Speaking to ifa, Mr Raftery said that, when looking at the core issues surrounding advice, most of the poorer forms of advice comes back to the SOA, where regulators can pick up problems with how a certain paragraph is expressed.
“It’s just about how a certain paragraph has been written, that may be poorly written or a poorly explained strategy – a complex strategy not explained in clear, concise language, as what’s required,” he said.
However, Mr Raftery believed there shouldn’t be an expectation on advisers to be an absolute expert in soft skills, as it is something that you’re continually learning and evolving throughout your career.
He noted that even excellent advisers with 30 to 40 years of experience might be rough with their soft skills, such as writing, and not realise the smaller mistakes they might be making.
“I know I’m far from perfect and my staff will be far from perfect in them as well, so no way in the world would we hold ourselves as the leading experts on them. But we’re learning all the time,” he said.
In his experience as an academic, Mr Raftery has found the subject dedicated purely to managing client relationships as the one most positively received by his students.
“It’s actually been the most positive subject out of all of the subjects in our degree, because there’s been a real takeaway for advisers,” he said.
“Even just with the client fact find – just being asked how that process will evolve. It’s constantly evolving.
“Hopefully, there will be an improvement in the first semester, and there will be another improvement in the next semester, and there will be another improvement in these softer skills.”
you guys – please – the whole process is setup as a barrier to business – If you really want to stuff something up – get the lawyers involved. A lawyers picnic if you will. What we have going on here is a banquet. Advisers banging on about other advisers – legal types looking down their glasses whilst spinning the till – for some perceived ill. Maybe – just maybe if you look at in the light of – my enemy’s enemy is my friend.
That is if you were looking to stuff the Wealth management industry up – let the lawyers loose on some pretext of a public good. Where do you get the model for this — UK. The left side of politics don’t want you working in this industry – they want to have the final say and dibs on what happens with the 2.7 trillion super pool – why do you think they constantly attack the SMSF world. They know what is best for you – and only the “filthy rich types” have money anyway – and they will never vote for us. ASIC is was a haven for card-carrying members of the left (Kell) was a former member of the labor party. London to a brick – ideologically that theme will run deep through that organisation. We all know this is not about providing a better outcome for the public – it never has been – LIF – FOFA et al. All doing the same thing – death by a thousand cuts. If nothing more it explains why they doesn’t listen to sensible approaches – and for the most part, APRA is entirely missing in action on its supervisory duties.
It doesn’t matter how good an adviser’s SoA writing ability is if the adviser’s licensee doesn’t let them step outside rigidly defined compliance templates. Smaller, non aligned licensees may offer this freedom but those firms are the minority at present.
Never in my 30 plus years have i seen an academic including Mr Raftery and his degree / course teach an adviser properly. In the field with experienced advisers is the only way — whoops all the experienced guys are probably leaving due to this crap!!!!
agreed. drawing from the medical profession, that is why after doctors finish medical school, they do an internship and a residency – practical experience
And no SOA !!!! even life and death sign as you go in and you dont have time to see what you are signing .
But they don’t skip straight to the internship
Ok Adrian, I’ll bite. Will your “managing client relationships” course qualify for FASEA’s Behavioural Finance bridging course unit?
I’d be super happy to log into an ASIC / money smart advice website that 1 set of lawyers update in the background where we complete the advice and it then takes you to the next relevant page to complete before progressing.
You then have your licensee attached to it and they provide a second document that includes the relationships, disclosures etc.
When you complete the document it is emailed to you, the client, ASIC and your licensee. Any of them can then audit the advice as it’s completed and adjust the system or contact you to review before you implement.
It was called Dover
Lol. Actually true.
Hi Terry!
miss ya terry come back!
Adrian, what happened to ASIC’s mantra a few years ago to make all SoA’s shorter, clear and concise.
Nothing happened, ASIC did 1 crap Life Insurance template that was pathetic and then the whole mantra of Short, Clear and Concise disappeared.
The legal BS need to be significantly cut and allow Advisers to prepare and present these Clear and Concise documents without fear of being sued. Only then will any progress be made.
90% of Clients listen, ask questions and seek advice and you are lucky if 10% read the SoA. And lucky if 1% read the 80 page PDS.
what about a SoA walk off? like Zoolander vs Hansel.
Terry m (the lawyer, accountant, and financial planner) can be in one corner with his two-page clear and concise SoA, with links to all that crappy disclosure(s) client’s don’t read AND Adrian Raftery (former FP, and accountant and now academic) in the other corner with his version of a well crafted SoA
the judging panel will be Kelly O’Dwyer, Peter Kell, and Greg Medcraft
Spot on! Yes the whole thing is a JOKE!! And thanks for all your help Ms O’Dwyer, I will bet my house she will turn up working for one of the big 4
beat you to it. she won’t just turn up. she will be paid $1m pa to do so PLUS bonus. (wink wink nudge nudge) you scratch my back …. you know what i mean welcome back to the board room Kel missed ya
If that end up being the case there needs to be an ICAC investigation into her!
walk off! walk off!! Walk Off!!!
Our SOA’s are 12-14 pages long and each strategy is clearly explained on a single page. The rest of the pages are stupid disclosures that the customer couldn’t care less to read about.
I hope the offer conjugal visits at your local state penitentiary.
So if his course is improving semester by semester will we all have to re-sit that subject in another 5-10-15 years to remain “up to date”. Seriously.. In any mid size firm it’s not the planner writing the plan, its the paraplanners and they are severely limited by the licensee dictated SOA templates. It has ZERO to do with planners. I could explain the strategy to any client without opening the document and if they didn’t understand the way it’s explained, poring over a 70 page document isn’t going to help the client one little bit.
totally. even in small practices, the paraplanning is outsourced to a licensee approved one. we have no control over that. maybe dover had it right all along. having their in house lawyers write the soa’s
The lawyers didn’t write the SoA’s – they reviewed them for legalities, after they had been reviewed by Administration, Internal Planners, Compliance, etc.
Anonymous completely agree with your comments. At the end of the day the biggest issue in this industry, like so many others is people getting ripped off. Like any other industry if someone wants to do this they can no matter what rules and regulations are imposed. Being in Finance you would expect that English/ Language skills are not necessarily an Advisers highest achieved Subject matter over his studies over the years. The biggest issue is how much time and money is involved in just helping a client these days with simple requirements.
SOAs are riddled with compliance and legal jargon. Template SOAs provided by compliance of some of Australia’s largest firms (think bank like) have no flow, are repetitive and the actual advice is sometimes confined to three / four pages only – the other 40 or so pages are legal / compliance padding. It today’s tech world, why couldn’t we simply record all sessions with the client, have a few standards ‘things’ like, “do you understand this” etc etc. Email the client the session(s), if they are happy, proceed. Come on techo nerds, invent something here!
This guys needs to get out of the industry.
Shown his true colours partnering with AIOFP and has no practical experience in FP but insists on pushing his tripe.
what’s really funny is that he is on the record telling accountants from the CA institute they don’t need any additional education in FP. then he tells students in the deaking fp course that accounting work is drying up there is plenty of work in financial planning
ha ha
Tripe is soft and squidgy. Very hard to push, you need to sccop it up. And it tastes disgusting.
“Force feeding his tripe” would be a better metaphor!
the guy has no shame. pathetic
I was involved in a remediation project. I investigated advice where the SoA was poorly written, missing important information, limited disclosures, yet on discussions with affected clients the advice was appropriate but the SoA was not!. On the other hand I also investigated well written SoAs, clear, concise, and effective. Files notes in order etc. Passed audits!!. yet on investigation and discussion with the clients totally inappropriate advice.
for more years than I can count, most advisers have complained that SOA’s as guided by ASIC and then interpreted by their Licensee is too long and does not allow them the freedom to convey their advice simply and concisely. But despite this requirement being in the corps act even ASIC’s attempts to write an SOA was a disaster…most advice really can be conveyed in no more than 2 or 3 pages…the rest is info the lawyers think should be in there to “protect” the client but its disclaimers/disclosures and all manner of guff we know most clients don’t bother to read. I think its about time advice docs become a prescribed doc and made generic under the law and simplified down to no more then half a dozen pages…enough to inform the client and actually read it. Legislators, academics, policy makers, lawyers and the regulators ALL have caused this debacle not the adviser…stop blaming them they have very little control or influence on what has happened over the last 10 years around compliance and how to document advice…ASIC in partic has caused this shitstorm but will never take responsibility for it
It was called a Customer Advice Record. Two pages. If replacing a policy there was an additional two pages for replacement policy advice. Clients actually read them, and if they didn’t understand they asked questions. Clear, concise and effective. More to the point it made advice affordable & easy to access. I could do 10 appointments a week with well researched advice and probably 5 sign-ups. Today I’m lucky if there is one sign up every two weeks.
Well written and to the point this bloke will never understand , and why would he , pushing his own barrow .