Executive Summary
Advisors spend a lot of time crafting their financial advice recommendations – and how they deliver those recommendations – for their clients. These ultra-personalized suggestions are central to what makes financial advice valuable and can have a significant impact on a client's life. So, what happens when a client doesn't act on that advice – especially when their inaction can compromise their financial and holistic wellbeing?
In our 163rd episode of Kitces & Carl, Michael Kitces and client communication expert Carl Richards explore how to engage more meaningfully with clients who don't implement the financial advice they receive – by asking what the advisor may have missed the first time around.
Many advisors receive training to overcome objections from prospects when learning how to sell advice and gain clients. However, they rarely have access to training that addresses the objections – or silence – from long-term clients. And these objections can often show up differently: Some clients will voice disagreement openly, while others may appear to agree with the advisor's recommendations and reasoning in the moment, only to quietly fail to follow through.
Inaction can be a sign that the advisor misunderstood the client's real priorities. For example, an advisor might assume a client would prioritize long-term financial stability, when in reality, their focus may be on supporting loved ones in the present – even at the expense of their own future financial security. While both perspectives stem from good intentions, the mismatch can lead to recommendations that technically make sense but don't resonate emotionally. The key is to uncover this disconnect – not by asking, "Why didn't you implement?", which can feel accusatory and cause the client to react defensively, but instead using open-ended questions like, "What did I miss?", "What's going on?", or "How can I be helpful here?" These kinds of questions set the stage for collaborative conversations that make space for mutual investigation and problem-solving.
Often, the issue isn't a lack of clarity or explanation – it's that the advice may have focused on a goal the client wasn't truly prioritizing. When a client nods in agreement during a meeting but takes no action afterward, it may signal that the recommendation didn't reflect what truly matters to them. Shifting the conversation to explore the client's underlying values – rather than repeating the recommendation with greater emphasis – can open the door to a more meaningful dialogue and a more accurate diagnosis of the client's needs.
Ultimately, the key point is that when clients don't act on financial advice, it can be an indicator that a deeper – and different – conversation is needed. By extending curiosity and empathy, advisors can uncover clients' deeper priorities that may not have been previously articulated. In other words, advisors can use inaction and objection as an opportunity to have deeper conversations and build trust as they learn what clients truly value most!
Authors:
***Editor's Note: Can't get enough of Kitces & Carl? Neither can we, which is why we've released it as a podcast as well! Check it out on all the usual podcast platforms, including Apple Podcasts (iTunes), Spotify, and YouTube Music.
Show Notes:
- "Scary markets got you down? Don't run. Just hug." by Carl Richards
- The Four Conversations: A New Model for Selling Expertise by Blair Enns
Kitces & Carl Transcript
Carl: Hello, Michael.
Michael: Hello, Carl. How are you?
Carl: Things are fantastic. Yeah, really good. And I have a question for you. Here's the question. We're just diving right in. We're diving right in. No conversation, no ramp-up...
Michael: Okay. Game on. Let's go.
Overcoming Objections With Clients Who Don’t Implement Financial Advice [0:10]
Carl: Yep. Let's go. So advice adherence is something that I've been hearing a lot about lately. How do I get clients to accept my advice? I tell them to do something and they don't do it.
Michael: Okay. So how do I get them to adhere to the advice I give? So this is like, was it Moira Summers, how do you make your advice stickier so it adheres?
Carl: Oh, yeah, yeah. Yeah, that's a good...yeah, that's actually a really great resource on this topic. But I also think, I don't quite want to go to the marketing level, but it's like this could be in the early first or second meeting level of here's what I want you to do and there's an objection. It could also be five years in, hey, I really want you to do this and there's an objection. So just this, and so they're not adhering, they're not... Advice adherence may be actually the... No, that's a good word, but I'm particularly talking about objection. I'm objecting to that advice.
Michael: Is this advice or is this, or, I guess, I don't know how far up the stream we're going. Is this objecting to advice or is it because the client hired me, and then they're not taking the advice, or are we all the way up to we're trying to get the prospect to become a client and they're objecting and don't want to engage our advice service?
Carl: So that's my favorite topic, right? One of my favorite topics of how to do marketing in a way that people don't object to it, but I kind of want to stick with this, it's advice. I've given them advice and it could be really early, just to be clear. This could be really early in a client relationship. In fact, it's really helpful to talk about it very early. Client has, feels really good about hiring you. You're now telling them what you would do in the early stages and they object to it. And this is often framed as, because I was just asked this recently, where do I go to get overcoming objections training? Remember that? That was part of your normal sales training was like, okay, here's...
Michael: Well, yeah, that's why I was wondering, because just when I think overcoming objections, my head goes to some version of sales training with the prospect who's got objections as to why they don't want to hire me. Maybe it'll be the point of where you're going. I don't actually know that they're that different at the end.
Carl: That's kind of what I'm trying, I kind of, we've talked a lot about that sales piece and I enjoy that, it's where I naturally want to go. But I'm actually quite curious about the same idea. And it could be very early, so it still feels like early sales of a relationship. But as the client, anywhere in that relationship, yeah, overcoming objections training. And I have a very visceral distinct reaction to overcoming objections training, but I wanted to hear what you thought first. What do you think about when somebody says, okay, let's give you some training on how to overcome objections?
Michael: Well, again, I'm slightly suckling because I hear overcome objections, just my head keeps going back to sales training and not necessarily client delivery. When I think of client delivery, I just think, frankly, the word that comes to mind is client just reject your recommendations. How to deal with clients who reject the recommendations.
Carl: Let me just, maybe I didn't do a great job of framing this. I think we're always selling. So yeah. So five years in, I noticed something about a client relationship that I need to tell them that they should do something different. I have advice and we all think it's advice, but we've got to sell that advice, right? We've got, and hopefully, we have some relationships so it doesn't feel like sales. But if somebody objects, like easy example, scary market, somebody wants to sell. And selling would not be in their best interest. And you have to convince them not to sell. Trust has never been funded. The way you're giving money to the kids.
Michael: Yeah. So yes, that hits home for me. Early on I had a client – we've all had these clients – that was just spending way too much supporting her adult children. I guess it was, one was a young adult and the other one was still in college and probably cruising for more support after college given the trajectory. And it was very unequivocally just tanking their retirement projections and her ability to retire. And I remember just we built the plan, all the beautiful projections because they were beautiful, Carl.
Carl: I'm sure they were.
Michael: My plan was beautiful. Beautiful projections where the lines all crashed to the ground in her 70s or 80s. And came with all these projections and just demonstrations, if you stay on the path that you're on, this is going to fail. You are going to run out of money not that far in your retirement. This just isn't going to work the way you're supporting the kids. You just have to dial back how much you're spending on them and how much you're supporting on them. And tried to show it as best I could. And it basically just flopped. Sheila nodded and smiled and seemed reasonably engaged, and said, she'll take our recommendations. And then came in six months later and literally nothing had changed, not one thing.
And I remember, and again, this is...well, for where I was in career because I think you're now going to go in a very different direction. My first thought and experience, I'm probably 28, 29 years old at this point, I'm six or seven years into the business was, oh, I clearly didn't explain that well enough. I didn't make the case effectively enough. She's clearly still failing. This isn't going to work. And I started taking a hard look. Should I have shown the numbers differently? Should I have framed it differently? Did I need a more dire-looking scenario to really hit the point? Because maybe it just didn't land. Yeah, going broke 30 years from now is still so far off. She wasn't that concerned yet.
I took a lot of it on myself to say, clearly, I need to get better in either how I explain this to clients or how I illustrate, or visualize, or show it to clients because Sheila clearly didn't get it. I was like, okay, that's on me. I blamed myself. I didn't blame Sheila. I blamed me. I didn't do a good enough job in bringing this to her. But it was, I was still very focused on how else could I have delivered this that maybe would have made it hit home.
Carl: Would you use the word ‘prove?' How else could I prove to her that this was right?
Michael: Yes. I think very, very much so. I was a debater in college, so there is...
Carl: I think that makesense.
Michael: ...I literally must win my case and I clearly failed to convince the judge and jury because she came in six months later, having not acted in a persuaded manner. So I, obviously, failed to prove my case. I think about it a little bit differently today with more years of experience doing this and some different experiences down the line but just as you're framing up the scenario, that's where my head goes. I can see the conference room that I was in because I actually remember being a little bit demoralized that she came back in like just nothing. "So tell me what's going on. Did you have some conversations with the kids?" She's like, "No. No, I decided not to." "But you're going to go broke." She goes, "Yeah, I decided not to." I'm like, did you miss the part about going broke?
Carl: Right. That's a really great story because that's exactly what I'm pointing to of how demoralizing it can be. They just don't... And look, it could be, that could be demoralizing because I didn't get them as a client, but it could also, what we're talking about here is more demoralizing because you just want deeply for this to work, you know? You don't want...
Michael: Well, there's nothing worse as a financial advisor than having a client run out of money on your watch.
Carl: Yeah, yeah. I was just thinking this...
Michael: There's no greater indictment of your failure as a professional. That's maybe a little harsh. I'm not trying to dunk on anyone who's actually had that happen to them. That, at least, was the script in my head. I still feel like it's a pressure that a lot of us feel.
Carl: Agreed.
Michael: You just never want someone to run out on your watch.
Problem-Solving With Clients Who Don't Implement By Asking What Was Missed [9:59]
Carl: Yeah. This brings up a lot of interesting questions that I wanted to get to because I think the idea of how could I have been more effective in my presentation of this is really a good place to go because it's different than, they just don't follow advice. That was very different. You took it on yourself, which I think is cool. And I think you may have been...
Michael: Now, it may have been, just I want to note that as some folks know, I was a psych major before I came into the financial planning world. And I do find this decision, in fact, in planning world, there's a segment of folks who view it as if you give the advice and the client doesn't take it, they're bad clients. I only want to work with clients who take my advice the first time I give it to them. So they know some advisors do. And I don't want to fault that. There are certain expediencies when you work with clients who take your advice the first time that you give it. But the psychology framing of this, how they tend to view it when you come from a therapy end is if the patient doesn't take your recommendations, that's you. That's not them.
Because, see, there's kind of a presumption in psychology that they came in because they had problems. If they were really good at self-correcting their behavior on their own, they might not be in your office. By the time they're there, almost by definition, they need help. They need some outside intervention to change the course that you're on. And it's your responsibility to figure out how to do that and how to have a positive intervention. You hear psychology, you have to talk to the words of interventions to change the behavior. So I carried that, for better or worse, to the financial planning world, which seems I've always kind of had this mindset of clients who don't take my advice doesn't make them bad clients. It means I got it wrong.
Carl: Yeah. No, I think that's...
Michael: I didn't prove my case.
Carl: Yeah. And I think what you were also pointing to a little bit earlier in terms of its slightly different direction, it's just another layer. It's just a layer, a little layer deeper, which it's not the layer of what facts and figures. How could I have presented it better? It's just one layer deeper, which is, and this is where I've tried to rewire my brain and I think it works in client scenarios, it works at home, works with friends. If there's some objection, I don't need more overcoming objection training, right? I need better listening training, right? So what I like to feel, what I want to see happen, and I know those of you watching the video can see me trying to do the switch in my head. What I like to see that rewiring in my own head is if I've spent all this time researching some...you hired me for this. This is a little different than in a friendship because nobody hired you for it and probably nobody's even asking.
But if somebody's asked you for your advice and you've thought really carefully about it and you really feel good about it and you did some diagnosis, right? So then you write this beautiful prescription, and then they don't follow it. What I like to have happen in my head is like, "Oh, I must have missed something in the diagnosis". And where you went is I must have missed something in the presentation, which I think is also great. I think they go together, right? But I think it's like, what question didn't I ask? So, Sheila, it must have... And some of these are not solvable, right? I was where my head went earlier on was there are only, I can only think of three clients that I had to fire and they were all because I've given you this advice. We've talked about it three or four times. You're not doing it. And then I don't, what I wanted to say was I actually, I might have even said this on one, but only one, and I can remember exactly who it was. I don't want to play on a losing team and I can see this is going to end badly.
But the softer way of saying that is, "I've given you this advice. We've talked about it. We've had a lot of discussion, which I want to talk about in a minute. I've understood everything. It's not working. Then there's clearly no reason for you to be paying me for this advice. Let's get you to someplace else." But what I want to talk real quickly about is the understanding part. The switch in the brain of like, "Okay, Sheila" -- and this is a conversation I had multiple times. Sheila, we gave you this advice, and then we noticed that nothing really happened differently. What are we missing? How can we be helpful? What are we missing? And you can even say, I'm pretty confident that this is going to end poorly but you're making a slightly different decision. So I'm trying to understand it, help me understand. That level. That's kind of last-ditch effort kind of communication, but it's important.
Michael: Well, look, I would very much agree. I think that's why, as I was trying to frame it, this was me almost 20 years ago because, yes, I would approach this conversation differently now. I'm still going to do my best to win and prove my case because the debating thing dies hard. But, yes, there comes a point where now my questions to Sheila at that six-month mark would very much be along the lines of, so we talked about some stuff when you were in last and you haven't moved forward with any of it. So I have to presume that you didn't really feel like my advice was on the mark. So I'm so sorry that clearly, I missed something. Help me understand more of what I missed. What's part of the evaluation in your head that I didn't realize because I clearly missed something in how you're prioritizing these things?
And ask a question like that. And, look, I would say both with wisdom of hindsight and candidly, now being in a stage where I have three children that I have been parenting for many, many years. When back then, I was a single 20-something that had not had children or responsibilities and what goes with them. If I honestly reflect back, I'm pretty sure Sheila's answer would have been, "I would do anything for my kids and if going broke in my 70s is what it takes, I'm so glad I made it to my 70s before I ran out". And then if I asked her why she hired us, it was not to tell her that she was spending too much money on her kids because I'm pretty sure she knew. That could not have actually been news to her in the first place. I'm pretty sure in retrospect that the reason we really got hired was, "I know I'm going to make, I know I'm going to go broke doing this. Make the money last as long as possible".
I think that's why we were really hired in retrospect. I didn't know how to have that conversation or get there. Again, as you said, now I would be...I'd try to be nicely much more direct like, "I'm so sorry we gave these recommendations and you haven't moved forward with any of it. I must have missed something. Help me understand further." And maybe I would have gotten something from that or now I'd probably start to say, like, "You came in and hired me for advice and you haven't moved forward with any of it. So I'd just love to...what do you feel the value of this relationship is? You're still coming in. I'm clearly doing something helpful for you. But it's not the recommendations I gave in the plan last time. So what is it that you're looking for me to do to help you here?" And again, I think her answer probably would have been, "I just want you to make the money last as long as it can because I don't have any intention of changing the course I'm on with my kids. They're my kids. I'm willing to lose everything for them, and..."
Carl: Yeah, yeah. It's really interesting. It's interesting...
Michael: That gets in all sorts of personal values for some of us about the trade-offs that we make for ourselves, our kids. Not my money, not my place.
Carl: Well, and yeah, frankly, keep your values off their plans, right?
Michael: Yeah.
Carl: And I think that's exactly right. And it's interesting even hearing you talk about that. And I'm going to sort of ask listeners if they noticed it. It's interesting the level of empathy that I felt as soon as we started to understand what was really going on in somebody else's head in this hypothetical/real example. Suddenly you're like, oh. How can I be helpful with that? How can I be helpful? And so I think this overcoming objections. When there's an objection, having a, you know, giving it another shot, right? Playing around a little bit. And, at a certain point, you reach the level where you've got to say, as simple as, hey, we gave you some advice. You didn't do it. What's going on? That simple. And the one thing I would just point to is being really...
Michael: I would note in that vein... Sorry. I have to interject quickly. It's you didn't take our advice. What's going on? I find makes people really defensive really quickly. That I come from, "I provided some recommendations that you haven't implemented. Clearly, my advice wasn't on target. Help me understand what I missed, right? So it's still like, it's all my fault. You're the client, educate me. I obviously screwed up, right?" So I don't want you to be defensive. I just want to, actually, get a good conversation, but I screwed up. You tell me what I missed.
Carl: Well, and that's kind of what I wanted to point to was that I think this is a really great conversation. One thing you're really good at is not taking things personally. I've watched you be in relatively heated discussions and you're not attached necessarily... You might be deeply attached to winning the argument.
Michael: So what's the saying? Strong opinions, loosely held.
Carl: You might be deeply attached to winning the argument, but as soon as it's done, you're like, let's move on. Some people get a little bit more attached. And so even in the language I used, which is, "What's going on?" And in the language you used, which is, "I must have made a mistake." There's danger in both of that set of language. I must have made a mistake could put somebody on the defensive from the perspective of like, oh, you're... It's not passive-aggressive. It's not, that's not at all the word. It's like, so I think there's a...what we're really trying to do is just an objective statement of fact.
And then one of the best versions of this I ever heard was a statement of fact, the fact pattern, which again, remember, as soon as we start talking about facts, we've got perception. It's so hard. But as close as we can get to an objective statement of fact like, we met. I understood this to be the challenge we were trying to solve for. I provided these suggestions. And then, what happened next, right? It didn't get implemented and I'm trying to understand why. And my first assumption, still at the language, my first assumption would be that I just must have missed something. What did we miss? How can I be helpful here? What would be helpful, right? I'm not sure the language is exactly right that I just used, but that's the tone and you're pointing at the...Sorry. That's the direction. And you're pointing at the same direction. And so, but I just think that's so much better than, oh, yeah? Here's another fact and figure. And here's a research report. And here's 12 more...
Michael: Which is still so my natural go-to.
Carl: Sure. Sure. But it doesn't, in the end...
Michael: I can make another spreadsheet that shows you growing broke if that would help.
An Order Of Operations For Client (Non-)Implementation Discussions [22:50]
Carl: Yeah. This was one of those sketches that we've gotten a lot of advisors ended up using, which was the first a hug. I think we called it scary markets hug. Hugs and the hug was a metaphor probably, which is like, yeah, the facts and figures are important, but probably after the empathy, after the understanding, right? After the hug, you know? And I think your example of Sheila's perfect because I, literally, was like, wow, I can feel the change in empathy when we understood really what was going on. And now, I can be helpful. And I have a decision to make. Do I want to continue to help? And in that case, I deeply do, right?
Michael: I would make some distinction though that... So scary market scenarios start with the hug to me is one thing. If someone's really in freak-out mode, right? Just they're in amygdala hijack mode. Their brain literally cannot process reasoning when you're in an emotional hijack. Your best-case scenario is just help someone come down. Give them a hug. Try to help settle them. Get them back to some rational, just some state where the rational brain even re-engages, and then maybe you can try to have the rational conversation.
Whereas, I look at Sheila's scenario a little bit differently. Yes, still try to find the empathy to connect. But, to me, it's not because I'm trying to get out of emotional hijacking into the part where we can have the conversation. It's, I just feel much more fundamental like you clearly have a different set of priorities than the ones that I assumed, right? I assumed one of your priorities was not run out of money and it turns out that was not the right priority because you're actually willing to do that. Now, as a financial advisor that doesn't want anyone to run out of money on my watch, I just sort of assumed that ‘not go broke' was one of your priorities. But that was probably actually wrong for Sheila. The priority was how long can I make this last because I really am willing to give everything for my kids and I just want to do that for them as much as possible.
So, yes, all sorts of parenting and other advice, that might not be the most bad... that might not be the best enabling behavior for Sheila's children. I'm like, I was not hired to be her marriage and family therapist. I was hired to be your financial advisor and the part that I didn't get to, that, again, just I can see so much clearer now with hindsight is her priorities didn't start with run out. Her priorities were make the money last, but not because she didn't want to run out. She just wanted to last as long as it could before she spent herself down to zero supporting her kids.
Carl: Yeah. I agree. I think that's a good point. I think the place we end is the same, which is if an objection comes up, let's first ask questions about what we could do differently. And I almost feel like we could work our way down. Could I have presented that differently? Did we not, were we not...
Michael: Was there a better spreadsheet?
Carl: Yeah. Were we not...
Michael: As long as it's on your checklist, I'll be happy.
Carl: Of course. Is there a better spreadsheet? Was, did we not communicate it clearly? And then I think you get to the spot at the bottom like did we just fundamentally miss something? Did we not ask the right questions to begin with? Were we solving the wrong problem? Have we not clarified with them? Did we not prescribe? I'm sorry. Did we not diagnose thoroughly?
Michael: So, yes, I agree with, I think, the asterisk. I would probably flip the order.
Carl: I think you're right. As I was doing it, I was like, no, you're right. Did we miss something?
Michael: Yeah, because if you're in the right neighborhood, people connect the dots about what they want to do. If you're in the right neighborhood of their priorities, they just ask the follow-up questions to figure out how to do the thing that they want to do that you're telling them they can do if it wasn't entirely clear. When the recommendations are made and seem to be taken and then nothing happens, I find it's almost never because I just didn't present it well. I missed something in the priorities much further upstream to your point and framing around this, that, I think that's where it really usually lies.
Carl: Yeah. I agree. I think that just objection equals probably missed something. Objection equals listen a little better. Objection equals ask another question.
Overcoming Objections In Sales Prospecting [27:57]
Michael: So then the one other piece I want to ask to this just before we wrap up. Is it the same thing when we are in a sales prospecting mode?
Carl: I think it's even, I think it's... So my favorite person who does any work on sales training is Blair Enns. And Blair's new book, The Four Conversations, one distinction he makes is between expert, and I think you would love this Michael, between, you feel like there's this dividing line between expert you and sales you.
And expert you, you're in love with. And sales you, you uphold, I don't like sales.
Michael: Oh, yeah. Coming from the advisory, yes. I just want to hang out and be an expert, and have everyone take my advice, actually getting clients was really unpleasant.
Carl: Yeah. And I think what Blair is pointing out is that you can sell like an expert. And that really without spending a whole time, our whole...Without getting into it deeper, it's really exactly what we talked about, which is... And I remember saying this to prospective clients, and especially to centers of influence specifically, I can think of two CPAs and a trust attorney where after a couple of years of trying, maybe sending them great clients. And keep in mind, I was sending them great clients because I knew they would do a great job. Not necessarily to get clients back but because I knew that that was just something I was hoping for.
And after a couple of years of not getting it, I finally sat down with him and I was like, listen. One of his names was Bob. I remember saying to Bob, I was like, Bob, I am positive if you knew what I did for clients, you would work... I mean, you would be not only would you be sending people to me, you would aggressively be looking for the opportunity because, and I feel the same way about you. You're, like, sometimes I sell you harder than I sell me. And I remember just saying, look, I'll take as long as you want to understand that because I know it's true. And that, to me, was the feeling in my bones with clients of like, okay, if you don't come to a meeting. Or especially if we've had a first meeting and I've given you the whatever your pitch is. Mine was this one-page plan, right?
Whatever your pitcher is for the, to the move forward suggestion, right? And you don't do it, I'm definitely going to have a conversation of like, hey, I felt like this is a really good fit. I know we could make an impact. I must have missed something. What did I miss? Was it the way, something about the way I communicated? Did I not ask the right question? Because remember, Russ Alan Prince's research in private client attorney?
Michael: Yep.
Carl: He said after they did that whole survey of people who didn't implement suggestions from an estate planning attorney. So it's high net-worth people who had the estate planning done, paid for it, didn't do it. They asked them why, and it was 90+% percent said, "This did not reflect what I wanted." That, to me, has been haunting for whatever, as long as I've, you know, 15, 20 years of like yet. So if you've objected, I must have just missed something because if you knew, if you knew what I could do for you. I'm not going to say that out loud but that's what I'm feeling. If you knew what I could do for you, you'd be lining up out the door. So what is it about the way I'm communicating, the way I'm talking, the way I'm presenting it that's getting in the way of that outcome? That's how I think about that sales part of it.
Michael: Very cool. All right. Thank you, Carl.
Carl: Cheers, Michael. See ya.
Michael: Thank you.
Leave a Reply