Calculated Response
Split Decision
Russ Alan Prince and Hannah Shaw Grove
10/01/2007

For the affluent, developing a comprehensive estate plan with an experienced legal professional can require days of work and cost tens of thousands of dollars—but not having a plan in place and operational at death can cost more in time and money in the form of wealth that is not transferred as desired, unnecessary complications and taxes for the estate’s heirs. Financial experts generally agree that having an estate plan represents a thoughtful and pragmatic step toward ensuring that the greatest amount of assets makes it to the designated people and organizations.

Unfortunately, many plans never become real, getting derailed before lawyers draft and execute the documents and create the necessary trusts, partnerships and other legal structures. We spoke separately to trusts-and-estates attorneys and affluent individuals to compare their views on this phenomenon and understand why this happens.

The Attorneys’ Perspective
In 2003, and again in 2006, we conducted separate surveys with trusts-and-estates attorneys who had designed and prepared estate plans for wealthy clients that never reached implementation. Given the amount of effort and expertise it takes to develop an estate plan, as well as how strongly these attorneys profess their commitment to the welfare of their clients, we were surprised to find almost no concern among these lawyers for their clients’ lack of follow-through. In 2003, just 17 percent of them expressed concern; the number dropped sharply to about 7 percent three years later (Exhibit 1).

Next we asked about the type of follow-up initiated by the attorneys to encourage plan implementation. Roughly 80 percent of attorneys who expressed concern about their clients’ inaction sent letters or emails suggesting clients come in to sign their documents. Very few—only 13 percent—initiated personal contact, either by calling or arranging a meeting (Exhibit 2). While these figures seem grim, the lack of follow-up by attorneys was startling. More than 80 percent of them matched their clients’ lack of action with their own and did nothing to promote further activity. Just 17 percent sent letters and emails; only 1 percent placed phone calls.

The reasons behind the attorneys’ apathy lie in the very nature of the trusts-and-estates business. It is largely transactional, meaning that lawyers work on a specific project or plan. Estate plans are long-term initiatives—designed to work over a period of many years—so after the lawyers complete a project or plan, they must find new clients. In effect, they close the books and move on without dwelling on whether their plan ever comes to fruition. Furthermore, once a client pays his bill, making sure he signs the documents becomes less important.

While this seems to be the status quo, it is an unsustainable situation for both attorneys and wealthy individuals who need estate-planning expertise.

The Clients’ Perspective
To understand why many wealthy individuals choose not to follow through on their estate-planning efforts, we constructed survey samples in 2003 and 2006 with families that had done just that. Each of these families had a net worth in excess of $10 million.

The overriding reason cited in both studies was that the estate plan did not satisfy their goals, wants and objectives (Exhibit 3). Many clients begin the process not knowing exactly what they want—or are unable to express it clearly—and hope that their attorney will be able to guide them through the procedures and help them crystallize their priorities and values. In the case of abandoned estate plans, the trust-and-estates attorneys clearly proved unsuccessful in identifying their clients’ core issues, but proceeded with plan development anyway.

Furthermore, most families felt uncomfortable with the attorney they had retained, which had a direct impact on their interest in pursuing the process. Clients typically express such unease when they perceive service professionals as poor listeners. Interestingly (and perhaps related), dissatisfaction among clients has escalated in the three years between studies, while concern among attorneys has diminished.

It’s worth noting that roughly half of families surveyed in both studies felt their estate plans were too complicated to implement. Ironically, most affluent families expect sophisticated and intricate strategies from their attorneys in order to protect their wealth. Nevertheless, many T-and-E lawyers clearly fail to assess their clients’ level of knowledge about estate planning and their comfort with complexity, and do a feeble job explaining abstract legal concepts to laypeople.

Poor Communication Undermines Efforts
Adding insult to injury, it seems that many trusts-and-estates lawyers possess further weaknesses when it comes to client interaction. Most of the families surveyed said they were unable to determine if the final plan presented by their attorney was, in fact, going to help them accomplish their objectives (Exhibit 4). Their lawyers did not (or could not) explain how the plan would work and their role in the process. Clients felt further alienated by the lawyers’ overuse of legal jargon and condescending behavior. Further analysis revealed that the perception of arrogance came about from consistent use of legal terminology, a "presumptuous air of authority" and an unwillingness to devote extra time to helping clients understand the details of their plan.

Across the board, clients rated trusts-and-estates attorneys much lower in 2006 than they did just three years earlier, underscoring the lawyers’ inability to communicate the value of their work and the financial pressure facing attorneys with a largely transactional business model.

A Lose-Lose Situation
As noted previously, affluent clients assume great risk when they choose not to implement an estate plan. Our research shows, however, that trusts-and-estates attorneys also have much at stake when they leave their clients unsatisfied.

We all recognize that one bad experience can have an insidious and lasting effect and, in this case, can cast a pall over both the attorney and the law firm as a whole. Very few of the clients surveyed expect to work with the lawyer or the firm again—and a similarly low number would refer a family member, friend or business associate to the firm (Exhibit 5). What’s worse is that, instead of simply choosing to work with another attorney or directing their colleagues and confidants elsewhere, these dissatisfied clients will advise other people to avoid the professional or firm altogether.

These simple actions, while imperceptible to the trusts-and-estates attorney, can have a compounded effect and cause business to flatline or suffer. The structure of the trusts-and-estates business has become less client-oriented in recent years, and, therefore, less client-friendly—while the wealthy have become more astute and demanding purchasers of professional services.

Russ Alan Prince is president of Prince & Associates, a market research and consulting firm for the affluent, and the author of more than 35 books on related topics. Hannah Shaw Grove, an author and columnist, is an expert on the behavior, concerns and finances of affluent consumers.