This quarter we put the platforms through their paces by road testing them to get a better measure of usability and functionality. We have done this through a combination of platform demos and viewing live accounts alongside financial advisers and paraplanners.
Instead of focusing on the bells and whistles, we have examined the core functions of platforms which are used by advisers and admin staff in their day-to-day activities. Above all else, platforms need to focus on getting the basics right before focusing on the additional ‘nice-to-have’ tools and features.
During our travels, we have looked at model portfolio functionality, facilitating charges, payments, signatures and timeout periods. However, in this article, I will focus on the trends we are seeing at an industry level for both model portfolios and signatures – the full lowdown on who does what, how they do it and where their future priorities lie is looked at in more detail within our UK Adviser Platform Guide: Issue 31.
Efficiencies can be created with smoother advisory model portfolio functionality
Creating advisory model portfolios, re-balancing model portfolios and adjusting the asset allocation in these portfolios is a core platform function.
Paraplanners tell us that the inability to ‘archive’ models – to hide from view but not delete legacy models would make their lives easier. Paraplanners also suggest that being able to sort model portfolios by the last used date would be helpful. Currently most platforms list model portfolios in alphabetical order meaning that paraplanners and advisers have to search by name through lengthy lists to find the appropriate model.
The majority of platforms impose no limit to the number of funds in a model but some do.
Platforms are behind the curve on e-signatures
Excessive paperwork and obtaining a wet signature from a client can be a cumbersome process for advisers. Advisers have long told us that they want to cut down on paper-based processes and improve efficiency – they expect platforms to support them in these aims.
Platforms recognise this and try to minimise the need for signatures where possible. Typically, platforms require signatures from the client when a new account is set up on the platform and to authorise a withdrawal.
Most platforms require to see a client’s wet signature during the application process whilst others are able to support scanned signatures. Removing the need for signatures where possible and introducing the functionality to support e-signatures is increasingly on platforms’ radars.
Platforms are increasingly picking up on their adviser users’ frustrations and many are hosting user groups to further understand advisers’ priorities. Several platforms are reaching the business end of technology upgrades which will significantly improve overall platform usability.
Other key areas of focus from platforms include increasing the efficiency of adviser processes, improving customer service levels and decumulation. Bear in mind that all of these developments are being made whilst significant resource is being redirected to making sure that platforms are ready for the MiFID II deadline in January 2018.
As always, we are open to hearing what functionality you would like to see on platforms and where you think your platforms should be investing to improve the user experience – please drop us an email to share your views. And I couldn’t finish our weekly newsletter without mentioning Platforum 2017, our annual conference on 10th October where we pose the question: can the leopard change its spots?