By Roy Vickery, Senior Manager - Retirement Propositions, Scottish Widows
Putting a rigorous process in place.
Imagine a cautious 66-year-old using drawdown for income, and a 35-year-old, however cautious, saving with an ISA. The two are unlikely to be well served by the same process and investments. For clients who intend to use drawdown, the industry is now moving to a more structured governance approach: a Centralised Retirement Proposition (CRP).
Many of the drawdown clients of today would formerly have used annuities. Of those wanting flexible access, a number have lower net worth, lack investment experience and are more likely to have a limited capacity to withstand loss.
Sustainability for all
It used to be that unrestricted access to drawdown was only for those with a minimum fund value of £100K+, but this is now clearly a thing of the past. The absence of such natural barriers means advisers now have a responsibility to ensure that they recommend sustainable withdrawal strategies whatever the level of wealth.
With a CRP, advisers can create a structured investment advice process. Like a Centralised Investment Proposition (CIP), a CRP creates consistent, repeatable and deliverable outcomes for diverse types of clients. Good governance not only helps reduce business risks but also improves the ability to service the larger volumes of clients needing retirement income.
The CRP process
The process above can be applied equally to all customers; with the major exception being stage 3: the investment strategy.
The FCA continues to make reference to the appropriate use of of CIPs, and it’s just as applicable to CRPs: “Where a firm has a diverse client bank, it may wish to consider segmenting their clients. This involves offering a range of CIP solutions to meet the needs and objectives of different client segments.”
The stage of the process that is most likely to differ between clients is the investment strategy. Especially when the complexity of their needs, their levels of wealth and their investment experience diverge significantly.
By employing differing investment strategies, firms are able to meet those varying requirements and objectives.
Cost and price sensitivity also need to be taken into account. This gives the opportunity to develop different investment strategies that provide a suitable balance between your clients’ ability to accept the costs, and the viability to deliver a profitable service.
Although your clients have differing needs that can be segmented using objective measures such as wealth and experience, there may be more subjective attributes that help group similar clients. One aspect that may unite many of them – a trait independent of their level of personal wealth – is the wish to protect, against loss, the savings they’ve already acquired.
The link between objectives and solution
Clients may have many requirements and – with the advent of greater pension freedoms – many options available to them. So it’s important to have a number of contingent strategies in place.