Stay informed Sign up for our newsletter and be the first to know.
Sign up for our newsletter now

Alternatives

Share
Print

Dunbar’s number and the advice client quantum query

Article Image
Share
Print

in Advice, In Practice

With the mass exodus of advisers reaching its nadir, advisers are taking on more and more clients. Dunbar’s theory shows just how unsustainable this is.


As the great exodus of financial advisers continues, greater strain is being placed on the advisers who remain as they automatically inherit client books from those that have departed.

As the planning industry starts to utilize newer technologies, increased efficiency emboldens firms to take on even more clients. However, research into human psychology suggests there is physiological limit to the maximum number of clients we can handle.

According to a new study by Stockholm University, an individual human can maintain stable social relationships with about 150 people, not more. “This is the proposition known as ‘Dunbar’s number’,” the report explains. “That the architecture of the human brain sets an upper limit on our social lives”.

The Dunbar’s number is named after the British anthropologist Robin Dunbar, who extrapolated the correlation between the relative size of the neocortex and group sizes in non-human primates.

Put simply, humans can only handle a maximum of around 150 relationships in total, whether it’s Facebook, personal friendships and clients. Beyond that, it becomes difficult to keep track and remember details of each relationship.

US adviser and author Michael Kitces applied this theory to the financial planning industry, where he found the Dunbar number held true.

In his report he found that “most financial planners, even with very efficient practices, seem to ‘cap out’ at a maximum number of clients around 100-125; beyond that point (if not before), they just can’t seem to maintain the client relationships”.

Share
Print

Not talented enough: Vanguard indulges in hubris as active equity managers slide

Advice groups may still be grappling with the best use cases for artificial intelligence tools, but the ones that aren’t at least trying are at risk of being seen as behind the curve according to Complii’s Craig Mason.

Navigating market extremes: Looking beyond the conventional

Advice groups may still be grappling with the best use cases for artificial intelligence tools, but the ones that aren’t at least trying are at risk of being seen as behind the curve according to Complii’s Craig Mason.

AI in advice a matter of how, not if: Complii

Advice groups may still be grappling with the best use cases for artificial intelligence tools, but the ones that aren’t at least trying are at risk of being seen as behind the curve according to Complii’s Craig Mason.

Not talented enough: Vanguard indulges in hubris as active equity managers slide

Advice groups may still be grappling with the best use cases for artificial intelligence tools, but the ones that aren’t at least trying are at risk of being seen as behind the curve according to Complii’s Craig Mason.

Navigating market extremes: Looking beyond the conventional

Advice groups may still be grappling with the best use cases for artificial intelligence tools, but the ones that aren’t at least trying are at risk of being seen as behind the curve according to Complii’s Craig Mason.

AI in advice a matter of how, not if: Complii

Advice groups may still be grappling with the best use cases for artificial intelligence tools, but the ones that aren’t at least trying are at risk of being seen as behind the curve according to Complii’s Craig Mason.

AI in advice a matter of how, not if: Complii

Advice groups may still be grappling with the best use cases for artificial intelligence tools, but the ones that aren’t at least trying are at risk of being seen as behind the curve according to Complii’s Craig Mason.