Even the best adviser relationships can become stale over time. Our view is that changing your adviser is a measure of last resort and most issues can be solved by open and honest dialogue, provided the adviser is willing to listen and respond.

When advisers are first appointed, great care is taken to put in place the right shape of team, so that work can be delivered in the most efficient way possible. Time is also taken to discuss the client’s work needs in detail, i.e. type and detail of advice, frequency of reporting and style of materials, etc. However, over time, team members leave or become more senior and a client’s requirements change. The problem is that neither the client nor the adviser always spots this.

Often bac is brought in by the client because there is concern that the adviser is charging too much for work that does not feel best in class. The paradox is that the adviser in question is normally a leading firm in the industry, so what has gone wrong? Usually it is a combination of reasons – sometimes the client and adviser have not identified their changing circumstances, whilst on other occasions the client can be resistant to new approaches. Linked to the latter, advisers can become nervous of proposing changes if the client might view such suggestions in a negative way.

bac projects tend to start with a detailed review of how the scheme currently operates, how the interaction with advisers works and when/why those processes were put in place. When we start to discuss with the client what is currently not working, the reasons often link back to historic working practices not being appropriate to current circumstances.

Almost without exception, a client starts by telling us that their scheme is uniquely complex and the problem with reviewing their adviser is that it would be too risky to bring in someone new. We have two problems with this:

• it is almost never true – yes, the scheme may be hugely complex but top-end advisers can come up to speed very quickly
• if the incumbent adviser does not believe the relationship is at risk if they don’t deliver, it is unlikely the client will succeed in getting the very best from their adviser.

Of the three most complex schemes where we have led adviser reviews over the last two years, all three have moved to new advisers, in part because the adviser thought their position was secure and did not properly listen to the client’s concerns. And we can vouch for the fact that, in all three cases, the trustees and pensions team are very happy with the new level of advisory support.