Internal Financial Planner Monologue
Financial Vulnerability, Adulting and Where We Go From Here
A couple years ago, I moved to a largely fee-only financial planning model; more specifically, a fee-first planning model, as my clients would, over the course of a one-year engagement, implement solutions with my team once we had established both trust and need.
Since many of my HENRYs (High Earner, Not Rich Yet) needed to work on cashflow/budget first to feel properly educated, this solution was a perfect fit: my team was paid for their work, I was able to invest time in my clients, and my clients absolutely got their money’s worth. From a business segmentation standpoint, this enabled me to work with a demographic that brings me joy, rather than seek to attract the highest-net-worth people I could find. After all, the “already rich” have lots of financial planners knocking on their doors, and I was creating the next generation of wealthy women.
Aside: My husband, who owns his own business, gets beautiful mailers from wealth managers inviting him to attend free seminars. Me? Crickets. My ex-husband, who is an artist, used to get credit offers—the ones with the interest rate published on the envelope—that were better than what was offered to me, never mind that I produced the household income. But I no longer waste time in righteous indignation. I just vote with my wallet. So, if I don’t give you my business, please understand it is absolutely personal. Your targeted marketing is incredibly insulting to me. Oh, wait. I’m a woman of a certain age. I’m not your target anyway!
But I digress.
Occasionally, a warm referral from a client who saw value in our relationship would find their way to me and would make an excuse, after consultation, not to move forward. Many of these people had a great need for fee-based planning because before they could implement anything in their own best interest, they had debt to resolve, cash flow priorities to establish, and sometimes, they needed to have a facilitated conversation with their life partner to put a relationship on the same page. There’s a reason they were referred by someone who cares about them to a financial planner, after all.
But some didn’t want to do the work of figuring out where their money really goes, or they had no intention of changing how they spent it. Some feared that the process of financial planning would make them wrong. They brought this guilt and shame to me, and my heart still hurts for them.
There’s a little art and a little science to delivering factual information without sounding judgmental. And if, as a client, you’re looking for an excuse not to adult, you will find it. Prospective clients have used any number of creative accusations to end conversations they themselves initiated. Believe me, I know when I make communication mistakes. And I know the difference between my errors and the baggage other people bring to the conversation. All I can do is make apologies for my misstatements. I can’t accept the blame for others’ unprocessed emotions. But I do understand they needed to create a suitable-sounding reason to back off, fooling—and potentially hurting--only themselves in the process.
Aside (again): This is true in any client acquisition profession: You will not be able to make everyone happy. You are not ice cream. You will attract your people. Bless and release the rest. And that brings me to a common truth about the clients who did stay to build productive relationships with me and my team.
As women, we somehow expect our financial planner to tell us we are doing everything wrong, even when that’s not the case. We approach our finances from a place of great vulnerability.
What if we stopped making ourselves wrong (because we already have mothers for that) and viewed the financial planning process as a way of making ourselves better? What if we just let credentialed experts deliver their expertise and take their advice to be intentional with our money? Is this any different than taking the advice of a physician to walk more and eat healthier?
I strongly recommend that women who have agency and income seek out a relationship with a CFP® Professional (or someone working toward this credential) and not simply an investment advisor. What’s more, that professional needs to be willing to discuss aspects of financial planning (and life) for which she is not always going to receive compensation. After all, your financial plan will contain elements of banking, insurance, and investments. And those may come from different places. Even if you are a DIY investor, a fee-only conversation will be enlightening.
Finally, as I developed deep relationships with my women clients, I was able to help them acknowledge their progress, their incremental education, and eventually, their financial planning mastery. They did the work. I just provided the guidance. And how satisfying it is for me, as I said my farewells in rounds of client reviews, to know that I did good work? I’m humbled by the number of women who told me that our financial planning changed their lives.
What would it look like if my style of financial planning education could reach a larger audience? Let’s find out. I’d be honored to hear from you in the comments along these lines: Would you prefer courseware? Webinars? A subscription community? I assure you I’ll never run out of topics. The team at Madrina Molly™ can benefit from your input on what we produce. This blog is just a start. Thanks in advance for your input. #WeRescueOurselves #NotYoungNotDone
© 2024 Madrina Molly
The information contained herein and shared by Madrina Molly™ constitutes education and not investment advice.
A couple years ago, I moved to a largely fee-only financial planning model; more specifically, a fee-first planning model, as my clients would, over the course of a one-year engagement, implement solutions with my team once we had established both trust and need.