Archives

Entries in Research (30)

Wednesday
Oct022013

Putnam Social Media Research Provides Insights And Data To Slice And Dice

Early discussions about financial advisors’ use of social media gravitate to the same three questions, which I’ve paraphrased to capture a bit of the skepticism:

  • “Of course, they have a LinkedIn profile, but what’s social about that?”
  • “Well, they may have accounts but their Compliance departments don’t let them really do anything, do they?”
  • “Yes, but are ‘our’ advisors—you know, the ones with the assets—really using it? Really?”

With the research it’s releasing today, Putnam adds to the collective understanding of how advisors use social media as a marketing, networking and relationship tool. Some of the data aligns with other research (including the authoritative work done annually by American Century) and is unsurprising. At the highest level, 75% of advisors use at least one social network for business, and eight out of 10 name LinkedIn as their primary network.

But there’s also a lot that’s new here. I’m going to cherry-pick but encourage you to review the full results.

The "Putnam Investments Survey of Financial Advisors’ Use of Social Media" (see infographic, a link to the full press release will follow when it's available) was conducted by FTI Consulting in July 2013, based on a survey of 408 U.S.-based financial advisors. More than half (54%) of the respondents are affiliated with independent broker-dealers, 17% national broker-dealers, 13% regional broker-dealers. The others have insurance, bank and financial planner affiliations.

Most exciting for some of us is the data visualization capability accompanying the research. Putnam has published the data in a workbook accessible via a public (free) version of Tableau software. This enables users to view the data distribution and even do their own slicing and dicing. 

“It's all about data discoverability, open-source data, and collaborative use of data. So, have at it,” Putnam Social Media Director Jayme Lacour told me.

The question never asked: Advisors on Google+

Before we look at how the Putnam research provides insights to the most frequently asked questions, I’ll call your attention to the data on advisor use of the sleeper social network: Google+. People rarely ask about Google+ and yet advisor use of it ranks much higher than most people would have guessed. Almost one-third of advisors surveyed (31%) used in it in the past year for business purposes; it’s second only to LinkedIn.

Overall, while LinkedIn is the most used social network, Facebook consistently ranks #2, largely in relationship management activities. The screenshot below is from the data viz page.

This data is reminiscent of similar questions that appeared in a previous FTI Consulting study done in conjunction with LinkedIn. The graph below is from the May 2012 Financial Advisors’ Use of Social Media Moves from Early Adoption to Mainstream research

These are two different surveys, but the dimensions are so similar I can’t resist comparing the findings and wondering whether a few differences reflect an evolution in the networks advisors prefer to use.

While the datapoints are different in the Putnam work, most of the order of the preferred networks is unchanged from the earlier research. Two exceptions relate to the prominence of Facebook as a means of enhancing current relationships and cultivating client prospects.

Twitter does not stand out in the Putnam research, except on a dimension that asset managers have keen interest in. Note that it is the preferred network for cascading thought leadership. That’s a much stronger showing than in the LinkedIn/FTI Consulting work a year ago when LinkedIn towered over all in that category.

Oh and elsewhere in the data you'll see that 58% of advisors say their usage of Twitter has increased in the last year, closely following 61% who report increased LinkedIn usage.

Q. “Of course, they have a LinkedIn profile, but what’s social about that?”

Take a look at the activities reported in the research and you’ll see that advisors who consider LinkedIn their primary social network are doing more than maintaining LinkedIn profiles.

The infographic reports on six activities but you’ll see a dozen total LinkedIn activities on the data viz page.

This may be the most encompassing look at advisors’ participation on LinkedIn. It was smart, for example, to ask whether advisors can access LinkedIn at work and whether advisors follow companies. For next time: What percentage are using the Contacts mobile app? What percentage are following the LinkedIn thought leaders? How many are customizing their LinkedIn updates? All have bearing on asset manager content marketing initiatives.

Putnam has more than research interest in LinkedIn. As you may recall, the firm broke new ground earlier this year when it empowered its wholesalers to engage with advisors on LinkedIn.  

Q. Well, they may have accounts but their Compliance departments don’t let them really do anything, do they?

The screenshot above of advisors’ LinkedIn activities is from the intriguing Activities tab on the data viz site. On the page you’ll see a rich list of possible activities that advisors could and do engage in on the other surveyed platforms: Facebook, Google+ and Twitter.

Unfortunately, Putnam chose to report the data by advisors’ primary network. Given LinkedIn’s dominance in the survey, the result is that low levels of data are reported for the other networks.

Other surveys have asked advisors to identify a primary social network, too, but this is an artificial construct. In this case, it diminishes the value of the data that could be collected to report on what advisors do on all networks.

Proceed with caution and be sure to note the sample sizes when considering the Activities data that's being shared.

Also, Twitter gets short shrift in the list of surveyed activities. Following and maintaining Twitter lists are two activities to report on next time, for example. 

Q. Yes but are “our” advisors—you know, the ones with the assets—really using it? Really?

This is the acid test for most mutual fund and exchange-traded fund (ETF) firms evaluating the opportunity today in social media.

Putnam’s work is not the first to seek to provide insight. When Accenture reported in March of this year, it surveyed 400 advisors including 250 brokerage/wirehouse/bank advisors and 150 advisors who were independent or represented a regional bank or insurance firm and reported very different results. According to its research, nearly half (48%) of financial advisors are using social media on a daily basis to interact with their clients—most of whom (60%) were reported to have assets of more than $20 million. Hmm, many found that hard to believe.

Putnam’s profile of The Social Advisor—which they defined as the advisor who uses social media on a daily basis—confirms the views of social media skeptics. Daily social media-using advisors look to be a little light in the AUM and in the average client portfolio, when compared both to the Accenture findings and to the characteristics of RIAs, as reported in Cerulli Associates' "State of the RIA Marketplace 2012." This is not an apples-to-apples comparison, note. Not all Putnam respondents were RIAs.

However, advisors surveyed report a return on the investment they make in social media as a form of connecting. Almost one-half (49%) of advisors say they acquired new clients through social networks and of those, 29% gained over $1 million in new assets, Putnam research reported.

And—in a move that might be most useful to broker-dealers and individual advisors—Putnam goes a step further and uses the data to map the states where the new clients and assets came from. The darker the blue, the more successful the social media participation. Sweet.

Wednesday
Apr032013

What Do Advisors Use Fund Company Websites For?

What are financial advisors using fund company Websites for? That's the question asked by an Advisor Perspectives survey, the results of which I've been anxious to see since January. The findings are elaborated on in a post published yesterday on the AP site. They reflect the responses of 282 investment advisers, registered representatives, financial planners and insurance agents who completed the survey online. 

While I urge you to check out the full report, below are a few of my notes. 

Websites are the #3 information resource after third-party sites and meetings/calls with wholesalers.


RTB’s take: Congratulations, digital marketers, you’ve reached the pinnacle of what you can hope to achieve. Can you envision Websites climbing any higher as an information source than third place, surpassing either third-party sites or meetings/calls with wholesalers and other real live people? I can't.

Note that print communications are nowhere to be found in the answers the Advisor Perspectives provided—I guess reliance on them is lumped into the Other category that 6% of advisors responded to.

Print’s fade is no less than stunning. Just six years ago a SwanDog/FRC study reported that firms with less than $50 billion in assets under management spent 40%-60% of their marketing budgets on sales literature fulfillment. And now...poof, at least in terms of what advisors rely on. Here's hoping a meaningful share of that spending on print has shifted to your digital budget.

What I wonder about is where asset manager apps would place on this list. It's a category worth breaking out next time. 

More than half of surveyed advisors get at least 25% of their due diligence information from fund sites. 

RTB’s take: Advisors who manage more money tend to rely more on wholesalers than on fund sites. But, the more money an advisor manages, the more they use the sites for research. Both of these would seem to make sense.

But if more than half of advisors get at least 25% of their due diligence done on fund sites, that means that a significant number of advisors are doing their due diligence on your firm and your products somewhere else. Are you plugged into those sources and how information feeds to them? Is someone checking on it regularly? These findings make it obvious that you can't afford to be disinterested about your firm's data and content syndication.

Advisors tend to use mutual fund Websites primarily to access core-level data on performance, holdings and risk metrics.

RTB’s take: No matter how imaginative you can get with enhancements to your site, here's a reminder of the highest value that a site can provide: As the product manufacturer, you’re recognized by advisors as having more product information than any other site is going to have. For many, it's the only reason to go to your site. Focus on improving the product information-gathering experience (e.g., how easy are your holdings to get to?) and all else will flow from there.

Asked to select up to five kinds of advisor-focused content that advisors found most valuable and relevant to their investment management and client service processes, 3% of advisors selected firm-created videos. (Detailed fund information, fact sheets, commentaries and fund research were what ranked highest.)

RTB's take: This has to smart, I'm sure. But, maybe it's time for you and your team to reset. Are the videos you’re producing truly advisor-worthy? Is it even realistic to be expecting advisors to regularly get their information from videos? Alternatively, what would you change in your approach if you instead optimized video on your site for the non-advisor visitors? 

55% of advisors access fund company sites on a mobile device.

RTB’s take: Advisor use of mobile devices has been studied by a few surveys but never have we seen numbers on mobile advisors' access of fund sites. More than half of the group surveyed (55%) say they've visited sites while mobile, and more than one-quarter (26%) say they do it daily. 

What are they looking at? "For everything except quick-hit tasks like getting price quotes, mobile users prefer tablets over smartphones," Advisor Perspectives reports. Below I've sorted the data to show the differences between advisor content consumption on smartphones versus tablets. 

These findings provide added incentive for firms to be form factor-aware when developing and executing their mobile strategies. Dig into your Web analytics and create at least two reports—one for smartphones and one for tablets. You need to understand the differences between these two very different types of visits. Pay special attention to visits that start from links in emails.  

"...Very few companies stand out as being the best. Of the top 20 largest mutual fund companies*, only nine were singled out by more than 10% of advisors as offering superior Website capabilities...This is an important wake-up call for fund companies." 

RTB’s take: Important wake-up call? I have to part ways with Advisor Perspectives on this conclusion. I just wouldn’t go that far with the data that’s being shared. For starters, perhaps “the best” aren’t all among the top 20 largest mutual fund company sites.

My hunch is that most advisors who regularly use firm sites are generally satisfied. Of course, every site can be improved upon. But there’s no indication that the industry suffers from poor quality sites across the board. Advisor Perspectives has a database of 300,000 financial advisors, and thousands of them will respond to a survey on a subject they feel passionate about. If advisors' needs weren't being met, I think there would have been a stronger response. 

But don't just take my word for all of this. If you're working on a fund company Website, the Advisor Perspectives research is a must-read point-in-time report on what's resonating and what isn't with a primary online audience. 

Wednesday
Feb272013

Questions Raised By Cogent's Social Media Research

On Friday Cogent Research released high-level findings of its recent research about social media and affluent investors. I tweeted about the research and posted a LinkedIn status update about it, but I couldn’t quite shake some questions it raised for me.

The work has me thinking about social media measurement, the role that social media participation plays in an overall communications mix and the impact to date of social media in the investment industry.

Click to read more ...

Thursday
Feb212013

Institutional Investors Value Social Media Content

“Using new media isn’t worth my time to derive even the 50th datapoint of incremental value.”

That was the consensus of institutional investors four years ago, according to Jason Golz of the Brunswick Group. But that’s not the view any longer, says Golz, citing global research that Brunswick conducted in late 2012.

Blogs and microblogs (Twitter in the United States) are very much a part of the institutional investor’s regular information diet today, the survey of 230 buy-side and 246 sell-side investors found.

Click to read more ...

Wednesday
Jan162013

Keeping Up With The Advisors

This could be interesting. Advisor Perspectives Monday emailed a survey to its database of 300,000 financial advisors, asking some salient questions about the relative value of fund company Websites and mobile platforms.

Of course, asset management digital marketers have kasina, Cogent Research, Cerulli Associates and a handful of other firms to go to for paid research and quantitative-based analysis. But, the Advisor Perspectives work should provide welcome insights, and some of it will be shared.

Click to read more ...