<img height="1" width="1" style="display:none" src="https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=369136441694388&amp;ev=PageView&amp;noscript=1">

Podcast Transcript

Episode 78, Season 1

How to start goal conversations, with Patrick Flynn


Fraser Jack: 00:00:00 That process is really important if we are a goals-based advice business. You need to give some scrutiny to what the clients are telling you. And this is for a lot of people the first time that will actually happen. Hello, and welcome to the Goals Based Advice Podcast, where our conversations with the pioneers of the New World [inaudible 00:00:19] I’m your host Fraser Jack and I thank you so much for tuning in today. I would also like to thank our supporting partner, advice intelligence, for powering this podcast.

In this episode, I chat with advice innovator, Patrick Flynn. Pat has spent many years solving advisors problems by installing processes into their businesses to make everything run smoothly. He currently helps advisors in three ways, with their websites and as a consultants building systems and processes. And he’s also currently solved the, how do I help my clients discover and articulate their goals problem that a lot of advisors have been struggling with. In this episode so we find out all about the solution and why Pat, the process guy, got the inspiration to solve it. Let’s then play my chat with Pat. Welcome to the show, Pat.

Patrick Flynn: 00:01:15 Thank you Fraser.

Fraser Jack: 00:01:16 Do I call you Pat or Patrick, what do you prefer?

Patrick Flynn: 00:01:19 I don’t have a preference, but Pat seems to be what most people default to. So go with that.

Fraser Jack: 00:01:24 Okay, Pat. It’s just that I’m so used to saying Pat Flynn, based on the US guru and in all things podcasting.

Patrick Flynn: 00:01:35 Yes, he has destroyed any opportunity. I have SEO on the back of my name.

Fraser Jack: 00:01:42 It is good to have, that nine is the same as a famous person, but I guess you’re right. It’s pretty hard to have a unique brand online.

Patrick Flynn: 00:01:48 Yes. Well, as I typically try to pick apart everything, I’ve taken a look at search terms and things like that, that I might be able to do. So I’ve considered trying to rebrand with a ‘J’ in the middle or something like that, but I’m happy with Pat Flynn.

Fraser Jack: 00:02:05 Fair enough. Now tell us a bit about yourself.

Patrick Flynn: 00:02:08 So I have been in financial advice since 2005. As with most people, fell into financial advice by accident and had an interesting start to financial planning where I effectively self-taught myself financial advice because my first job was to scan documents for a financial advice firm going paperless. So that was working with Best Gardener from when he was in practice many, many moons ago.

And as I was scanning things back then, scanners were so slow that I could read the next file and read SOA’s whilst also eavesdropping on a whole bunch of advisors that were in the broader room, and really became fascinated with financial advice and the impact it could have on people. Just not just from a tax saving perspective or anything like that, but just the different types of advice that people would be giving, and the amount of hand-holding that would go above and beyond what was in the air. So I was really fascinating to me. So I’d hear all these conversations that would go on in the room, and so little of it would actually have to do with the stuff that I was reading on the file. It became a really interesting dichotomy that is sort of hung with me ever since.

Fraser Jack: 00:03:22 It’s very common, isn’t it? That the actual conversations, the actual clients, interactions with their advisor is very ... There’s always such a small part of it, and reading their file and understanding that and then working out, seeing what actually happens in real life very different.

Patrick Flynn: 00:03:39 Absolutely. So I worked in financial advice, becoming an advisor fairly quickly. And then I was absolutely comprehensively mediocre advisor. Definitely, not a claim to fame. I know something I struggled with because I’m a process guy. So everything I do, everything I see, everything I look at, I think of in terms of process and systems, which sometimes makes me prone to forgetting the people part of that. So I need to constantly remind myself to do that.

As I was working with Best, who was incredibly good with reading people, and incredibly good with helping clients to understand the deeper parts of their financial advice, everything I had to do, I had to learn manually and really try to think, “Okay, what’s happening here?” When these clients are opening up here, what’s the process, the questions that are being asked?

And some of it I was able to emulate, which is why I wasn’t a horrible advisor and I was a mediocre one. But a lot of it was really I need to build a process for what I need to build something around. So some of that can be as simple as script, some of that would be when do we go to diagrams, when do you use visual, some of it would be around body language, but there was a lot of stuff that I had to do there that was really ... They took a lot of effort for me.

And in part of that, I managed to work out that really working with people wasn’t the bit that fulfilled me personally, helping people fulfilled me. But I didn’t need to work with them to get there. So I’d really like to bring it back to process, and if I could prepare an advice document that will save people a huge amount of money, and restructure things, and make them more comfortable going forward, I’d be so excited about that. But I don’t need to see the look on their faces. I don’t need to hear about the personal impact it has. So following logic and process I figured, well I can deliver this at greater scale so.

Fraser Jack: 00:05:39 You’re the process guy that everybody wants in their business. You say you’re making a mediocre advisor but I think technically you’re very, very good advisor. You just didn’t necessarily enjoy the people conversation part of it.

Patrick Flynn: 00:05:55 That may well have been it. And even when you’re okay at something, you might be okay in a lot of things, but you don’t really enjoy them. The bits that I would enjoy when I was giving advice would be when I know I’ve created an ongoing benefit for them. So I’d know great. They came in the door, they look like trash and on paper. They fact fine look like trash, and what I’d find myself doing is going great.

If I can set them up in a way that scaled and ongoing, and creates a significant impact that’s not just in year one, but in year two, year three or four because now they’re saving tax every year or they’re saving in fees every year, or now they’re diversified where they weren’t and now they’re going to be less volatile than they were before. Then I’d say all of those is really practical benefits and that would be how what validate myself there.

But still, it wasn’t me doing as much as I could. As the business grew, and we grew quite rapidly from being one advisor with myself and a receptionist, to being six advisors of which I was one. And most I kept a small panel of my own clients. It was really looking at going well. I’ve got five other advisors here. If I can make them all more effective, then think about how many people I’m indirectly helping. And that was pretty cool.

Fraser Jack: 00:07:16 Yes. I like that helping people but not necessarily working with them directly.

Patrick Flynn: 00:07:20 That’s right.

Fraser Jack: 00:07:21 Helping people indirectly.

Patrick Flynn: 00:07:22 Yes, absolutely. There’s definitely plenty of ego wrapped up in that. It’s not a selfless thing. It would just be a pure logic. Thing is, the more people I can deliver to, the more people I can help better.

Fraser Jack: 00:07:38 Yes.

Patrick Flynn: 00:07:39 So after working in practice in that way, with a couple of steps in between and up working at Iron Hill financial advisor as a licensee, which was pretty much the dream. Because now I was delivering to 220 odd advisors or so at the time, starting out with working in technology, but really expanding that to be broader and covering the entire advice process over the time there, which was very good. And gave me a lot of insights into how advice would work, and how lots of different advisors would do lots of different things.

I’d be able to tell when, because we were at a licensee you can see when a practice’s successful in the practices and you know what to talk in what’s effective. And there are a lot of quiet achievers out there in the world of financial advice. There’s an awful lot of them. We’ve definitely got some tall poppies, and I don’t know how good some of them are. But I definitely know there’s a lot of quiet achievers. And in doing that, I’d be at great grade.

I can take a peek under the hood and say, “What’s going on here? What’s going on there? And what does this person do, and what does that person do?” And during that time there are put together a power planning team, and was managing our vast documents and have the technology under me as well. And in doing that, it’ll be great to look at the end-to-end process, which is what I’ve always wanted to do. And I’d be out there to see what’s coming in. I’ll take a look at what the power planning team have done with it, and take a look at what the compliance team thought of what the power planning team had done. And then really try to resolve that with a process standpoint.

So ideally, we try and fix it with technology, because technology is predictable and it’s cheap. If you invest in it, it’s actually quite cheap. It’s a lot cheaper than people. And then we sort of work our way back from there. Is this a training thing for like, is this a process thing? Is this training on for a power plan? Is this a training on for an advisor? Do we need to put another process or do we need to provide some more support?

Fraser Jack: 00:09:43 Now this is an interesting role for me because, you’re a licensee. It’s a mid to large licensee. You’ve got a lot of advisors that are already in process. You ever think about it where you can just like wipe the slate clean and start, If you could start fresh, would you do it that way? Would you do it completely different, everything about that?

Patrick Flynn: 00:10:05 Well, I actually had that opportunity to a large degree. So after I’d been working in the technology for some time, I’d made that process relatively efficient, but it was quite difficult to make it more efficient because the body of work that we had there had been going for quite some time. And it had suffered a lot from what I call complexity creek, where it might have started out relatively simple, but then the complaint comes in, and we need to add a paragraph here to help manage that complaint or somebody has hit this problem that review. Okay, great, we’ve added a little bit here and unless you’re constantly trying to manage that continuous improvement of keeping things simple, things always get more complex.

Fraser Jack: 00:10:53 Is this a sort of, the larger the licencee, the more complexity and the longer it’s been around the more creek we have coming into it?

Patrick Flynn: 00:10:58 100%. And also the lower the lowest common denominator that we’re trying to manage for. So there’s a lot of merit in that licensing model towards a smaller licencee where you get that balance between scale, a bit on nimbleness. But also the more aligned the people are to each other and the higher the quality, the average advisor quality, then the fewer things that are going to be there, that are there to manage a lowest common denominator advisor at the expense of advisors that are doing a great job, but now have to tick a box that they really shouldn’t have to be ticking.

Fraser Jack: 00:11:38 Yeah, and a little bit of the advisors in that group keeping each other accountable and really trying to push the standard up.

Patrick Flynn: 00:11:46 Yes, absolutely. And I think there are a number of people that are really trying to get that right at the moment. And then there’s a balancing act with the larger groups of, they have a lot of scale and a lot of resources, but some of the policies and requirements they have in place are things that are hard to apply in a haphazard way where I’m sure they know internally, this advisor over here has brilliant process. So we can relax a couple of the other things there, to make sure a client signed something that may not necessarily be required because you know for a fact that this advisor is a good advisor.

They’re having the conversations every time. They are following the conversations every time. We don’t need a signature to confirm that the clients read and understood that, because we’ve got great fall notes coming up from this advisor. But often that’s required because it’s a licencee wide policy, which comes with pros and cons, and there are a lot of pros, but there’s a lot of cons as well.

Fraser Jack: 00:12:48 So you spent a fair bit of time in a licencee really being able to say that you understand every piece of that jigsaw puzzle. And you’ve also spent some dollars advisors, spending some time with that jigsaw puzzle, and now you sort of moved out of that.

Patrick Flynn: 00:13:03 Yes. So for the last little while I’ve been doing consulting. So I’ve really been able to work with some of the firm’s that I’ve been wanting to work with for a while or wanting to really dive deep on. So I’m typically working with a smaller number of groups, definitely not looking at the one to many model there. And really just looking at groups that are doing some good stuff, but are ready for some transformative change.

The sweet spot that I’m finding so far is when you get that inflection point where what used to work quite well, but it’s now at the point where it’s not necessarily working so well, because they’ve grown and doing something yourself as an advisor is very different to leading a small team of advisors and leading a small team of support that runs that. It’s a different skill set, but it’s also, you need to now have policies, and procedures, and processes, and systems, and technology in place that you didn’t need before because the process was, this neuron talks to that neuron, and we know what’s there.

Fraser Jack: 00:14:18 So just getting this straight, because obviously consulting comes as a massive amount of stuff. You’re not going in as a business coach and saying, we should focus on these things, no hypotheticals. You’re going in as a practical guy. We want to achieve this, and you look back and go great. Well, I can see there’s probably 25 steps in there, how do I get every 25 step down in this order and actually putting in place. It’s the doing part, right?

Patrick Flynn: 00:14:44 And that’s the bit that excites me the most. So I find that’s the difference between the conversations being, you should as opposed to we should. And I really much prefer it to be we should. In some respects, it’s just about how we’re engaging and my commitment to that. But it’s also in very practical terms a lot more efficient, because if I’ve done something 10 times, 10 different practices, it’s not very hard for me to do it for you an 11th time. But if I’m saying you should get better data from your clients, you should be getting better feedback, it’s very easy for me to put together a survey, I’ve got a template, I know what to do. And I’ll get to those finicky little tidbit points because of saying, this work well in other surveys and not in others.

Fraser Jack: 00:15:33 Which I think is great, because if I do it as the first time-

Patrick Flynn: 00:15:35 That’s right.

Fraser Jack: 00:15:36 ... and you’re doing it for the 11th time.

Patrick Flynn: 00:15:37 That’s right. And it’s what advisors do in practice. And advisors do implementation. Advisors work with their clients hand in hand. That’s how I grew up in business effectively. So, that is my default setting. In the licencee, it was the same. It wouldn’t be set and forget. It would be, I come in and if I do a bit of work, or I help build a system, either individually or for a license, I’m hanging around to see if that worked or not. And if it didn’t work and it was a waste of time, then I’d hear about it. And I don’t really have a way of just sort of being a flash in the pan, sort of person. I do some older analysis work, and it can just be a case of look, you walk away with an action plan that you can implement yourself, but I much prefer when we’re working on it together, and I’m helping you get there.

Fraser Jack: 00:16:24 Now, one of the things I of course really want to talk about today and speaking of building systems, which is what you do. This is the Goal Based Advice Podcast. You’ve spent plenty of time inside statements of advice looking at people’s so called goals and objectives. And looking at them going, some of them sound like reasonable goals and objectives, and some of them just have no idea where they came from and been building systems. Tell us about the goal cards.

Patrick Flynn: 00:16:55 So I have recently launched Life Goal Cards, which is a business, and a service that’s designed essentially around making it easy for advisors to have great conversations with their clients around goals specifically. So we bring it back to the sort of couple different elements to where I came along, and how this problem became relatively not obvious. But where I reached this conclusion that we needed some more support in this area, was one at the licensee, I’d say all sorts of goals come through, and the worst one I think I ever saw was, you want a product to have a binding depth benefit nomination, or you want to superannuation fund have a binding death benefit nomination, which no client has ever said ever.

And that comes down to confusion around the education process versus goals. And what might be good for a client, because it is good for a client to have that, but that’s never going to pay what they say. But even going, even when they’re a bit better than that, there was still lots of goals that you could tell were not meaningful to the client. And so I’d be working day to day on that and trying to solve processes, and trying to seeing SOS come through, seeing what compliance have had to say about them, and looking back and going, what’s the root cause here? And how can I best resolve that? And sure there was some stuff I was able to do at the licensee, at helping that. But I always had that barring along in the background.

Then there was my background of being in many client meetings, and really having to learn how to do those things, how to have a good conversation with clients, and having to build a process so that I could have a good conversation with clients. And I never lost touch with that problem that I had to experience, I had to solve as best I could.

Fraser Jack: 00:18:56 And this is not just your problem, right? So many times advisors say, “Clients don’t know they goals, it’s so hard to clients to articulate what they want.” And when you just ask that question out of the blue, it is extremely hard. What do you want? What are your goals for the future? People are like, “Uh-Uh.” Like that moment where they might give you one or two, but it could be 30 or 40 sitting in the subway.

Patrick Flynn: 00:19:21 Especially when a clients come in. And if you think about where their brains are, and you put the client at the center of what you’re trying to do, very much a design thinking approach. Client comes in, and what are they thinking? What’s on their mind right now? Yes, okay, I am going to tell them that they are super, he’s probably going to do something about insurance. I don’t really know what I’ve got. I hope he doesn’t ask me about my budget, et cetera. And then you get to the next step, and you start saying, “Hey, what are your dreams?” The brain is not in that space. The brain is entirely fact-driven, short term, and very, very functional. And then you’re asking them to be aspirational. So they’re going to give you trash.

Fraser Jack: 00:19:59 Yeah. I find too sometimes that they want to tell you what they think that you want to hear as well.

Patrick Flynn: 00:20:06 Very much, very much. And that’s particular in the advice context. So there was another piece in this puzzle, which helped us come together. And that was my wife and I, we were doing some work with some allied health professionals. My elder son, he has autism spectrum disorder. So we were working through with his professional support network, and we really hadn’t focused in with laser focus as to what we wanted to achieve as a couple around, what do we want him to focus on? Do we want to focus on his interpersonal skills? Or do we want to focus on his language skills? Or do you want to focus on his gross motor or fine motor skills? There’s so much stuff in there. And the people-

Fraser Jack: 00:20:52 And of course, you probably want all of that?

Patrick Flynn: 00:20:55 Of course.

Fraser Jack: 00:20:56 And then what do you start with?

Patrick Flynn: 00:20:57 That’s right. And because they can only focus one thing at a time, or absolute maximum three, because my son can only focus on one or two or three things at the absolute maximum. Really, it’s one. If you really want to get that improvement, you going to focus on one. And you might try and make sure the hours don’t go backwards in time. So they put us through a process around, clarify and importantly prioritizing goals. And as my wife and I went through that, my wife actually said, “Wouldn’t it be great for advice?” And she should work with us in practice for a little while, and she had a good understanding of the advice process and it was like, well that solves a few problems, doesn’t it?

So I put together these cards. So these cards are practically 54 flash cards that are really nice cardboard, and they in person practical, tactical solution that you can use with clients to be able to sit down with them, and you just literally use these cards to represent what goals could be. There’s a whole stack of them. Some of them are intentionally really rudimentary, to sort of help people park. Some of those things that they bought they might have come to you about, but they’re not actually really important. So things like health insurance and stuff like that. They don’t know if you do health insurance or not.

And it’s in there deliberately so that they can sort of go, “ That actually isn’t a high priority for me, that’s not a goal.” And then there’s a whole bunch of other ones in there around. We have four different areas, values, growth, protection, and lifestyle. So it might be small grandkids is a goal that’s in there. It might be maintain lifestyle is a simple one. And then there’s a whole bunch of 54 across those four categories. And the process that we recommend an advisor take a client through, it’s a two step process.

We ask a client take this stack of goals. Each card represents a goal that you may or may not have. Sort them into low, medium, and high. You’ll have a few that are not applicable, we’ll just park those over here. small grandkids isn’t applicable for me. Not yet. So Park those over here, and then we would get them to go through that process. And they think that they’ve qualified their goals for you at this point.

But then it comes the trick. Will take those low and mediums, will park them over on the side. And they may still be relevant when it comes to some of the tactics and strategies that we apply. But we’ll take those high pile and then we’ll ask them to sort that pile into low, medium and high. So it may have had 10 different goals and the high priority pile, but now you’ve really got to rationalize it. And now you’ve actually got to make the decision between, do I want a deposit for a house or do I want a new car. Somethings got to give now because we’ve only got 10, we got to split them across the three categories, or is retirement really an important goal? Or is it a nice to have.

And depending on their age, it may be very, very important, maybe a high-high, or it might be a high-low because what again people themselves, they may want to have plenty money in retirement. It really doesn’t stack up against getting the house or getting the car or whatever, other lifestyle goal that might have. And then that process, that two step process, really gets them to think about it for the first time in many cases. 

Fraser Jack: 00:24:37 Having had a few goals at the cards but with certain victims that I sat down beside and Ted and by the way, we’re doing this right now, and I just went, “Okay, interesting.” All of which, by the way, actually got a lot of value out of the process. And we weren’t even in a conversation around the bias. We were just like, “By the way, I’m trying these cards on you-”

Patrick Flynn: 00:24:59 Which is actually a great test because most people aren’t expecting to talk about their goals and dreams.

Fraser Jack: 00:25:03 Yes. So personally, no one complained. And secondly, everyone got something out of it. And some of the high-medium-low sometimes it was high-medium and no. I use that term and then one person I did it on, only ended up with a few in the high pile. And I was actually ended up where we’re at right now, prioritize those 1, 2, 3, I put them in order, and I just tried some different things. By the way, that was outside of your system.

Patrick Flynn: 00:25:27 Right.

Fraser Jack: 00:25:27 But yes, there was some really good results that came back from them. And then of course, the conversations that flowed out of that, the back of it, were incredible.

Patrick Flynn: 00:25:35 And that’s what these are for. So in part there, to build some structure. So it normalizes talking about your goals and dreams in front of people. You’re sitting in an office, and you’ve had the stain attained coffee with the matching tea cups, and all that. All of this, the advice process seems very structure typically, when it’s done well. Seems very structured. And we’re now asking people to really step outside that box. If your doctor, people expect you to have tools of your trade, you’ve got stethoscope, in fact, it’s proven, they trust you more if you have a stethoscope around your neck. As an advisor or an accountant, if you’re presenting in front of a client, they expect you to have a calculator as your tools of trade.

So if you come with tools of trade in to work with them, as in here’s a pack of flash cards that we use to help extract your goals. Then it normalizes the process. This is stock standard. This is not me being weird. This is not something I made up. This is not my way of winning through this conversation and padding out my hour. This is something that structured the way [though 00:26:39]. This is what we take you through. This is our journey that we take you through.

The other bit that’s really interesting in that, is that a lot of the time, this will be an emotional journey, especially if there’s a couple in the room, which builds that emotional connection with what they’re trying to achieve and the emotional connection with the advisor. And that’s something that’s quite often not everybody’s cup of tea. And not especially advises that getting more technical, the technical requirements or educational requirements are all the greater. And as we look at how we engage with people, it’s really important to try and get down to those basics. And then this helps to achieve that. And really the strongest area of feedback I’ve gotten so far is around couples in that context.

Fraser Jack: 00:27:31 And then the next thing I did with everybody was, made them to take their own photo of the goal-

Patrick Flynn: 00:27:35 Great.

Fraser Jack: 00:27:37 ... and feminine advice scenario. Then I’m taking a photo obviously from my fall notes because that would also make a great visual for your advice, for your staff ,all those sorts of things.

Patrick Flynn: 00:27:51 Absolutely. And because the cardboard, it’s not like a piece of technology where it’s, “I wanted this to do this thing here.” And it’s like, “Well, no, you can just move the cardboard around.” And I’m a tech guy but sometimes an analog solution is the right solution. And this gives you that flexibility. So I do recommend that you take a photo. We also provide a goals report template. It’s just a fairly, simple word document. But it gives you an opportunity to take that snapshot and actually include that in what you sent back to the clients. And it has the same imagery and stuff built into different parts of the template,  so that you can turn what is just a few words on a card to capture what you flashed out in conversation.

And then we keep bringing things back to SMART goals. And whatever you have to say about smart goals, and how technically great that acronym maybe, it’s something that is relatively well understood. Not everybody knows what a SMART goal is, but a lot of people do. And if nothing else, it’s a nice mnemonic that people can remember. SMART goal is relatively memorable.

Fraser Jack: 00:28:54 Well, there’s obviously a couple of different meetings we talked about here. One is, it could be a review meeting. One is, it could be a new meeting, probably slightly different process, especially if you’re doing a review with somebody who has never done this before, it’s a new process for the advisor to bring along?

Patrick Flynn: 00:29:12 Yes. And the feedback that I’ve been getting is that, it does work well in both contexts. The new business meeting is naturally very easy to bring it in, because these people don’t know what to expect. But even at the review stage, one of the best stories I got was from an advisor who said that, handled this particular client for about eight years and she came in and he said, “This time, we’re going to do something a little bit different. We’re really going to try and map out your goals, and see how we’re tracking against your goals.”

And she said, “Okay, that’s great You can hear what it is, and I guess move into the normal chit-chat at the start of a conversation.” And during that she says, “I’ve got to tell you, I need to take out some money for a car, I’m going to get a new car, I need about $40,000 for a new car.”  Advisor says, “That’s great, I’ve been telling you to spend a little bit more money and you’ve got it there, you should do it.”

Anyway they move on. They get to the structure part of the meeting, and they go through the Life Goal Cards. During that time, he makes the observation that she didn’t put the buying new cargo in the high power. It got too high, but all of a sudden when she really went to rationalize, it actually went to high-low. So it was obviously not that bigger priority to have. So instead of the counter there to facilitate a conversation, he said, “I noticed you said you wanted to do this, but you you didn’t put it there, why was that? Just tell me more about what was going through your mind.”

She said, “Well, now that I think about it ...” Which he hadn’t really done before. “My friends are telling me I need to get a new car because I’ve been driving this old thing for 12 years, and I can afford, and should upgrade in their view, but I’m actually really happy with that car. I’m really comfortable in it. It serve me well and never breaks down. I trust it.

And the advisor simply said, “Well, if you don’t want a new car then, we’ll just park that money and as soon as it breaks down, as soon as anything goes wrong with it, will get you a new car.” But she ended up not buying a $40,000 car that you didn’t really want, because she’d gone through. And this was really the first time that she actually sat and thought about the process, and what was actually important to her. It seems obvious from an advisor’s perspective, you think about that before requesting the withdrawal, but people don’t necessarily work that way.

Fraser Jack: 00:31:34 Yes, that’s a brilliant story for a review conversation around the idea of just qualifying. What are these goals and sort of the cards do create that thought process and thinking, that extra level of thinking I guess, that’s really helpful for the advisor.

Patrick Flynn: 00:31:51 There is a brilliant bit of research from Morningstar where they said, “This is a financial planning client.” So Morningstar interviewed about, I think it was or they tested this against about 400 financial planning clients. And they got them to simply write down their top three goals on a piece of paper. Then they showed them a master list of 17 goals. This is the Mining for Goals report. You can just google at Morningstar Mining for Goals. And they gave them the 17 item list of master goals, and then said to the client, “Take a look at the 17 goals. And then reconsider your goals and your top three goals, and you can change them if you want.” And about 25% of them changed all three goals. Roughly 75% of them changed their top goal.

So if you think about that, they would literally ask to sit down and write down their goals. But until they had that opportunity to really think about it with a master list or if it was cards that operates as a much longer master list. They hadn’t really given to consideration to what their goals really were. They’re affected by recency bias, so whatever it might be, telling the person what they think the person wants to hear. And then that process is really important if we are a goals-based advice business, you need to give some scrutiny to what the clients are telling you. And this is for a lot of people the first time that will actually happen.

Fraser Jack: 00:33:27 Yes. And as you said, this is a master list of 54 of cards, rather than a master list of I think there’s 25 or so-

Patrick Flynn: 00:33:27 17.

Fraser Jack: 00:33:34 17 on the master list.

Patrick Flynn: 00:33:35 And this one is an interactive one. So they’re going through that and they’ll be a lot of things in there that, just because you’re thinking a little bit differently, you’re moving something that’s tangible, and structured, and functional in front of you, it’s a little, I would argue, this would have to be more impactful. So natural, I’ve got a bias in it, but I can’t say how it couldn’t be if you moving those sort of cards around.

Fraser Jack: 00:33:58 Well, well unless you’re a list person and enjoy reading their list-

Patrick Flynn: 00:34:01 It’s true.

Fraser Jack: 00:34:01 Then it definitely would. So you’ve obviously put a lot of research into this whole idea of how do we elicit these goals from the consumer?

Patrick Flynn: 00:34:12 Yes. Because I’m process guy. You can’t put a new process without some sort of basis. And sometimes things are common sense. And I’d probably argue this lens in the common sense bucket. But if you want to make it the best process it can be, then it’s best if it’s supported by some research. So there’s a guy called Edwin Locke, who is really led the way over the last 35 years in goal research, and he’s done some fascinating stuff. And then there’s a lot there that really, if we think about what we’re trying to achieve as advisors, and if we’re trying to achieve like some of the stuff that you mentioned all the time around goals under advice, so really trying to help clients to achieve their goals.

Then there’s a lot in goals and goal attainment that can really support the advice process. And one thing that I’ve been uncovering in my research is that, there’s a lot of this stuff that’s really statistically based. So if we think about what people have been trying to qualify and quantify in financial advice for years, which is, what’s the value of an advisor? And we’ve got the vanguard advisor alpha.

And we’ve got these different measures that are there to try and go cool, where you’re probably going to save this much in tax, and you’re probably going to do this, and you’re probably going to do that, and you’re going to outperform, and you’re not going to sell down in a trough of the market and so on. All those things are very real. But there’s something to be said whereas if your client’s goals are to achieve their goals, which is self-evident.

Fraser Jack: 00:35:49 You’d think it would be, wouldn’t you?

Patrick Flynn: 00:35:51 Yes, that’s right. But it may not necessarily be to have more money. But there is stuff that we can measure around goal attainment. So we know there’s a Dominican University study, which actually went to the bank. There’s an old Yale University or a Harvard Business Review University, depending on where you get your online myths from. That said, essentially, they’ve asked a room of the Yale students in the 50s, who knows what their goals are.

And then another question is who’s written them down? And the one guy in the room with a 3%, who had written down their goals was extremely successful. The 10% were moderately more successful and the other 87% weren’t as successful in achieving their goals. That complete harks. That story never happened. But after that got the bank, this Dominican University study actually went and explored just that.

And the difference between just thinking about your goals and the likelihood you have of achieving them in that study, versus at the other extreme end, they went through five different cohorts of people that have not just thought about it, but written them down, that makes you more likely. And in their case, it was an online survey, so it’s not even as good as sticking on your fridge, on your wall, but writing it down. You’re already well on the way to being more likely to achieve your goals. But if we can take it much further, if you put an action plan to get there, you’re much more likely and there’s lots of studies that cover that.

There’s some really good ones in the weight loss area, where if you just say, write down the goal to lose some weight, not so great. If you write down, I’m going to do 10 push-ups every morning and ten sit-ups every morning. We’re going to increase that every week, and I’m going to go for a jog, and all that sort of stuff. And this is what I’m going to do, and I become part of your goals. You get much better results. It seems obvious, but not everyone does it.

Planners and advisors are great at that. But then we can go even further and if we get the clients not just commit to a goal and having shared it with the advisor but then we’re constantly checking on them. This research was weekly checking for over four weeks. And there’s other stuff that’s demonstrated this for longer time periods and not as many checkings. But in that context, somebody was 76% more likely to achieve their goal than they were, if they just thought about it.

An advisor that tracks and measures goals, and brings clients back to their goal attainment is 76% more likely to achieve their goals. That’s way more interesting than, hey, we reduce your volatility by X and we outperform your average portfolio by Y. This is much more compelling because it actually brings it back to what matters. And if you can tell a client, just by working with me, you’re more likely to meet your goals. There are studies that support this, that mean that if you follow our process, and we’re following an evidence-based process, you’re 76% more likely to achieve your goals. That’s more interesting than advisor as far as I’m concerned.

Fraser Jack: 00:39:01 I completely agree. Not only that, but every time you see a client, you’ll have your own stats. And you’ll have your own stats when you can go, “Okay, great, we helped this amount of clients achieve this many goals because we actually wrote it down and got them at how to process in place, and started tracking them and monitoring and keeping them accountable, and then all of a sudden they started achieving them.”

Patrick Flynn: 00:39:24 For the advisors that are listening to this, a lot of them probably aren’t tracking that stuff right now. But there’s enough evidence out there, that gives you a great starting point. And then Dominican University study is a great one that you can start to refer to, just by simply saying, studies have shown if we do this, you achieve these better outcomes.

Now, there’s another really interesting part in some of the research that I’ve done about goal conversations. And there’s Derek Siver’s TED Talk that’s really, really good on this, and it becomes very interesting in the advisor context. So there’s actually conflicting research. There’s different bits of research that show that if the client was a person, a normal human, tells people that they’ve set a particular goal, it can have confounding effects. So some research will show that you get better results by having an answer, and they tie that to, you’ve now got a social impact if you don’t achieve that goal.

However, I’d argue that sometimes there is no social impact. You say, “Hey, everybody, I’m going to lose weight.” And then you don’t give them a weekly update on Facebook around how much weight you’re actually losing. No one’s actually going to come back to you a year ago. Yes, that was a bit silly, wasn’t it? So there’s some merit to that, but then there’s the stuff that Derek Silver’s was covering, was some research where when people set some goals, and announced some goals to a room in that study, then the people that made the announcement would work less towards their goal and have less goal performance, and they’d feel more satisfied. Because the whole room sort of said, “Good for you. You’re going to lose that weight.” or “Good for you, you’re going to do that study.” or “Good for you, you’re going to learn a language.”

And they’ve gotten that reward mechanism at moment zero without actually having put any work in. Whereas, the people that didn’t get the reward mechanism work harder, because they’re not going to get their reward until they actually achieve their goal. So if we bring that back to the advice context, there is something to be said about sharing a goal with someone, and there is something to be said, and that’s quite clear if we track goals, and we keep people on task, then they perform better.

So if I’m an advisor, you want to take somebody down that goal journey. Once you’ve identified their goals, you want to keep them on track to their goals, but you don’t want to positively reinforce just having set goals for the sake of having set goals. If a client says, “Great, I’m now going to put some money away, and I’ll recommend 12 months, so I can have enough money for a deposit.” Don’t give them the positive reward, the social positive reward of telling them, “That’s fantastic, I’m so glad you’ve clarified that goal.” It should be more along the lines of, “That’s excellent, we’re going to keep you on track, and we’re going to keep you on task.” Don’t reward them. There is a lot-

Fraser Jack: 00:42:20 That’s interesting because I’ve always sort of the scenario of like, I would then say, what are some of the milestones if we meet quarterly, we should be here by the end, that’s the accountability milestone. And a little bit of pat on the back, good on you for hitting that milestone, now keep going.

Patrick Flynn: 00:42:37 Yes.

Fraser Jack: 00:42:38 But obviously, keeping them focused on the end goal, or the reward on the end.

Patrick Flynn: 00:42:44 It’s interesting you say that actually, because there’s so much in this area, and I spend a lot of time looking into it. If somebody feels like they’re a little bit along the journey already towards their goal, they actually feel more motivated to get there. So 10 grand for a holiday, they’ve got two grand in a savings account. Now, that’s something that’s good to recognize.

Fraser Jack: 00:43:09 Yes, because it’s that thing in first gear. You don’t know if you can do it until a month down the track, and you’ve been doing it for months, and you think, “Oh, maybe I can do this.”

Patrick Flynn: 00:43:19 That’s right. So actual achievement towards that is a good thing to reinforce. So you do that at the review, but even if at the starting block, they actually realize “Oh, Jeez, I’m actually 10 meters down the track towards my 100 meters goal. Then that’s even more positive.

Fraser Jack: 00:43:37 Yes, it can be very, very good news. So plenty of research and obviously, clearly you’ve done a lot of it. You spend way too much time in this, in the zone.

Patrick Flynn: 00:43:45 Well, I’m just curious by nature, but it’s also about one of the journeys that I went down personally in becoming as a process guy and working with people. I’m still not great at it and I’ll have a number of former colleagues who would be nodding their head if they’re listening to this thinking now, you know, go ahead and do it. But when I work with people, I have to build processes for how I manage that.

And it took me a long time to realize that I used to be very numbers-focused, dollars-focused, minutes and hours focused. I’d look at a process, and I’d go, great. I’ve costed out the value of the advisors time, the power planners time, the CSIS time. Cool, let’s work out the most cost-effective version of delivering this outcome. Because if you look at all that, they’ll now come in a binary. Why? That’s how it looks.

However, and sometimes it’s obvious and sometimes things aren’t even close, and you get some good process improvements there, but if you look at the people part of it, then you go, “Okay, well, maybe we can get an admin. So the admin supports time is worth a third of the advisors time for argument’s sake. Then if we will take a look at that, and we go, “All right well, the advisor could have done this” And because I already know everything, they could have done it in 15 minutes.

If the admin support does the second either come to the fall notes and stuff like that will take them 45 minutes. Now we might have a business bottleneck that might drive the right decision there, but if you look at that, and it’s fairly line ball, it’s quite easy to forget that there are humans involved here. And maybe the advisor can’t stand paperwork.

In which case, there’s a there’s an engagement cost that we need to overlay that. And maybe the admin person feels really confident in working in paperwork and getting to understand the phone and all that, which case there’s a positive engagement benefit in them doing that. So sometimes it might not be such a clear trade off, maybe it takes the advisor 30 minutes to do something. And it’s going to take the admin support and do some things a little bit less clear now in terms of what’s the best dollar.

But if you start putting those people overlays, then you can get more meaningful outcomes in the longer term. And you can have the right people doing the things that they enjoy, and the right people doing the things that motivate them, and the right people doing the things that they’re good at. And going through all this research was really important for me to understand what leads to good client conversations.

Fraser Jack: 00:46:20 Yes. One of the things I wanted to told you about to before we get too far away from the gold card is, the pack of cards that you produce are quite large, the size of, I don’t know a large mobile phone if you like. Good cards, but you also have the small pack of cards as well that you brand with the advisor, and to give away or to give or to hand out to the actual client.

Patrick Flynn: 00:46:46 Yes. So we have a whole bunch of different options. So if you go to our website, which is just lifegoldcards.com it’s got a clear option that you can just buy a pack of cards, get them sent out here. That’s idea was by the way. But we go a bit deeper for those that are interested. So we have some advisors that have come to us and said, “These look great, but we want to have brand all over.” Which is great. We customize them and we can not just white-label stuff and make it look, and smell, and sound like your brain. We also get our illustrator to put in custom cards in there as well.

So there’s a particular part of your advice process or particular angle that you take, for example, you’re an estate planning specialist, then we might, instead of just we have one in there around, making sure your estate goes the way you wanted to or something a little bit more plain speaking than that. And we’ve got a little illustration there of three people fighting over a suitcase of money, which is a hard one to find a good illustration for.

Fraser Jack: 00:47:48 But yet it happens so often.

Patrick Flynn: 00:47:51 Spot on. We can go through that process and drill down a little bit more into, maybe you’ve got three or four cards that you want to have managed around estate planning, and might be giving back to the community after and might be supporting family after or might be building a legacy or something that’s a little bit different. So there’s some opportunity to customize those. And then once you go beyond just the customization part, yes, we’ve got those little playing card decks that are technically playing cards, although I don’t think you typically use them in that way, but they’re just a small pack that you can give to a client.

That comes in a lot more cost-effectively, and the idea is that, anybody who’s worked with clients will often know is that, you’re not always dealing with the sole decision maker in front of you. And those conversations that you have often continue on at home, while on truly when you’re out of the room. So anything that we can give clients to help them, reflect even further when their goals is great.

And anything that we can use to engage that absent decision maker, be it the partner, be it the husband or the wife or whomever. Anything we can do to engage them, will help them come back with better goals. So we got these little playing card versions that you can have with your brand and your details on them, and you can say, “Here, take this if you want to have a review of this at home or you want to try it again at home, because I don’t think you did the right things in the appointment. You can go nuts, if not, you can give it to a family or a friend.”

Fraser Jack: 00:49:18 Yes. And I think what I love about this is, like you said, that sometimes the decision-making might not be there, but sometimes the validators aren’t there either. And sometimes people have to go and talk to their friends and other people about the stuff that they’ve come up with, and almost justified to them. But the the scenario around, people don’t necessarily refer their advisor to barbecue because they sort of, they don’t have a conversation. That this is not about financial advice, it’s about goals. And so, this is the sort of thing that people would have conversations with, over a cup of coffee with a neighbor or whatever it might be and go, “I did this thing, I found it quite interesting and pull cards out.” Which could actually end up in a referral for the advisor.

Patrick Flynn: 00:49:59 Spot on there. If it’s all branded, and it’s consistent, and we’ve got a little insert that we put in there, which gives instructions for anybody to be able to follow the bouncing ball.

Fraser Jack: 00:50:08 The rules of the game?

Patrick Flynn: 00:50:09 Yes, that’s right. Then you should be able to get those, and I had one advisor tell me that, it almost ended up being negative because the clients end up being fascinated with them, because it was a young couple that have been married for just under a year, and they had wildly different goals. So they were some people that really would have benefited from taking that conversation home and being able to continue that.

Fraser Jack: 00:50:34 Yes. Fair enough. So, that’s good. So lifegoldcards.com?

Patrick Flynn: 00:50:39 That’s right.

Fraser Jack: 00:50:41 If anyone wants to check that out, they should definitely check that out. It’s certainly a resource that I would love to use in a practice had I been still advising. Right now, so jump on that have a look. What else have you been working on?

Patrick Flynn: 00:50:54 So, there’s my consulting work, which is really just on that practice level, and that’s very tied to each individual practice. So it’s really more, that’s something that benefits from a longer conversation that’s specific. So essentially, if you have a problem in your practice, then maybe a process could help with that. In which case, what I typically do is, I go through a diagnosis process of getting to understand your practice, typically surveying your clients, at the very least surveying your staff, potentially interviewing them, if that’s required, and then reviewing your documents and your process.

And then we typically go and restructure your process to make it more effective. We can also review your technology stack sometimes, that’s part of that sometimes that separate and go through pretty much where you build your process from the ground up. And all of this is built around the brand that presents under is called simply Kaizen, and that’s because I take a Kaizen Approach, which is the old Japanese-

Fraser Jack: 00:51:56 Continual improvement.

Patrick Flynn: 00:51:57 ... continuous improvement methodology. And that’s something that I’ve always stuck to because I’m always trying to find better ways of doing things, and I’m always trying to find ways to improve and I never stop. So we look to work with practices where we go through. We ask those questions, why are you doing things the way you’re doing them? We build a structure and then ideally, work with them ongoing after we build an action plan to make those continuous improvement [inaudible 00:52:26].

Fraser Jack: 00:52:26 So best practice obviously, you are across best practice, but you’re always looking at better, better than best?

Patrick Flynn: 00:52:35 That’s right. It’s actually been a really fun journey, because I’m working with practices the way. Everybody is doing something different, and everybody’s got their strengths. And there’s some stuff that ... And everyone presents a unique opportunity. So I’m working with one practice who I just finished their client survey and they have gotten the best NPS results ever I’ve ever seen.

Literally, it’s not a huge sample size, which is part of why they’ve got such a great result, literally one negative result, and everything else is a nine or 10. Everybody else is a nine or 10. And it’s not hard to sort of say why that’s taking place, but then the advisor has some other issues at the other end where we need to go great, we need to become a little bit more efficient. But we do not want to upset that apple cart of these clients that just hold the advisor in the highest regard.

And then on the flip side, see other things where it’s just completely, not the other end of the spectrum so to speak, but the types of problems that they’ll have are quite different. If that’s something that is of interest, then the best way to look a little bit deeper into that is to book a virtual coffee with me, which you can find at Patrickflynn.info. That’s F-L-Y-N-N, and that’s when we sort of start that discovery around what are your problems and maybe there’s something we can do, maybe there isn’t.

The other thing that I’m doing is, I’ve got a website service. So, as part of my whole thing is being a process guy. If I see something that is not working, then I try to fix it. And one of the problems that I’ve identified is that advisors don’t have good websites a lot of the time. And when I drill down into the reason why they don’t have a good website, it’ll be because my nephew built it for me three years ago, but now he’s graduated university and he doesn’t have time to fix it. I don’t even know where the logins are. Or it’ll be actually scarily, I often hear we’ve actually paid a firm to do that. That was six months ago. They built the website and now just told me to fill out the content and I need to get the content up.

Fraser Jack: 00:54:52 Yeah, the same reason, the overlying reason is because their advisor is not web [inaudible 00:54:57]. Yes.

Patrick Flynn: 00:54:56 A lot of time they’ll actually be sitting on a good website that looks pretty from a design perspective and a function perspective, but they just haven’t gotten the content in there. And then they have paid five or six grand for that. They build 75% upfront or 50% upfront, and they’ve literally just wasted that money, because they haven’t filled out the content. Part of that pricing when I looked at that, when advisors don’t have a good website, because they feel I can’t afford it, a lot of times will be because the people that they would go to, sometimes their existing clients, sometimes they have a local web design firm, they don’t have a good idea of what financial advice is, what it does. In particular, what the compliance requirements are, what a licencee would demand and so on.

So this particular tool, which is at advicewebsites.com today, has pretty much some websites that start off with a template so that you’re not paying to recreate the wheel, but then it’s built on WordPress, which allows you to do a lot with it. So you can start with not recreating the wheel, but there’s all sorts of things that you can do in a very high functionality ceiling, which allows you to really tailor them quite a lot. We charge 2200 for that, which is less than half the average sort of pass, in part because you’re not paying to recreate the wheel, and in part because we’ve really got the process narrow down, where we capture all the information upfront, and we know where that stuff has to go.

We know that we need your cell details and they’re going to go here, and we need the car details and they’re going to go here. We need to know where your FST is, and your privacy policies, and what your general advice warning is, and all that sort of stuff, and you just plug them in where you want to plug them in. And then because we’ve built a great engine behind it, they just go with it.

Fraser Jack: 00:56:46 Like you said when you’ve done something 20 times and rather than the first time.

Patrick Flynn: 00:56:51 Spot on. And especially whilst I was at the licencee where a lot of advisors would come to me for suggestions on their websites or ways to improve things and stuff like that, even before I’ve done any of this kind of work. You’d see them go back and forth with compliance and the advisor would be the middleman with compliance. So we also work with licencees, and we work directly with compliance team.

So when your website is done, we send it straight off to compliance, and we take the advisor as the middleman. When it’s administrative, and it’s a case of what we want the FSA to be a bit more prominent, then we just do it, and when it’s a little bit more of a qualified thing, then we engage the advisor, and we go cool, compliance of Z, X and Y. We’re looking at doing this or doing that.

Fraser Jack: 00:57:39 It would be easier to if you went to compliance and you said, “Here are the 10 things that you would probably require. Here they all are. This is where they live. Answering all the questions before they’re asked.

Patrick Flynn: 00:57:50 Typically, the compliance team seem to like it from what I can tell. They don’t give me that grant of feedback in terms of how much they enjoy the experience, but the idea is, it is there to support them in large part. So if we working with a licencee, it’s a license partner, then we know what their requirements are. And we have a particular structure for how we engage licencees in particular, but any licencee had a client go through this. They’re going to know that, not only are all the things and the all the basics in all the right places, they might have their own rules that go above and beyond what the basics are, which is fine.

But those basics will always be there, and in fact, the advisors can’t even get that right in many respects, because we don’t even let them not have a photo with the cell details in there. Which is great if they want to go in there and try and do some things themselves and self-serve, because they can’t even break some of the stuff. We don’t even let them. And then that’s probably the only point of restriction in there. We keep it very open and allow advisors to do as much as we can let them in there. There’s just a couple of key points particularly around the people pages and the photo, where we put some constraints in there so that they can’t get the compliance wrong.

Fraser Jack: 00:59:08 Fair enough, that’s probably a really smart thing to do, but all I could say, advisors, just web developers and designers, don’t break it if it’s working.

Patrick Flynn: 00:59:18 And make it easy for them, because I don’t know of any advisors who want to do things wrong.

Fraser Jack: 00:59:26 No, that’s exactly right.

Patrick Flynn: 00:59:29 But I’ve known plenty of advisors that have done things wrong by accident.

Fraser Jack: 00:59:31 Yes.

Patrick Flynn: 00:59:32 And being a process guy, I don’t like the look at that, so I got to fix it.

Fraser Jack: 00:59:37 Fair enough. The process can now tell us some ... So if also LinkedIn, I think probably a good way to get hold of you too, you’re doing three things, you got the cards, the Life Goal Cards, you’re doing the consulting and the website. So somebody-

Patrick Flynn: 00:59:51 Yes, LinkedIn is a great way to catch me or Twitter as well. So @patrickflynn, FP on Twitter or LinkedIn/Patrick James Flynn, but just type in Patrick Flynn and you’ll find me.

Fraser Jack: 01:00:02 Fair enough. Thank you so much. Now, a couple of questions before we let you go. What tips do you have to financial advisors out there at the moment, thinking about getting into advice?

Patrick Flynn: 01:00:11 About getting into advice, the biggest thing would be that Stephen Covey, 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, myth number two, begin with the end in mind. A lot of the time when I’m working with practices, especially ones that are not necessarily clear on where to go, it becomes very hard to see the end-goal. Whereas, if you really go, “Okay, five years from now, this is the kind of practice I want to be.” Then you can make sure that everything you do along the way is a baby step towards that goal. And everybody is got that precious right now. I got to [inaudible 01:00:48] right now. I’ve got to find some centers of influence that will actually support me right now. That’s all cool, not taking away from that, but if you’ve got that end in mind, then every step along the journey becomes clearer, more obvious.

Fraser Jack: 01:01:05 I feel that, that’s probably good tips advice for all advisors actually, not just ones getting into it but those that are looking at change, those that are looking at what to do over the next few years, and pretty much everybody.

Patrick Flynn: 01:01:17 Well, I couldn’t agree more. And especially if you’re in that existing sort of part, I think one of the other things that could be quite relevant would be looking at the time frames of what you’re doing, because everybody wants a quick fix. But if we look at the types of processes that we typically have in business, and we think, how much time can we save, how much cost can we cut out, or how much risk can we reduce, or how much of the client experience can we improve. If we’re thinking beyond three month time frames, and we’re really thinking towards that five years sort of time frame, then again, investment in spending time and money and improving your own process and improving your practice becomes really obvious.

  And when you see advisors treat things like technology as an expense, then that’s when you say ineffectiveness, because they’re not looking at that poor time frame, they’re looking at as an expense. And then all of a sudden, you’re going to be stuck on the treadmill as opposed to looking at the people cost, which is really the bigger expense in any practice. Absolutely, any practice. The people expense, by far and wide outweighs the technology, but the technology impacts how they work every single day.

Fraser Jack: 01:02:39 Yes, fair enough too. The last question, you know this one is coming. What advice or tips would you give yourself if you go back in time?

Patrick Flynn: 01:02:50 I would have liked to have worked out the people part a lot earlier. I would have liked to have worked out the impact of people on the system and the people are essential to get anything to work. I wish I’d worked out that an awful lot sooner. I also would have liked to have perhaps been a little bit bolder at some point, a little bit braver at some point, and that’s taken time. I still have a way to go on that, but-

Fraser Jack: 01:03:22 Well, but that’s the intro of the new I suppose?

Patrick Flynn: 01:03:27 Yes. Very much, and sometimes I feel like I need to be certain of my facts before I’ll go out and do certain things. Or sometimes I’ll be a little bit too worried about the impacts of some of the stuff that I’ll do, whereas looking back if I’d been a little bit bolder, maybe I could have prevented problems before they happened.

Fraser Jack: 01:03:47 Fantastic. Well, I look forward to the next 12 months of you being bold and brave. You put yourself out there now. You’ve got some great offers for the market and I really do hope that people get in touch with you, and continue this conversation. So thank you so much for coming on the show.

Patrick Flynn: 01:04:03 Thanks Fraser, great to be here.

Fraser Jack: 01:04:04 If you haven’t already, I’d love you to subscribe to the podcast on your podcast platform of choice. And to continue the conversation, head over to our social media channels. We’ll catch you next time.



Disclaimer: This document is a transcription obtained through a third party. There is no claim to accuracy on the content provided in this document, and divergence from the audio file are to be expected. As a transcription, this is not a legal document in itself, and should not be considered binding to advice intelligence, but merely a convenience for reference.