I read a slightly odd and very worrying article on the social media platform Twitter / X the other day. Some of you may have seen it…

An airline supplier was showing a pilot for the airline some new software they were rolling out.

The pilot could not fathom some of the outputs on the screen but then announced that it did not matter, in any event, as pilots could not see the top lines of the screen anyway.

This caused consternation. He explained it was because they keep the Heads Up Display (the HUD) on at all times. This again caused surprise, as the supplier assumed that this tool was used only for take off and landing and the pilots did not look out of the window during the flight but just relied on the computer.

There is a lot of stupidity to unpack in these examples but the biggest single question is this: How on earth do you develop a multimillion dollar bit of software without ever speaking to those who use it, or even sitting in on a number of actual flights to see what really happens? And that gave me pause for thought.

How many new developments, tools and upgrades do we, as IFAs and Financial Planners, get presented with every month? And how many are actually useful or worthwhile?

Would I be harsh in suggesting that 90% of these are developed and launched by people – well meaning and highly competent people – who have never, ever met an advised client, given advice or even sat in an IFAs office?

We attended the LangCat’s  ‘Home Games 4’ last week, where AI and technology was the main theme. We were struck by the fact that the most useful software, the stuff we could see ourselves using, was actually developed by financial advisers themselves.

It's sad to report that much of the other stuff was either totally inappropriate for small firms, or – even worse – a clever solution in search of a problem. And pretty much all of these other companies had clearly been nowhere near an IFA’s office.

We have had the same conversation with platforms and other providers over the years. We have asked them “How does this change that you are making help us or our clients?” The usual answer is: “I have no idea.” At no point in the project was any user or client consulted in any way, as far as we can see.

So here is my challenge to all the software companies, product providers, journalists and regulators: You think you know how our businesses should work better than us. You think you know what our clients want better than us. That’s fine – you are entitled to that opinion.

But what would it be worth to you to just check? To speak to us and real life clients? What might the upside be?

When aeroplanes go wrong, it's very visible. When software and platforms go wrong, the damage is invisible, but it can cause serious problems. 

Challenge issued. Who will accept?

Phil Billingham FPFS CFP Chartered Financial Planner, Chartered Fellow (Financial Planning) is a Financial Planner and a director of Perceptive Planning, a Chartered Financial Planning firm based in London and Essex. https://www.perceptiveplanning.co.uk/

Biography: Phil joined the profession in 1982 and is a past director of the Institute of Financial Planning (IFP) which merged with the CISI in 2015. He is a past member of the Financial Planning Standards Board (FPSB) Regulatory Advisory Panel. He is a specialist in helping advisers cope with regulatory change and has worked with advisers, planners and regulators in the UK, Europe, USA, Canada, South Africa and Australia. He writes this column most months for Financial Planning Today.