Articles About Kitces & Carl Podcast

In recent years, financial advice has expanded beyond spreadsheets and technical strategies to consider the behavioral and emotional factors driving clients’ relationships with money. Advisors today often serve not just as technical experts but also as thinking partners – helping clients process their money stories, explore values, and determine what they want their wealth to accomplish. Yet advisors also bring their own money histories, attitudes, and values into the relationship, which can influence not only how they interpret clients’ financial situations but also how they perceive their own financial standing.

In this 167th episode of Kitces & Carl, Michael Kitces and client communication expert Carl Richards explore how advisors can productively navigate the personal and philosophical distance between themselves and their clients – particularly in cases where clients have higher income or net worth. As Kitces Research on What Actually Contributes To Advisor Wellbeing has found, advisor wellbeing tends to decrease as client net worth increases – while higher client income is associated with greater satisfaction. One possible reason is that advisors may subconsciously compare their own financial standing to that of their clients – especially when clients’ wealth is inherited or perceived as unearned.

Reflecting on their personal history with money may help advisors understand the formative stories and emotional associations with money throughout their lives. Even an exercise as simple as writing down a dollar sign and naming the first few emotions that come up can surface themes that shape how advisors think and respond around money, and how those beliefs show up in client work.

At the same time, advisors’ personal money stories may serve as a magnet for like-minded clients – and an asset to the relationship. For example, an advisor who sees money as a safety net may naturally attract clients who value security, while another who sees money as a means of freedom may resonate more with clients who prioritize flexibility. The similarities can foster trust, and the differences – when thoughtfully navigated – can lead to deeper conversations.

Ultimately, the key point is that comparison is a natural human impulse, but it doesn’t have to be a liability. With greater awareness of their own financial backstory, advisors can cultivate more meaningful client relationships and use their emotional insight to help clients connect more intentionally with their own values and goals. And by treating the emotional and philosophical distance as an opportunity for empathy and mutual reflection, advisors can unlock richer conversations and a deeper sense of purpose in the work they do!

Read More...

Every financial or business decision brings some amount of inherent risk. However, the consequences of those decisions – positive or negative – don't always align with the actual level of risk taken. As a result, when advisors are tasked with (re-)educating clients about the potential consequences of financial decisions, there may be a disconnect between potential risk and what a client actually experiences. So how can advisors help clients understand dangers they haven't personally encountered?

In our 166th episode of Kitces & Carl, Michael Kitces and client communication expert Carl Richards discuss how advisors can bridge the gap between planning and a client's lived experience to guide better decision-making.

One helpful framework to contextualize financial decisions is the concept of 'wicked' versus 'kind' learning environments. Kind environments have clear rules, quick feedback, and consistent patterns, making them easier to navigate and learn from. Tax planning often fits the 'kind environment' model: The rules are relatively stable, outcomes repeat annually, and feedback is immediate (e.g., a tax bill or refund). By contrast, wicked environments feature ambiguous rules and delayed or misleading feedback, where individuals can 'learn the wrong lesson'. Investment planning falls into this camp; a client who makes a risky bet and sees strong returns might conclude the strategy is sound, even if it was more luck than skill.

For planners, kind environments tend to allow for systematization and consistent advice delivery. Wicked environments, however, require more narrative focus and concrete examples. Advisors can use historical context and stress testing to show clients how a situation might play out differently under less favorable conditions. And when clients persist in making risky decisions, advisors can help by constructing guardrails, allowing for some flexibility while protecting against catastrophic loss.

The wicked/kind framework also appears in business leadership. Those who thrive in kind environments may excel at optimizing systems and scaling efficiently but might miss warning signs when conditions shift. Leaders in wicked environments may excel in handling ambiguity and disruption but may struggle to maintain stability in calmer business environments. Both leadership styles offer value, but they manage different types of risk and opportunity.

Ultimately, the key point is that the results of a decision don't always reflect the risk involved. Advisors who recognize this disconnect – and who adjust their planning strategies to fit the terrain – can help clients and businesses remain resilient across a wide range of circumstances. That means knowing when to lean into systems and when to pause and reassess, when to simplify, and when to explore new possibilities. And by helping clients understand the type of environment they're in – and shifting between 'peacetime' and 'wartime' toolkits as needed – advisors can offer more than just technical guidance. They become trusted navigators in a changing landscape, offering clarity, perspective, and a steadier path forward in an uncertain world!

Read More...

Financial planning is inherently complex, especially when it comes to data gathering, analysis, and crafting well-reasoned recommendations. But delivering those recommendations in a way that clients can understand and act on is a separate skill. Advisors not only need to do the deep technical work, they also need to translate that complexity into clarity – a step that can be surprisingly time-consuming and cognitively demanding. And when an advisor is already managing a full schedule, carving out the time to make the message clear can be a real challenge. So how can advisors ensure that their advice is both comprehensive and simple enough to be truly actionable?

In this 165th episode of Kitces & Carl, Michael Kitces and client communication expert Carl Richards explore how advisors can simplify the delivery of complex advice and why doing so is such a critical (and often underdeveloped) skill. While clients don't necessarily need to understand the full depth of the analysis behind a recommendation, they do need to trust that the analysis has been done thoroughly and clearly understand what the advice is, why it matters, and what's being asked of them. Because when advice is clear and comprehensible, clients are more likely to act on it and gain peace of mind from knowing there's a well-considered strategy in place!

One way to simplify delivery is to build meetings around a single core takeaway. For example, if someone stopped a client in the parking lot after the meeting and asked what they talked about with their advisor, what would the advisor want them to say? That question can help clarify the central message and shape meetings around what matters most. From there, additional sub-points can be layered in, while reinforcing the main takeaway to ensure the client walks away with a clear understanding of what to do next.

Visual aids can also help advisors clarify complexity and reinforce key messages. Summary charts or graphics – especially for topics that come up repeatedly (e.g., investment strategies or tax planning) – can reduce cognitive overload for clients and keep meetings on track. And because these conversations tend to repeat across clients, visuals offer leverage: the upfront time spent finding or customizing a helpful chart can pay off many times over. Fortunately, advisors don't need to start from scratch. A growing number of FinTech companies – like Holistiplan, Income Lab, fpPathfinder, and Clearnomics – offer ready-made illustrations to help make advice more understandable for clients.

Ultimately, the key point is that simplifying financial advice is not a simple task – but it is a skill that can be developed over time. The goal isn't simplicity for its own sake, but clarity. By combining communication strategies with technology solutions and approaching each meeting with one clear takeaway in mind, advisors can deliver recommendations that aren't just technically sound, but truly understandable and far easier for clients to act on!

Read More...

Young advisors may feel – and face – an extra burden to prove their expertise to clients. After all, it can feel odd to create an estate plan that will impact a client’s grandchildren… when those grandchildren may be older than the advisor themselves! And while any advisor needs to determine how much detail to share when explaining strategic decisions, younger advisors may feel added pressure to prove their credibility. There is a definitive difference between actual and perceived capability, and young advisors may risk overcompensating by diving too deeply into the granular details of their recommendations.

In the 164th episode of Kitces & Carl, Michael Kitces and client communication expert Carl Richards discuss how young advisors can strike the right balance between complex explanations and simplicity as they build trust and social capital. Clients don’t just need to be accurately diagnosed – they need to feel accurately diagnosed. But walking through every page of a financial plan line by line could take up an entire afternoon and often isn’t necessary. So, how can advisors strike the balance of communicating competence without overwhelming clients?

A helpful approach may be to start with a simple, high-level summary, and then let the client guide the conversation from there. Then, when clients respond with their own follow-up questions, the advisor can elaborate, demonstrating the thoughtful analysis and care behind the recommendations. Along the way, regularly checking in (e.g., "Do you want more detail here?" or "Do you have any questions about what we’ve covered?") ensures the advisor stays aligned with the client’s preferences and attention span.

Advisors can also offer the client options like, "Would you prefer to review the executive summary, or would you like to go through the full details?" This approach not only honors the client’s preferences but also signals that the advisor is prepared to explain the full scope if needed. For visual impact, advisors might also show a printed or onscreen version of a full-length plan, using it as a physical representation of the underlying work, even if the discussion focuses only on the highlights.

The reality is that a young advisor may be asked to explain their reasoning… at first. But with time and experience, those requests often decrease as credibility and trust naturally grow, and as clients internalize that the advisor is fully capable and competent. This reflects a broader truth in client communication: While technical knowledge is essential, the ability to adjust and simplify explanations based on the client’s needs becomes equally important over time. Knowing when to stop explaining – before overwhelming the client with more information than they need – can be just as important as knowing when to elaborate.

Ultimately, the key point is that deciding between complexity and simplicity is, itself, a complex and nuanced decision for young advisors. But by letting the client direct the questions and level of detail they want, advisors can showcase their competence while also building trust and credibility over the long term!

Read More...

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!

Read More...

Hiring a contractor is an exciting step for many advisory firms. It represents a chance to delegate tasks, step away from day-to-day operations with more peace of mind, and pass a key milestone of (traditional) firm growth. However, hiring contractors isn’t without its complications. Even outsourced support requires some oversight, and delegation doesn’t always go as far as some might hope. So, how can advisors best leverage contractors, and how can they evaluate the value of such work (especially against the prospect of hiring a full-time employee)?

In the 162nd episode of Kitces & Carl, Michael Kitces and client communication expert Carl Richards explore how to master delegation, measure success with contractors, and weigh the cost of outsourcing versus hiring full-time to determine what’s actually ‘reasonable’.

Before an advisor can truly evaluate a contractor’s value, they must challenge themselves by looking inward. Delegation can be deceptive: Advisors may believe they’ve delegated more than they have, or that tasks only they can do are more essential than they really are. Taking time to interrogate those assumptions – by asking what can be delegated or even eliminated – can help free up more time than expected.

From there, an advisor can focus more on the art of delegating well. Creating style guides or video tutorials can streamline both training and follow-up questions. Advisors can also use these materials to communicate the firm's values and purpose – both for conveying firm culture and reducing the time advisors need to spend reviewing and correcting work done by others.

Eventually, advisors may wonder if it’s still worthwhile to ‘just’ hire a contractor, or if it’s time to bring on a full-time employee. There are certainly different ways to evaluate the all-in cost of a contractor versus an employee; both approaches will be the ‘right’ answer for different firms depending on the unique circumstances and challenges faced by advisors. While a contractor's hourly rate is often higher, the firm foregoes the additional cost of benefits, downtime, and in-depth people management. In fact, when considering the real cost of a full-time team member – including salary, oversight, and overhead – a contractor can be more cost-effective, especially when an advisor only pays for what they need. And, if an advisor is looking to manage costs more precisely, they may want to segment tasks by outsourcing low-cost work to one contractor and higher-skill work to another – without needing a single full-time hire.

Ultimately, the key point is that outsourced contracting can be a great tool to better leverage and reclaim an advisor’s time – when used well. With thoughtful and continual delegation, clear communication of the firm’s ‘why’ and unique values, and an eye toward iterative improvement, advisors can focus their energy where it’s needed most: on the work that only they can do!

Read More...

Launching a new business venture is often a creative – and somewhat vulnerable – act. Whether it's opening a new firm, publishing a book, or even just posting on social media, each public-facing offering reflects many hours of ideation, refinement, and effort. When preparing to launch, advisors must typically answer two core questions: "Who will show up for this?" and "Will the people who do show up like it and get it?" A good way to address both questions is to ask for feedback – but the real challenge is knowing who to ask,  and when.

In the 161st episode of Kitces & Carl, Michael Kitces and client communication expert Carl Richards discuss how and when to ask for feedback, how to use it constructively, and when it's better to simply act and launch.

As a starting point, gathering a sufficient volume of responses is crucial when asking for feedback. Negative feedback often feels ‘louder' than positive feedback, but a single critical opinion may not reflect a broader sentiment – people simply have a variety of preferences. Advisors can mitigate overreacting to one-off responses by ensuring they collect enough responses to identify real patterns, which can also prevent an advisor from rebuilding everything in response to a single opinion. Furthermore, ensuring that feedback is coming from the ‘right' people is just as important. For example, if a firm launches a new offering for its core clientele – dentists near retirement – then it may not be helpful to ask newly minted doctors what they think of the offering. The doctors may not find the offering helpful or relevant… and that's okay. Feedback from outside the target audience may be interesting, but it isn't always relevant!

In some cases, behavioral data may also be a helpful source of useful feedback. Observing the topics and offerings that clients actually engage with may offer better clues about what they find valuable. Doing more of what connects – and less of what doesn't – can be an easy, effective way to refine offerings over time.

Finally, there may be times when the best audience to build for is the advisor themselves. Many advisors build firms with fee service models that resonate with them. At times, what's needed isn't feedback – it's confidence. For example, there may come a point where an advisor may not need feedback as much as a rallying cry to move forward. Then, once something is launched, the advisor can watch for how prospects and clients react to their offerings and take that as implicit (or explicit) feedback.

The key point is that feedback can be a powerful tool to refine offerings and creative ventures, but only when it comes from the right people at the right stage of the process. When thoughtful feedback comes from a core part of the audience, it can be a helpful resource for advisors to shape services that resonate with their target audience. And, ultimately, those points of feedback can help advisors build a stronger, more relevant product – amplifying their impact in the long term!

Read More...

Whenever the markets become ‘scary' due to current events, advisors can anticipate calls from anxious clients wondering what to do next. These clients are often in fight-or-flight mode, which can make it difficult to have a rational discussion or a productive conversation about their financial plan. And if an advisor jumps straight to data – trying to ‘prove' why staying the course is the right decision – the client may become even more frustrated and reactive. So how can advisors navigate these conversations in a way that helps clients regain a sense of control?

In our 160th episode of Kitces & Carl, Michael Kitces and client communication expert Carl Richards explore how empathy-centered conversations can help clients emotionally reset before engaging in rational decision-making. They discuss a structured five-step framework that financial advisors can use to guide clients from fear back to confidence – helping them feel heard first before introducing logical reasoning.

When a client calls in distress, the first step is to greet them with empathy. If the client says they are worried, it can help to reflect that concern back to them with a simple acknowledgment, such as, "You sound very worried. I feel worried when I watch the news, too." Next, creating space – such as taking a minute to grab a glass of water or introducing a natural pause – can help slow the pace of the conversation and ease tension. Once the client feels more at ease, the advisor can affirm their goals by reinforcing what truly matters to them, such as ensuring they can continue spending a certain amount in retirement. From there, the advisor can remind them that their portfolio was built to support the client's long-term goals and designed to withstand market hiccups, declines, and corrections. Finally, once the emotional intensity has subsided, the advisor can introduce data and historical patterns to provide reassurance.

Still, some clients may insist that "this time it's different". In these cases, it can help to acknowledge that while the cause of each scary market downturn is unique, the market's pattern of recovery has been remarkably consistent. Walking the client through how their individual portfolio would perform in a recession can also be reassuring. Often, the worst-case scenario isn't financial ruin – it may instead be a matter of weathering a few years without an increase to their year-over-year spending. These conversations can also be a great opportunity to affirm why portfolios are structured for risk management, especially since the same client who fears a downturn today may, in a strong market, wonder why they have to rebalance when they could be chasing higher returns!

Ultimately, the key point is that scary markets feel scary – but advisors don't need to rely solely on data to convince clients to stay the course. While historical patterns provide perspective, no one truly knows what will happen next. By leading with empathy and curiosity, advisors can guide clients through market volatility with confidence and care, ensuring they leave conversations feeling heard, understood, and reassured!

Read More...

New financial advisors often start with below-market fees – sometimes to build confidence that prospects will actually pay, other times to attract clients quickly and establish a base. But as the firm grows, so does an advisor's skill set and the demands on their time. And while new clients often come in at higher fees, early clients may still be paying well below the firm's current rates.

As such, new firms that start with low fees might make plans to raise fees quickly and, in the meantime, avoid promising clients that the fees will stay the same. But what happens when an advisor did make this promise – and now needs to increase their fees anyway? How can they handle the conversation fairly while maintaining trust with long-standing clients?

In the 159th episode of Kitces & Carl, Michael Kitces and client communication expert Carl Richards discuss how to navigate the ethics and logistics of fee increases for a firm's first clients – especially when the advisor previously promised them their fees would stay the same.

As a starting point, it's important to acknowledge that many advisors feel a deep sense of gratitude and obligation toward their first clients. These were the people who took a chance on a new firm, often building multi-year relationships with the advisor. However, it's worth distinguishing actual promises from emotional obligations – in some cases, advisors may feel bound to a commitment they never explicitly made.

It's also important to consider the business impact of maintaining lower fees for early client segments. As while one or two clients paying below-market rates may not hurt the firm's financial health, several clients for whom the advisor granted exceptions can spell trouble down the road, either by impeding the firm's growth or the advisor's own capacity to sustainably produce high-quality service.

If an advisor did make an explicit promise never to raise fees but now needs to do so, the best course of action would be to have a direct face-to-face conversation. Acknowledging the past promise and explaining why the fee needs to change with honesty and transparency can go a long way. The advisor may emphasize how the firm has grown, compare the client's fees with the current market rate for financial advice, and help them understand the value of the service they're receiving. The advisor may be surprised by how understanding many long-standing clients will be – but for clients who are unable or unwilling to adjust, the advisor may need to guide them to a firm that better fits their budget.

Ultimately, the key point is that fee adjustment conversations – especially with long-standing clients – are rarely easy but may often be necessary. By approaching the conversation with honesty, clarity, and empathy, advisors can maintain trust and fairness while ensuring their firm remains sustainable… and may even be surprised by the client's reception. At the end of the day, charging fees that align with their value allows advisors to grow their firms and continue delivering great advice to more people!

Read More...

Many financial advisors approach prospect meetings with a mindset of giving potential clients ample space to consider the relationship before making any commitments. Asking them to "think it over" after an initial meeting is a common strategy designed to help clients feel comfortable and avoid the perception of being pressured into engaging in the relationship right away. This approach allows prospects to consider if the relationship is the right fit for them while also mitigating the risk of the advisor coming across as too aggressive and ‘salesy'. As such, some advisors have formalized this step into their prospecting process.

However, what happens when an initial meeting goes exceptionally well, and the prospect is immediately ready to commit? In such cases, advisors may find themselves faced with a conundrum – should they keep their process and ask a prospect to "think it over", potentially stalling the momentum, or should they adapt to the prospect's readiness, which might introduce internal stress about compromising the process they've built and deviating from their usual routine?

In this 158th episode of Kitces & Carl, Michael Kitces and client communication expert Carl Richards debate the pros and cons of maintaining a longer prospecting process – especially when a prospect is ready to commit early in an advisor's process.

While "think it over" is often framed as a benefit to prospects, there are also compelling reasons for advisors to take their time considering the relationship before agreeing to move forward. For example, advisors operating a lifestyle firm generally have limited client capacity and may need time to evaluate whether the prospect aligns with their values and service model. Similarly, advisors who provide comprehensive plans as part of their value proposition might need time to put together the necessary information – and asking prospects to "think it over" gives both parties time to ensure a good fit.

On the flip side, being told to "think it over" can also be frustrating for prospects who have already done their due diligence and are ready to move forward. While prospecting can be nerve-racking for the advisor, it can also be challenging for prospects who feel ready to commit – they may interpret delays as unnecessary obstacles. Advisors can strike a middle ground if they want (or need) a longer prospecting process without disempowering the ready-to-commit prospect. For example, the advisor may frame a second meeting as an opportunity to review documents while having paperwork ready for those who are still ready to proceed. This can help a prospect feel empowered and heard while still giving the advisor time for their own process and consideration.

Ultimately, the structure of a prospecting process often reflects the personal style and comfort level of the advisor – while some may prefer a deliberate, multi-meeting approach, others might embrace quicker commitments when the fit feels right. The key is finding a balance that respects both the advisor's process and the prospect's readiness, ensuring forward momentum without compromising the integrity of the relationship!

Read More...