In this column I dive into new research that flips the usual conversation about trust in financial planning. We often talk about how clients need to trust their advisers, but a recent paper in Judgment and Decision Making shows that the reverse matters just as much. When advisers signal that they trust their clients, the advice carries more weight and people are far more likely to follow through. It reminded me of how medical researchers look at adherence. Advice only has value if you actually act on it. If a planner recommends boosting your monthly contributions and you ignore it, the plan falls apart. Trust from the adviser seems to make the advice feel more respectful and collaborative rather than top down.
I also explore what this means in a world where advice is coming from everywhere, including AI tools and finfluencers with huge followings. Human advisers can show trust and build a relationship in a way an algorithm cannot, which might explain why people find certain creators so persuasive. They make their audience feel heard. But feeling trusted is not the same as receiving good guidance. In the column I encourage readers to check both boxes. Notice whether the adviser, planner or creator treats you as a capable partner. Then pause and scrutinize the advice itself. A bit of healthy pushback can strengthen the relationship and help you separate genuine guidance from something that only feels supportive.
Preet Banerjee
Discussion