Is your financial adviser a replacement ref?
As the NFL season has kicked off, fan enthusiasm has been blunted by an abundance of missed calls by the unappreciated and unloved replacement officials.
We have been pining for three-hour football games where officiating blunders were secondary to the Vikings' depleted secondary.
As the season plugs along, it's time to ask yourself "Is my adviser a replacement official?"
If your adviser bullies or blusters, then he or she is a replacement official. You are not simply paying someone for advice, you are paying for advice that is specific to your situation. Recently, our firm was working with clients who are siblings who have inherited money. Each of the them is in a very different financial situation and, more importantly, each has a different view of money. While their assets are similar, their advice cannot be.
Advisers cannot have all the answers because there are too many variables in any situation. While most financial decisions don't have a deadline, there is still a fine line to walk between procrastination (over fear of making a mistake) and inertia (from not being completely comfortable with the advice). If something is not sitting well with you, then get a second opinion -- hopefully from a professional without a vested interest in the outcome.
If your adviser is rigid in his or her approach, then he or she is a replacement official. It is important for your adviser to have a well-defined process for your planning. If that process is not consistent with what you want, then you should find a different planner. On the other hand, the adviser should not be a prisoner to the decisions from this process.
For example, I am completely ambivalent regarding long-term care insurance. But I view it as more of an emotional decision rather than financial one. One of our clients had sufficient assets so that she had no need for long-term care insurance. Yet her fear of needing expensive assistance later in life prevented her from experiencing more of her life today. We set her up with a long-term care insurance provider so she could enjoy herself without worrying whether she would run out of money. While the numbers said she probably didn't need the insurance, her demeanor said that she did.