What happens when our clients run into trouble and the issue we think we are dealing with is not the real one? If it’s not the real issue, our answer is not going to be the right answer.

Take, for example, one of our clients. This client has a “secret” stash of money set aside to use for early retirement. Whenever the client wants to spend cash beyond means, not only can we not suggest spending from this account, but we have to pretend it does not exist. It is the Lord Voldemort of bank accounts. We cannot use it, even though taking money from the client’s regular investment portfolio will trigger capital gains—an investment portfolio that will likely do better over time if left alone than this cash account we are not allowed to touch. The cash, furthermore, could be earning even higher rates through online savings or Treasurys.

But taxes and investments are not the real issue here.

The real issue is this: The client is facing retirement and feeling unsettled, wanting to have control over money while anxiously facing the next stage, one the client is not fully emotionally prepared for. It’s poor planning to optimize the client’s cash in this case. Sure, we can try to convince the client that keeping cash on the side is not rational. We can show the client how much it is costing. Or we can help the client get through this period to have a better chance of enjoying it.

Did you tell your kids there was no Santa Claus, or did they find out on their own? Maybe you felt it was your duty to disabuse them of the notion that some round guy traveled the world every Christmas handing out presents that were uniquely picked out for them. Maybe you were concerned that by not revealing the truth you were participating in a lie and that your children would need years of therapy to again trust you. Or maybe you let them believe until they felt ready to no longer believe.

Was the issue that you would never lie to your children, or that you wanted your children to appreciate the benefits of fantasy?

Knowing the real answers to questions like these can help you make better decisions. It’s no different with clients, who are making choices based on underlying emotional factors we often miss.

We had another client who was working with her elderly father, trying to help him get his house in order. She would eventually have power of attorney, but that was not yet necessary. The father had a large estate that was continuing to grow. We were working with him on a gifting strategy.

The client’s two brothers were in different situations. One had very little money but also no interest in it. He was living a minimalist life, and financial decisions made him anxious. The other brother was working a dead-end job, had a wife and two children, and could have used the money. Our client, the sister, did not need the money but felt responsible for doing the “right” thing (remember, there is rarely one right thing; the world is not binary).

Since the father had not really done integrated planning before, we started by having him gift the bypass trust income to the kids, since he did not feel attached to the income. We then made substantial gifts to each child and funded 529 plans for the grandchildren. Our client worked closely with her father to be sure he felt comfortable with the strategy.

But then, because no good deed goes unpunished, one of the brothers complained about how his tax situation was changing and the other brother indicated that his financial planner told him he needed more money gifted into the 529s in order to fully pay for college.

My client was hurt and frustrated. She had mistakenly thought that the real issue was to make the best decisions about the disposition of her father’s estate. But that wasn’t really the issue. For one of the brothers, the minimalist, the real issue was trying to understand how money could potentially change the life he was living. Or it was about the responsibility of stewardship. Or it may have been about being rich while his friends were poor.

For the other brother, the issue might have been that there could never be enough money because he had grown up in a financial situation vastly different from his current one. He might have been wondering why his sister was the one in charge of his father’s finances. Or it could have been that he still did not feel successful after being blessed with these riches.

And our client was likely asking why she was not appreciated for doing the right thing. Why did all sorts of family history have to be acted out in such a harmful way? Could she have possibly done something wrong?

Since there are multiple parties involved, each with only limited information about the others, there are a number of possible issues at play. So in this case, identifying the most important one was probably impossible.

Instead, we tried to find clarity about everybody’s intentions. We communicated with the brothers about what they could expect to receive going forward and why the grandchildren would be gifted only the annual exclusion amounts. We also talked about people’s behavior: for example, why it was inappropriate to go behind their siblings’ backs to lobby Dad.

This approach helps our client understand why she is making decisions, identify how they are consistent with her role and give her brothers needed information related to what they can expect. They may also be able to find their own help. What the approach doesn’t do is put an end to everyone’s issues, because everyone has sovereignty over their own dysfunction (and by the way, that includes all of us planners).

Couples pose a different problem when we are trying to get to the real issue behind financial ones. For example, if we identify overspending as a problem for a couple, is creating a better budget the solution? How many of you have had clients who overspend no matter what budgeting tools you use? Guess why. The spending wasn’t the issue. It was why they were overspending. Maybe they felt unsuccessful and wanted to prove otherwise; maybe they felt as if they had a hole that could be filled by buying things. Maybe they had little control over their impulses.

Trying to get clients to open up about what may be causing this allows us to get closer to helping them. One of our recently divorced clients was in a habit of splurging on things for herself. She had put herself on a number of budgets, crossed her heart and hoped to die several times, pinky swore, and did everything except tie herself to the mast like Ulysses when she wanted to stop spending.

Finally, we had a long conversation with her about what need she was meeting by shopping, and we realized that she did it when she felt lonely. We talked about other ways of dealing with the loneliness and steps she could take when she was experiencing this.

While she didn’t capture complete control over her spending, she found herself binging much less frequently.

We can do much for our clients if we are willing to spend the time on the underlying issue rather than just finding a solution to a problem that we didn’t understand in the first place.

Ross Levin, CFP, is the founder and chief executive officer of Accredited Investors in Edina, Minn. He can be reached at [email protected]