By Mindy Diamond – The formation of teams within big brokerage firms is often seen as a win-win scenario. For advisors, there is strength in numbers when serving clients and building their businesses. For the firms they work for, teams represent an even bigger advantage and a hidden retention agenda: That is, it’s harder to recruit away a group of advisors than it is an individual because solving for varied risk tolerances and divergent sensibilities amongst multiple constituents can be far more challenging.
By Mindy Diamond – Advisors at big brokerage firms have found themselves in a world driven by a zero-tolerance culture—an environment where compliance departments rule with a heavy hand while management is focused on the lowest common denominator. It’s a transformation that evolved over the last several years as firms became more risk-averse, creating an incongruence between advisors who want to provide a bespoke experience for their clients and a compliance department that wants to put a narrow box around them.
By Mindy Diamond – No doubt that financial services firms strongly encourage their advisor ranks to form teams or partnerships because it works to the firms’ advantage: it makes the assets stickier and harder to move and in general, means that clients will receive a more well-rounded experience. But, the question I am often asked is whether the formation of a team or partnership is actually better for the advisor.
By Barbara Herman – What happens when partners no longer share the same vision? Does a lack of consensus about the future mean the end of the relationship? Advisors are seeing more value in partnerships than ever before, acknowledging that it has become extremely challenging to be a sole practitioner and motivating many to join forces with other like-minded professionals.
