A. By brand—whether the advisor is affiliated with a wirehouse, broker-dealer or independent RIA.
B. By standard of care—whether the advisor is subject to a suitability versus a fiduciary standard.
C. By whether the advisor is inspiring—is viewed by the investor as a leader and steward.
D. By compensation model—whether the advisor is compensated from commissions, asset-based fees or both.
E. By whether the advisor possesses certain designations.
You’re probably tempted to say that all the answers are correct, and to some extent they are. However, there is one that stands out from the rest.
Consider that survey after survey has revealed that the public cannot discern the differences between brokers and advisors; between a suitability standard and a fiduciary standard; between a basis point and a stolen base; or between CFAs and CFPs. Even when informed, investors don’t seem to care about the differences. We’ve also chewed up a lot of time, money and resources to advocate for the proposed uniform fiduciary standard of care. The reality is that no matter how proposed fiduciary standards are implemented, they’re not going to have any real impact on how investors choose their advisor.
The correct answer to the above question is “C”—the vast majority of clients who are looking for a long-term relationship with an advisor care only about one thing: Does the advisor inspire me? A broker who is charging commissions and does not hold a single professional designation can be as inspiring as a registered investment advisor who charges only an hourly fee and needs two lines on her business card to list her designations.
That’s not to say brand, standard of care, compensation model and designations (collectively referred to as “professional attributes”) are not important. They’re incredibly important—but more to the financial advisor than to the clients. Advisors want to feel like they’re part of a team, and certain professional attributes are what give financial advisors a sense of membership and community.
So what does it take to be an inspiring advisor? What are prospects looking for in an advisor? Three things: character, competence and courage. To be inspiring, there must be a balance, manifestation and continuum among all three elements. A shortfall or incongruence in any one of the three will send a client looking for a new advisor.
Character
Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf (West Point class of 1956) is known for the famous quote, “Leadership is a potent combination of strategy and character. But if you must be without one, be without strategy.”
Character defines who you are, how you act and how you respond to positive and negative events. It is the primary determinant for how you will treat others. You are not born with character—it is a learned behavior shaped by habits. You can’t regulate a change in character, acquire a new character through a series of mergers or acquisitions, disguise a flawed character with a new marketing or branding campaign or change the disingenuous character of a company by having employees sign a “pledge of integrity.”
When I started writing about fiduciary responsibility 27 years ago, I melded industry best practices with legal and regulatory requirements to define the term “fiduciary.” In turn, “fiduciary” was soon recognized as a way of defining the moral character of an advisor (see the figure below). Today, it appears that fiduciary is going to be relegated to a de minimis legal term. For this reason, we have begun to separate the two tiers of what formed the old fiduciary standard. Moving forward, the lower tier will be defined as a legally substantiated fiduciary standard, and the upper tier will be defined as a stewardship standard. Of the two tiers, the stewardship standard will define the higher professional standard of care (see Figure 1).