PosSol sheds partners in drive for quality
Share
Positive Solutions says it lost a large number of poorly performing partners in the last quarter of the year with total partner numbers dropping from 1,662 at the end of 2008 to 1,614 at the end of 2009.
Positive Solutions says the loss of 48 partners over the year was as a result of it focusing its efforts on “high quality IFAs”. It says that despite the overall drop in numbers the firm recruited 234 partners over the year and a further 47 committed to joining.
Positive Solutions chief executive Jim Reeve says: “It is true our partner numbers have reduced during 2009 but we delivered a very strong recruitment performance in the year as 234 joined and a further 47 IFAs committed to joining us.
Reeve adds: “A large number of low producing partners left us in the last quarter as we increased our focus on supporting high quality producers. The quality of the IFA continues to be key for us. The majority of our new recruits continues to come from the directly authorised sector.”
If you enjoyed this article, sign up here to receive daily email updates from Money Marketing and Follow @_moneymarketing
View results 10 per page | 20 per page
Readers' comments (16)
Julian Stevens | 13 Jan 2010 11:06 am
How does Pos Sol define "high producing"? Is it just those who flog lots of new stuff or does it take into account ongoing, service related recurring revenues?
As a business matures, unless it takes on more and more people to put more and more new business on its books, it may, to an outside observer whose prime criteria in judging a firm is its new business above all else, look as though it's becoming stale.
Other people, though, may consider stability of revenue and client base to be at least as important. A small business can't just go piling on new business ad infinitum ~ eventually, the servicing obligations become such that you have to slow down on the new bus front. Unless, of course, the servicing obligations are largely ignored.
I may be doing Pos Sol a disservice, but clearly most firms' business model is heavily weighted more towards grabbing new business than about servicing and developing what they already have on their books. On this point, I must confess to being in sympathy with the FSA's thinking on this subject.
But that's just MHO ~ not gospel.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 13 Jan 2010 11:15 am
I find it incredible that advisers that write the largest sales volumes are deemed "quality advisers" and those that do not are seen in some ways as less quality. In my experience the reverse can often be true as quality financial advice has absolutely nothing to do with sales output.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 13 Jan 2010 11:36 am
Lost a large number of poorly performing partners? Now focusing it's efforts on recruiting "high quality IFA's? I reckon the one's recently lost would have been considered "quality IFA's" when they were reccruited by Pos Sol. The arrogance stinks.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Graham Clark | 13 Jan 2010 12:37 pm
Julian makes a valid point to which I think we can all relate. The anonymous contributors seem to have formed their own opinion as to what a quality adviser is. As a PS partner for some 8 years I can say categorically that the definition quite definitely is not simply being the biggest new business producer.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Ken Nairn | 13 Jan 2010 12:45 pm
As a PS partner I feel it would be helpful to point out a couple of things.
Positive Solutions has moved over the years to significantly encouraging advisers to move to review/trail based service. I have noticed a considerable change in the company over time. Internal message boards will castigate the very few who seem to be angling for advice on how to gain top buck at the expense of service.
What this article does not make clear was whether or not the partners were asked to leave or simply decided to leave.
As for focusing on the "high quality producers", surely in a world where the 80/20 principle is accepted it makes absolute sense to provide more help to those that do produce the greater revenue in a compliant way. All businesses do the same.
That said I would also struggle if it were suggested that with things like the Learning Academy and also the Partners Forums and Synergy events, all of which are free to partners that any partner, no matter what level of business they write, received less support than they would gain from other similar networks.
Most businesses would think that shrinkage of less than 3% in the early stages of a recession was in actual fact reasonable performance. My feeling is that this is simply news made out of nothing.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
SIMON MANSELL | 13 Jan 2010 12:51 pm
A Pos Sol advisers needs to do three times the work load to obtain the same level of production as a "normal" adviser. Much of their business needs to be pre submitted for approval before a formal application is submitted. Rightly or wrongly their systems are so restrictive and prescriptive. Could it be that many advisers (and non Pos Sol advisers) are just saying enough is enough? The industry is no longer viable, the regulators have killed the goose that lays the golden egg. You can load the cart with more and more regulation. The cart slows until finally the knees buckle and the old horse just falls and will not rise no matter how much more you beat him.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 13 Jan 2010 1:07 pm
Poorly Performing, High Producing and High Quality are not stand alone terms. The reference to Poorly performing is a reference to all areas of business not just turnover. High Quality and High Producing are the best sort of advisers to have and to aspire to be. If you aspire to be a high quality but low producing adviser, what is that? Good advice that never produces a income or return?
Lastly and most importantly J reeve was talking as CE of PosSol, and as such was not commenting on anything other than the performance of the group as profit making entity. The merits of each and every partner within PosSol is that they are all unique and none stick to a pre planned and pre ordained structure. The resources available to a partner are all that he/she wants or not. It is a way of working and if the company has made a profit that, in this time of RDR prep, low levels of advice and feelings of disdain for the finace industry, of which we are a part in the public eye, is a good thing. It will allow advisers to work in the industry and as long as they are profitable and of good quality there is a place. If they join and slip, dont maintain CPD/Competant Status and all relative measures then they will go, as they wouyld with any company.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 13 Jan 2010 3:45 pm
I find it incredible that advisers that write the largest sales volumes are deemed "quality advisers" and those that do not are seen in some ways as less quality. In my experience the reverse can often be true as quality financial advice has absolutely nothing to do with sales output.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 13 Jan 2010 3:54 pm
Seems that if you leave Positive Solutions you are deemed to have done so because you are a poor adviser and no other reason could possibly be found?
These comments seem unjust as there must have been others that have left for other reasons. It seems to easy to blame poor advisers, thats what everyone else does.
Many advisers have thrown in the towel last year and more will this year.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 13 Jan 2010 10:23 pm
Was it not the over complicated True Potential back office system to blame, rumour has it they are about to ditch them and develop their own.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment