Today was the final day of FPA Business Solutions 2010 in Dallas, TX. To capture the back channel discussion on Twitter, I used the Tweetdoc.org website to create a PDF file of tweets with the #FPABizSol hashtag.
Tweetdoc is free and extremely easy to use, and it outputs a fairly pleasing document to boot.
Click here to view the 96 tweets captured for FPABizSol.
I just read a great article at CPA2Biz from Alexandra DeFelice, senior editor of the Journal of Accountancy. Ms. DeFelice highlights a CPA firm that implemented the Results Only Work Environment, or ROWE, and explains how it rewarded employees for productivity and work output rather than recognizing how many hours each employee spends in an office chair.
Click here to read Rewarding Talent Beyond Billable Hours.
ROWE is the brain child of Cali Ressler and Jody Thompson, authors of the book Why Work Sucks and How to Fix It.
I’ve always been curious how well the ROWE principles would work in the financial services setting. As evidenced by the CPA firm reviewed in the article, ROWE is freeing employees to work how and when they want, but to always be striving to produce results in all aspects of work.
Would ROWE work inside independent financial adviser firms? What do you think?
Looking ahead to 2010, I’m seeing more and more articles indicating that wealth management and financial planning firms plan to hire staff in the next 12 months (see InvestmentNews and Investment Advisor for examples).
But when the time arrives to hire for your firm, will you rely on providence or planning to find the right employee?
When I say rely on providence, I’m referring to firms that cast a wide net by posting want ads across the Internet and wade through the deluge of résumés that pour in. Yes, posting a job description on industry related sites is more likely to generate qualified candidates, but firms are hoping that ideal candidates are constantly watching the job postings for new positions. Hence the reference to providence.
So instead of relying on chance to find the right employee, advisors should turn to organizations that specialize in matching talented individuals with open positions.
I wrote back in May about the SEC’s proposal to require surprise audits of Registered Investment Advisers who have custody of client assets. The proposal also clarified that custody requirements apply to advisers who withdraw advisory and/or management fees directly from client accounts. Therefore, advisers with custody of client funds would be required to undergo surprise audits, estimated by the SEC to be $8,100.
The Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA) recently said not so fast. $8,100 is severely underestimated.
According to SIFMA, estimates for surprise audits of RIAs who custody funds are as high as $282,800. You read that right: nearly three hundred thousand dollars.
Obviously the exact estimate depends on the amount of assest under management and the number of accounts, custodians, and securities maintained by an RIA.
For more information on the cost estimates, refer to this article at InvestmentNews.
I have an exciting announcement to make, which in part explains the delays in updates to the FPPad.com blog.
I was asked, and have accepted, to be the technology contributor to a new practice management website for financial advisers, advisorsforadvisors.com.
Now I must admit, practice management website is not the best way I’d describe advisorsforadvisors. Yes, you will find articles and commentary on practice management issues, but advisorsforadvisors offers much more.
advisorsforadvisors is positioned to be a key destination for financial advisers looking for timely, relevant information on the markets and economy, investment news, regulatory changes, compliance, marketing, practice management, software reviews, and technology.
This is a quick follow up to my post Anti-Fraud Measures Your Practice Needs where news of “irregularities” in accounts managed by Matthew Weitzman of AFW Wealth Advisers was highlighted in the New York Times.
It turns out the Mr. Weitzman is facing very serious charges. Here’s a snip from an InvestmentNews article released today:
Earlier today, the U.S. attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York in Manhattan and the New York office of the FBI said they charged Matthew Weitzman, 43, of Armonk, N.Y., with one count of investment adviser fraud and six counts each of securities fraud and wire fraud.
He also faces charges from the Securities and Exchange Commission over the alleged theft of client funds.
Click here to view the full story at InvestmentNews.
It’s unfortunate to see anyone take advantage of clients, and it’s even worse when the individual in this case once had an affiliation with NAPFA, a group of respected fee-only financial advisers.
So again, take this opportunity to communicate to your clients about the processes and procedures you have in place to prevent fraud and protect your clients’ interests.
Thanks to Andy Gluck at Advisor Products who hosted the webinar Advisors Using Social Networking Successfully. I really enjoyed the opportunity and have been overwhelmed by the positive feedback I’ve received about the content.
If you were not able to attend the live presentation, click here to register at Advisor Products and view the replay.
Also, you have a little more than 24 hours to register for the upcoming webinar 50 Cost-Saving and Money-Making Ideas in 50 Minutes hosted by InvestmentNews.
Click here to register for the InvesetmentNews webinar.
Over the next week, I’ll be participating in two webinars that I hope you will attend.
First, Andrew Gluck at Advisor Products, Inc. has asked me to participate in Friday’s Financial Crisis Webinar Series. The topic is Advisors Using Social Networking Successfully. I will share some of the experiences I’ve had through the use of Twitter, LinkedIn, and Facebook mediums that have personally resulted in new connections and new business.
Click here to register for the Friday, June 5 webinar Advisors Using Social Networking Successfully.
Second, I’ll be part of a panel hosted by InvestmentNews to offer 50 Cost-Saving and Money-Making Ideas in 50 Minutes. I have a list of my top 10 technologies that I believe financial advisers can use to save money, make money, and sometimes both simultaneously. There should be at least one good tip for every adviser listening to the webinar.
Hope to “see” you on the web.
Last week I wrote about the proposed changes published by the SEC to require surprise audits of investment advisers who debit fees directly from clients’ accounts, falling under the requirements of custody. The proposed changes were estimated to cost each adviser office on average of $8,100 a year in compliance costs.
This proposal, just barely three weeks old, seems likely to be rescinded according to this Financial Planning article published by Donna Mitchell. In it she writes:
Unofficial reports from the SEC, however, now suggest that the regulator is dropping the third-party compliance audit requirement for advisors, according to the Financial Planning Association’s Web site.
To read the full article, click here.
Update: See the article FPA, NAPFA and IAA to fight SEC’s pop-quiz proposal from InvestmentNews.com where group officials say “that the proposal is misguided and would saddle advisers with unnecessary costs.”
It should be no surprise to financial advisers following the Madoff Ponzi scandal that the SEC recently issued proposed rule changes to custody requirements. The release, IA-2876 (click to view PDF from SEC.gov), addresses custody requirements of client funds and securities and is open for a 60-day comment period through July 28, 2009. Should the proposed rules be adopted, advisers may face additional compliance fees of $8,100 on average.
Surprise Examination Proposal
The SEC proposes that advisers with custody of client assets must undergo an annual surprise examination by an independent public accountant, regardless of whether or not assets are held by a qualified custodian. The premise behind the surprise examination requirement is to provide “another set of eyes” on client assets to prevent fraud and misappropriation of client funds by registered advisers. Reports of theft and fraud by advisers have plagued the SEC since the Madoff scandal erupted in late 2008. So what does this mean for advisers meeting the custody definition?
You are currently browsing the archives for the Practice Management category.
