How do we "politely disengage" during the Financial Road Map Interview™ process prior to the Commitment to Hire Conversation™ if we don't feel it will be a "good fit"?

Article ID: 104
Last updated: 20 Nov, 2019

Tell the truth and give them some sound advice about what to do next that doesn’t include you. This is why the language BEFORE Commitment to Hire Conversation™ is so important. It gives you a chance to reflect how the Financial Road Map Interview™ has gone so far and make a good decision about whether or not you want to offer to be hired.

The Clients' answer to the question: “So, what’s the value to you of the work that we’ve done so far in putting together your Financial Road Map®?” will affirm whether or not your gut feeling about offering to be hired or not is right.

If you don't feel it would be a good fit, it could sound something like this, "Well John & Mary, I’ve really enjoyed helping you with your Financial Road Map® today. I hope you’ve gotten value from the experience. To be perfectly frank I don’t think that it would be appropriate for me to offer our services to you at this time. Here’s what I recommend as logical next steps for you…"

You could refer them to another Values-Based Financial Planner™ at your firm or in your area who would be a better fit. Also tell them to read the chapter in the Values-Based Financial Planning™ book about how to find a good advisor and follow that process. Or whatever else you think is good advice.

Just be honest and don’t feel guilty. This is your business. Keep your business and your charity separate. You have an obligation to your family and your clients to run a good, profitable business so you can be of the most value in both your personal and professional life.

Please click the attachment below for Bill Bachrach's audio version of this answer.

Attached files
item CCS BB Answer.mp3 (2.92 mb) Download

Also listed in
folder Commitment to Hire Conversation™ -> Disengaging from Non-Ideal Clients


Others in this category
b Under my current model, there are different means of compensation, depending upon the deliverable (I.e., planning fee, % of AUM, insurance commission, other). It seems that the planning fee would logically be part of the Commitment to Hire. When would the other pieces be brought into the discussion?
b I have been advised that there is a psychology that comes into play when a client pays for services (They are much more invested in the process if they pay for the service, no matter how little/much). If the payment does not take place until implementation [%AUM], does this minimize their commitment to the process? (Your experience here, please). What if there is no formal agreement to sign until implementation and the transfer of assets? What affect does this have? Do you have something that can be used? I am trying to find a "workaround" to the Financial Planning Agreement of my RIA, while still being compliant.
b I really need some simple language to explain the following issues. We are charging a flat fee of $9,870 per annum, plus all the Deliverables, which will add up to a total of a minimum of another $10,000. Do I, for example, just state the total will be say $22,000 per annum, or do I just suggest our fee does not include the things you buy to advance progress towards their goals.
b What is the script that should be used for a Commitment to Hire while I am only being paid in commissions at this time?
b I have several existing clients and prospects that have zero debt and range typically from $3-$10 million in liquid net worth. Many of them have believed in “Term and invest the rest” mentality and therefore don't like to discuss insurance needs and their term policies have expired. By this, I'm referring to clients who are past the accumulation phase and confident in their mind that they have been adequately insured and no longer need much insurance (I realize this may not be true), and have the notion typically to only buy term and put the rest of their money into savings. When we get to the Commitment to Hire Conversation™. Many of my existing clients have zero debt, more cash then they need to have sitting around (I realize this needs to be addressed), and don't feel they need much help with insurance. Therefore the step-by-step plan addressing these four areas only has one area where they typically want, or feel, they need help in creating a plan. I'm curious if it would it make sense to change the "What you get” discussion to something that could provide a little more value than the 4 bullets currently in the script? Can you please tell me perhaps a different word track then the Financial Road Map® script since two of the four areas are not of much interest to these types of clients?
» More articles