The quality of a financial plan means little if the adviser communication style used to deliver it fails to connect with the person on the other side of the table. That is the central argument Amanda Ford, co-founder of The Financial Planning Club, makes in a piece examining what genuinely personalised client service requires in practice.
When one explanation does not fit all
Ford draws on Insights Discovery, a framework that describes behavioural and communication preferences through four colour energies: Fiery Red, associated with directness and pace; Sunshine Yellow, with enthusiasm and possibility; Earth Green, with empathy and a focus on relationships; and Cool Blue, with precision and attention to detail. The framework’s value, Ford argues, is not in labelling people but in building awareness. Once a practitioner understands their own natural preferences, they can make a conscious choice to flex toward what a client actually needs.
The couple-in-a-meeting scenario she describes will be familiar to many advisers. One partner wants to examine every assumption underpinning a cashflow forecast. The other simply wants to know whether retirement is on track and when the holiday can be booked. Same household, same financial plan, entirely different communication needs. An adviser who delivers a thorough, technically rigorous explanation may leave the room satisfied while one client mentally switched off well before the end.
Ford’s point is that personalisation cannot stop at the plan itself. Advisers routinely tailor recommendations to a client’s circumstances, objectives and risk tolerance; there is no obvious reason the conversation should be delivered in a one-size-fits-all manner. The questions worth asking before and during a meeting are straightforward: does this client want the headline or the reasoning first? Do they need time to reflect before committing, or do they want to decide and move? What gives them enough confidence to act?
Adviser communication style inside the advice firm
The same principle applies to how advice teams function internally. Ford observes that without awareness of differing preferences, colleagues can attach unhelpful judgements to one another’s behaviour. The person asking yet another question before agreeing to a course of action may not be obstructing progress; they may simply need greater certainty before they can commit. The person pressing for a decision may not be dismissing colleagues’ concerns; they may be trying to generate momentum.
Ford’s remedy is what she calls ‘flexing 10%’: not a wholesale change of character, but a modest, conscious adjustment in how a message is framed or paced. Even a small shift in approach can substantially change how communication lands. The relevant question moves from ‘why don’t they understand me?’ to ‘what does this person need from this conversation?’
For advisers serving clients approaching or in retirement, where trust and clarity carry particular weight, that reframe is worth taking seriously. The Financial Conduct Authority has consistently emphasised the importance of clear, fair communication with clients; a deeper understanding of how individual clients receive information is one practical way to meet that standard in every review meeting, not just on paper.
