Twenty Years On: What Clients Will Really Pay For? Part 2

In Part 1 of this two part series, I explored the dilemma that firms are facing right now; where to focus their development. There is a race to adopt the best technology, to navigate the use of AI without being left behind. However, this opens up a question: what will clients pay for when they aren’t paying for time? In this second part, I will explore the human skills that firms should also be focused on developing, in parallel to AI, if they want to survive.

What human skills do clients value now, and what will they value in the future?

When we ask clients what they look for in an advisor they say:

• Responsiveness

• Someone who understands them

• Someone they like and can work with 

• Someone they can trust
  

This doesn’t really change much year-to-year and it doesn’t really vary across industries. We hear it of lawyers, accountants, property consultants and investment firms. Is it, therefore, safe to assume that these same skills will still be what clients will want in 20 years time? 

Let’s look at these against the backdrop of a world where AI does much of the doing. Don’t forget we have taken a massive leap from where we were 20 years ago, and there is no reason to assume that technology will slow down, or go away. 

Responsiveness is an easy thing to solve. Often clients don’t want things done immediately, what they mean by responsiveness is that they want to be kept in the loop. The email that might be being actioned behind the scenes, but the receipt of which hasn’t been communicated. The document that might need longer to draft, but the deadline for which isn’t communicated. 

Responsiveness (or lack thereof) is usually a communication problem rather than a response problem, and AI is likely to solve it. It can automate replies, it can provide nudges to professionals to remind them to communicate. It can tell a professional when they are working on a file that the client may not be aware of what is happening behind the scenes. And, of course, AI will mean that things happen more quickly. So, responsiveness is unlikely to be where value will be found – not at a human level anyway.

Understanding has a few layers. At one level clients want professionals to understand their sector. They also want them to understand how they fit within that sector. Below that, they want them to understand the nuances of their business; their appetite for risk, the commercial drivers behind what the professional is being asked to do. Then, on a human level, clients want advisers to know how they like to work, and ultimately what they need as a person. Again, AI will help with this. It can store, analysis and play back information on each of these levels faster than any human can. Professionals will be able to feed advice through AI to make sure that it fits with the realities of the clients world. Yes, even the human stuff (if it has been taught correctly). 

Trust and working with someone they like – ok, so these are surely the human skills of the future?! ‘AI won’t be able to make a dent on those’. Let’s pause for a moment. Trust can be articulated as an equation. Two of the parts of that equation – credibility and reliability – are things that AI will be able to reproduce. Sure, we are seeing the impact of AI hallucinations in today’s world. But, in twenty years time, the technology is bound to have caught up. 

The next part of the equation is emotional intimacy. A uniquely human skill. Having emotional intimacy, to really dig below what is going on, is that where the good advisors step out from the crowd? Currently, that is true. And it is true that humans are better at empathy and reading between the lines than machines. BUT, empathy is a skill that is rarely taught, and in most firms, it struggles to grow. 

Then there is self-orientation, the denominator that – if present – kills trust. Machines are neutral. Humans are not. This is a big watch out for firms that want to rely on trust for value. 

Then there is something else that can get in the way. The Pinsent Mason case was not an AI problem – it was a human one. Trust eroded by a poorly supervised individual, who was afraid to admit they were wrong. Psychological safety is, perhaps, the biggest red flag here. Again, psychological safety is often lacking in firms, but rarely is it a focus for development. 

Clients want someone they like. We all, as humans, strive for human connection. We want and need to relate to those around us. This is an evolutionary driver that is unlikely to disappear in twenty years. However, paying someone just for this – looks and feels rather like paying for a friend. It is the icing on the cake in an environment where clients need to spend a lot of time with their advisors. As AI dives efficiencies and reduces the time that clients need to spend with their advisors, this human driver is likely to become less important. 

What other skills might be needed?

So, where have we got to? Empathy, emotional intimacy and psychological safety are all going to be important. BUT, those alone won’t create value. Just as the need for AI will change and evolve, so too will the need for uniquely human skills. And empathy, intimacy and psychological safety will all need to wrap around other skills that are scare in many firms. 

• The need for judgement in ambiguity – Many firms let this skill develop organically at the moment. However, more often than not we hear clients complain that their advisers are very good at giving options, but are not so good at backing any one particular recommendation. Owning the outcome in a world where AI generates the work, will be something that clients will value.
  

• Framing the problem – not just solving it. Most professionals are very good at coming up with solutions. Many ask the right questions – often with a heavy does of assumption thrown in. However, the ability to ask the right questions will become even more important. The advisor who can reframe  “this isn’t actually about X, it’s about Y” will create enormous value.
  

• Connecting across silos  - In order to frame the problem and ask the right questions, it will become increasingly important to connect across silos. Advisors who can see how legal, commercial, reputational and human factors interplay and who can help clients navigate their whole system will be valuable.
  

• Commercial courage - the ability to say no and handle conflict will become increasingly important.  AI is always agreeable. The user is always brilliant. This leads me to think that saying no, not just technically, but commercially and relationally will be key. Calling out flawed thinking, misaligned incentives, or short-term decisions that create long-term risk. This will lead to trust in humans, because ultimately trust isn’t built by being agreeable, but by being honest when it matters most.
  

• Emotional depth – Developing emotional intimacy will be important for trust, but advisors will need to go deeper. To develop empathy, not just at surface skill, but with the ability to notice hesitation, tension, contradiction and gently surface it. This is where real decisions are often made.
  

• Creating environments where the truth can be spoken Finally, as the Pinsent Masons case shows us, future risk isn’t just in bad outputs,  it’s with humans who are afraid to question them. Creating safe environments will no longer be a ‘nice to have’ it will be a must have. And remember, the last person you should ask about the water are the fish! 
  

The future of value will not sit in doing more, faster. That will be assumed. It will sit in choosing what matters, in naming what others avoid, in taking responsibility when it would be easier not to. In a world of increasingly intelligent machines, the differentiator will not simply be being human. It will be being a skilful human. If you are interested in finding out what skills you need to be developing NOW then get in touch.