Despite the rapid convergence of financial services providers toward what appear to be “look alike” wealth management services, a new report suggests it is difficult to transform affluent household perceptions of various types of financial services providers.

The study profiles the attitudes and specific financial services provider usage of households with greater than US$1 million net worth.

The Spectrem Perspectives report, Perceptions of Providers among Wealthy Households: Banks vs. Brokers vs. Insurance Companies, illustrates the distinct attributes that wealthy households associate with different institutional models providing wealth management services.

It includes the rankings of nearly 1,000 respondents of banks, private banks, full service brokerage firms, investment management firms, insurance providers and mutual fund companies on a series of six attributes.

Full Service Brokerage firms were awarded more positive attributes than any other provider type. They also dominate as primary advisors to the affluent and enjoy an 86% satisfaction rate with customers for whom they are primary advisor.

Private Banks and Full Service Brokerage firms score highest on a “Knows Their Customers” attribute, related to their strong advisory relationships and long tenure with customers.

The financial services industry as a whole does not fare well in Innovation and Prestige. No more than 21% of respondents associated these attributes with any provider type.

No provider category earned a stellar reputation for outstanding service. Twenty-seven per cent was the highest mark received by any provider type on this attribute. Compared to other industries, financial services firms are not considered to be leaders in service excellence.

Spectrem says that these low “industry” scores on service occur despite relatively high satisfaction scores with primary providers. The research firm offers three explanations for this finding: financial services have historically been operations and finance driven, not marketing and customer focused; service improvements have been erratic, with repeated hiring and layoffs in customer support staff; and product lines have become increasingly complex, making them more difficult to service.