Navigating Profile Objections

In last week's blog I wrote about letting the Financial DNA^® profile do the work in the facilitation process; the strategy being to get the client to talk, through asking open-ended questions. The approach is still the same even if it is not an advisory situation and you are interacting with a spouse, family member or team mate. During those discussions, you should expect that some objection or query about the profile will come up. In reference to one of the profile factors, people will say this is not me, or I do not behave this way. Overall, we have had very few people dispute the overall accuracy of the profiles, particularly when they have had their query explained.

As a starting point, I always tell people not to be afraid if there are some objections. This does not mean the profile is wrong. The fact is that based on the University validation and also the subsequent extensive use through 90,000 profiles completed we know the profile is correct 90% of the time for 90% of people, and the outcomes are stable through a person's life. The objection actually makes the facilitation MUCH more interesting and rich. The person will tell you a whole lot more about themselves when they are allowed to challenge the profile. You should get the person to describe situations where in their view of the profile may not be correct. This will be VERY revealing. Then ask them times when it may be correct, or they have acted or made a decision this way in the past. This is true discovery now happening and will in the end build more trust because of the deeper conversation and greater buy-in to the profile.

What you will see in the discussion is that people have blind-spots about themselves - it is natural, we all do. Generally speaking there is a consistent pattern of behavior there even though we may not admit it. Remember a camel cannot see its own humps. One strategy I always suggest is to tell the person to show their spouse - the truth will then be told!!

In fact I had this type of discussion with an advisor (Mary) and her husband (Jim) this week. The challenge came up around Jim being very daring (top 1% of the population) thus having the propensity to take risks. He did not see that he took risks. So I asked Jim to describe 3 situations when he took risks in making major decisions. Frankly, it was amazing what came out - the purchase of a diamond mine, buying a maintenance company, committing to a large infrastructure project. Some big decisions had been made. Mary was ready to tell me more!! Jim had just not seen this as taking risks. BUT what also came out was that Jim did not take so many risks in areas he did not know about - he was not a gambler. In fact, Jim had a lower risk tolerance which provided a hand brake on some of the risk taking (these being very different behaviors). For me as their Wealth Mentor I found out a lot. Just because Jim had a natural propensity to take some risks, does not mean he always does. He is more calculated and concerned to maintain stability. In dealing with the family mutual fund portfolio his risk appetite was more cautious because of less knowledge. In this case he let Mary, being 'the advisor' make the decisions. Because of his lower risk propensity and tolerance in this area, some caution needs to be taken so that Mary does not take the family portfolio into too much volatility.

Around risk this works the other way too where someone is low on daring but takes financial risk. Very often this is a financial advisor who has learned to take risk from extensive financial education and experience. BUT in other areas of their life they have little inclination to take risk. If this was a non-financially educated client I would be much more concerned because they would then be taking risks outside their natural propensity and learning.

The point here is that when there is a query on the profile you have to ask the person, "is this your naturally motivated behavior or learned behavior at work?". In daily life, we live with both in operation. However, under pressure or when we are acting instinctively the natural behavior will take over. So for Jim, he is a calculated risk taker in certain areas and has learned to manage the risk-taking with investments and other life decisions. The profile was revealing this but he did not see all of that about himself. The value of the profile is putting objectivity against self perception, and often they are different.

Also, the other important point to mention is that the profile is not telling you about a person's values. This is a very common topic of discussion. A person will say "well the profile says I am very rational, logical and not supportive - I am tough minded". The question will be "Does that mean I do not care about people and have people centered values?". ABSOLUTELY NOT. Rather, it is saying that without awareness, you may not show that you care. There could still be a "teddy bear" inside. You could still be doing charitable work, help a team mate, help your kids with their homework. But you may do that in a different way to someone who is naturally compassionate. So do not confuse natural behavior for values. I have found that when this distinction is probed and discussed more that most people see the difference and become even more accepting of what the Financial DNA^® profile says.

Remember that the Financial DNA^® profile is your starting point from a behavioral standpoint and a very strong predicator of where you are likely to revert to under pressure (triggered mostly by money and relationships), but it is not how you operate in every situation faced in life or financially. If you keep the person focused on this broad point, the discussion becomes much easier and keeps you away from being too analytical on the profile factors which may itself cause unwarranted objection.

Facilitating Your Clients with Financial DNA

In my last blog on engaging the client, I concluded with the comment that facilitating the Financial DNA profiles with your clients is easier than you may perceive, and does not have to take you away from being an advisor to a counsellor. There is no doubt this is a concern for some advisors particularly for those who have been more focused on the investment side of the business.

In my training sessions, I often use the golf analogy, if you already have a good golf swing meaning you are a good client facilitator, then Financial DNA is putting a much better golf club in your hands. So we are not here to change your swing, just make the ball contact better and straighter, meaning have a more powerful conversation. I wish to be clear that the goal is not to convert advisors to being counsellors or defacto psychologists. Rather, our goal is to take a lot of the guesswork and assumptions about client behavior out of the client discovery process.

How you facilitate a client through the Financial DNA profiles depends to some degree on your discovery process and the type of discussion that you are prepared to have with the client, and the client with you. Every advisor will have a different facilitation approach depending on who they are. Because life and financial decision-making are inter-twined, you should also integrate the profile discussion with the whole meeting agenda.

As mentioned in my last blog, I have learned that people love to talk about themselves, so ... give them the maximum opportunity to do so. The Financial DNA Profiles are a great starting point. If you have a couple sitting in front of you, there will be very few times that one of them will not open up and start talking. Importantly, they are likely to reveal information that you may never have known or it would have been emotional and confrontational to ask about.

In approaching the discussion, there is no need to do a behavioral strip-down and go through each profile factor with the client straight away. To kick start the discussion, simply ask them how did they feel about their profile? Or what did they think of their profile? Thereafter, you engage them in a discussion and we have further questions you can ask. All you need to do is keep on asking them open-ended questions to draw them out. Further, always ask them positive questions so there is no shut down, the negatives will be revealed anyway. Later in the discussion, you can ask more specific questions that reference back to the profile more closely.

If the client has an objection about the profile, it is normally a "blind-spot". The profiles have proven to be very accurate - 90% right for 90% of people. When you explain to people that the profile is about natural behavior only and not learned behaviors they are normally disarmed. For instance, is being organized stressful and something you learned, or is it a natural habit.

A golden rule in facilitation is never take the client further than they are ready to go. If they do not want to discuss the profile as much as you do, then allow that to happen. You still have great information, so move on. This happens very rarely. What you will see happen is that they may mention it later in the advisory process. Remember, not every client is "engaging" and an open talker.

So my message is, there is no need to change what you do now in client discussions. Allow the profile to do the work for you. This will keep the facilitation much simpler.

Engaging Your Clients in Financial DNA

Interestingly, the most common question that we have been asked by financial advisors is: How do I get my clients to take the profiles? Will they do the profiles?

I have been in the shoes of the advisor introducing the Financial DNA Profiles and fully appreciate the questions. Being honest, when I started down the track of introducing the Financial DNA profiles to my clients in 2001 and, before then asking more probing life orientated discovery questions, I did not necessarily expect such a process would be for everyone. Particularly in Australia where there is less personal openness than in the United States. There is no doubt that I was expecting resistance. However, I also knew that in order for me to deliver the best service to my clients in accordance with my values, I wanted them to do the Financial DNA profiles.

Over the past 5 years we have seen a lot less client resistance than expected. The experience is that most of the clients want to participate in the Financial DNA Discovery Process. Under 5% have not taken the profiles when asked and this is often just as much a time matter as it is resistance. So really, the barrier to introducing it is in the advisor's mind. The key is how the process is introduced. There is no need to be blunt and say: "Now I would like to psyche test you"!! In reality, this is not happening anyway. The process that I recommend for introducing the profiles to new clients is summarized as follows:

1. Demonstrate that you have a truly client-centric brand and outline your overall advisory process which supports the brand.
2. Build the client's confidence in you, as YOU are what they are buying. The focus is on you and not Financial DNA.
3. Once, the client is connected to you and your process then introduce that the first step in the process is for them to take the Financial DNA profiles. In effect, Financial DNA is totally integrated into your overall process and not left as an option or side service.
4. Practically, we have found it better to have the clients take the profiles in a paper and pen format at the end of the first discovery meeting whilst they are still in your office. You can then process the profiles online ready for the next meeting.
5. Showing the client the outcome always builds trust. I have found all the fears are removed when they see my profile.

For existing clients, I would introduce Financial DNA when they get to a transition point where there may be a change in direction that necessitates a deeper discussion. There will be some clients who are naturally interested to know more about themselves and will see Financial DNA as a great exercise.

There are a couple of lessons that I have learned about introducing Financial DNA into the advisory process. Firstly, people love to talk about themselves. Those clients who did take the profiles became much more prepared to be more open and talk about their feelings, dreams, aspirations and fears. For me as the advisor this was fantastic because it often mean't that I learned some very powerful information without having to directly ask for it and risk a shut-down or confrontation. Hence, I was able to better navigate through the planning process with this information and be far more sensitive to the client's needs. Introducing the Financial DNA profiles was truly instrumental in building trust. Secondly, those clients who did not take the profiles relatively quickly became the most difficult clients to handle. Managing their expectations and effectively communicating with them was much more difficult than for the other clients.

The next stage is about how you facilitate the profiles. Again, this is easier than you may perceive and does not have to take you away from being an advisor to a counsellor.