Adviser confidential: ‘My biggest technology mistakes’

Technology is supposed to provide solutions for advisers, not create more problems. But sometimes advisers discover that they have bought more of the latter and less of the former once they put their new tools to use.
To help head off disappointment and frustration with future purchases, we asked three advisers to explain their biggest technology mistakes — and what they would do differently now, given their experience. In many cases, the problem wasn’t the technology itself but more about its proper use and its not being a good fit for the advisers’ needs.
Here are their stories:

LOREN KAYFETZ

Convinced that Interactive Advisory Software Inc.’s soup-to-nuts program would give him everything that he needed to run his practice, adviser Loren Kayfetz took the plunge and signed a contract four years ago.
Today, the president of Personal Financial Consultants Inc., which manages $120 million in assets, admits that he still can’t use most of the $2,500-a-month program, which incorporates a database and tools for financial planning, portfolio management, customer relationship management and document management.
“It’s one thing to adopt a software program; it’s another to get your use out of it,” he said. “We’re still frustrated, but we can’t blame the software.”
Mr. Kayfetz says his biggest mistake was not training his employees to use the software, which he still likes because it allows him to enter data once and because its applications do everything his practice needs. Nevertheless, the firm’s employees use only the portfolio management system to its full extent, and dabble in the other systems.
“Each part of the program is very comprehensive,” he said. “Unless you commit personnel to the implementation process, you can be very disappointed.”
While ready to ditch the software for something more simple, Mr. Kayfetz decided to give IAS another shot last month. That entailed spending about $5,000 on an intensive two-day training session for his employees and an additional $15,000 on a consultant who will help him set up processes that better utilize the software, among other assignments.
For instance, the IAS financial planning software requires the adviser to input a client’s monthly expenses broken down by category. Since Mr. Kayfetz doesn’t collect those data from his clients, he will ask the consultant to help him use the program without inputting those data.
The IAS program has the flexibility to omit certain kinds of data and still be able to complete a financial plan, said Linda Grace, director of training for the software firm. She believes training will help Mr. Kayfetz and his firm — as well as other firms that add training — achieve greater productivity from the software.
“It’s tough,” she said. “It’s a commitment of time to work on it. A lot of advisers don’t want to invest that kind of time.”

MARK S. SMITH

Mark S. Smith purchased NaviPlan financial planning software from Emerging Information Systems Inc. a few years ago to create simple projections for clients.
But Mr. Smith, president and chief executive of ChartMark Investments Inc., which manages $50 million in assets, discovered that doing the necessary calculations was too arduous, and the results were not always accurate. The firm’s staff also wasn’t pleased with the program’s printouts, because they made it difficult for clients to interpret projections, he said. Despite repeated calls to EISI, the problems couldn’t be resolved.
In desperation, Mr. Smith ended his two-year, $3,000 contract early by paying the full
amount due.
“We take the blame, although putting in the time and effort to use the software, and still not getting what we wanted, was frustrating,” Mr. Smith said.
Cindy Bennett, director of marketing at EISI, wonders if the inaccurate calculations were caused by user error. She looked at the firm’s history and noted that there were several calls related to data being put in the wrong places, which obviously affects the calculations.
She said many of the calls from Mr. Smith’s office concerned issues that are addressed in training sessions — which Mr. Smith and his employees elected to skip. Ms. Bennett encourages advisers to train themselves thoroughly before using the software, adding that she appreciates the suggestions from ChartMark’s staff about improving the software.
One suggestion from Mr. Smith’s staff involved being able to use different Social Security projections in the same plan to show clients how receiving benefits at different ages affects retirement projections. Currently, the software creates a duplicate plan to show different projections.
“That’s a really good suggestion,” she said.

ANDY MILLARD

Not afraid to try new programs, Andy Millard, principal of Main Street Financial Group Inc., discovered that buying software just because it’s well-regarded may not always be the best move.
Mr. Millard’s two-person registered investment advisory firm, which manages $60 million in assets, purchased Junxure’s $3,000 customer relationship management software in order to set up client contact reminders and efficiently enter notes about client meetings.
“We soon learned that what had taken two seconds to do with [Sage CRM Software’s] ACT! was taking us three minutes,” he said.
After a few months — and discovering that he had purchased a BMW when he needed a Honda — he canceled his contract and received a full refund.
Ken Golding, a vice president at Junxure, called Mr. Millard’s complaint about the system’s complexity a common one, and one reason his system often is better-utilized by larger firms than small ones. That said, Mr. Golding noted that it shouldn’t take advisers more than 10 seconds to click through the system to write notes about clients.
“We struggle with the system’s complexity,” he said. “But if we make it easier, we’d be removing a lot of the stuff advisers love.”

E-mail Lisa Shidler at [email protected].