Five areas where wealth firms most need to improve advisor support

As firms across the brokerage, dealer and retail bank channels continued to update their digital business tools in 2024, they also strove to improve back-office services. Still, advisors reported their lowest satisfaction level in the “advisor’s experience with back-office tools & services” category, as they did in 2023.

That category’s collective performance average was 7.7 out of 10 this year, unchanged from 2023, while its collective importance average (9.2) also hadn’t budged. The ratings for each of the brokerage and retail bank channels ticked up by 0.1 of a point over that period to 7.9 and 7.6, respectively, but the dealer channel’s rating was, once again, 7.7.

Back-office support for advisors can vary widely by firm and channel, but the need to process business smoothly with efficient tools remains important for advisors in all channels. For brokerage advisors, the issue wasn’t only firms’ technology shortfalls or digital glitches; staffing shortages caused by Canada’s prevailing economic and employment landscape also were blamed.

“Because of the economy, [there are] too many cutbacks in essential areas,” one advisor in Ontario with a bank-owned brokerage said about their back office. Meanwhile, a brokerage advisor in British Columbia said, “It’s an ongoing challenge for everyone. Our [firm’s] biggest problem is getting the right people.”

Said a brokerage advisor in Alberta: “Our back office is continually pushing things back into branches. [That] creates work I don’t need.”

Advisors in the dealer channel commented on external factors, such as industry regulation, while also mentioning the need internally for improvement in back-office support.

“It shouldn’t be so hard to have a [portal] you can go to, where you can learn how to use new [tools]. This kind of back-office help would be helpful,” said a dealer advisor in Ontario, who struggled with routine regulatory change.

A dealer advisor in Alberta said their firm had indicated back-office support was a priority and that hiring was ongoing. This advisor welcomed the news, saying skilled back-office staff can drastically reduce the amount of time it takes to process business.

In the retail bank channel, branch advisors and planners mainly lamented long wait times when processing transactions or asking for help. Such delays hampered good client service, said one retail bank advisor in Atlantic Canada, who added, “The communication [from the back office] could use some revamping to keep the client experience at an acceptable level.”

A retail bank advisor in B.C. expressed dissatisfaction with their bank’s “client relationship tools.” They said, “There are always tech issues and problems with platforms [not] communicating.” New tools had been introduced in the past year, they added, but they hadn’t been adequately tested.

Another retail bank advisor, in Alberta, echoed that dissatisfaction: “[My bank] could do a better job testing new programs to avoid initial glitches.” While technology problems are “unforeseeable,” they added, “it’s difficult … when there’s a client in front of you and [a tool] doesn’t work.”

The retail bank channel was rated lowest for performance, out of all three channels, in both the “client relationship tools” and “technology training & internal IT support” categories (7.6 and 7.4, respectively, compared with 7.9 and 7.4 in 2023).

However, both those categories were among the five with the highest satisfaction gaps, collectively, in 2024, meaning it’s not just the retail bank channel that has work to do.

The brokerage and dealer channels were each rated only a little higher for performance, at 7.9, for their relationship tools (compared with 7.9 and 7.6, respectively, in 2023). The two channels were rated 8.2 and 7.8, respectively, for their technology training this year, unchanged for the brokerages but up from 7.4 for the dealers.

The lesson for any firm that plans to change either its back-office systems or general technology suite is this: advisors appreciate communication during the development phase, and they want follow-up learning guides — especially where new systems are replacing legacy tools.

For example, one dealer advisor in Quebec said their firm was “undergoing an ambitious technological transformation” that affected client statements and portals. Advisors’ technology literacy was bolstered by a “robust training campaign” around new tools, a helpful initiative led by the dealer’s practice management team.

“Client onboarding tools,” was another technology-focused category among the five with the largest satisfaction gaps. The brokerage channel showed the greatest satisfaction gap in this category: advisors in that space gave the category a performance rating of 8.1, and an importance rating of 9.3, leaving a gap of 1.2.

Even when investment dealers were putting money into their tools, advisors in this year’s Brokerage Report Card still offered suggestions for improvement. Brokerage advisors wanted continually improved learning resources and expected their firms not to cut corners when implementing changes. (See the full story at investmentexecutive.com/brc2024crm.)

Across all channels, advisors suggested their firms should leave no client behind in the technology race. For clients who are uncomfortable with digital tools, as well as senior clients and those with complex planning needs, having “several [onboarding] channels to ensure we can meet clients’ preferences and scheduling needs” is key, said a retail bank advisor in B.C.

This advisor added that clients must be able to access account statements and portals in various ways that are “efficient and secure.”

Listening to advisors

The category in this year’s Report Card series with the fifth-highest satisfaction gap, collectively, was “receptiveness to advisor feedback.” It was rated 8.1 for collective performance and 9.0 for collective importance, leaving a gap of 0.9.

Advisors across the three channels stated varying needs regarding the frequency and degree of detail of firms’ updates — a theme measured in the “effectiveness in keeping advisors informed” category. However, advisors’ general desire to be heard by their firm’s or bank’s management was consistent.

“After [many] years with no ability to give feedback, [my bank] finally implemented a system where we can [give] input at any time, on many topics,” said one retail bank advisor in Ontario. Before that, this advisor added, the “only way to provide feedback was to [your] manager directly, which just felt like complaining, or to the periodic employee survey,” which wasn’t timely. (The retail bank channel was rated 8.0 for feedback receptiveness in 2024, the same as a year ago.)

The performance ratings in the advisor feedback category for the brokerage and dealer channels were 8.3 and 8.1, respectively, compared with 8.6 for the brokerages and 8.0 for the dealers in 2023.

Advisors in those two channels appreciated offerings such as conferences, regular calls with management and places on advisory councils. But, said one dealer advisor in the Prairies, “they need to allow more time to listen [to] and hear advisors when fundamental or structural changes are happening,” especially when those changes involve client fees or services.

If firm or big bank executives are too “far detached from everyday life and how [advisors and clients] interact when they’re trying to do business,” advisor morale deteriorates, said a retail bank advisor in Ontario. “They forget we are human beings with families, not here to be robots for our institutions.”

Brokerage advisors often choose and remain loyal to a firm whose management is responsive to advisors’ concerns. “I’ve raised issues and [my firm has] addressed them,” said one brokerage advisor in Quebec. “We don’t want friction when running our practice.”

This article appears in the November issue of Investment Executive. Subscribe to the print edition, read the digital edition or read the articles online.