"They who know the cost of everything, know the value of nothing”. - Talking QInvest 3rd and Final

QInvest was destined to end the day integration with QSuper was decided. Looking at it now, it was the inevitable outcome.

Culturally, operationally and philosophically, they are polar opposites.

Consider this:

QSuper is a successful, well operated Superannuation fund. Its ongoing success depends upon reliably managing high volume processes and delivering consistent standardised solutions.

QInvest was a successful, well operated Personal Financial Planning Practice. It’s ongoing success depended on reliably consulting with people face to face, getting to know and understand them and being trusted with their more confidential and personal information to then produce a unique, tailored financial plan.

The things that make QSuper great don’t apply, or largely do not apply to QInvest. Equally, the reverse applies.

Let’s look quickly at some specifics:

QSuper has a large IT division keeping about 1000 staff operational. Most of these 1000 deal directly or indirectly with the day to day transactions of more than 500000 members. Geographically, there are only 3 locations.

The necessary structure of an IT division required to look after a large number of people and members is quite different to the more tailored needs of Professional Financial Planning.

As hard as QSuper IT tried and as committed as they were, QInvest would surely have absorbed time and expense that far exceeded it overall impact on the QSuper Group. They also had to consider 9 separate geographical locations.

Human Resources and associated policy was another challenge.

The skill sets and personality needs that make for excellent QInvest recruits are quite different to those required for QSuper. Several unfortunate appointments resulted.

QInvest was much smaller and before integration had it’s own HR area. Understandably, this was able to be far more nimble and responsive than the much larger QSuper HR. This is not a criticism, but an understandable reality based on size.

I recall a mind numbing conversation with a Senior QSuper HR Leader. QInvest and QSuper had quite different maternity leave policies with one being clearly more beneficial than the other.

Many months in to integration, QInvest had been absorbed in to a more cumbersome and less flexible remuneration and reward process however addressing maternity leave was progressing at a snail pace or (I suspect) not at all.

In discussing the concerns around this, I was treated to a long rant about the difficulty involved in deciding what to do with maternity leave. This rant included citing as an example the problem presented by staff fresh fruit deliveries. QInvest had fresh fruit delivered monthly whereas QSuper received a delivery 4 weekly. (or it might have been the other way around)

The fact that these 2 issues were considered comparable staggered me and that each was equally difficult to resolve was disheartening.

Eventually, and after much damage to morale and the creation of further suspicion and dilution of trust, the maternity leave question was resolved to the benefit of all. I have no idea and like most, did not care what the resolution was to the fresh fruit dilemma.

I also believed HR lack of understanding and lack of appreciation for QInvest differences were reflected in several senior staff appointments.

In my opinion, the first unfortunate appointment was the Chief Manager in 2012.

Sure, he came credentialed and was experienced, enthusiastic, well travelled and determined. His bank background meant the focus would be on cost rather than value.

There is a wise saying:

“They who know the cost of everything, know the value of nothing”.

He set about fulfilling his mantra of delivering more with less. He preached lowering the “cost to serve” while never seeking to understand just what service was valued.

The second unfortunate appointment (in my opinion) was Head of Advice in 2017. I will refrain from sharing my opinion and the opinion of others concerning this appointment. Except to say it was a surprise to see what values seemed to be important to QSuper.     

I think I am correct in saying he departed after about 12 months. I suspect by then QSuper was losing its appetite to seek a sustainable operating model for QInvest.

There are other factors as well.

Horizon was a large project aimed at stripping cost. Many talented committed people worked incredibly hard to deliver an outcome within a time frame they said was half what was needed.

Errors were made in the costings of a key service and base figures were overestimated.

Significantly, 6 months after the start of implementation, the majority of recommendations were discontinued, re-designed or significantly diluted.

I am in no doubt at all that QSuper had totally honourable and long term intentions for QInvest. Equally, I do not believe the differences between what is a successful superannuation fund and a successful Personal Financial Advice business were ever understood, by either QSuper and QInvest.

With each successful conclusion of a piece of the integration puzzle, the end of QInvest drew closer and inevitable.

I praised the professional staff at QInvest in part one and will conclude by doing so again.

The ability of the Financial Advice, Para Planning and Client Support Teams to put aside their own concerns and pressures and to continue providing a professional, quality reliable service to clients has been exceptional.

The commitment to clients has been unparalleled and like so many things, it is perhaps only now as the days tick away to the end of QInvest, will the absence of a Personal Financial Advice service be truly and fully appreciated.

Finally, to all my former colleagues at QInvest, thank you for having me as part of your world for 7 years. It will always be a period of time I am proud of.

 
I consider you granted me a great privilege having me along for the ride.