“We’ve been together for ten years and all the original members are still on board. We are often asked how we have managed to keep working together for this long because it is so rare.”
That was a comment which financial services consultant Carol Davis had presented to her while researching the Resnik/ ING Opinion Leaders survey.
The comment came from a planning business in which the principals where still working together after a decade.
And the fact that other planners were seeking the answers hints at the seldom addressed issue of how to remove staff and partners when the relationship no longer works.
“Many planners said there was a need to exit clients from the business who were no longer profitable and for some it was an emotional issue,” Davis says.
“However those who were looking at their practice from a business angle also said the same had to be done with staff or partners in some cases.”
Davis says diverging aims for the business and often egos lead to a clash of values, prompting many to ask what the secrets are in businesses that have maintained the same staff.
“This is a major issue at the emotional level, especially if these staff or partners are part of long term business or succession plans,” Davis says.
“However those who had maintained stable business relationships said they knew each team member had complementary skills as well as a strong team focus.”
Davis says this also applies to those planners who used outside referrals for areas such as accounting or life insurance.
“The relationship has to be seamless, as it would be if they were in your own business. There is no point in sending a conservative client to an creative thinking accountant,” Davis says.
Those who had thought about exit strategies for themselves or other people in the practice used and thought in terms of a business model, according to Davis.
Such groups had elements such as a board of directors, process driven systems, and had corporatised the practice. It also meant these businesses were using people with a team approach and educating clients to see other staff beyond the principal financial planner and be comfortable with that situation.
At the same time, Davis says such practices are also pragmatic about any moves to separate themselves from personnel who no longer fit the business.
“It is a mixed set of emotions but most of these people are entrepreneurial and they work on a rational basis. There is a certain level of willingness to deal with such issues but it does not mean they don’t feel for them,” Davis says.
“It is a costly exercise with possible loss in the short term. Yet any planner looking to divest staff is ready to do so looking long term and will make sacrifices now for a larger goal.”
