If one partner died tomorrow, would the other understand the financial plan?

Financial advice may do more than improve tax planning, investment choices and retirement outcomes. Research commissioned by Aberdeen suggests it could also help narrow the persistent financial literacy gap between men and women. The industry enjoys discussing inclusion in broad terms; asking who understands the plan and who actually speaks during the review meeting tends to be rather more revealing.

Among women who use a financial adviser, 28 per cent achieved a ‘very good’ financial literacy score, compared with 15 per cent of women without advice. Six in 10 advised women recorded a ‘net good’ score, against 48 per cent of those who didn’t receive advice. The figures for men showed little difference: 69 per cent of those using an adviser achieved a net good score, compared with 71 per cent of those without one.

The research doesn’t prove that advice caused the improvement among women. People who seek professional help may differ from those who don’t in other important ways, and the findings shouldn’t be stretched beyond what they show. Even with that caveat, the contrast suggests advice could help women develop the knowledge and confidence needed to make decisions about saving, investing and retirement.

Verona Kenny, chief distribution officer at Aberdeen Adviser, said: “Women who have a financial adviser are far more likely to demonstrate strong financial literacy than those who don’t, suggesting advice can act as an important bridge between people and the knowledge they need to make confident informed financial decisions.

“As an industry we need to take these stats seriously and by seriously I mean do something about them.”

Who is missing from the conversation?

A sensible place to start is inside the existing client bank. When advising couples, firms should consider who receives most of the questions, who understands the pensions and investments, and who would be left trying to piece everything together after separation or bereavement. If one partner can explain the plan while the other merely knows there is one somewhere, the relationship is not as inclusive as the paperwork may suggest.

Properly involving both partners means more than occasionally aiming a technical question at the quieter person. Advisers need to build a relationship with each client, check understanding separately and make sure both sets of priorities influence the plan. Where appropriate and with the client’s consent, involving adult children could also help them avoid years of uncertainty, costly mistakes or doing nothing because finance has been made to sound unnecessarily impenetrable.

This doesn’t require turning review meetings into classroom lessons. Good advice builds understanding through clear explanations, fewer assumptions and enough space for clients to admit when something hasn’t landed. Technical expertise is valuable, but considerably less so when only one person in the room feels able to use it.

Giving every client a proper voice takes time, particularly when firms are trying to involve people who have traditionally sat at the edge of household financial decisions. The Timebank can handle the technical analysis and suitability reports behind those conversations, leaving advisers more time to make sure everyone in the room is heard and understands what has been agreed.

The financial literacy gap won’t disappear after one review meeting. Advisers can, however, stop quietly reinforcing it.