In his book Selling the Invisible: A Field Guide to Modern Marketing, marketing guru Harry Beckwith takes a fascinating look at the unique challenges of selling a service—which, unlike a physical product, is “invisible” and intangible, and thus is especially hard for consumers to evaluate. You can’t judge a service by its look and feel and quality, and you can’t look at what someone else purchased to evaluate it, the way we can a product. And in the case of sophisticated expertise services like financial planning, consumers don’t even have a clear basis to judge the expertise, either; how, really, do you know if someone is truly an expert at what they do…at least, until after it’s too late?
In fact, Beckwith makes a compelling case that because it’s so difficult for consumers to judge the value proposition and expertise of a service provider, the greatest “competitor” for most—including financial planners—is not actually other service providers (i.e., other financial planners), but simply client inertia and the desire to either do nothing, or get something done but just do it themselves. Doing nothing is easy, doing it yourself is “free,” but hiring a professional is an uncertainty, an unknown quantity, and something that is almost impossible to know because the service is invisible.
Given this difficulty, and the demands on time for most people, Beckwith points out that in practice consumers rarely even look to make the “best” choice—because it’s almost impossible to know which service will be “best,” anyway. Instead, most people will be satisfied by just looking for a solution that will be “good enough” to address the issue.
Similarly, because we fear the unknown, we may be far more likely to buy the service we fear the least—the one that is least risky, and most certain—rather than the service that “might” turn out to be the best but has a more uncertain outcome (a mediocre known may be preferable to a potentially superior unknown!)
How do clients evaluate a ‘good’ financial advisor?
The key point from Beckwith’s perspective is that because “invisible” services are so difficult to evaluate, most people don’t actually make their purchasing decision based on the expertise of the service provider. Instead, they evaluate the relationship they have with the person instead. In other words, if you don’t have the expertise to evaluate the expertise of the expert, you evaluate what you can—the relationship, how much of a connection you feel with the person, their integrity, and whatever limited outwards signs there are that they might provide good service (e.g., promises are kept, and phone calls returned promptly).
In essence, this means that when a prospective client is considering an intangible service like financial planning, they may especially focus on what is “tangible,” from how the advisor dresses, the look of his/her office, and the firm’s marketing materials and website, to how the staff answers the phone and the quality and clarity of the communication.
In point of fact, the reality is that most clients have relatively few points of contact in which they can possibly form a first impression—the advisor and his/her business card, the physical office space, the website, and how the phone is answered—and thus it pays to pay attention to those details, as when there is so little that is tangible for the client, those few items may have a highly disproportionate impact on the client’s decision about whether to do business or not. And an advisor that fails at just a few may lose out to another firm that executes the communication and relationship-building process ever so slightly better—regardless of which advisor is the more knowledgeable expert!
Strategies to make your invisible financial planning more compelling
So given the dynamics and challenges of selling the invisible as Beckwith highlights, what should financial advisors do to make their service offering more compelling to prospective clients—recognizing the difficulty that prospective clients will have in actually evaluating a financial planner and his/her expertise and services in the first place?
While it may be obvious to many that we as financial planners are in the relationship business, it bears remembering when really considering the touch points that a prospective client may have with you and your advisory firm. For instance, if you’re really focused on building human connections, does your website have pictures of you and your staff so prospects can make a visual connection? And for that matter, if a client’s first impression of you is your website, is it up to date and professionally done?
Alternatively, if you really expect your client’s first impression will be calling your office or coming in for a visit, how much time do you spend training with staff about how the phones should be answered, and how prospects should be greeted when they enter your office? And have you carefully considered the decor of your office? As Beckwith emphasizes, these seemingly trite details may have far more impact than you realize in your prospective client’s decision about whether to work with you; as the saying goes, there’s no second chance to make a first impression!
Similarly, to the extent that prospective clients will drive their decision by their relationship and connection to you (because they can’t really judge your expertise), it’s especially important that prospective clients really understand not just what you do, but why you do what you do. As Beckwith puts it: “Prospects do not buy how good you are at what you do. They buy how good you are at who you are.”
In other words, when you do talk to clients about yourself, start with the “why” first. Moreover, because people feel more trusting once they feel they have been understood, your ability to talk about what you can do or why you do it is still less important than showing that you understand what the client needs and making them feel heard.
In addition, because those purchasing a service may have relatively little to go on in making their decision, Beckwith emphasizes the importance of branding and advertising. Prospects who have already heard of you and your company are more likely to trust if they are familiar with you. Beckwith notes that familiarity of brand is especially important in our increasingly time-starved lives. We seem to have less and less time to thoroughly research a decision, and therefore are even more likely to rely upon gut feelings and brand trust. In turn, this implies that it is especially important for advisors to have a niche or focus, because it allows the firm to create a clear brand and value proposition with a core clientele, and become familiar and known in that community.
Beckwith also points out that because the decision to buy a service feels risky for the prospective client (“How do I know if I will really get a service that was worth paying for?”), it’s important to do what you can to make the transaction feel less risky. For instance, Beckwith suggests offering a trial period or test project.
For advisors, that might mean not insisting that clients do a comprehensive financial plan up front, and instead offering a modular financial planning service for a standalone fee. For instance, you could offer a two-hour Social Security review and analysis for $300. You would then invite the client to consider a more comprehensive financial planning solution after you have demonstrated your value proposition. The client gets a valuable service, while you have the opportunity to build a deeper connection and provide a more tangible outcome. At worst, you’ll be paid for your time and part ways.
Some clients fear that hiring an advisor will be a waste of time and they can do it best themselves. In addressing this risk, Beckwith notes that it is bad to criticize competitors. While it might feel like you’re saying you’re better than the competition, you are actually reducing the client’s trust that anyone will be able to do the job well. Degrading your competitors (e.g., by questioning their compensation methodology or their fiduciary status) may make the prospect less likely to work with your competitor, but it doesn’t make them more likely to work with you. It makes them more likely to work with no one.
Ultimately, “selling the invisible” is not really specific to financial planners (or even the financial services industry), and in point of fact it is somewhat dated—having been written in 1999. And for some advisors, it may be dismaying to hear how little of the decision about whether to hire you as a financial planner has to do with your actual expertise as a financial planner.
Nonetheless, Beckwith’s ideas and insights about both the challenges and opportunities in marketing an intangible service like financial planning remain remarkably relevant. In fact, he really presaged the rising relevance of behavioral finance research. After all, many of Beckwith’s tips about positioning and branding are built around the kinds of mental shortcuts our brains take in making complex decisions. If you’re struggling to market and grow your own advisory firm, Selling the Invisible is definitely worth a read.
So what do you think?
Have you ever read Beckwith’s Selling the Invisible? Do you think the points about the difficulty of selling a service—as opposed to a product—are salient and relevant? Would you consider marketing and communicating the value of your practice differently, recognizing that—like it or not—prospective clients may make their decision based on other points beyond just your actual knowledge and expertise?