The Wilson Group

The consequences of different paying methods towards financial advisors

Marketing Research project

Maastricht University School of Business andEconomics Maastricht, 12th of December Study: International Business Course code: EBC2009 Tutorial group: 12 Research group: C Balashov, K. Es, van R.A.R. Hoebert, M.J.J. Staats, P.R.W. 6003043 569550 6001467 6001760

Table of Contents

Executive summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 3 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..4 Research method and data collection ................................ ................................ .................... 5 Research Question 1 (Compare paying methods) ................................ .............................. 6 Research Question 2 (Trust towards the paying metho ds) ................................ .............7 Research Question 3 (Trust and likeliness) ................................ ................................ .........8 Research question 4 (Financial sector) ................................ ................................ .................9 Research Question 5 (Gender) ................................ ................................ .............................. 11 Research question 6 (Educational level) ................................ ................................ ........... 12 Research question 7 (Age) ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 14 Research Question 8 (Income) ................................ ................................ ............................. 16 Research question 9 (Nationality) ................................ ................................ ....................... 17 Limitations of the research ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 19 Conclusion and recommendations ................................ ................................ ...................... 20 Literature list ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 22 Appendix A ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ . 23 Research Question 1................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 23 Research Question 2................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 23 Research Question 3................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 24 Research Question 4................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 24 Research Question 5................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 25 Research Question 6................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 27 Research Question 7................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 28 Research Question 8................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 31 Research Question 9................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 31 Appendix B ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ . 33 Appendix C ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ . 35

2

Executive summary Thi research deals with the consequences for the financial advisors of the government¶s policy to change the provision based paying method towards a paying method where the customers directly pay the financial advisor for the advice.

In order to research this issue, nine research questions were developed and statistically tested for significance. Subsequently was set up with twelve questions, this questionnaire (Appendix B) was done by means of an online questionnaire. A total of 141 participants was achieved. Our respondents consisted mostly of two nationalities, namely Dutch and German.

In this research there are several limitations. It mostly consists of young people, which might not be the most suited target group for financial advisors in the short term. Additionally, only two testable nationality groups are considered. This is a weak aspect, since the culture of German and Dutch people do not differ that much.

The findings of this research are; first, people are more likely to turn to a financial advisor in the new case that he or she is paid by the customer, rather than by the provider of the financial products through provision. Second, perceived trust of the customer towards the advisor is bigger in case the advisor is paid by the customer, than paid by the provider of the financial products. Third, if the perceived trust of a customer towards a financial advisor is high, the likeliness to go to a financial advisor is high as well. Fourth,trust towards the financial sector is not an influential variable concerning the preference towards both paying methods.Fifth, contrary, to the old situation, in the new situation males are more likely, than females, to turn to a financial advisor. Sixth, that educational level does not make a significant difference in preference for any of the two paying methods. Seventh, age of the customer was an influential variable in the old situation, but is not anymore in the new situation. Eight, income was of influence in the old situation as well, but not anymore. Ninth, it is found that nationality does not make a significant difference in preference towards any of the two paying methods.

To conclude, the new policy towards the financial advisors does influence the sector in many ways, different customers, probably more customers, a chance to expand abroad, but the Wilson Group should pay special to retain and improve their trust image.

3

Third. trust and age are tested. in this way the company gained direct experience in this market and is therefore able to offer consumers reliable and high quality advice/services. was founded in 1976. This research assumes. such as assurances and mortgages.. (Alphen. To investigate this statement nine research question have been developed. the Alternative and the Null Hypothesis are presented. Second. In 2001. the problem statement of this research is: Whether the buyi per hour opposed to by provisions paid by the provider of the financial product. To be able to get the necessary data to statistically answer the research questions a questionnaire was conducted. Consumers can turn to the Wilson Group for a range of financial services. in the beginning only an insurance company. which is included in the appendices. The new policy is directed towards establishing a more objective environment in the financial sector of the Netherlands. Since then the company subsequently has developed from a one-man business into a medium-sized company with more than 5. 2010) Whereby. The broker¶s office arised by an acquisition of Heijloo&Molkenboer Van GerwenMakelaars. a listing of the according 4 ¡  preference of costumers changes. in order to know if they have a significant impact. Each of the nine research questions are dealt with in the following manner.000 acquaintances. the Wilson Group expanded its business range of activities by acquiring a broker¶s office. (Wilson Groep) The main problem the research deals with is new regulations in the financial sector concerning financial advise in the Netherlands. Several other variables like education. van F. First. there is a brief explanation why it is important for the research to have this research question. A new police will be established in 2013. if their advisor charges the customer . which enforces financial advisors now to charge their customers a payment per hour when they provide an advice. this policy of payment should have an effect on the frequency of visiting a financial advisor for a customer.Introduction The Wilson Group. the financial advisors were paid previously by the provider of a financial product on a provision if the customer chose the specific financial product as a consequence of the received financial advice. income. Consequently. These research questions will deal with the issue of whether people are more willing to go to a financial advisor when he is paid by the hour or by a provider.

Hence. causal research. the statistical output is described and last.. this research solely consists of primary data. second. it can be used everywhere so it is not limited in terms of geographic and the data is instantly available and ready to use. For this research the consumer survey instrument was an online questionnaire. Longitudinal design monitors responses made from the same person over a period of time. Since the data does not have to be collected this research method can save a lot of money and time. the used statistical test is stated. but for another problem (Solomon et al. this research uses a cross-sectional design. Fourth. Research method and data collection For a marketer there are two different types of researches available to gather the necessary information. This research is using the descriptive research method. Primary research means that the data needed is specifically collected for this purpose. since it uses much larger sample size than the other two methods. Fifth. These questionnaires have some huge advantages for example they are basically for free. consequently.. it is completely free of interviewer bias. This was not possible for the research. Also. This research did not have the chance to use secondary data. by the use of a consumer survey instrument to systematically collect the responses (Solomon et al. 2009). Descriptive research is divided into two categories cross-sectional design and longitudinal design. most of the data collected with this method is of quantitative nature and therefore. and last. the outcome is discussed and a short conclusion based on the outcome is drawn for the specific research question. 2009). more accurate to use. On the other hand there are also some disadvantages. Primary research is divided into three categories: first.questionnaire questions and their measurement scale is provided. descriptive research. The researchers can not completely control who is participating and thus can not be sure if the respondents do understand every question in the right way. Secondary research is the use of data which has been p reviously collected. which is characterized. 5 . exploratory research.

the null hypothesis states that there is no relationship between likeliness to go to a financial advisor. than to go to a financial advisor that is paid by the provider of the financial products? Consequently. therefore it provides strong evidence for the alternative hypothesis.1 and 1. instead of by the provider of the financial products. a possible cause might be the differencein perceived trust 6 . we take the population mean of the output from question 4. the research stated two questions in the questionnaire. (Table 1. A possible reason for the change might be. As stated earlier. that in the case the financial advisor is paid by the provider. the test reveals a significance level with a p. The Null hypothesis is rejected and the Alternative hypothesis is confirmed. In order to find whether there is a significant relationship in the investigated data. which is applied as the test value for the output from question 3. namely question 3 and question 4. This research assumes that the last argument is stronger and thus comes up with the following research question: Is the customer more likely to go to a financial advisor if he is paid by the customer. than to go to a financial advisor that is paid by the provider of the financial products? For the input. H0: The customer is less likely to go to a financial advisor if he is paid by the customer. It can also be reasoned in another way. thus customers could be more likely to go to a financial advisor.2. thus lowers the boundary to go to a financial advisor. might be more independent and.6241. the consult is free of charge in a direct way and. The findings confirm in conclusion that the customer is more likely to go a financial advisor if the financial advisor is paid by the customer for the advice. since the financial advisor paid by the customer.Research Question 1 (Compare paying methods) The governments introduction of the new payment policy in the financial advisor sector may result in the change of customer`s behaviour in regard to visiting a financial advisor. than to go to a financial advisor that is paid by the provider of the financial products? From the research question the following Alternative Hypothesis can be stated: Ha: The customer is more likely to go to a financial advisor if he is paid by the customer. (Appendix B) To check the hypotheses the research uses one tailed one-sample ttest for the stated interval questions.000.value of 0. Appendix A) Consequently. namely 4.

In order to research this. as the result shows (Table 2.05. As a result the Alternative hypothesis is: Ha: Perceived trust of the customer towards the advisor is bigger in case the advisor is paid by the customer.towards both paying methods. it is important to test whether there is a change in trust in the financial advisor. than paid by the provider of the financial products.2 in Appendix A). has been achieved. Consequently the null hypothesis will be the opposite: H0: Perceived trust of the customer towards the advisor is not bigger in case the advisor is paid by the customer. Sig. the coming research questions deals with this issue.1 and 2. This is based on the assumption that financial advisors that are paid by the customer are more independent and objective.05 and. than paid by the provider of the financial products. (Appendix B) To test the question a one-sample t-test is used.000 < 0. in the case when the financial advisor is paid by the customer. 7 . opposed to by the provider of the financial product. thus whether the objective of the government. This would implicate for the Wilson group that there is more trust in a financial advisor that is paid by the hour.So the new policy is actually in favour of the Wilson Group. The questions from the questionnaire used to test these hypotheses are 5 and 6. 0. to increase trustworthiness towards the financial advisors. the significance level is lower than 0. when the advisor is paid by the customer. Therefore it can be stated that: The Null hypothesis is rejected and the Alternative hypothesis is confirmed. Therefore it can be concluded that the objective of the government is achieved. rather than paid by the provider of the financial products? In the research it is assumed that the trust in a financial advisor is bigger. Research Question 2 (Trust towards the paying methods) Due to the changes in the policy towards financial advisors as described in the introduction. thus the null hypothesis can be rejected. The research question is: Does perceived trust of the customer towards the advisor increase. In case they will be paid by the customer and. their measurement scale is interval.

7.1 and 3. Therefore the research question is as follows: Is there a relationship between perceived trust in the financial advisor and the likeliness to go to a financial advisor? The research assumes that there is a relationship between perceived trust in the financial advisor and the likeliness to go to a financial advisor. (do not trust. Further investigation of the output reveals that there is indeed a significant difference between the 8 .2. Appendix A) already reveals quite a difference for the two groups in terms of the mean likelihood to go to a financial advisor. (do trust. or unlikely) Old value 6. to check the data and test if there is a significant relationship.Research Question 3 (Trust and likeliness) This research question tries to determine whether or not there is a significant influence of trust on the likelihood to go to financial advisor in general.10 turned into new value 2. This relationship is based on the assumption that people share more and will more easily accept advice or information who the customer trust.5 turned into new value 1.4. Consequently. It is based on the assumption that trust to any kind of advisor is quite important. To check the hypotheses the research uses the twosample t-test. that the perceived trust is higher in that case.2. In order to have a sufficient test. The according questions from the questionnaire are 1 and 2 (Appendix B) The measurement scale of these questions are both interval.9. since it can be concluded from research question 2. H0: There is no relationship between perceived trust in the financial advisor and the likeliness to go to a financial advisor. or likely) A first look at the output (Table 3. the output of question two has been downgraded in the following manner: Old value 1. The outcome is important for the financial advisors in order to know about the urgency for them to create a trustful image towards the potential customers and whether people are more likely to go to a financial advisor if he is paid by the customer. the alternative hypothesis is as follows: Ha: There is a relationship between perceived trust in the financial advisor and the likeliness to go to a financial advisor. Logically out of the alternative hypothesis follows the null hypothesis that states that there is no relationship.8.3. rather than a person that is low in trust.

025. This research tries to find out if this distrust plays a significant role in whether a client chooses to go to a financial advisor who is paid by the customer himself and/or to a financial advisor who is paid by the provider of the financial product e. Ha: Trust towards the financial sector influences the buying preference towards financial advisors paid by the customer and/or a financial advisor paid by the provider of the financial products. Thus. that people share more and will more easily accept advice or information from a person who the customer trust. the null hypothesis states trust in the financial advisor does not influence the buying preference towards financial advisors paid by the customer. there has to be a reduction of trust in the market and its products. A plausible explanation for this outcome could be.g. like stated earlier. Therefore this research states the following research question: Does trust towards the financial sector influences the buying preference towards financial advisors paid by the customer and/or to paid by the provider of financial products? The assumption is that trust in the financial sector influences the buying preference towards financial advisors paid by the customer. it can be stated that: The Null hypothesis is rejected and the Alternative hypothesis is confirmed. Therefore.groups. This implicates for the Wilson Group that they have to be totally aware of their trust image and try to increase it and probably put in as a key objective for the following years. rather than a person that is low in trust. Consequently. H0: Trust towards the financial sector does not influence the buying preference towards financial advisors paid by the customer and a financial advisor paid by the provider of the financial products. 9 . Research question 4 (Financial sector) This research question is based on the assumption that. this is stated in the alternative hypothesis. Since equal variances can be assumed it can be seen that the two tailed significance is almost zero and therefore lower than 0. due to the current crisis on the international financial markets. the bank.

This seems to support the alternative hypothesis. the trust in this sector does not significantly influence the buying behaviour towards financial advisors paid by the customer and/or financial advisors paid by the provider of the financial product. A possible explanation for this outcome could be that a financial advisor is not perceived as a part of the financial sector and consequently. it can be concluded from the data output that there is no significant influence of trust in the financial sector on the buying preference towards financial advisors paid by the customer. Therefore.025. add up the answer choices ³mostly distrust´ and ³somewhat distrust´ to get the distrust group and add up the answer choices ³mostly trust´ and ³somewhat trust´ to get the trust group. The first test examines the relationship between questionnaire questions three and seven. The Levene¶s test for equality of variances suggests that equality of variances can be concluded. respectively. (Appendix B)All three questions have answer options so that the resulting data is interval.457. 10 .2. (Appendix B) The output shows that there are 51 participants in the distrust group and 44 in the trust group.4.025 and therefore. (Table 4. in a way that it harms them. the null hypothesis cannot be rejected. The significance shown in the data output is 0. Appendix A) Consequently. which is the test the research uses to test for significance. thus the alternative hypothesis can not be confirmed. (Table 4.994 this is again not lower or equal to 0. it might be recommendable for the Wilson Group to actively work on the image that they are not part of the financial sector.The according questionnaire questions to answer this research question are questions 3.3409. Appendix A) The null hypothesis can not be rejected and. This is achieved by sorting out the neutral answers.9804 and 6. 4 and 7. Given this. In this case the significance level is 0. Question 7 is downgraded so that there is distrust and a trust group. The means are 5. The same applies for the case if the provider of the financial product pays the advisor. not significant. in order for the results to be significant this number should have been lower than or equal to 0. This is a necessity in order to perform the independent two-sample t-test.

than females. 4 and 10. A possible effect of this lack of experience might be that they are more indifferent about it.047 < 0. based on a p-value of 0. because they never experienced any consequences of the different paying methods. Appendix A) 11 . This assumption is based on the fact that women might be less dealing with financial products and.047. Sig. The two categorical variables are gender (Male/Female) and likeliness to go (Unlikely/Likely). thus have less experience.Research Question 5 (Gender) Gender is a factor that could influence the willingness of a customer to go to a Financial advisor or not. In this research there is a focus at whether the likeliness of going to a financial advisor. The data for the test was obtained from the questionnaire questions 3. 0. the null hypothesis will state the opposite: H0: Gender of the customer does not influence the preference to turn to a financial advisor who is paid by the hour and a financial advisor paid by the provider of the financial products? To test used in the research is the Chi-square test for independence. therefore. males are more likely to go to a financial advisor. is influenced by gender Consequently the research question will be. As can be seen from the test we can reject H0.3. when he is paid by the hour.2 and 5. As a result the alternative hypothesis is: Ha: Gender of the customer does influence the preference to turn to a financial advisor who is paid by the hour and/or a financial advisor paid by the provider of the financial products? Following.05 (Table 5. the conclusion is gender is a significant variable. As can be seen. Does gender of the customer influence the preference to turn to a financial advisor who is paid by the hour and/or a financial advisor who is paid by the provider of the financial products? The assumption here of the alternative hypotheses is that gender does influence the preference. Question three¶s and question four¶smeasurement scale is interval and the measurement scale for question ten is nominal. First the scale of likeliness was downgraded from first being from 1 to 10 to now 1 being unlikely to go (former 1 to 5) and 2 being likely to go (former 6 to 10). when this one is paid by the hour or the provider.

investigate whether the new regulation of payment policy might result in different perceptions among different education groups the following research question will be focused on: Does educational level of the customer influence the preference to turn to a financial advisor who is paid by the hour and/or a financial advisor paid by the provider of the financial products? 12 . it is no wonder that these low likelihood values are not of significant impact. A possible explanation could be that historically speaking the men was always in charge of the household¶s money. to go to a financial advisor who is paid by the provider of the financial product. the likeliness to go to a financial advisor who is paid by the provider of the financial products. The finding that there is no significant difference between men and women in the old situation can be explained when looking carefully at the outcome. is now much more likely to go to a financial advisor.850 > 0. Research question 6 (Educational level) The inquiry to research the difference in likeliness among groups with different educational background to go to a financial advisor is a valuable contribution for the Wilson group.05 (Table 5. males. It is common knowledge that people from different groups of education level have different attitudes and maybe different stereotype perceptions towards the financial sector as a whole For this reason in order to . the test is not significantSig. The Null hypothesis is rejected and the Alternative hypothesis is confirmed. The results are strongly in favour of the initial idea of the research that men are actually more likely to go to a financial advisor. This can be explained by the increased trust in the financial advisor operating under the new policy. as it can enhance the knowledge about its customer base.5.For the second part. Hence. Consequently. Appendix A). this new policy is indeed a huge improvement for the Wilson Group since their target segment. From an historical point of view it only seems logically that males are more likely to go to a financial advisor due to the facts mentioned above. it is only logical to see a financial advisor in order to obtain help in this field.4 and 5. It can be seen that both genders are really unlikely to go to a financial advisor in the old situation. 0. Since financial products increasingly become more and more complicated. So there is no significant difference of the likeliness between males and females.

It is a one-way ANOVA test. our alternative hypothesis is stated as follows: Ha: Educational level of the customer does influence the preference to turn to a financial advisor who is paid by the hour and/or a financial advisor. educational level. Furthermore this relationship is based on the assumption that people of different educational groups will have different preferences in their choice of payment policy of the financial advisor. Therefore. and the amount of groups is three. question 3.hence there is only one factor. educational level. the variance of the educational level is taken and compared with the variability within each of the educational groups. µsecondary school¶. µpractical education¶ and µhigher educationµ. In order to test the hypothesis the ANOVA test has been used. as presented in the descriptive output table below. the three samples are independent of each other. 4 and question 8 are used. The dependent variable is the likeliness towards either of the paying methods. H0: Educational level of the customer does not influence the preference to turn to a financial advisor who is paid by the hour and a financial advisor paid by the provider of the financial products? For the input. Furthermore. (Appendix B) the independent variable µeducation level¶ is recoded into three categories with distinctions into: moderate education. between the customers` educational level and the preference to turn to a financial advisor. The analysis of variance concludes that there is no significant difference in the likeliness to go to a financial advisor among different groups of education for both of the paying methods. The ANOVA test has been chosen. In order to find whether there is a significant relationship in the investigated data. To test the hypothesis the inquiry uses one-way ANOVA for the stated ratio questions. since the input is ratio data. 13 .This research assumes there is a relationship. paid by the provider of the financial products? Consequently the null hypotheses will state that there is no relationship between the customers` educational level and the preference to turn to a financial advisor in their choice of payment policy. high education is the former µundergraduate university¶ and highest education is µpost-graduate university¶. influencing the preference towards the two paying methods (the continuous dependent variable).

thus the alternative hypothesis can not be confirmed. 0.2. These experiences might influence the preference as well. since they are not that much limited in terms of money. which is based on customers of different educational groups. The implications are probably advantageous for the Wilson Group. Appendix A) Sig. The null hypothesis can not be rejected and. though depending on the experience in which way it 14 . these implications reveal that the Wilson Group can create a diversification in their customer composition. the following research question will be investigated: Does age of the customer influence the preference to turn to a financial advisor who is paid by the hour and/or a financial advisor paid by the provider of the financial products? One can reason that age could have a significant influence on the preference of the two paying methods. Appendix A)Therefore. Furthermore.Sig. (Table 6. older than 40 years have a better income. It can be concluded that there is no significance difference between groups differently educated. The variable age might be of some value for the Wilson Group in order to better target their clients.728 > 0.098 > 0.05 for the likeliness to go to a financial advisor that is paid per hour by the customer. So older people will be more likely to turn to a financial advisor who is paid by the consumer itself per hour.2. for this age group this should not be an obstacle. To research the prescribed issue. The output shows that Wilson Group should not experience any changes in their customer base after the introduction of the new payment policy. Another reason might be that older people are more likely to have had experience in receiving financial advise.05 for the likeliness to go to a financial advisor that is paid by the provider of financial product. The first reasoning could be that people. Research question 7 (Age) This research question deals with the importance of age concerning the preference between the two paying methods for financial advisors. It could be argued that in the case in which the advisor is paid by the customer directly. 0. (Table 6. than younger people will.

Furthermore. 0. hence there is only one factor (age) influencing the preference towards the two paying methods (the continuous dependent variable). (Table 7. the respondents were put into 3 age groups. The ANOVA test has been used. the three samples are independent of each other. It can be concluded that there is a significant difference. They have the highest incomes and children that are already somewhat older. 0. which of the majority still studies.05. rather than knowing that there is a difference. for question three and four it is interval. The first consist of people that are 16-23 years old. For the Wilson group it is probably more valuable to know in which age group the difference occurs. The last group consists of people that are 41-80 years old. The null hypothesis expects that the variable age has no significant influence: H0: Age of the customer does not influence the preference to turn to a financial advisor who is paid by the hour and/or a financial advisor paid by the provider of the financial products. (Table 7. (Appendix B) The measurement scale for question twelve is ratio. It is a one-way ANOVA test. 4 and 12. Appendix A) There is no significant difference in preference in the new situation among the age groups.05. in this group most people are graduated.257 > 0. Sig. 15 . To test the hypothesis the ANOVA test has been used. Sig. adolescents. Only based on common knowledge the following alternative hypothesis can be stated: Ha: Age of the customer does influence the preference to turn to a financial advisor who is paid by the hour and/or a financial advisor paid by the provider of the financial products.011 < 0. The input for this test consists of questionnaire questions 3. Appendix A) The Null hypothesis is rejected and the Alternative hypothesis is confirmed.influences the decision. The second group of people are 24-40 years old. since the input from questions three and four is interval and the respondents are divided into three age groups.2. In order to be able to do the ANOVA test. might have children and are most likely employed. in the preference to go to a financial advisor that is paid by the provider of the financial product among the different age groups.2.

4 and 8. They will buy more often a house and can take more care of pensions. (Table 7. the null hypothesis states that the current monthly net income is not an influential variable.Therefore this research also conducted a Tukey and Donnett test. since the old payment method does not apply anymore. Research Question 8 (Income) This research question deals with the question whether or not the current monthly net income of the household is an influential variable. (Appendix B) 16 . in order to see where the preference differs. Therefore the following research is stated: Does the current household¶s monthly net income of the customer influence the buying preference towards a financial advisor paid by the customer and/or a financial advisor that is paid by the provider of financial products? We assume that the current monthly net income is an influential variable and therefore this is our alternative hypothesis. Based on that the following statement can be done: People from the age group 16-23 are significantly more likely. Ha: The current household¶s monthly net income of the customer influences the buying preference towards a financial advisor paid by the customer and/or a financial advisor paid by the provider of financial products. Consequently. than the age group 24-40 to go to a financial advisor that is paid by the provider of the financial product.3 Appendix A) These findings actually have no further implications for the Wilson Group. It is based on the assumption that wealthier individuals must have a greater need for more complicated financial advice opposed to lower income classes. The according questionnaire questions for this research question are 3. H0: The current household¶s monthly net income of the customer does not influence the buying preference towards a financial advisor paid by the customer and a financial advisor paid by the provider of financial products.

Examining this output further reveals a different picture. the output confirms the alternative hypothesis. The statistical output shows that for one case. One group with monthly net income per household of under 3000 euro. The output shows a significance level of 1. the customer pays the advisor. Looking at the means of ³Likelihood to go to a financial advisor. Hence. A possible cause for this outcome could be that the lower income group is actually in need of financial advise. compared to the higher income class. that is paid by the provider of the financial product´ it can be seen that both groups are rather unlikely to go. In order to use this test there had to be formed two groups from the results of question eight. Therefore. which represents the lower income class and one group with more than 3000 euro to represent the higher income class. by having an office it can serve this market as well.1 and 8. (Table 8. it might be interesting for the Wilson group to expand abroad.1% which strongly supports the alternative hypothesis. Since the test is two-tailed the significance level on each side is 2. Research question 9 (Nationality) The European market is getting more homogeneous due to EU regulations. (Table 8. but can not afford this kind of service if they have to pay for it directly. In order to investigate the impact of nationality the following research question is stated: Does nationality influence the buying preference towards financial advisors paid by the 17 . thus less costly. the provider of the financial product pays the advisor. since they both are below five on a scale of one to ten.5%.All these questions have an answer option so that the measurement scale is interval.2. current monthly net income per household is not an influential variable. Wilson group could in order to deal with this fact. Another fact that enhances this possible movement is the fact that much Dutch people move to Germany close to the border of the Netherlands. Appendix A) For the case. make their advice cheaper for poor people that are most likely seeking for basic advice.1 and 8. Therefore: The Null hypothesis is rejected and the Alternative hypothesis is confirmed.2. To check for significance. Appendix A) It shows that the lower income class is significantly more likely to go to a financial advisor who is paid by the provider of the financial product. which can be given by a financial advisor that is less experienced and. a two-sample t-test has been used.

4 and 11. First test: 0.118 > 0. or at least the nationalities Dutch and German do not 18 . (Appendix B) The grouping variable is nationality. It can be concluded that nationality. but since the group that were unlikely to go to a financial advisor that is paid by the provider is bigger. instead of likely in the variable before.4 Appendix A). experiences or economic factors of the country. variable likphnew). In order to have a sufficient test variable. data received from question 11 is nominal. Consequently. thus not representative. The null hypothesis expects that nationality of the customer does not have an influence: H0: The nationality of the customer does not influence the buying preference towards financial advisors paid by the customer and/or a financial advisor that is paid by the provider of the financial products. Answers on questions 3 and 4 are interval data.The test itself did not provide outcomes that were significant for either of the paying methods. (Appendix C) The second variable is similar. The input data are the answers on questionnaire question 3. Reasons might be different culture. the group µother¶ has been left out. The first variable has the values of 1 and 2. since that group was smaller.719 > 0.3 and 9. The numbers only were assigned to respondents that were likely to go to a financial advisor (µif¶ case.05 (Table 9.customer and/or a financial advisor that is paid by the provider of the financial products? This research assumes that there is a difference between the nationalities.2 Appendix A) and second test: 0. this research states the following hypothesis: Ha: The nationality of the customer does influence the buying preference towards financial advisors paid by the customer and/or a financial advisor that is paid by the provider of the financial products.05 (Table 9. Therefore: The null hypothesis can not be rejected and. there has a to be a new variable. namely nationality. thus the alternative hypothesis can not be confirmed. where 1 is Dutch and 2 is German. To test the null hypothesis the research conducted a Chi square goodness-of-fit test. Because of this we had a bigger group and. The only two groups are µDutch¶ and µGerman¶.1 and 9. thus a more reliable test than in case we only looked at the people that were likely to go. since the size was only 7 and. the respondents only received a number in case they were unlikely to go. The new variables are called µnationlikeph¶ and µnationunlikeprov¶.

due to the fact that this age group in most of the cases is not in need of financial advise.g. The sample limits the research in two more ways. the results from the ANOVA test are not that powerful anymore. The reason can be that the culture of both countries is quite similar.make a sufficient difference for both paying methods. they are probably the future customers and. Consequently. but this research is still valuable for the Wilson Group. This more or less excludes some older age groups. However. For the Wilson group it means that for a possible expansion to Germany differences in the buying preference is not a substantial problem. financial advise. Since the Dutch and the German culture do not differ a lot from each other it is not a surprise that nationality is not a significant influential variable. there are less than 20 participants in two of the three age groups. To confirm this outcome the research should be performed again with a broader range of nationalities. The sample not only mostly consists of younger participants. e. the vast majority of the participants are either Dutch or German. thus important for the future of the Wilson Group. This leads to the conclusion that the majority of the participants are students and this again might not be the most important group for a research about financial advise. First. These two groups account for more than 95% of all participants. yet. Limitations of the research This research has some limitations. Also younger participants might not have a lot of experience with financial advisors. One of the reasons for the low mean age is that for obtaining the questionnaire answers the research solely relied on online questionnaires. 19 . The first and most important one is that the sample might not be very well suited for this research. Since the research deals with a quite narrow range of products. Second. it could be a pitfall that the sample mostly consists of younger people. It can be concluded that there are several limitations. but also mostly of well educated and low income participants.

Contrary to this thought this research shows that trust in the financial sector does not influence the preference for the two paying methods and does not change the likeliness to go to a financial advisor. household¶s net income and nationality. According to these three findings. but according to the findings of this research it had no effect on the likeliness to go to a financial advisor. it can be concluded that the main objective. namely increase the trust in the financial advisors had been accomplished. age. Indeed. it is correlated. does increase the likeliness to go to a financial advisor. educational level. that are paid by the customer. since in the last years the trust towards the financial sector has declined. In line with the issue stated before. only educational level did not show a significant difference towards preference for the 20 . one could wonder if trust in the financial sector as a whole is of importance to the Wilson Group. which they ask advice about. Whether the financial advisors are re ally more trustable and if they are more independent will be seen in the future. rather than paid by the provider of the financial products. From the first research question it can be stated that people are more likely to go to a financial advisor if he is paid by the customer. namely gender. The third research question tests this issue. According to the results. Higher trust towards the financial advisor. The second research question concludes that people perceive a higher trust towards financial advisors. In order to provide some more information about the customer base for financial advisors. this research highly recommends the Wilson Group to pay attention to the perceived trust of the customers towards them and try to improve their trust image. this research posed several questions concerning demographic aspects of customers. Therefore. According to this there could be a relation between these two findings and. This is actually a positive conclusion for the Wilson Group. That is a good message for the Wilson group.Conclusion and recommendations According to this research the governments policy to change the paying method for Financial advisors has much impact on the financial advice market. thus that higher trust is positively correlated with higher likeliness to go to a financial advisor. Therefore the Wilson group should stress the point that they are not a part of the Financial sector that has the bad image. but that they are more willing to advice you in an honest manner. rather than paid by the provider of the financial products.

so the Wilson Group can also serve this segment. their questions are less complicated. it can be concluded that nationality of the customer does not have an effect either. Therefore. who is paid by the provider. since they are in need of only the basic products.Furthermore. since the preference for the paying method is not different in Germany opposed to the Netherlands. This means that the Wilson Group should even more focus their marketing efforts towards this target group. But both groups are still more likely to go to a financial advisor in the new situatio and. 21 .two paying methods. Furthermore. Probably. than the age-group 24-40. opposed to people with higher incomes. less experienced employees can be used because they are less costly and will have sufficient knowledge about the basic products. though the test was only done for the Dutch and German nationality. are more likely to go to a financial advisor. it can be concluded that males are more likely to go to a financial advisor if the financial advisor is paid by the customer. The main finding of this research is that trust plays a major role in the likeliness to turn to a financial advisor and consequently should try to pay special attention to this issue. Therefore. it is highly recommendable for the Wilson Group to analyse the possibilities to expand their activities to Germany. thus the n Wilson Group should not pay special attention to this finding. This is probably because they are less likely to afford the financial advice if it has to be paid directly. Additionally. For these consults. the research provides evidence that people with lower incomes. who is paid by the provider. Other results from the research are that people in the age-group 16-23 are more likely to go to financial advisor. younger. it is recommendable for the Wilson Group to make some special tariffs for people from the lower income group.

R.volkskrant. V. Barnes. G.Hill.. Solomon.W.. New York: McGraw.In 2013 verbod op provisiehypotheken. Real Decisions. Marketing Research and Cases( 4th ed). Retrieved 11 December 2010. Marketing Real People. van F.Literature list Alphen.W.. B.wilsongroep. First European edition. Mitchell. (2009). Retrieved 30 November 2010 from: http://www. (2010).nl/vk/nl/2680/Economie/article/detail/1032478/2010/10/12/In- 2013-verbod-op-provisie-hypotheken. (2010).. from: http://www. M.Volkskrant.. E. Stuart. Pearson education Wilson Groep.dhtml Department of marketing & supply chain management.nl/page/18 22 . Marschall.

Appendix A esearch Questi n 1 Table 1.2 23 .1 Table 2.2 esearch Questi n 2 Table 2.1 Table 1.

Research Questi n 3 Table 3.2 Tabl ¤£¢ .1 Table 3.1 Table 4.2 Research Questi n 4 Table 4. 24 .

Table 4.2: Gender * Li eliness to go to a financial advisor that is paid by you per hour ¥ 25 .1 Table 5.4 Research Questi n 5 Table 5.

3: Gender * Likeliness to go to a financial advisor that is paid by you per hour Table 5.Table 5.4: Gender * Likeliness to go to a financial advisor that is paid by the provider of the financial product 26 .

Table 5.5: Gender * Li eliness to go to a financial advisor that is paid by the pr ovider of the financial product Research Question 6 Table 6.2 ¦ 27 .1 Table 6.

1 Table 7.Research Question 7 Table 7.2 28 .

3: Post Hoc Test 29 .Table 7.

5 30 .4 Table 7.Table 7.

1: Chi-S uare Test.Research Question 8 Table 8.1 Table 8. Frequencies § 31 .2 Research Question 9 Table 9.

Table 9.3 Table 9.2 Table 9.4 32 .

Since then the company has grown from a one-man business into a medium-sized company with more than 5. 10 highest likeliness) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (Please 2. On a scale of 1 to 10. including assurances and mortgages. how likely would you go to a financial advisor? circle. The Wilson Group was founded in 1976. On a scale of 1 to 10. On a scale of 1 to 10. Ditonderzoekwordtuitgevoerdvoorniet-commerciëledoeleinden en kadert in eenonderwijsopdracht. in the new situation the advisor has to be paid by the consumer that is asking for advice. On a scale of 1 to 10. how likely would you go to a financial advisor if he is paid by the provider of the financial products that you ask advice about? (Please circle. Consumers can make an appeal to the Wilson Group for different financial services. 10 highest likeliness) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 5. 10 highest trust) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 33 . On a scale of 1 to 10. 10 highest trust) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6. 10 highest likeliness) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4. how much do you trust a financial advisor that is paid by you for the advice? (Please circle. we would like to thank you for your participation in our survey. On a scale of 1 to 10. how much do you trust a financial advisor that is paid by provider of the financial products? (Please circle.Appendix B Questionnaire Maastricht University urvey: Before we start. 3. how likely would you go to a financial advisor if he is paid by you for the advice? (Please circle. 1. 10 highest trust) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (Please Imagine your government is planning to change the policy towards financial advisors. The data that we obtain from you is anonymous and will not be used for other purposes than the Maastricht University survey. In the old situation the financial advisors were paid by the provider of the financial products. It started as an insurance company. how much do you trust a financial advisor? circle.000 acquaintances.

namely: ___________________ 34 . What is your age? ______ years Other. What is your gender? Female Male 11. What is your household¶s current monthly net income? Between ¼0 and ¼1500 Between ¼1501 and ¼3000 Between ¼3001 and ¼4500 Between ¼4501 and ¼6000 More than ¼6001 9. What is your nationality? Dutch German 12. Ausbildung) Higher education (HBO. How much do you trust the financial sector towards financial products? mostly distrust somewhat distrust neutral somewhat trust mostly trust 8. What is the highest educational level that you finished or currently doing? Secondary school Practical education (MBO. Fachhochschule) Undergraduate university (Bachelor) Postgraduate university (Master) 10.7.

. that is paid by the provider of the financial product...¼4500 4 = Between ¼4501 . 10 = Really likely 1 = Reallydistrust . . the Financial products.¼3000 3 = Between ¼3001 . Trust in Financial advisor 1 = Really distrust paid by you (per hour).Appendix C Question nr.. 10 = Really likely 1 = Not likely . Likelihood to go to a financial advisor. that is paid by you (per hour).. 10 = Really trust Trust towards Financial 1 = Mostly distrust sector 2 = Somewhat distrust 3 = Neutral 4 = Somewhat trust 5 = Mostly trust Monthly net income 1 = Between ¼0 and ¼1500 2 = Between ¼1501 . Trust in Financialadvisor CodingInstructions Respondent nr. 10 = Really trust Trust in Financial advisor 1 = Really distrust paid by the provider of . (N-1) 1 = Not likely . Variable name in P ID Likfa Label in P Identificationnumber Likelihood to go to a financial advisor.¼6000 5 = More than ¼6001 Highest level of 1 = secundary school education 2 = Practical Education 3 = Higher education 4 = Undergraduate university 5 = Postgraduate university Gender 1 = female 2 = male Nationality 1 = Dutch 2 = German 3 = Other Age In years 35 . 10 = Really trust 1 = Not likely . 10 = Really likely 1 2 Trustfa 3 Likph 4 Likprov 5 Trustph 6 Trustprov 7 Trustfin 8 Netinc 9 Educ 10 11 Gender Nation 12 Age Likelihood to go to a financial advisor..

36 .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful