View more on these topics

Roderic Rennison: How to get adviser remuneration right

Too many business owners base remuneration structures on assumptions, missing the chance to make them work better for all involved

Roderic Rennison of The Ideas LabRemuneration, which encompasses salaries, bonuses and other variable pay such as incentives, is usually the largest expense item for advice firms.

Yet many directors spend relatively little time on the design and review of remuneration structures for employees, missing the chance to tailor them to meet their firm’s specific needs and requirements.

Indeed, there is a tendency to accept convention and to stick with the status quo.

For example, many employed advisers are set salaries based on a perception of market rates and paid bonuses once the level of adviser charges, commissions and fees exceed 3 to 3.5 times that base salary. The bonus is then usually tiered to increase in bands based on the total income the adviser generates for the firm.

So, what is wrong with this approach? Perhaps nothing at all if the level of overheads, the quality of business generated and the resources used by the adviser deliver the desired level of bottom line profit and client outcomes.

But many firms do not have the management information to know what the adviser’s costs of operation are, basing them instead on assumptions or guesstimates.

What is more, despite several papers from the FCA over the last few years, in reality, a lot of firms do not have sufficiently robust qualitative measures in place that focus on the impact on clients and the firm’s resources, as distinct from ones that focus on quantity – i.e. the level of production.

Last but not least, many firms’ remuneration structures are not granular enough to differentiate between the cost of acquisition of new clients and the servicing of existing clients. Arguably, new client acquisition needs to be recognised separately, as long as the way in which it is done and the service to the client is reflected in the payments made to the adviser.

If you have read this far, you may be saying: “I know what I am getting from my advisers and staff for the remuneration I pay them, and I know which advisers deliver better client outcomes and retention than others, and their levels of profitability”. If so, all well and good.

But if you are not sure, here is a checklist for you to consider as and when you next come to review these structures:

 1. Culture

Remuneration should be aligned to a firm’s culture. Are you confident the structures in place encourage and foster the right behaviours?

2. Budgets and projections

Have the possible outcomes and likely/maximum payments been modelled and budgeted for?

3. Incentives

If an incentive is to be paid for production over a specific period, will it increase productivity as well as drive the right behaviours in terms of treating customers fairly?

4. Long term versus short term

Even if a remuneration package delivers initial increases in productivity, will it also deliver profitability in the longer term or will it distort productivity and quality because of shorter-term targets which are manipulated?

5. Quality not quantity

Can your firm demonstrate that the remuneration structures in place measure and reward quality, not just quantity?

6. Measurement

Is management information available to accurately measure outcomes on an ongoing basis and to enable trends to be identified and acted upon quickly and effectively?

7. Refresh

Nothing stands still, and this is especially true of remuneration schemes. They should be assessed annually to ensure they are not only delivering the desired financial outcomes but also the appropriate client outcomes, and that they are still motivating employees and advisers in the right ways.

8. Do not follow the crowd

Just because other firms remunerate their staff and advisers in a specific way, does not mean that structure will work the same way in your firm. They may in practice be overly generous or drive the wrong behaviours. It is important to be clear what you are seeking to achieve before implementing or revising remuneration structures.

9. Do not be different for the sake of it

The converse is also true: do not seek to be different unless there are sound reasons based on careful thought regarding the possible outcomes and modelling.

10. Avoid complexity

Some remuneration schemes have complex formulae and so are difficult to understand. Unless the remuneration structure you are seeking to put into place is easily understandable, it risks failing to motivate those participating in it and the desired outcomes will be lost.

Implementing and managing remuneration schemes is key to ensuring the structures are fair to the participants and the firm’s clients, and will help build and preserve value in the business. Spending time on this will deliver long-term rewards to all concerned.

Roderic Rennison is director of Rennison Consulting

Recommended

Sam-Sloma-700x450
19

Should advisers offer free services?

The kind folk at Money Marketing gave me the following brief when discussing writing this, my first ‘At the Coal Face’ column: “You’ll have a chance to praise, rant, share ideas, start discussions or debates. Whatever you fancy really.” It made me think this could be a fun gig. When thinking about what topic to […]

Prudential advice arm architect joins annuity provider

Fixed-term annuity provider Primetime Retirement has hired Russell Warwick, who helped create Prudential’s financial planning business. Warwick, who has worked in the pensions industry for more than 30 years, has been appointed managing director of sales and marketing at the company. Primetime Retirement is a subsidiary of Key Retirement. Warwick’s most recent position at Prudential […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There is one comment at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Roderick. The best remuneration package was developed by Philip Congrave as part of the Prestwood program. It was certainly ahead of its time and was the business plan for the firm as well as the individual adviser.
    The areas it covered included the adviser’s financial objectives (what he wanted to receive by way of income) after he had completed his own personal financial plan.
    The planner’s direct costs allowable car\travel costs and other expenses e.g. pension other benefit cost conference and CPD costs
    Other operating cost of the firm incurs
    What proportion of the FCA liquidity requirement he must cover (Sadly that must be a cost to client not the firm owners or its shareholders) as at some stage they will want any cash they personal injected to be repaid.
    Assumed cash flow percentage received during the financial year
    Allocation of billable hours (after deducting holiday CPD and other day you not available
    Advisers billable activity per day (How many hours allocated to clients)
    Target profit for the firm for the year
    Corporation and other taxes

    The summary and conclusions flowing from the Objectives and planning assumptions (I think today they call it the outcomes) for the firm and adviser are Key statements
    Hourly rate
    Target turnover from existing clients
    Turnover target for new clients

    During a visit by the regulators PIA they asked how I calculated my hourly rate I showed the plan I am sure that current regulators FCA would approve

    incidentally and a couple of occasions shared this business plan with client’s purposes. One they get a clear understanding how I calculate my charges. It is also helped in the planning process especially with owner who are self employed or own SME
    One must bear in mind that they the client give you personal and financial information so why not share it if the circumstances are right.
    I still use it in xl spread sheet format and will currently be starting on this year’s plan

    Generation X and Y would certainly benefit from a program like this given their outlook to life has different set of values to an old age pensioner like my self

    It will help Generation X and Y understand they a selling a service helping clients manage their finances which includes recommending products and not a client’s life.
    That life planning\ coaching which is a complete anathema to me.

Leave a comment