{"id":83,"date":"2017-03-20T06:53:55","date_gmt":"2017-03-19T20:53:55","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/?p=83"},"modified":"2017-07-14T14:36:35","modified_gmt":"2017-07-14T04:36:35","slug":"mdrt-2017-international-adviser-round-table-part-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/mdrt-2017-international-adviser-round-table-part-2\/","title":{"rendered":"MDRT 2017 International Adviser Round Table &#8211; Part 2"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"fw feature2\">\n<h3>Riskinfo joined forces with the MDRT organisation and Zurich in an International Adviser Round Table discussion on the changing nature of the \u2018Value of Advice\u2019 equation\u2026<\/h3>\n<\/div>\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"><a href=\"http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/mdrt-2017-international-adviser-round-table-part-1\/\" class=\"woo-sc-button dark  silver med\" ><span class=\"woo-\">Read Part 1<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<h3>Part 2<\/h3>\n<p><strong id=\"#top\">Table of contents\u00a0<\/strong>(Click these links to move directly to those topics)<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><a href=\"#01\"> Perception of value in the mind of the client <\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#02\"> Scale and diversification <\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#03\"> Changing traditional mindsets?<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#04\"> Final comments <\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<hr \/>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone size-full wp-image-701\" src=\"http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2017\/03\/features-01-01.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"1800\" height=\"985\" srcset=\"http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2017\/03\/features-01-01.jpg 1800w, http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2017\/03\/features-01-01-300x164.jpg 300w, http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2017\/03\/features-01-01-768x420.jpg 768w, http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2017\/03\/features-01-01-1024x560.jpg 1024w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1800px) 100vw, 1800px\" \/><\/p>\n<p><b>Panelists (L &#8211; R)<\/b><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><b>Peter Sobels<\/b> \u2013 Publisher, Round Table Moderator<\/li>\n<li><b>Dominque Schuh<\/b> \u2013 Australian MDRT adviser member<\/li>\n<li><b>Michelle Hoskin <\/b>\u2013 Standards International, United Kingdom<\/li>\n<li><b>Ryan Pinney<\/b> \u2013 US MDRT adviser member<\/li>\n<li><b>David Braithwaite<\/b> \u2013 United Kingdom MDRT adviser member<\/li>\n<li><b>Mathew Fogarty<\/b> &#8211; MDRT Oceania Chair, Co-host<\/li>\n<li><b>Jessica Brady &#8211; <\/b>Zurich Financial Services Australia Senior Exec \u2013 Sponsor\/supporter<\/li>\n<li><b>Kobus Kleyn<\/b> \u2013 South Africa MDRT adviser member<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<hr \/>\n<div class=\"fw ad\"><!-- Either there are no banners, they are disabled or none qualified for this location! --><\/div>\n<p>We continue with Part II of our 2017 MDRT International Adviser Round Table where we asked advisers from around the world to reflect on the potentially changing nature of the \u2018Value of Advice\u2019 equation:<\/p>\n<h3>Part 2<\/h3>\n<h3 id=\"01\">Perception of value in the mind of the client <span style=\"font-size: 12pt\">&#8211; <a href=\"#top\">Back to top<\/a><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The panel was asked to now consider the perception of value, taking another quote from the 2016 article written by Kobus as a starting point:<\/p>\n<p><i>\u201cIt, goes without saying that if your clients perceive value in your advice offering it will be much easier for you to charge for said advice.\u201d\u00a0<\/i><\/p>\n<p>He continued,<i> \u201cThe difficulty that many financial advisers have is in communicating the value in what is essentially an intangible product, advice.\u201d<\/i><\/p>\n<p>We also read the panel a statement made by risk specialist adviser and consultant, Chris Unwin:<\/p>\n<p><i>\u201cI\u2019ve found that many risk advisers are struggling with the concept of charging a fee for risk advice\u201d.<\/i><\/p>\n<p>And:<\/p>\n<p><i>\u201cMore often than not, this will be because the value that a risk adviser represents to their client is not as tangible as the value that an investment adviser represents to their client. The monetary value of peace of mind is not as tangible for life insurance as it is in investment returns.\u201d<\/i><\/p>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2017\/03\/features-01-06.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"1600\" height=\"794\" class=\"alignnone size-full wp-image-736\" srcset=\"http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2017\/03\/features-01-06.jpg 1600w, http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2017\/03\/features-01-06-300x149.jpg 300w, http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2017\/03\/features-01-06-768x381.jpg 768w, http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2017\/03\/features-01-06-1024x508.jpg 1024w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1600px) 100vw, 1600px\" \/><\/p>\n<p>Following these statements, we asked the panellists:<\/p>\n<p>\u2018How does the consumer come to perceive the value that\u2019s inherent in life insurance advice?\u2019<\/p>\n<p>Kobus: \u201cYou need to create the link with storytelling \u2013 so that the client can believe it can happen to anyone in their family. Until you\u2019re able to paint the picture through storytelling, through \u2018real life happens\u2019 moments which clients can relate to, you\u2019re not going to get these perceptions become reality in the clients mind.<\/p>\n<p>Ryan responded to the challenge of this question by suggesting it needed to be considered relative to three different consumer demographics, being:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>Mom and Pop middle. \u201cPick your country &#8211; America, Australia, UK, New Zealand \u2013 it doesn\u2019t matter. They\u2019re the segment where the risk-based products are far and away more important than any other product that they can own and they\u2019re usually the most underinsured population segment for life insurance.<\/li>\n<li>Business owners who need it for business succession, business continuation planning, etc<\/li>\n<li>High net worth individuals who are using it for tax leveraging strategies or for wealth creation or transferring welfares.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>The problem, according to Ryan, is, that \u201c\u2026it\u2019s really hard to make any money and stay in business if you focus on the most needy [mom and pop] segment.\u201d<\/p>\n<div class=\"fw ad\"><!-- Either there are no banners, they are disabled or none qualified for this location! --><\/div>\n<h3 id=\"02\">Scale and diversification<span style=\"font-size: 12pt\"> &#8211; <a href=\"#top\">Back to top<\/a><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>He continued, \u201cThe industry tends to focus on the other two segments: business owners and those who are wealthy, and so the challenge has become how do you even have a conversation with someone who is going to struggle to pay for the premiums of the life policy and to whom you also need to provide advice? Ryan questions whether a fee-only strategy would work and suggests the merits associated with a combined fee and commission-based remuneration strategy, depending on the product segment, needs to be communicated more effectively to regulators.<\/p>\n<p>Ryan continued, \u201cWe have one whole division that\u2019s focussed on comparison shopping and speed of receiving the coverage. In some cases we can underwrite and insure somebody in the US in 15 minutes. I can have a policy to you completed, approved, and ready to go in 15 minutes or less and still have an adviser talk to you on the phone during that time period, asking you the questions \u2013 so it changes the conversation. If I couldn\u2019t do that at scale, though, it wouldn\u2019t be profitable, because I couldn\u2019t afford the technology. I couldn\u2019t afford the staff. I couldn\u2019t afford the support personnel.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>If I couldn\u2019t do that at scale\u00a0it wouldn\u2019t be profitable<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Following Ryan\u2019s comments on scale of advice, Dom was asked how her clients see that her advice is delivering value and whether she was contemplating different or scaled ways of delivering different value in future:<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWhen I first entered the business I thought I\u2019m going to set up a financial planning business talking about investments. I\u2019m not even going to touch insurance. And it was on the end of the GFC (so, like worst business decision ever!) and so I went into advising on life insurance and eventually changed my business to be able to adapt to meeting those different needs. And I\u2019ve just continued to do that &#8211; to move more into the holistic advice space.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Dom said she would consider expanding her service proposition to potentially include complementary services such as lifestyle coaching or structuring fee-based SoA or claims services: \u201cI wouldn\u2019t say no to them but I&#8217;m not looking at it right now.\u201d But Dom added that she does have crossover opportunities in her business with accounting and mortgage broking services, \u201c\u2026so we\u2019re able to tell our clients we can do everything here. \u2018Apart from a few little bits and pieces we can pretty much look after your financial house here\u2019, so that is quite a valuable thing for some people,\u201d said Dom.<\/p>\n<p>From the UK adviser perspective David\u2019s business offers comprehensive advice services: \u201cWe do the whole thing, so we\u2019ve got investments and life insurance. The biggest difference I think between those two things is that when you\u2019re setting up an investment or a pension for somebody, it\u2019s something they already have and we\u2019re just going to make it better, whereas when you\u2019re buying insurance you\u2019re asking them to part with money for something they don\u2019t want to buy because people don\u2019t want to face their own mortality,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThey can see investment planning and can touch it, compared with paying a premium for something that they never want to use. You\u2019re asking them to buy something they never want to use and that is the hard conversation to have with them and often it does take life events such as bombings or from clients who have just had a first baby. And often they will come to us for advice because they don\u2019t know quite what to do or how much they need.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>So it\u2019s incredibly valuable what we do when we walk these people through this and set up these policies correctly &#8211; the right sum assured, the right terms, ensuring that it works and then going above and beyond. We have loads of claims. We just paid out somebody last week and \u2013 for a critical illness so you go through that and then you realised yourself the value of advice.<\/p>\n<div class=\"fw ad\"><!-- Either there are no banners, they are disabled or none qualified for this location! --><\/div>\n<h3 id=\"03\">Changing traditional mindsets?<span style=\"font-size: 12pt\"> &#8211; <a href=\"#top\">Back to top<\/a><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>\u201cBut here\u2019s an interesting concept as well: we think that perhaps clients won\u2019t pay for our advice, but I\u2019m just sitting here thinking I\u2019ve never asked anyone to pay for it. I\u2019ve never asked them to pay me. So it\u2019d be quite interesting.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>As a possible starting point, David projected this scenario: \u201c\u2018Well actually, we\u2019re going to charge you a fee to set up that structure and it includes this, but we\u2019ve also gone and set up a trust and a will as well, so that we add the value there\u2019. So if someone buys a policy we can wrap it up in a trust and we charge for that and that\u2019s become normal. So why shouldn\u2019t we be charging for the other bit?\u201d<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>the large majority of the problems around the value of risk advice are in the advisers\u2019 heads, not the clients\u2019 heads<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>David\u2019s comment led into another quote for the panel from Chris Unwin, in which Chris states:<\/p>\n<p><i>\u201cI believe that<\/i><b><i> <\/i><\/b><i>the large majority of the problems around the value of risk advice are in the advisers\u2019 heads, not the clients<\/i><b><i>\u2019<\/i><\/b><i> heads. You are almost certainly already giving value; therefore any changes needed will be in your mindset, not your process.\u201d<\/i><\/p>\n<p>We asked Mat if he could ever see the value provided by a financial adviser being placed on the same pedestal in the mind of the consumer as they place the value of the advice they receive from other professionals, such as doctors, lawyers and accountants.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWith the professional standards increasing, yes &#8211; the minute the commissions are taken out,\u201d said Mat, who suggested a move to charging fees for risk advice may take at least a generation to come to fruition.<\/p>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2017\/03\/features-01-02.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"1800\" height=\"701\" class=\"alignnone size-full wp-image-732\" srcset=\"http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2017\/03\/features-01-02.jpg 1800w, http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2017\/03\/features-01-02-300x117.jpg 300w, http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2017\/03\/features-01-02-768x299.jpg 768w, http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2017\/03\/features-01-02-1024x399.jpg 1024w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1800px) 100vw, 1800px\" \/><\/p>\n<p>\u201cIt\u2019s probably going to take a bit of time. Professional standards are going to go up, there is \u2013 the commoditisation of products that\u2019s happening and I think people who are still holding onto getting paid a commission in the future world may be disappointed.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWill it happen in the risk business? Absolutely, I have no question about that in my mind.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Kobus: \u201cI believe that we are on the way to transforming into a fully-fledged professional industry and a profession and especially within the long term assurance and investment sectors of our industry. We will \u2026transform from an industry to a profession because if you look at the definitions, an industry is simply a manufacturing facility producing products or policies, in the case of our current industry. A profession is much more profound in nature and comprises a disciplined group of professionals who operate under a code of conduct and strong ethical standards. Such a group positions itself as possessing special knowledge and skills under a recognised professional body with continuous professional development, and is recognised by the public as professionals they are willing to pay for their services. These professionals are prepared to apply their knowledge and skills in the interest of others first and foremost. It includes a formal qualification and designation.<\/p>\n<div class=\"fw ad\"><!-- Either there are no banners, they are disabled or none qualified for this location! --><\/div>\n<p>We asked Ryan whether he could possibly imagine his business set up charging fees rather than being remunerated by commission:<\/p>\n<p>Ryan: \u201cYes and no. It\u2019d be a difficult transition. I would love to have a product that was 100% commission, and then an option for me to take zero per cent or some number other than that because then I \u2026 could compete against somebody who is charging full commission and say to the client, \u2018You can see that the reason that their product\u2019s 15% or 20% more expensive [than our offer] is because of the commission.<\/p>\n<p>Dom: Would your business be able to survive and prosper if all life insurance commissions were banned?<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIt would now,\u201d she said, \u201c\u2026but only because I\u2019ve differentiated into other areas of advice.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>So what would happen for the risk-focussed advice?<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI think you\u2019d have to have scale, big scale in Australia, to be able to do that,\u201d she cautioned.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>there are some necessary endings that need to be had across the profession and industry as a whole before we become a new breed of planner.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Michelle agreed that part of the issue relating to the perception of the value of life insurance advice is \u201c\u2026all in our heads. I would never question the value of my advice \u2013 ever, because I&#8217;m being paid by the person that\u2019s receiving my advice. If [all] commissions were banned and you couldn\u2019t take a single penny from anywhere other than the client we\u2019d be having a whole different conversation around the table. Ryan would have a different business model but he\u2019d make it work &#8211; of course he would. So I think we\u2019re trying \u2013 I think there are some necessary endings that need to be had across the profession and industry as a whole before we become a new breed of planner.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Jessica: \u201cI think the challenge may be that, as an insurer we deal with people who have businesses not unlike Ryan\u2019s and then we have people who are not unlike Mat. This has become quite an emotive discussion in Australia [regulation, compliance, journey to \u2018professionalism\u2019].<\/p>\n<p>Change is coming; some of it may be daunting and whether or not those changes meet their ultimate goal \u2013 that is, better advice outcomes for consumers \u2013 only the future can tell. Despite how extended the discussion has been, I think there\u2019s a varying level of readiness amongst the adviser populace for the change. Significant regulation changes come into place in January 2018 and yet when I ask risk-focussed businesses about their strategy and their plan and what modelling they\u2019ve done, amongst some, there\u2019s been very little.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>She continued, \u201cI&#8217;m not convinced that everyone who is risk-focussed truly understands the mechanics of it \u2013 and because these regulations cover how people are remunerated in future, that\u2019s a huge concern.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Jessica said she and her colleagues were optimistic about risk advice \u201c\u2026and we want people to be fairly remunerated. But I think a lot more thought and consideration needs to be given, particularly by those who are risk advisers, around the feasibly of how this will work in the future and around really understanding how the numbers for their own business will unfold.\u201d<\/p>\n<div class=\"fw ad\"><!-- Either there are no banners, they are disabled or none qualified for this location! --><\/div>\n<h3 id=\"04\">Final comments<span style=\"font-size: 12pt\"> &#8211; <a href=\"#top\">Back to top<\/a><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Having run out of time (as usual!) our panellists were invited to make final comments\/observations\u00a0 on any issues that were under discussion or on the question of how they would solve the underinsurance crisis in their country:<\/p>\n<p><b>Dominique Schuh<\/b>: \u201cWith the underinsurance issue, there\u2019s a cost to paying for insurance but there\u2019s also a broader cost to the community and the government and the taxpayer to support individuals and families who don\u2019t receive claim benefits. So I would be interested in a solution on a national scale in Australia, and maybe around the world, based on the fact that consumers often respond well to incentives.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWe\u2019re financially incentivised to take out private health insurance in Australia, so perhaps that would be a way to work nationally for life insurance as well.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><b>David Braithwaite <\/b>\u201cBefore we start trying to create client value we\u2019ve got to value ourselves. We make a dramatic difference in people\u2019s lives because of\u00a0 what we do and how we deliver our services. But also don\u2019t assume we know what the client\u2019s thinking in terms of whether we were to charge them a fee. If we haven\u2019t asked them to pay a fee, how do we know they won\u2019t? At the moment, we\u2019re making assumptions based on old habits. And I think there\u2019s a potential here as well to package the risk product into a wider chargeable solution<b>. <\/b>So you package it up and you create something that is worth valuing by the client.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cAnd it\u2019s not just one solution. It\u2019s a multiple solution to different issues and part of that package includes the risk component.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2017\/03\/features-01-05.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"1600\" height=\"1110\" class=\"alignnone size-full wp-image-735\" srcset=\"http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2017\/03\/features-01-05.jpg 1600w, http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2017\/03\/features-01-05-300x208.jpg 300w, http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2017\/03\/features-01-05-768x533.jpg 768w, http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2017\/03\/features-01-05-1024x710.jpg 1024w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1600px) 100vw, 1600px\" \/><\/p>\n<p><b>Mathew Fogarty<\/b>: Mat was on the same wavelength as Dom when it comes to addressing the underinsurance crisis: \u201cPeople generally don\u2019t want to take responsibility for themselves. You need to give consumers some sort of incentive. You know the Government uses a stick to incentivise people to take out private health insurance in Australia, and some people respond to the stick. But some people also respond to the carrot.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><b>Kobus Kleyn<\/b>: \u201cI want to go on to what these two guys are saying that makes so much sense. I refer to underinsurance. It\u2019s a global problem; it\u2019s a country problem; it\u2019s an individual client\u2019s problem and because they\u2019re our clients, it\u2019s our problem, too. It means we\u2019re not doing our job because if you\u2019re really building your brand and your financial planning and your package you should be doing holistic financial planning \u2026and that means every year you review your clients financial plans and risk concerns and ensure there are the least possible gaps or shortfalls or, as I like to refer to it, \u2018opportunities to enhance your risk (protection) profile\u2019.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>there are some necessary endings that need to be had across the profession and industry as a whole before we become a new breed of planner.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>\u201cI don\u2019t think there\u2019s always an issue with professional planners like us on this panel, but there are country and global-level underinsurance issues due mostly to the lack of awareness in the community. It comes down to all of us using the power of social and other media with the help and support of our professional consumer bodies, our professional and industry affiliations and our financial planning bodies to keep on driving significant consumer awareness around financial planning and the value-add of financial planning and risk planning. The rest will surely follow as a consequence of awareness and education.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cAwareness of risk insurance through social media is what should be the driving factor and differentiator. So I think this whole underinsurance or gap-insurance problem is a global phenomenon, but it starts with all of us to close the gap on underinsurance. By building our professional brand &#8211; by building a profession out there, if we do that through social media and get it out there, the consumer will believe that when they buy this product they\u2019re actually buying a solution.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><b>Ryan Pinney<\/b>: \u201cI\u2019m going to steal a line from my friend Van Miller and say this is the greatest time in the history of mankind to be a professional financial adviser or insurance agent and personally I\u2019m glad for all the turmoil and I&#8217;m actually glad for MDRT because I get to see what\u2019s happening around the globe and I get see what the response has been from Australia and England and New Zealand and South Africa in dealing with some of the same issues that we\u2019re starting to see ourselves. And I have a pretty clear roadmap of where I want to go and what I need to do to keep my business successful. And I\u2019ll tell you now I think that<b> <\/b>the biggest advantage I have \u2026 is technology.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cSo, if you\u2019re looking to expand your business and get scale today you\u2019re probably looking for \u2013 for lack of a better term \u2013 a CTO (Chief technology Officer) and maybe a CMO, Chief Marketing Officer, who can utilise social media, who can utilise email and set up e-commerce and things like that because really we all have clienteles who want to interact in a very hands-off virtual environment &#8211; low touch, and it would not be difficult to charge those people a fee who require those services if you have the technology to support it.\u201d<\/p>\n<div class=\"fw ad\"><!-- Either there are no banners, they are disabled or none qualified for this location! --><\/div>\n<p><b>Michelle Hoskin<\/b>: \u201cIn the UK it\u2019s illegal if you have a dog and don\u2019t chip it, right? Which is crazy, right? It\u2019s illegal to drive a car without car insurance, which is obvious. The only way we\u2019re ever going to crack this [underinsurance] is if the Government makes it illegal to not have life insurance. But they wouldn\u2019t do that because it has no benefit to them at all. They are incentivising you to have health insurance because it doesn\u2019t cost them then. But I like the incentive idea. I think that\u2019s bang on and I think the problem we\u2019ve got in the UK is we have an amazing health service and we\u2019re so lucky. We pay into it, but we don\u2019t know we&#8217;ve been born half the time so our lives are taken care of by the Government. Our health is taken care of by the Government. If they stopped the health service I think you\u2019d see more people insuring their lives.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><b>Jessica Brady<\/b>: \u201cI see advice moving to more of a coaching-style relationship and I think that is definitely coming through, particularly in the younger generation of advisers. They\u2019re not interested necessarily in products as such &#8211; they\u2019re much more interested in understanding the financial goals of the client and making sure the plans stack up to that.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI also think Ryan\u2019s point on technology\u2019s a really interesting one. I think in Australia a lot of advisers have feared technology becoming a disrupter of their industry and their business and subsequently haven\u2019t really invested enough. I think it\u2019s actually been to their detriment because they haven\u2019t necessarily looked at how they can utilise technology to create stronger relationships with clients.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cSpecifically on the under-insurance problem ,the idea about deductibility is a really interesting one. The other one that\u2019s been floated about was I know that in some European countries, you can\u2019t take out a debt unless you take out equivalent insurance. I think that\u2019s an interesting kind of concept, and in Australia, that only currently exists at a business level.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cSo I think there is obviously a piece for the Government to really consider at a higher level, specifically in the insurance market. We have such a lot to do to change the perception of clients that this is not a \u2018maybe have\u2019, but rather it\u2019s a \u2018must have\u2019. Within the Australian market I think we\u2019ve got a lot of work to do to share the good claims stories. Bad news sells, and all we talk about is perhaps the \u2018not-so-good\u2019 stories. So I think we all have a part to play in sharing those great stories where we\u2019ve been able to help clients with their insurance.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWe educate ourselves and we\u2019re preaching to the converted here, but we\u2019ve got a lot to do to get to that next level.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Riskinfo joined forces with the MDRT organisation and Zurich in an International Adviser Round Table discussion on the changing nature of the \u2018Value of Advice\u2019 equation\u2026<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":718,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-83","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-feature"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/83","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=83"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/83\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/718"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=83"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=83"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/magazine.riskinfo.com.au\/31\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=83"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}