Advisors’ ability to opt out of the process is likely to be limited. Virtually every advisor is on Google Maps, and that makes Google Reviews accessible to their clients. Delisting one’s office from Google Maps could be the only option for advisors who want nothing to do with the reviews.
At the same time, advisors looking to measure the quality of their services will have new, cost-effective tools at their disposal. For decades, many leading advisory firms have paid third-party researchers to conduct client satisfaction surveys.
The new rules, coupled with technology, could permit them to do more client research on their own. Most of the feedback is much more likely to be constructive, enabling advisors to manage their business more effectively.
Theder sees it as an opportunity for advisors to mine data and get real-time client feedback and adjust processes. For example, clients could offer suggestions about ways to streamline the onboarding process or share their common concerns during financial downturns.
If advisors offer specialized services for particular client segments—for instance, parents with special needs children or divorced women—they would be able to feature clients on their home pages discussing how specific problems were solved, Theder explains.
What about negative comments? Advisors can temporarily flag these comments to see if they come from legitimate clients, ex-clients or prospects. However, Theder says the best way to counter negative comments is "overwhelm" with positive comments.
But if a complaint is serious, an advisor who is a licensed securities rep must report it to his or her broker-dealer. RIAs cannot delete negative comments permanently unless they find that the purported client isn’t really a client but an impostor.
This raises the issue of anonymity. Clients can remain anonymous to outsiders, but advisors can’t. Systems like FMG’s will allow advisors to check and see if the negative comment comes from a real client or someone who is pretending to be one and creating a nuisance.