions where different interpretations and viewpoints are shared is never a bad thing. It only becomes “bad” when people view it as personal or as conflict.
Dear Bev,
We have a team approach to serving clients. We have hired a couple of specialists over the last five years in the areas of tax and planning. For many of our meetings, it’s important that we have these specialists along with us (the advisor) to ensure a more thorough discussion with our client.
We often get together before a meeting and plan. We review the client plan and portfolio, we generate of list of questions we’d like to cover and we outline the agenda. It’s all quite collaborative and open – that is until we get into the meeting.
One of the tax specialists is an egomaniac and a talker. He will derail a meeting and pontificate on topics related to tax changes that aren’t relevant. He has strong views about some of the tax changes that could happen with the new administration.
In one meeting, one of our clients who believes in paying her fair share of taxes and is very much about social issues and giving back, got very upset when he was complaining about some of the changes and how much money our wealthy clients are going to lose. She called me afterward and told me she’d prefer he not be in future meetings with her.
I have tried to broach this with him. The planner and I cringe in the meetings and want to shift the dialogue. However, he always has a reason – we were not talkative enough, the client seemed interested, this is important to show our knowledge and expertise.
We have not had a rigorous process around post-meeting debriefs. But given how much this has happened, that’s our next step. How do advisors put this in place without coming across as accusatory or critical of one another?
G.E.
Dear G.E.,
If you are taking the time to prepare for these meetings, considering the things you outline here and having everyone take the time to consider their role and questions, then you are missing a big part of the overall process if you are not closing the loop and debriefing on what actually happened. The post-call isn’t to accuse or be critical, it is to look at what worked, and what didn’t. It is to review if the meeting unfolded the way it was planned and whether team members played the role that was outlined for them. Teams cannot improve their working relationships if they are not willing to be open and honest about what happened and what could have been changed.
You need to implement a post-meeting process. The best way to do this is to have an organized set of questions, and time scheduled on the calendar before you even go into the meeting. This helps ensure it will be more objective, and expected and won’t just focus on the interpersonal aspects you would have wanted to change.
However, your team member probably does not possess a high emotional intelligence (EQ). The fact that he isn’t noticing when the audience is in vehement disagreement with his view and it is not entirely relevant to the client, or that he isn’t listening when you share input about his behavior, is not a great sign for having a healthy debrief process.
Go into questioning and listening mode. Ask your colleague, “How did you think (the client) felt when you were disagreeing with her? What was she likely thinking when you were going on about the changes? I know they are relevant to you, but how relevant do you think they are to her?”
When people are self-involved it can be hard to get them to see how their behavior impacts others and when they are resistant to hear the feedback, or they have a reason for it, you have to take an objective and interested approach to help them see what you can see so clearly.
Perhaps, with time, if you have rigor in your debrief process, and everything is delivered in an objective and open fashion, your colleague will start to see the impact. He will also likely have feedback and ideas for you and your planner colleague, so be prepared to hear this also!
Beverly Flaxington co-founded The Collaborative, a consulting firm devoted to business building for the financial services industry in 1995. The firm also founded and manages the Advisors Sales Academy. She is currently an adjunct professor at Suffolk University teaching undergraduate and graduate students Entrepreneurship and Leading Teams. Beverly is a Certified Professional Behavioral Analyst (CPBA) and Certified Professional Values Analyst (CPVA).
She has spent over 25 years in the investment industry and has been featured in Selling Power Magazine and quoted in hundreds of media outlets, including The Wall Street Journal, MSNBC.com, Investment News and Solutions Magazine for the FPA. She speaks frequently at investment industry conferences and is a speaker for the CFA Institute.
Read more articles by Beverly Flaxington
Beverly Flaxington is a practice management consultant. She answers questions from advisors facing human resource issues. To submit yours, email us here. 
