Despite the economic environment and the prevailing mood of the times, financial advisors surveyed for Investment Executive’s Report Card series have been disgruntled with the same three issues year after year.

It should come as no surprise, then, that advisors say in this year’s Report Cards that their firms’ performances are well below expectations in technology tools and advisor desktop, back office and administrative support, and client account statements.

That dissatisfaction is evident in the gap between the overall importance ratings advisors gave each category and the performance rating they bestowed upon their firms. When the importance and performance scores across all Report Cards were averaged, back office and administrative support and technology tools and advisor desktop had, with a full point difference, the largest satisfaction gaps. Client account statements category had the third-highest gap, at 0.8 of a point (tied with compensation). All three categories have held higher importance ratings than performance scores over the past three years.

The problems and low scores that afflict the firms are not industry segment-specific. Complaints heard from advisors in the brokerage world were also being voiced at dealer firms, banks and credit unions, as well as in the insurance channel. Prehistoric software, inefficient tools and lack of training all garnered widespread groans.

“They are trying with technology, but have missed the mark,” says an advisor in Ontario with Toronto-based bank-owned brokerage ScotiaMcLeod Inc. “ The new system just isn’t doing the job.”

“When it comes to technology, we are still in the dark ages,” adds an advisor in Manitoba with Winnipeg-based insurer Great-West Life Assurance Co.

But not all firms are drawing the ire of their advisors when it comes to their technology tools. For instance, Toronto-based boutique brokerage Richardson Partners Financial Ltd. has once again demonstrated its strong ability in the category, as advisors gave it equal importance and performance ratings of 9.3. So, what is Richardson Partners doing right?

“We look at technology in terms of making sure our advisors have the right tools,” says Sue Dabarno, the firm’s president and CEO. “In the past year, we’ve spent quite a lot of time in providing tools so that advisors can understand how their practice works and, in turn, they can spend time on what is important — their clients.”

Although many advisors complained about their firms’ technology tools, others did not hesitate to rhyme off the numerous issues that bother them about their firms’ back office and administrative support.

Over the years, advisors have complained about high employee turnover rates, miscommunication between departments and back-office staff’s lack of proactivity.

“We need to have better educated personnel because there’s been a very high turnover and the new people don’t know what to do,” says an advisor in British Columbia with Toronto-based bank-owned brokerage TD Waterhouse Private Investment Advice. “There’s a lack of ownership with issues, and people aren’t organized. They’re poorly trained.”

“Sometimes, there is too much follow up [by the back office], adds an advisor in Ontario with Waterloo, Ont.-based insurer Sun Life Financial (Canada) Inc. “It’s not consistent enough.”

Of the firms that scored well in the back-office category, Toronto-based specialized managing general agency PPI Financial Group Inc. was praised by its advisors for providing well-trained, educated staff who are able to respond to advisors’ needs in a timely manner.

“Prompt, quick service is important when it comes to the back office,” says a PPI advisor in Alberta. “If clients phone for information, they want to think you’re on top of it right away.”

Adds a colleague in Ontario: “PPI has underwriters on staff that look at cases before they even go to the insurance companies. I don’t know of any other [firm] that offers that.”

In addition to advisors’ endless gripes about technology and back-office issues, they also had plenty to say when it came to their firms’ client account statements. Advisors at every firm IE surveyed has at least one advisor with misgivings about their client account statements.

“The statements are horrific,” says an advisor in Ontario with Toronto-based TD Canada Trust. “The firm is working on them, but there is no light at the end of the tunnel.”

With so many poorly structured statements, advisors are baffled as to what is taking so long to correct the situation. “They need to talk to advisors first,” says an advisor in Ontario with Toronto-based Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce. “It has been six years, and they haven’t been restructured yet. People can’t make sense of it.”

@page_break@“Missing information,” “unclear language” and “confusing formats” were among the long list of advi-sors’ complaints. These are not uncommon to the issues that industry expert Doug Lincoln, senior strategist with Toronto-based Simplified Communications Group Inc., has heard throughout his 17 years focusing on the approach and development of client account statements.

“Having the correct content in a statement is critical,” he says. “But you are only halfway there if it is not presented in a manner that is clear, concise and in a framework that covers all the attributes.”

Although there are many aspects that go into producing a good statement, Lincoln says, these can be broken down into four core areas — content, organization, writing and presentation, including the typography and the use of charts or graphs. (See story on page B13.)

One firm whose advisors praise its client account statements is Winnipeg-based dealer Investors Group Inc.

“We’ve been praised highly on the industry side,” says an advisor in Quebec. A colleague on the East Coast adds: “Our client account statements are top of market.” IE