Episode 1.4 with Tanya Staples

Stream this episode and others in this series on Spotify.

Text transcript

Kevin Press: 

Welcome to the Canadian Advisor.cast, a podcast dedicated to financial advisors and the people that work with them. My name’s Kevin Press. I’m Editorial Director of Advisor.ca. My guest today is Dr. Tanya Staples, Certified Financial Planner, Professor of Financial Planning and Research at the School of Business at Conestoga College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning. This fall, she completed her doctorate in Personal Financial Planning from Kansas State University. Her thesis is entitled “Exploring Gender Differences in Retirement Preparedness Behaviours in Canada: A Health Belief Model Approach to Understanding Perceived Motivators, Barriers and Behavioural Moderators.” You can find it on the Kansas State University website. Tanya has also studied women’s place in the financial planning industry. Welcome, Dr. Staples. It’s great to see you, and congratulations. This is really a wonderful accomplishment. 

Tanya Staples: 
Thank you so much, Kevin. I’m really happy to be here, and I’m happy our paths have crossed again as well. 

Kevin Press:  

Yeah, you and I kind of grew up in the group benefits/group retirement world as part of the business that not all financial advisors are familiar with. How’d you enjoy it, and how did it prepare you for what you do now? 

Tanya Staples: 

I loved it. I must admit, I was obviously young and fresh into the industry at a time where there was lots of support for continuing education, and so I pursued my CFP at the time in the firm. There wasn’t someone to oversee the financial planning for the individual members that exited out of our pension plans. And so, that was an opportunity for me to step into that role. And I, really, once I started working with individual clients, financial planning itself had always fascinated me. I loved the idea, even though that’s not what I did in my undergrad or in my master’s, but I think there’s still a connection through that whole labour studies piece that I looked at in older workers. I think that was the connection. And then once I realized I could actually help individual Canadians, I’ve loved being in the profession ever since and pursued my CFP right away. 

Kevin Press:  

You rose pretty fast, too. You were a Vice-president, Business Development, at Corporate Benefit Analysts up until about 2008. Do I have that right? 

Tanya Staples: 

Yeah. Yeah. 

Kevin Press:  

Tell us what happened next. 

Tanya Staples: 

So, I had my second child, my son, complicated pregnancy, complicated delivery. He was a little guy, born a bit early. And so at that point in time, my husband and I made the decision that I would kind of consult part-time basis. We were doing some executive health through his practice, and so I was providing some financial wellness services to executive members, sales teams, their employees, so still in that financial planning space. And then my husband’s sports medicine clinic was doing the executive health piece internally. And so, through that program allowed me to be at home with Jules and also be able to still feel involved and still feel committed. I was one of those moms that never completely wanted to stay at home, always very passionate about having my own professional identity. And I did that until just after my, our third child was born, Marlaena, when I left and then entered into the college system. 

Kevin Press:  

You describe a scenario that so many women across the country experience in their lives: successful professionally. What’s it like to feel that kind of pull in a couple of different directions at such a busy time of your life? 

Tanya Staples: 

It is really difficult, actually. And, you know, sometimes for me that’s now a long time in the past. My youngest is 14, my eldest is 22, and I’ve got a middle. And so, you know, on some levels it seems very long ago. I guess in hindsight I’m not surprised I then began to do research in that space, which I think we’ll talk about. But, and again, I’ve never quite figured out, Kevin, whether it’s the societal pressures you feel or if there’s also a personal piece that you also feel kind of that internal, if you have that maternal instinct. I adore my kids. I think so many women adore their kids, but, for me, it just wasn’t enough. I just didn’t feel completely full. But then you step into the professional world for what feels like minutes sometimes, and you are feeling like you’re not giving a hundred percent there, you feel like sometimes you’re not giving a hundred percent at home. So that is the psychological or the social piece is a real pull. Over time I figured out balance, but it definitely, it wasn’t always easy. I’ve got some interesting stories over the years of me trying to balance all this and babies in arms and client on the phone call, and yeah, anyhow. 

Kevin Press:  

I think a lot of dads feel that too, right? That sense of understanding that their partner is going through all of what you just described, but not being able to be there in the way that they want to be. I know myself, I feel, in retrospect, I think a lot about those early childhood years, my two kids, and wish that I had been more available. This is such a complicated thing, isn’t it? 

Tanya Staples: 

It’s really complicated and I do talk to more and more parents, right, who both are feeling that pull, right, is that wanting to be there for their children. Hearing previous generations say, “If I could do anything again, it would’ve been spend more time with my kids.” And so, my husband, when we had our son, he was able to take-he’s a medical doctor, sports medicine, so owns his own practice-so he was able to take, back then they gave eight weeks off. So, you could do a hybrid model; you could work a little bit, but then you could also be off. And, it was great, but it was, you know, if I look at parental leave in other places outside of Canada, something like that would be foreign to the second parent, right? And so, yeah, just being able to balance that. I have lots of gentlemen now who are male friends and they, too, are attempting to balance this and trying to get as much time with their kids, but also not feel that they’re not holding or owning their responsibilities professionally as well. 

Kevin Press:  

Yeah. So, you joined Conestoga College in 2012. What appealed to you about teaching? 

Tanya Staples: 

So, I think in the last, my last little bit at Corporate Benefit Analysts, I did a lot more of that financial planning education at the corporate level. So, that was all when the CAP Guidelines were coming in. I’m not sure, I would think that you would probably remember that, that Capital Accumulation Plan Guidelines, those were coming in. Employee groups were, or employers, employee groups were looking at figuring out how they can better support their employees because of this new legislation. And, so I was doing more of that education piece and it was actually a friend of mine that said, “Hey, I saw this position. I really think you’d be great at that.” And I hadn’t actually ever thought about teaching ever, Kevin, but then I connected with the co-ordinator of the program, Pat Leicester, and she was just a fireball. And I loved everything about having a conversation with Pat and her philosophy to planning. And I jumped at the opportunity. I applied, prepared for the interview, and I was really fortunate to get the position. 

Kevin Press:  

You mentioned earlier that you researched the experiences that women have as they return to the financial planning profession after a maternity leave or some other kind of leave. Tell us about that project. 

Tanya Staples: 

So I had the opportunity to work with Dr. Megan McCoy and then an industry professional, Hannah, and I am so sorry, her name is escaping me-we’ll get it after-on a project a little over a year ago. We looked at, we interviewed women that were both in the planning profession and having children. And we interviewed them and we talked about their experiences, kind of the good, the bad, and the ugly. And, not all of them, which was interesting from this group, not all of them were actually American. There were a couple [of] Canadian women who participated. So, very different experience that they had, but some strong similarities that still exist because of the way the financial planning profession is designed. And it’s not the only profession designed that way, but, you know, compensation model. You’re paid when you sell a product, you’re paid when you’re servicing a client, whereas there isn’t just that solely, that salary piece; you might actually be entirely commission. Although I think that is becoming less and less in our profession. And that was, it was eye-opening for me, but it also brought back some memories, too. 

Kevin Press:  

We have talked about this so often in our industry, the relative lack of representation of women in the financial planning profession. What do you think is at the heart of that? 

Tanya Staples: 

I don’t think it’s one thing, Kevin. Now having done a few different, I’ve kind of attacked this from a few different angles now, both by this project here, also interviewing Canadian CFP professionals, women, getting their insights, trying to determine whether or not what resonates with American women is also resonating with the Canadian women in the financial planning profession. This also is very pervasive in Australia as well. Women are more likely to be what they call a paraplanner in Australia, not a full certified financial-they may be a Certified Financial Planner but not acting as a Certified Financial Planner. And, I think there’s real structural issues. I do think there is a structural issue for sure. I think compensation is one. One of the things that became apparent in our research is also around this concept of presenteeism. So we’ve heard of presenteeism in the concept of being at work and maybe not being that productive, but there’s also an interpretation of presenteeism that says, because men are often in the office more, men are better at advocating for themselves better because they aren’t balancing, sorry, in the office more is because they aren’t balancing as many of the primary caregiving duties as women are. Women are simply out of sight, out of mind more often and therefore may not be able to advocate as well from a promotional perspective. Women also don’t apply for positions until they know they are fully qualified, whereas men are more likely to apply when they may not have all the credentials. And so, I think there’s a little bit on the structural. The other one is, I think, both structural and just timing. So, often when women are gearing up for that first big promotion, it’s around that five-year mark, seven-year mark, around age 30, and that’s now often a time when women are having first children or a second child. And so they’re removed right from the opportunity. And then, I don’t think we’ve realized how far that then sets women back on the ability to jump back on that promotional train when they return to office. 

Kevin Press:  

The timing, as you say, it just comes in many respects at the toughest time. You’re just getting yourself going as a professional and positioning yourself for future advancement. 

Tanya Staples: 

Well, and you hope, also you’re preparing yourself financially as a planner to be able to have that time off or your spouse and you share that time off so that you can actually, you know, if that’s your, if that’s your preference, be the parent that you want to be, but you need to be financially prepared for that. So, having the opportunity to pay off your student debt, having the opportunity to maybe be into a home and have the mortgage be manageable. I think the timing is truly critical. Although there’s other factors, I think there’s some real structural ones that are going to take awhile to remedy. 

Kevin Press:  

And you mentioned caregiving, which is an important point here in that there’s oftentimes the parental care piece that can disadvantage women professionals, perhaps not to the same extent as childcare, but it really does have an effect, doesn’t it? 

Tanya Staples: 

Yeah, there was some really fascinating research done by Dr. Margaret Denton-and, ironically, I didn’t know till I was doing my PhD dissertation that Dr. Denton was actually on my Master’s Committee Thesis, and it wasn’t until I looked at her research later on-but she calls it the “Disrupted Life Course Work Pattern of Women.” And I thought that phrase was phenomenal because it encapsulates both when you have your own children, but both if you have the need to provide care for potentially ailing parents as well. It is this disruption, and then there’s a compounding effect. So, in my dissertation research, one of the things that, and again, it just became apparent, more research needs to be done to look at it from a statistically significant perspective. But if we look at these women in this disrupted life course work pattern, they are in and out of the profession, so they don’t have the opportunity, in many cases, to consistently earn income and therefore be eligible for employer-sponsored retirement plans. They don’t have the ability to accumulate the same amount of wealth because they’re not having earned income. And, in many cases, it is part-time work or contract work that lacks some stability, lacks potentially other benefits that are not subject to a disrupted life course work pattern. And so, it has this like compounding effect then on women and their ability to then accumulate own future assets, not even the impact on what it’s like to be in the profession as a practising professional. 

Kevin Press:  

You’ve also written about Social Exchange Theory. It’s an idea that dates back to 1958. Absolutely fascinating. Explain its significance for us in all of this. 

Tanya Staples: 

So, when we use that for our maternity paper, what that theory allows us to understand better is that the choices that women make in their efforts to balance work and family demand. And so the theory suggests that social relationships are assessed on a cost benefit analysis, right? So, you’re going to assess the perceived benefits. So, if you look at the perceived benefits of working, okay? And the cost that it takes to engage in that work: time, energy, sacrifices, what you give up in order to work. And as long as the benefits outweigh the cost, women will stay in that position, right, that employment position. And so if they are seeing what we would deem a positive exchange, Kevin, so they’re getting support, they’ve got flexible hours, the compensation is as expected, they feel that their contributions are valued, those are things in from a perspective of being positive on the exchange side and keeping women in the profession. If there’s in a negative exchange where the costs associated with doing that outweigh it, women, the Social Exchange Theory suggests that women will not stay, or they’ll [at] least look for another employer. 

Kevin Press:  

You identified five specific barriers that women face in the financial planning industry, and I’d love to go through them with you one by one because each of them, I think, really bear a conversation. First is a lack of role models. How does that play in? 

Tanya Staples: 

So, it dates back and it could very well have been, and again, not this concept itself, but I think where it’s relevant for most people, practitioners or even individuals who are planning is, I think it was quite a few years ago, Nike did a “If You Could See It, You Could Believe It” or “You Could Become It” commercial. And there’s lots of women in this space doing research on if there aren’t women in these roles, if there aren’t female faculty, if there aren’t women in upper management at the C-suite level, junior women don’t see that they can become that. We need to see what we can become in order to believe that we can become that. And so, there was even a gentleman in some work that I did, he simply phrased it in the interview is that, “If all I see is white, male, and pale, I’m going to hire white, male, and pale because I don’t see anything else.” And so, there’s been a lot of concerns around an absence of those women in that pipeline, Kevin. So, there aren’t women in the pipeline. Women don’t advance at the same rate as men. There’s some research to suggest that women often choose careers that don’t lead to the CFO or the CEO position. It might lead to the Chief People Officer, it might lead to a Chief Marketing Officer, but it’s not likely to lead to a CFO, a CEO, or maybe even a COO. And so, and that’s where a lot of that corporate decision-making gets made. And so if junior women can’t see that, junior women don’t have the confidence or you know, yeah, don’t have the confidence to believe that they can do that themselves. 

Kevin Press:  

The second is networks and professional development opportunities. 

Tanya Staples: 

Yeah, so that one is an interesting one. So, feedback on that is a little bit, it’s a little bit mixed. So, definitely women value and appreciate all the networking that goes into the profession. They recognize that it’s critically important to our profession. I think what they, where the issue lies is often maybe the type of networking and the timing of networking. So, after hours, which is harder for women if they’re in a primary caregiving role to attend. Early mornings, same thing, so classic breakfast meetings are more difficult. They tend to often revolve around sports and alcohol. And not that women don’t want to be a part of that, but they, as women, we have different interests, right? And so [it would] be interesting to see networking events that were done a little differently. That’s a part of it. Around the networking and even the opportunity to attend these events, there’s some really good thought and research around the difference between a mentor and a sponsor. Whereas men are more likely to be sponsored through their advancement, having the, you know, the contractual support of a senior person guiding them, making sure they make the right connections; women, the research suggests, are more likely to have a mentor, and yet fewer women than men have either, right? So, women are more less likely to have a mentor or a sponsor. And so, women, this mentoring is very informal, right? Nobody has, is contracted to ensure that the success of that relationship gets the individual to where they want to be. And so I think those types of professional development opportunities are fewer for women. And I think the networking timing and maybe the “what” of the networking isn’t as appealing to women also. 

Kevin Press:  

What can men in positions of authority do more to identify women who deserve their sponsorship? 

Tanya Staples: 

Well, I think you answered the million-dollar question, or at least you asked it. I agree, there needs to be a greater awareness for men at that level. I think the problem is the pipeline, I think based on the research that I’ve done so far, men are saying the pipeline itself is broken or empty: “So, I just don’t see women that are coming through that pipeline and are available or qualified for that position.” And so, again, this is an area that requires a lot more research. There are some places around the world where they’re actually seeing an exit of women from the profession. So, obviously, we want to stop that because the goal is, right now, is to have more women come into the profession at the planning level, not at the associate or the licensed assistant level. We really want women in that planning space. And I think a better communication of what the role is, Kevin. So, I think it’s, you know, recognize, yes, this is about money, but this is really a helping profession. As we look at it much more from this holistic financial planning, client-centric-I mean, that is definitely where financial planning is moving-I think we could actually add significant value from encouraging more women into the profession by simply letting people know that this is a helping, guiding, advice profession. You don’t have to, you know, be selling product every time you open your mouth. And I think there’s value in that. 

Kevin Press:  

Sorry, Tanya, two additional barriers there. I’ll ask you to touch on compensation models. 

Tanya Staples:  

Sure. 

Kevin Press:  

And work/life balance. 

Tanya Staples:  

And so, again, the compensation, I think we’re aware it’s better in Canada than it is in the U.S. The gap is smaller. It’s there, but it’s smaller. And I think it’s this commission. I think women have a very, not all women, but I think a solely commissioned model is based on what women have shared with me and the research that I’ve done. It’s very unattractive. You know, the argument is, how can I possibly stop working at all if I’m only paid if I am working with clients? And so, you know, there were women in this one project that we did that were back to work after two weeks of having a child. And I don’t know how your brain functions. I don’t know how you physically recovered from such an undertaking. And so, I think figuring out how to improve those models, I’ve had the opportunity to chat with some bigger firms in Canada. This is definitely of interest to them, Kevin. They recognize that there are some compensation, structural compensation issues. And then something else that women shared was just the sheer competitiveness, the aggressive competitiveness that some saw in their firm where that it wasn’t so much of a team atmosphere, that they weren’t collectively working together for all clients. That was a concern also. So, I think from a compensation we need to, they’re a little bit antiquated, I think we need to modernize them a little bit so that women see that this is a place that they can be from a compensation perspective, too. 

Kevin Press:  

Yeah, that lack of team-playing is built right into the comp models, isn’t it? I mean, that is, as you say, a systemic issue. 

Tanya Staples:  

It is. It is, and that’s the, it’s not that women don’t want to succeed, it’s not that women don’t want to be rewarded for their efforts. Women are competitive, too. It’s just when it crosses over into that very aggressive “me for myself,” and I think sometimes that’s just a stereotype that gets perpetuated and that’s what women hear. But I think it’s still pervasive in some areas. 

Kevin Press:  

The final barrier is misconceptions about the profession that women themselves have. 

Tanya Staples:  

Yeah, that’s a real interesting one. This whole math myth, right? So, there’s been lots of research written about this concept of the math myth and lacking what we call financial self-efficacy, or sorry, lacking self-efficacy around your ability to do math, thinking financial planning is nothing but math. I think those are some misconceptions. In the research we did on CFP pass rates in the U.S., that lack of confidence was more pervasive in women than it was in men. Even if their GPAs were almost identical, men felt more confident in their ability. And so, that has also led to something called test anxiety. So, if women are feeling less confident about their ability to do the math portion, and they think that there’s going to be an excessive amount of math on the exams, women can then suffer from-and men, too-but more so that math myth compounded by some test anxieties. There are things that we could do better to help women feel more confident, to help kind of abate some of this issue around this math myth. And I think STEM is helping. I think we are seeing more women get into the sciences, technology, math, and engineering. I think we’re seeing that, but that was such a conscientious and concerted effort on the part of those disciplines to do that. It would be, I think it’d be very rewarding for us in financial planning if we did something similar. 

Kevin Press:  

And this all comes at such an important time as the wealth transfer is underway, women are playing a very, very important part in this from the client perspective. And the ability, the industry’s ability to put women in front of women is really critically important, isn’t it? 

Tanya Staples:  

Well, it is, and there is some research to suggest that women prefer to work with women. There’s also some research to suggest that we’ll have to counter that over a certain threshold of assets, clients prefer men or have more confidence in men. So, again, we need to kind of balance that and make sure that our teams feel supported, our female teams feel supported. And I think it’s really about helping women both as financial planners and as clients manage and support this wealth transfer that we know women are going to experience both in Canada and the U.S., and to support them in that. And I’m sure we’ve all heard that stat that says within about 18 months of the death or the departure of a spouse, a woman will transfer her assets to a new advisor. And, it doesn’t always have to be a female advisor, but it absolutely has to be someone that they identify with, that they believe truly understand what it is that they want to accomplish in their lifetime with their money. And that trust piece is critical. And so that’s what the research says. 

 
Kevin Press:  

Yeah, and you’ve done some of that research. So let’s talk about your dissertation: “Gender Differences in Retirement Preparedness Behaviours.” Tell us about the research project. 

Tanya Staples:  

So, this is something that I’ve been really interested in for a long time, is understanding better what motivates people to engage in retirement preparedness behaviours, specifically Canadian data. So, having the ability to do research on Canadians was really important to me. And so, what I looked at is I looked at both kind of the tangible things-like not having an emergency fund, being indebted-but but I also looked at the psychological, because the Health Belief Model does come from psychology. It’s a predictive framework that says if people, you know, can see the benefits of engaging in behaviour, if they can identify a serious threat to what they’re susceptible to, that will motivate behaviour, and obviously comes out of psychology and healthcare. So, it’s been very effective around some behavioural modification relating to diabetes and obesity and COVID in particular, getting people to engage in vaccination. And so, for me, I wanted to have a look at things that I thought were potentially holding Canadians back or things that Canadians really kind of, that really resonated with Canadians for, yes, this will help me to engage in retirement preparedness behaviours. And so, kind of the big barriers were around being indebted and lacking an emergency fund. The psychological barriers were much more around feeling that money might run out, not feeling that we had life’s wants, so only being able to afford need. And then the benefits that really resonated, there were two, simply recognizing the value of spending less than you make, which I think is a given. But it was a, had a huge, huge impact around spending less than you make in present day was much more likely to encourage you to engage in retirement behaviour going forward. And then the other benefit was feeling confident about retirement in the future, that believing you could actually retire. And so, I looked at other factors as well, but those would be the six big ones. 

Kevin Press: 

Are women being served well by the industry right now, do you think? 

Tanya Staples:  

Anecdotally, no, I don’t think so. And the reason I say that is that I, and again, I’m not saying it’s just the industry’s issue. I practised for a long time. I watched many women defer to their husbands for financial decision-making, but I also have been in many meetings where the advisor only speaks to the husband. So I think there’s work to be done on both sides. I think women, and again-just another research project, Kevin-I’d like to know from a women’s planning perspective, I think what women want to do with money is different than what men want to do with money in retirement. I have an inkling that I think men are more concerned about legacy planning, leaving money, making sure that there’s money for the future, whereas women, I think, are more interested in living with their family and their friends in retirement and making sure that they feel rewarded in retirement and that they can live the way they’d like to live in retirement. And so, again, I do not have research on that. I would like to do some research on that. But I think that there, I think men and women have different goals in retirement. And I think that, I think if we traditionally plan for men, we’re going to make assumptions about how women want to live in retirement that are incorrect. 

Kevin Press: 

What are the things that advisors are missing, you know, aside from understanding the important points you’ve made, what should they be doing differently? 

Tanya Staples:  

And not that there isn’t trust in the male client-advisor relationship. I know trust is paramount in our profession. I think what we’re missing is hearing women, truly understanding where women are at. So there are assumptions around women have lower risk profiles; women do not want to be engaged as actively in their retirement planning. And I think those are, I think those assumptions are misguided. 

Kevin Press: 

Thank you, Tanya. My guest has been Tanya Staples, Professor of Financial Planning and Research at the School of Business at Conestoga College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning. This episode marks the end of Season 1 of the Canadian Advisor.cast. We’d love to hear what you think and who you’d like to see us invite in for Season Number 2. You can reach me at kevin@newcom.ca. Season 2 will kick off early in the new year. Canadian Advisor.cast is a production of Newcom Media. It is produced by Alisha Hiyate. Noushin Ziafati is our Associate Producer. My name’s Kevin Press. Thanks for being with us.