Would the introduction of more female risk advisers have a meaningful positive impact on Australia's underinsurance crisis?
- Yes (62%)
- No (32%)
- Not sure (6%)
One of the issues stemming from last week’s announcement of the Female Excellence in Advice Award forms the basis for our latest riskinfo poll question, which asks:
Would the introduction of more female risk advisers have a meaningful positive impact on Australia’s underinsurance crisis?
This question relates to underinsurance and gender inequality in the financial services sector. While the Female Excellence in Advice Award is one that spans the full range of advice solutions, our poll is considering the impact of more female advisers on the life insurance sector.
…women prefer to speak with other women about their investment and insurance needs
In originally launching the Award, its Patron and former NSW Opposition Leader, Kerry Chikarovski, reflected on the lack of numbers of female advisers in the financial services industry, but observed that it was a fact of life that women prefer to speak with other women about their investment and insurance needs.
Speaking to riskinfo at the MLC Risk Specialist Network Risk Retreat, Adelaide-based adviser Sim Sinesi said she supports the notion that women do like dealing with other women, but suggested one reason the life insurance and broader financial services industry has historically not been attractive to women as a career relates to its remuneration structures. Ms Sinesi added, however, that as the industry evolves towards a more ‘professional’ model, the greater certainty or guarantee of income may have a positive impact on more women adopting a career in financial advice.
But irrespective of whether women prefer to speak with other women about their investment and insurance needs, the fact remains that female consumers are often not given a choice to deal with a female adviser, given the overall lack of numbers of female advisers in the industry today.
If this is the case, then surely an injection of more female financial advisers who include risk advice as part of their services would have a meaningful impact on underinsurance.
Is this a solid contention, or is it simply a good theory that won’t work in practice? Would new female advisers be confronted by the same issues facing existing male and female advisers when it comes to the fact that insurance is a solution that is sold and not bought?
Even so, would not the introduction of more financial advisers and more female financial advisers in particular, be a good thing for the life insurance industry in addressing the underinsurance dilemma, particularly amongst female consumers?
And why does there remain such a gender imbalance in the financial advice sector? Why, in 2011, does such a gap still exist between male and female adviser numbers?
Let us know what you think…
Add your comment now
10 Comments
I think the majority of Para Planners are women, and encouraged to stay that way by their male counterparts.
I am a qualified adviser but within my own work place snowed under with male advisers Para planning work, thus unable to get out to do the role I am trained for Advising. I think you would find many para planners are qualified but undervalued within their work environments and left to do the traditional secretarial roles and para planning, rather than encouraged to get out and advise.
I see no difference in female vs male risk advisers..Risk Insurance will always haver to be sold, not bought. Selling Risk Cover is not a skill that can be taught overnight,(like investments), you either can or you can’t.(Gender makes absolutely no difference, but having a bit of grey in your hair certainly helps.)
I am a female risk adviser, however I know I am not remunerated as well as my male counterparts, although I probably write more than most. Very frustrating. I also do not have any assistance with the role because I am able to “do it all”. No doubt a male adviser within my firm would get an assistant/paraplanner.
Empathy for understanding females is a major determining factor in providing advice. People will do business with those whom they know, like and trust. Whether it be right or wrong, men do not have a reputation for the caring and sharing most women want. It takes time to build a relationship with a woman, as compared to another male. Only when a woman truly trust and feels comfortable with an adviser will they commit to trust and sharing. Most people don’t care how much you know, until they know how much you care. Cultivating a relationship will always prove invaluable to providing advice.
As a female risk adviser with many years experience, in the end people deal with those they connect with, and risk insurance is never bought, always sold. Early in my career I was part of a ‘women’s team’ of advisers,however, I’ve never really seen the model work in the ‘expected’ way ie. more business from female cleints. Some women wish to deal with women, just as many prefer to deal with a man and many young women will still ask their father or (male) partner their opinion in relation to their own risk management regardless of the gender of their adviser. So lets get rid of the gender debate (other than encouraging more young women to join the industry which I think is a good thing) and focus on underinsurance as a universal issue in Australia, regardless of the gender of the adviser OR client.
Success in selling risk policies is not gender based - it is attitude based. Clients tell me that they understand their insurance and therefore see the value in it. eg clients came to me paying $165 pm and complaining bitterly that they were paying too much and saw no real value - after 2 hours, walked out of my office with cover at $250 pm as now they truly understand their cover. Maybe time is a factor too and perhaps a little empathy wouldn’t go astray.
More advisers (whatever the gender) would have a positive impact.
I don’t believe that people generally want to buy according to the gender of the adviser. Rather they are concerned about the quality of the advice.
And where does one get this knowledge? It’s not the providers, their Sales Managers or BDMs with their emphasis on product knowledge. It’s generally gained through listening to and talking with peers, mentoring and just doing the hard yards. All hail MDRT and AFA who are committed to giving new advisers access to those who have been there and done it before.
Oh, and Kelly…(from 12.39 pm). If you want to advise, quit your current role and go for it. I remember when I started being told that I’ll be underpaid for 5 years and then overpaid for the rest of my life. They were right!
as a risk adviser who works mostly from home, I see this as a great career option for those wanting part time work. The majority of my work is on the phone or email, so can fit around my family commitments. That said, I’m not keen on a quota system, highlighting options and encouraging employers is my preferred method of increasing female representation.
Clients trust and accept the recommendations of advisers with long term professional stability in the business irrespective of gender. Unfortunately the majority of female advisers suffer from “non-stickability” resulting in most single females of all ages seeming to prefer to accept the advice of male advisers.
The gender of the adviser makes no difference, as long as… a)the adviser tells the truth, b)the correct cover is provided, and c)the government stays out of it.