Financial advisors often seek to scale their practices by investing in technology, hoping efficiency gains will allow them to bring on more clients, and thus unlock greater profitability and capacity. While this may alleviate some demands on the advisor's time, it may not have the scale of effect advisors are looking for. In fact, according joint data on the latest Kitces Research on The Technology Advisors Use And Like and How Advisors Actually Do Financial Planning, investing in technology has a limited yield in advisor productivity. When productivity is measured by revenue per advisor or per employee, the dominant is how much clients are able and willing to pay. In other words, advisors working with a higher number of clients paying a lower fee are unable to match the productivity of advisors who serve a lower number of high-paying clients – even if they leverage technology to increase their day-to-day efficiency.

In the 172nd episode of Kitces & Carl, Michael Kitces and client communication expert Carl Richards discuss the limitations of advisor productivity relative to technology and how advisors can scale up instead. In practice, productivity gains through technology tend to yield relatively incremental results compared to that of client affluence. The data shows a steep curve: revenue per advisor accelerates dramatically as client affluence increases, because wealthier clients both need and can afford more comprehensive services – and are willing to pay premium fees for them. While servicing high-net-worth clients may require more time, it does not scale linearly with revenue. Instead, advisors working with affluent households tend to earn much higher hourly rates, which compounds the financial leverage of moving upmarket.

On the other hand, scaling through client volume – adding more clients to an advisor's book – often hits practical limits that are difficult to overcome, even with well-integrated tech stacks. In contrast, the most productive advisory firms adopt a “one on / one off” model, replacing each new, more affluent client by graduating a less profitable one. This approach allows firms to increase average revenue per client while maintaining or even reducing total client count, thereby enhancing profitability without increasing workload. Over time, this incremental upgrading strategy results in leaner, more profitable practices with deeper client relationships and stronger service capacity. The firms that scale best don't expand capacity to serve more clients – they narrow focus to serve fewer, higher-value ones better.

Interestingly, advisors who approach technology primarily as a tool for efficiency and cost-cutting tend to have lower productivity than those who use technology to deepen the client experience. When tech is deployed to enhance advice quality, communication, or engagement with top clients, it acts as a force multiplier. But when it is used mainly to manage the complexity of serving too many clients, it fails to meaningfully expand advisor capacity. This suggests that the most effective use of technology is to elevate the advisor's value, rather than to increase the number of clients they can serve.

The broader implication is that if the goal is to grow a financially successful advisory business, the clearest path is to work with increasingly affluent clients. Like in medicine or law, some specialties pay more than others – not because the work is more virtuous, but because the market rewards certain kinds of value. While this may conflict with a desire to serve a broader population, the math is difficult to ignore. Each financial planning firm must determine for itself how to reconcile the tension between accessibility and scale. Advisors must decide for themselves how to balance service and economics. The good news is that many advisors have built profitable, enduring practices servicing 'average' clients – but for those who aim to maximize profit, the best path likely involves moving upmarket!

Read More...

After years of growth and hustle, an advisor might arrive at a stable, profitable firm with loyal clients, a thriving staff, and a healthy income – only to find that the day-to-day work has become a repetitive cycle of meetings, service tasks, and familiar conversations. The practice is no longer challenging or creative; it simply runs. And for highly driven professionals who thrive on challenge and novelty, that can feel suffocating. Over time, this feeling of stagnation can lead to burnout – or something else entirely.

In this 171st episode of Kitces & Carl, Michael Kitces and client communication expert Carl Richards discuss the difference between being burned out and being 'bored out' – and how advisors can explore new ways to shake things up without destabilizing the business they've worked hard to build.

Burnout is often rooted in prolonged emotional and physiological exhaustion: too many demands, too little recovery. Being 'bored out', by contrast, emerges when the challenge disappears. The firm functions, clients are happy, the bills are paid… but without an imminent new goal to pursue, the advisor may feel disengaged or like their work lacks meaning. Ironically, the very success that was once the goal becomes the source of frustration: The advisor 'won', and now there's nothing left to strive for.

While these are two very different states, the root cause may be similar: a need for change. Advisors with enough revenue to slow down may still find themselves compulsively reinventing the firm. They might alter their service model, pivot to a new client base, overhaul the marketing strategy, or redesign internal processes. But constant reinvention can increase complexity, put stress on staff, and create instability for clients. Slowing the stream of new ideas and giving the firm time to catch up can be essential for everyone's wellbeing – including the advisor's.

In some cases, implementing frequent change may actually stem from the same root causes of boredom: a lack of new challenges. After years of invention, a reliable client base and familiar routines may feel limiting. Some advisors may have an impulse to completely overhaul or even sell their business – yet, while those options are available, there are often less drastic ways to regain a sense of fulfillment. Some channel their time, energy, or entrepreneurial drive into pursuits outside the firm, such as athletic challenges, philanthropic ventures, or new business endeavors. Others may choose to delegate more of the firm's operations or client work so they can focus on the parts they truly enjoy. And for advisors with a persistent creative itch, carving out a designated space to brainstorm and explore ideas – without any obligation to act – can help contain and channel that drive in a sustainable way.

Ultimately, the goal is to rekindle a sense of inspiration and autonomy. When the excitement of building wears off, it's worth pausing to consider a broader range of possibilities than just "stay and suffer" or "sell and escape". Whether the next step lies in restructuring the role, rediscovering creative ways to serve clients, or pursuing something entirely new, advisors often have more freedom and flexibility than they realize. Recognizing the difference between burnout and boredom can open the door to more thoughtful, aligned decisions – and help build not just sustainable practices, but more fulfilling careers!

Read More...

AI's increasing development and integration in the workplace presents many opportunities for increased efficiency and production – and, with that efficiency, the potential for significant disruption to those working in highly-automatable industries. As these changes accelerate, many clients may begin to fear not just job displacement, but full-blown career obsolescence. Unlike a temporary market downturn, this type of uncertainty can feel more existential, raising difficult questions about professional identity and long-term viability.

In the 170th episode of Kitces & Carl, Michael Kitces and client communication expert Carl Richards explore how financial advisors can support clients whose careers may be disrupted by the rise of artificial intelligence. While AI may or may not reach the level of job elimination that some fear, it does represent an irreducible uncertainty – a risk that can't be fully defined or planned around, especially in fields such as law and software engineering. And when faced with such irreducible uncertainty, the most effective approach is not necessarily to aim for detailed prediction, but instead to focus on simplification, adaptability, and resilience. In this context, planning shifts from optimizing for known risks to preparing for unknown disruptions.

One core strategy is to simplify wherever possible – reducing discretionary spending, trimming financial commitments, increasing liquidity, and revisiting allocation choices with a focus on flexibility rather than long-term growth. For example, instead of maximizing tax efficiency through pre-tax retirement contributions, clients may choose to allocate more toward savings vehicles that can be accessed without penalties if needed. Shifting to more conservative, liquid investments can also create optionality to fund retraining, bridge career transitions, or launch entirely new ventures in less automatable fields. Similarly, clients concerned about AI-related disruption may opt to delay large purchases until there's more clarity around how their industry will be affected.

Helping clients navigate AI-related disruption reinforces the advisor's role not only as a financial expert but also as a trusted thinking partner. Clients facing career instability – or even a loss of professional identity – need space to voice their concerns and explore potential paths forward. Often, simple questions like, "What might happen next?" or "How would we need to prepare for that?" can open up space for meaningful reflection and reveal tangible next steps. In this way, advisors can help clients balance long-term uncertainty with shorter-term action – anchoring their sense of agency when outcomes remain unclear.

Ultimately, the key point is that it's difficult to predict how AI will reshape specific career fields. For clients whose livelihoods may be at risk, advisors can work collaboratively to create an individualized, practical plan to reduce the financial strain of potential career disruption. That kind of planning can offer clients substantive peace of mind, ensuring that they understand their options amidst an ever-changing landscape – all while giving the advisor a chance to reaffirm their value in a rapidly evolving world!

Read More...

From the advent of personal computers and the Internet to smartphones and sophisticated financial software, the profession of financial advice has always been in continual dialogue with technology. However, the rapid rise of artificial intelligence has brought a deeper wave of disruption to the financial advice profession. As clients increasingly expect seamless, automated financial solutions – what might be thought of as ‘self-driving money’ – advisors are left to consider how their roles are evolving and where they can continue to add value.

In this 169th episode of Kitces & Carl, Michael Kitces and client communication expert Carl Richards discuss how AI will reshape the tasks advisors perform and the value they bring to client relationships. Looking back across the decades, the foundational elements of financial planning have remained surprisingly consistent – from discovery meetings to financial plan presentations – as advisors have striven to help people make sense of their financial lives. In fact, as technology solutions have become more sophisticated, some advisors now serve fewer clients more comprehensively.

AI will likely accelerate this trend – not by replacing advisors, but by automating some of the mechanical aspects of planning, including cash flow modeling, tax optimization, and investment rebalancing. As the mechanical side becomes more optimized, the human side of financial advice increasingly becomes the true differentiator. Clients rarely have clear, static goals; their values and priorities evolve over time. Helping clients articulate what matters, navigate trade-offs, and stay emotionally aligned with their plans is a task that remains uniquely human, since even with perfect data and perfect modeling, planning decisions must still be made within the messy context of real lives!

Technical expertise remains essential – not because it alone creates value, but because it underpins the confidence and judgment needed to evaluate outputs, catch errors, and guide clients through complex decisions. In our current era of financial advice, the internet and early iterations of AI can solve many prospective clients’ problems. However, a core segment of the population will always be delegation-oriented, while others will face financial situations so complex that they require an expert’s help. This dynamic may deepen over time; as ‘basic’ financial planning questions become easier to access, the bar for an advisor’s competency may continue to rise. Which means that deeper specialization – whether in a subset of clients or a specific set of financial problems – may help advisors differentiate themselves in the long term.

Ultimately, the key point is that as AI evolves, so will financial advice, stretching advisors to embrace both technical competence and human connection. In the years ahead, the advisors who stand out will help their clients better understand who they themselves are, what they want, and how to leverage their financial resources to get there!

Read More...

As the financial advice profession has matured, behavioral finance has become an increasingly important element of modern advice. This holistic approach to financial advice, often referred to as life planning, focuses on helping the advisor understand the client’s financial history, deep-seated goals, and overall relationship with money, which can allow for more targeted and comprehensive advice. However, for advisors who want to explore financial psychology with their clients, it may be difficult to determine when – and whether – to go deeper, and how to handle high-emotion conversations gracefully without overwhelming clients.

In this 168th episode of Kitces & Carl, Michael Kitces and client communication expert Carl Richards discuss the pros and cons of holding financial psychology conversations early in the client (or prospect) relationship – and how to determine whether a deeper exploration of the client’s financial history is appropriate in the first place.

From the prospect’s point of view, it’s easier to not hire a financial advisor than it is to hire one (at least in the short term). Sifting through advisors’ websites, fee schedules, and other information can require substantial effort. While some prospects may seek an advisor’s behavioral coaching – especially if the advisor markets themselves as a behavioral finance expert – the majority are motivated by a specific event that propels them to begin the process. As such, a prospect usually comes to an advisor with one key stressor in mind, and it may feel jarring to hear questions like, "What is your first memory with money?" These questions, though intended to build trust, may inadvertently leave clients feeling disoriented or uncomfortable if they were expecting a more straightforward problem-solving approach.

Instead, advisors may find more success in leading with solving the problem that the client immediately presents, and then, over time, gradually exploring the client’s financial background as trust develops. This process of earning permission to go deeper can take months – or even years! – of consistent, high-quality work. Such an approach may also create a more organic environment for advisors to practice and hone their empathy and behavioral finance skills.

Ultimately, the key point is that starting a financial planning relationship with introspective behavioral finance questions may feel jarring to the client unless the advisor has an express specialty in life planning, and the prospect is expecting that approach. For many prospects, it can be more effective to start by addressing the immediately presenting problem and, once trust has been established, dive to gradually explore their money stories together. And in the meantime, it’s worth remembering that the so-called technical work of financial planning isn’t ‘just’ technical – it often involves an incredible amount of emotional support and can go a long way towards helping clients realize their most important financial goals!

Read More...

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...