Re: Big evolution in rewards, By Kat Shermack, Investment Executive, August 2016
I read this article with interest and continue to stumble upon the description of the core reason for changes in the financial services community.
Whenever the terms "there ‘may be' or there ‘could be' a perception" are used to drive changes to compensation or incentives — or anything else for that matter — it only proves that the industry lacks the confidence and fortitude required to build and maintain a healthy industry.
After all, who works for nothing? I bet your clients don't. Or, better yet, who doesn't want to be rewarded for doing above average work?
This is very much about being "careful what you wish for" because the end result is that you're simply driving down excellence by rewarding minimum expectation among both consumers and the industry.
The real solution is simple, cheap and effective: In the insurance or investment application, add a section that clients check off whether they are: OK with travel incentives; OK with commissions; or OK with a fee-for-service arrangement. If the client is not OK with the travel incentive, then the sale does not qualify toward it — or a fee for service is arranged instead.
Choice. It's the Canadian way. It's so simple, it makes you wonder what's really driving change. If you don't, you probably should.
Mark A. Schneider, CFP, CLU, CFSB
M.A. Schneider Insurance Agencies Inc.
Photo copyright: gajus/123RF