Feature
I suggest using group participant meetings to generate
interest in one-on-one meetings to review their individual
situation. An advisor that heads down this path should be
able to effectively communicate the process in the group
meeting while also conveying a feeling that everyone should
have a plan and you will help them start theirs. Participants
generally do not want to think they are going to have to learn
and then apply what you teach them. An effective group
meeting will present the need for the planning, the process,
and the desired outcome so when the sign-up sheet is passed
around, people do not hesitate to place their name on the
sheet to get the process started. This means the advisor had
to have presented the need for a review of their situation in
a way that pushed them to action. I will suggest this is the
sales pitch and the critical first step in heading down a road
of retirement readiness.
Once the interest has been generated in group meeting(s) the
next step is to deliver in individual meetings. This means the
advisor needs to be set up to handle the volume, consistence,
and fiduciary responsibility of individual meetings. Keep in
mind my initial premise that participants do not want to be
educated—individual participant advice should be entered
into carefully and properly. If set up correctly, an advisor
can change a retirement plan from one that is just another
benefit to one employees talk and brag about. I say this
because employees do talk and how an advisor implements
this phase of the advice process is critical to the success of
this type of program and quite possibly their future as the
advisor to the plan. It is difficult to describe the time and
effort commitment necessary to implement an effective
participant advice program since the task is basically taking
on a large number of individual clients, analyzing their
situation, creating a plan with them, and then implementing
and monitoring the plan. Participants need to understand
exactly what the advisor’s role is in the process and what
each party is responsible to do. A miscommunication here
can end in a bad outcome if a participant thought the advisor
was going to implement recommended changes and the
advisor thought they communicated that the participant
needed to implement them. Again, one mishap on this front
and it could end the program before it gets off the ground.
The one-on-one meetings should be designed to get the
critical information to create a plan and leave the “good to get
to” stuff for after the plan is created and implemented. This
14 | WINTER 2014
There is nothing wrong
with educating participants
in a Corporate Retirement
Plan, however, if the goal is to
move the needle on retirement
readiness, education is not
what produces results.”
means that the process of gathering the information needs
to be well established, practiced (since the time with each
participant is limited), and then consistently communicated
to each participant. Each participant needs to leave the
initial one-on-one meeting with the same story and the same
level of service from the advisor, since they will compare
notes. Since each participant will have a unique financial
situation, the advisor should have a path for the participant
with a relatively simple financial situation and as well as
a path for someone with a sophisticated situation. The
participant with the easier financial background could have
the plan established along with recommendations in two
meetings. Being able to do this means the advisor has a
repeatable system in place to gather, process, communicate
and document the information being discussed.
For the participant with a more sophisticated financial
situation, the initial process is a bit longer and requires more
work on both the advisor’s and participant’s part. First, the
advisor needs to establish a level of trust and competence
which gives the participant the confidence to hand over
the details of their financial life. I have found this means
the initial one-on-one meeting is used to gather the first
level of information from the participant. Then there is the
information that will need to be provided after the meeting
is over since the participant will most likely not bring all of
the data they needed for this meeting. Obviously, a system