The traditional role of the relationship manager is undergoing a profound transformation. For Thomas Bossard, joining an independent firm is not simply a change of employer, but a genuine entrepreneurial venture that requires preparation, strategic vision and the ability to rebuild a lasting relationship of trust with clients.
Where do we stand today with regard to the migration of relationship managers from banks to independent asset managers?
We continue to see sustained interest from experienced relationship managers in independent firms. These are primarily seasoned professionals seeking greater entrepreneurial freedom, a broader product range, shorter decision-making processes and a more personalised client relationship model.
At the same time, we are seeing increased talent mobility across the entire wealth management sector. Relationship managers are no longer simply moving from private banks to independent asset managers. They are increasingly moving between EAMs, family offices, multi-family offices, dedicated platforms and other entities specialising in wealth management.
Do you consider this to be a structural trend or a cyclical phenomenon?
We consider it to be a structural transformation, even if the pace remains cyclical. Wealth management is undergoing a profound transformation. Tighter regulation, the acceleration of technological innovation, the largest transfer of wealth in history and changing client expectations are fundamentally reshaping the sector.
At the same time, business models are becoming increasingly specialised, ranging from traditional private banks to independent asset managers, family offices, multi-family offices and platforms specialising in private markets.
Against this backdrop, the role of the relationship manager is also evolving. An increasing number are seeking environments that offer greater entrepreneurial freedom, a closer client relationship and the opportunity to create more value beyond the confines of a traditional banking platform.
Another phenomenon that is often underestimated concerns succession. It is no longer solely a matter of ownership or governance structures, but also of leadership, entrepreneurship and the ability to pass on to the next generation a corporate culture and client relationships built on trust over several decades.
EAMs have advantages in terms of flexibility and customer proximity. But is this enough to offset the industrial and technological lead held by the major private banks?
Flexibility and client proximity are genuine strengths for EAMs, but they are no longer enough. Today’s most successful firms combine entrepreneurial independence with institutional quality. They have robust governance, sound compliance frameworks, transparent reporting, strong relationships with their custodian banks, recognised investment expertise and a disciplined and credible investment process.
Competitive advantage is no longer determined by the size of an organisation, but by the quality of its business model. Technology is gradually becoming accessible to all and no longer, on its own, constitutes a sustainable differentiating factor.
What really matters is a compelling operational model, a strong culture, excellent advisory capabilities and the ability to build a lasting relationship of trust with clients.
Beyond the issue of transferable assets under management, what are the main factors behind relationship managers’ failed moves to EAM structures?
Clients do not follow a relationship manager solely on the basis of a personal relationship, however much trust they may place in them. They also assess the quality of the platform, investment expertise and the overall client experience.
Another common misconception is the belief that success within a private bank automatically translates into entrepreneurial success. This is not the case. Outside a large institution, an entrepreneurial spirit, personal accountability and resilience become decisive factors.
This is why we place as much importance on leadership, cultural fit and strategic alignment as we do on assets under management alone. Successful transitions ultimately depend on the quality of preparation, discipline in execution and the trust built between all stakeholders.
With talent being redistributed across different models, how do you see the role of the relationship manager evolving?
Their role is currently undergoing a fundamental transformation. Historically, the focus was mainly on portfolio management and access to products. Today, high-net-worth families are looking for a long-term adviser who is capable of understanding not only their financial objectives, but also their family dynamics, their entrepreneurial interests and their ambitions regarding wealth succession.
Furthermore, an increasing proportion of wealth is set to pass into the hands of women. High-net-worth female clients therefore represent an increasingly important strategic segment for wealth management.
The relationship manager is evolving from a product specialist into a strategic adviser capable of coordinating various areas of expertise. Ultimately, their success will no longer depend on their ability to master an ever-increasing range of products, but on their ability to build a genuine relationship of trust with their clients.
What is the profile of a relationship manager who excels in this kind of transition?
Their performance is not measured solely by the size of their client portfolio. An entrepreneurial mindset, cultural fit, proficiency with the tools of the trade, a thorough understanding of client needs, and the ability to build, develop and maintain a relationship of trust over the long term are just as essential.
It is these factors that give clients compelling reasons to follow their adviser into a new environment.
The best talent does not join a new organisation solely for the brand or an attractive salary. Above all, they seek an environment where the culture, leadership, strategic vision and business model align with their own values, and which enables them to create greater long-term value for their clients. Successful transitions are never impulsive. They are carefully planned, executed with discretion and based on a clear strategic rationale aimed at creating sustainable value for clients, relationship managers and the organisation.
Shouldn’t banks, ultimately, consider outsourcing their relationship managers rather than seeking to retain them at all costs?
For certain client segments and some experienced relationship managers, partnership or platform models may offer a compelling solution. At the same time, private banks will continue to play a central role, particularly in global asset custody, lending, access to capital markets, product expertise and regulatory infrastructure.
The key question, therefore, is no longer one of organisational structure, but rather which business model is best suited to serving clients’ long-term interests and enabling relationship managers to create the greatest value.
What are the key principles a relationship manager must follow when joining an EAM?
The fundamental principle is not to view this move as a mere career change, but as an entrepreneurial decision that must be prepared with the same level of rigour as a strategic decision, ideally with the support of a sparring partner.
This begins with a clear assessment of one’s own ambitions, values and value proposition to clients. It must be complemented by an in-depth analysis of the future company, its culture, shareholding structure, investment capabilities, relationships with custodian banks and long-term strategy.
It is also essential to realistically assess the transferability of client relationships and the added value that the new platform will be able to offer.
The most successful transitions are based on a clear alignment between the relationship manager’s plans and those of the firm, as well as on rigorous preparation. Our role is to support the various parties in their deliberations, to assess the possible options and to create the conditions for a sustainable and mutually beneficial partnership.
What makes this transition process particularly complex to execute?
Because a transition of this nature is simultaneously a strategic turning point, a legal and regulatory process, a communication exercise with clients and, very often, a fairly profound personal transformation.
Perhaps the most important point is that trust is not automatically transferred. It must be rebuilt between the RM, the clients and the new structure. This is precisely what makes these transitions so complex.
They now require far more preparation than they did ten years ago. The key question is no longer simply how many assets under management can be transferred.
What matters more is the quality of the business model, cultural fit, a realistic assessment of the portability of client relationships, and the discipline with which the entire transition is prepared and executed.