As social media continues to take the world by storm, advisors are increasingly under pressure to begin using social media in their own practices. Yet the advisory community has generally been slow to adopt, due both to the compliance challenges involved, and a general wariness about whether prospective clients would really make a decision to trust and work with an advisor based on social media marketing. In fact, a recent study by the Aite Group suggested that "the bloom is off the rose" when it comes to advisors adopting social media to bring in new business. Yet at the same time, a new social media trend is emerging - using social media not to develop new clients, but to better communicate and interact with existing clients. And the good news is that this approach to social media potentially has far fewer compliance headaches, too, because it's less about talking, and more about listening.
Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" - this week's edition highlights an interesting interview with Geoff Davey of FinaMetrica about risk tolerance, some practice management issues on how economies of scale impact the client experience and moving your technology to the cloud, and a few articles exploring the big recent news from the Department of Labor regarding both finalized rules on 401(k) fee disclosure and new proposed rules about how (primarily immediate and longevity) annuities might be integrated into qualified plans. There's also an interesting look by John Mauldin at some of the economic difficulties and choices the US faces in the coming years, and a fascinating look at the problems the US faces (and some of the causes that got us to where we are) by the brilliant Woody Brock. We finish with a controversial article by Blaine Aiken of Fi360 suggesting that advisors aren't true professionals because they need a code of professional conduct similar to accountants, and a lighter piece by Angie Herbers about why a lack of confidence is not a career death knell but simply a challenge to overcome. Enjoy the reading!
Financial planning has long struggled with the criticism that it serves only a limited subset of the relatively affluent, and has failed to develop business models that deliver financial planning to the wide swath of "average" Americans with more limited income and resources. Yet at the same time, the reality is that our education as financial planners does not really effectively prepare us for the kinds of "financial counseling" knowledge and skills required to serve those with less income and fewer assets. Which raises the question: is that simply because financial planning hasn't grown far enough, or is the reality that the financial planning body of knowledge is separate and distinct from the kind of "counseling" knowledge needed to help people through the basics of navigating our financial system, from credit cards to credit reports to checking accounts to the use of public agencies? Or perhaps stated more broadly, is financial planning for the mass affluent and wealthy a different discipline than financial counseling for those of more limited means?Read More...
Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" - the major highlight this week is the release of the Financial-Planning-Coalition-sponsored study on the costs of various regulatory oversight options, with some pretty shocking costs for FINRA or a new SRO to take over. Other articles include a discussion of Schwab's first franchise branch opening, the emerging field of financial therapy, an analysis of annuity guaranteed withdrawal riders and their limitations due to ongoing inflation, and two great investment pieces on last week's European Summit by John Mauldin and GaveKal, along with a somewhat disturbing warning by John Hussman that the market may be in significant near-term danger. We wrap up with a brief article that was written for entrepreneurs, but translates in my opinion to virtually anyone in professional services, taking a hard look at what your time's really worth, and what you should - and shouldn't - be doing yourself versus outsourcing to others. Enjoy the reading!
Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" - highlights this week include two new articles on safe withdrawal rate research, an investment discussion about Europe from John Hussman, a few practice management articles about business development and cultivating relationships (or not!), a controversial piece that 401(k) plans should have no more than 10(!) investment offers, and more. Happy reading!
Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" - highlights this week include a number of articles on new investment vehicles coming down the pike, some interesting investment discussions from two of my favorite investment writers, John Hussman and John Mauldin, an interesting article suggesting perhaps we need to give clients MORE performance reporting information instead of less, and a white paper on implementing internships. Happy reading!Read More...
If you've been to any session delivered by a practice management consultant in the past several years, you've probably need that to grow your business further, you need to standardize and systematize. In other words, you can't do everything differently for every single client and expect to keep growing much, because at some point your practice is so complex delivering 100 different services to 100 different clients that you just can't absorb the 101st without having your head explode (or alternatively, you couldn't possibly find the time to meet with the 101st prospect to try to get him/her as a client anyway).
In response, planners tend to complain: "But financial planning must be tailored to each individual's situation; and since every client is a unique snowflake unlike any other, so too must their financial planning experience/products/deliverables each be individualized, unique, and customized one client at a time."
Are there still ways to run an efficient practice in a world like this?
For most financial planners, the focus of college planning advice is accumulation based. After all, it seems that almost by definition, "planning" for college means acting in advance by saving up money ahead of time so that the costs can be funded when the child is ready to matriculate. If you just pay as you go when the tuition bills show up, you may be funding college, but that doesn't really constitute "planning" does it? Yet the reality is that many actions can be taken in the final high school years leading up to college beyond just long-term accumulation planning; however, most planners seem to skip these client conversations about so-called "late stage college funding planning" opportunities, despite the potential for a high impact on the actual client costs to fund college. For the most part, it seems this is by no means willful negligence, but simply a lack of awareness about the strategies that really do exist. We've just never had much opportunity for training about how to do this effectively. Until now.
Most planners think of college planning as accumulation planning – contribute to a 529 plan, invest properly, and start spending in 5, 10, or 15+ years; and if you don’t earn much income nor have a lot of wealth, you can apply for need-based financial aid. In reality, though, it’s never too late and you’re never too wealthy to keep doing good planning for college funding… but the strategies are different!
Read More...
- « Previous
- 1
- …
- 26
- 27
- 28