It was a dark and stormy night...How many stories start like that? Actually, it was a dark and stormy night when I flew my small plane into Jacksonville International Airport on Christmas evening. With storm cells all around and clouds only 500 feet off the ground, I used my instrument landing system to approach and safely land. Each day, hundreds of similar flights, conducted under instrument flight rules (IFR), have predictably positive outcomes when trained pilots flying well equipped aircraft use the air-traffic control (ATC) system. This system is comprised of expert professionals who work with ground-based equipment to provide weather and routing directives based on a complex mix of rules and regulations.

Jimmy Doolittle pioneered flying solely by reference to instruments in 1929. Today, flying IFR is commonplace, and the latest avionics vastly increase the safety of every trip.

Now, before you think I'm just an airplane nut gone round the bend, read on...

Flying IFR has evolved from following a compass to using the ATC system, which is designed to deliver passengers and cargo safely from point A to point B. Everyone reading this column has been in the ATC system and benefited from it.

Today, general aviation accidents in the ATC system are more common than those involving commercial air transport aircraft. Why? Causes can be loosely sorted into three categories: less stringent formal standards and less requirements for training general-aviation pilots in decision making; inappropriate pilot response in difficult situations due to lack of training; and fewer backup systems.

IT'S NO ACCIDENT

In a sense, financial planning is like flying: the goal is to move a client from one point to another safely and securely without financial "crashes." This calls for proper decision making by the relationship manager--the senior planner in-volved with each client. To ensure a safe journey 100% of the time, formal standards for and training in decision making are necessary.

Does this always happen? I wanted to think so. However, as our firm started to take on more clients, I carefully examined our processes and found inconsistencies.

For our growing firm to get more clients financially between points A and B, I had to hand off certain decision-

making responsibilities to less experienced professionals. The question was, how could we do this without having the younger decision makers "crash" when they were "flying IFR"--that is, when the entire planning picture was unclear.

Using the ATC analogy, we reduced the odds of a financial planning crash by:

• Developing formal standards and training in decision making;
• Communicating what to do and whom to consult when faced with unusual, unfamiliar or difficult issues or situations; and
• Using technology to maximize effectiveness and minimize errors.

The ATC analogy helped us create systems to make sure every client engagement results in appropriate, financially sound recommendations. As a result, every financial planning "flight" concludes satisfactorily. Here's one such process our firm has developed.

FLYING WITH "FEPA"

In 2004, seven of our clients died. While the pain of losing that many friends was intense, it was worsened when we found that one surviving spouse didn't have all the necessary documents relating to a very long-standing trust. After trying to track down microfilm at a law firm the client had not dealt with for 25 years, in a state where she no longer lived, and dealing with a trustee she'd never met, we realized that we were flying blind.

We hadn't been involved in creating or maintaining this trust, but it was our duty to help the widow nonetheless. The trip was an eye-opener.

As a result, I gathered our planning teams and examined our own estate-planning processes. We decided to develop a system to review every client, using a standardized, comprehensive process. We named it FEPA: formal estate planning analysis.

While there are similar elements to almost every estate plan, such as a will and retirement-account beneficiaries, clients have a range of individual situations. Thus, FEPA had to be comprehensive--yet flexible enough to cover every conceivable situation our clients might face. We have modified it along the way as incremental improvements took place.

FEPA uses analytical procedures, meetings and a "product" in the form of a comprehensive notebook. The tabbed notebook helps organize the information, making the whole process more palatable to clients and easier on us.

There are several parts to FEPA:

Findings. We start with a comprehensive review of documents, paperwork, accounts and products, such as insurance policies. To gather the information, we developed an eight-page checklist, which we mail to the client as "homework." The list contains a minimum of 89 items. A client is unlikely to have all of them, but we check each one anyway. We created a template to ask questions about each document, and the results become formal findings appearing behind a blue tab. This is similar to an aviation preflight checklist. Copies of related documents follow in 12 yellow-tabbed sections.

Recommendations. In most cases, once a problem is clearly defined the solution becomes apparent. The same is true in estate planning. Once we have analyzed a client's situation, understood the issues and delineated the goals, our planning teams can readily develop recommendations. These are presented in a green-tabbed section.

However, when planners and clients face unusual situations or cloudy issues, answers are not always clear. In these cases, planning teams will consult with the vice president of planning or with me to map out the best "route." If I don't know, I call an outside expert for help, just like the ATC system requires.

Survivors' guide. At the end of the notebook is a distinctive red-tabbed section entitled "Survivors' Guide." It's designed to be used should a spouse, partner, family member or other individual involved in the estate plan die or become incapacitated. The directions spell out the steps that should be taken, and serves as a letter of instruction that few clients ever take time to draft without prompting. This is more post-meeting homework for clients to modify as necessary.

CD. Finding information in a complex estate plan including dozens of documents is, at best, daunting. We simplified this process for those who favor plastic over paper by providing a CD with a PDF copy of each reviewed document which sits in the front pocket of the notebook. A client can review documents anywhere, anytime on the CD.

FINAL APPROACH

A FEPA is just one example of a system designed to ensure that you're not flying blind, and that every client's financial planning flight is safe and successful. Here are some points to keep in mind when you're using the process in your own firm:

• Use technology to minimize errors and maximize effectiveness. What is state of the art today, won't be tomorrow. Similarly, we know FEPA will have to evolve over time.
• Develop formal standards for training and decision making. FEPA is one example of a growing set of complex processes we have developed. Even so, it won't get every client from point A to point B without another key ingredient-good decision-making skills, which come with time and experience.
• Know what to do when you're faced with an unusual or difficult situation. Blundering your way through an unfamiliar problem while you're mid-flight may lead to a crash. Develop a network of experts to help you-just like pilots using ATC do.

If you feel like part of your advisory practice is in the clouds, maybe it's time to take a lesson from the flying professionals. Develop and use checklists, procedures and techniques to make sure each engagement with a client leads to a successful outcome. Happy flying!

Glenn G. Kautt, CFP, EA, is president of The Monitor Group, a wealth management firm in McLean, Va. He can be reached at kautt@themonitorgroup.com.

(c) 2006 Financial Planning and SourceMedia, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

http://www.Financial-Planning.com http://www.sourcemedia.com