The Trust Certificate Program equips financial services professionals with the tools needed to overcome these hurdles and develop skills to address future complexities as a resilient, effective leader. Through this program, you’ll become a trusted partner to financial advisors, identify and overcome barriers to trust, master client trust, and navigate industry trust-related challenges.

This program goes beyond theory, applying frameworks developed by the American College Cary M. Maguire Center for Ethics in Financial Services to help participants build deeper connections, address barriers to trust, and create trust-based relationships that drive long-term success.

Participants can choose between two course offerings:

Strategies for Building Trust: A Practice-Based Certificate Program TRST 101 Box

• Live program designed for financial professionals, advisors, and leaders from various financial services institutions
• Program provides six hours of fully remote education, with CE credits
• Next Cohort: June 13, 20, 27, 11:00am-1:00pm EST
• Available for open enrollment via The College’s student enrollment portal

Advanced Strategies for Building Trust: A Practice-Based Certificate Program TRST 100 Box

• Live program tailored for home office leaders at a single company
• Provides 10 hours of education, including a capstone project, with CE credits
• Delivered on-site, hybrid, or fully remote
• Delivery dates tailored to the company calendar

The Center for Ethics in Financial Services is dedicated to raising the level of ethical behavior in the financial services industry – this program is your best investment in a thriving and successful future! Enroll today and unlock the power of trust.

More from The College

• Learn more about the Center’s Trust Certificate Program including enrollment information.
• Access information on the Center’s research on trust's role in financial services.
   

This analysis of the survey results highlights the current state of business ethics education in the U.S., offering valuable insights for financial services professionals.

The authors identified several key topics that are critical to business ethics education in the U.S., including leadership, ethics management, and corporate governance. For financial professionals, these areas are essential, as they emphasize common trends that highlight the need for ethics training that goes beyond compliance. Survey respondents stressed the importance of ethical leadership in setting the "tone at the top," ensuring that ethical behavior is embedded across all organizational levels.

Emerging Ethical Issues: ESG, AI, and DEI

Emerging ethical issues that are addressed in contemporary ethics education include topics that address the role of business in society, including systems-level implications of business activities. These include environmental, social, and governance (ESG) concerns, artificial intelligence (AI) ethics, and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). As the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has considered how to address investor demands for more climate-related disclosures, ESG considerations are becoming a crucial factor in how companies manage risk. Similarly, the increasing use of AI in the financial services industry raises ethical concerns around privacy, fairness, and preventing bias in automated systems. Addressing these issues is vital for businesses committed to long-term sustainability and trust.

Conclusion: Implications for Financial Services Professionals

The evolving landscape of business ethics in the U.S., as outlined by Filabi, Gustafson, and Warren, reflects both regulatory requirements and broader societal expectations. Financial services professionals and organizational leaders need to stay informed about key ethical issues, particularly leadership, AI, ESG, and DEI, as they are becoming integral to navigating the complexities of the modern business environment. Ethics is no longer a mere compliance issue; it is a strategic priority essential for long-term success and trust-building efforts across the financial sector.

More from The College

• Access the full report for an in-depth look at the research findings, including key insights discussed in Chapter 13 (p. 365).
• Learn more about AI ethics in financial services with research from the Center for Ethics in Financial Services.
• Access information on the Center’s research on trust's role in financial services.
   

Moderated by Domarina Oshana, PhD, the Center’s director of research and operations, the panel highlighted how financial services professionals can leverage behavioral science to foster a culture of ethical excellence. This webcast was provided with media partner InvestmentNews.

The panel brought together four leading experts:

• Azish Filabi, Associate Professor & Charles Lamont Post Chair of Business Ethics, The American College of Financial Services; Managing Director, the American College Center for Ethics in Financial Services  
• Katie Lawler, Executive Vice President and Global Chief Ethics Officer at U.S. Bank
• Todd Haugh, Associate Professor of Business Law and Ethics
  Arthur M. Weimer Faculty Fellow in Business Law; Director, Institute for Corporate Governance, Kelley School of Business, Indiana University
• Wieke Scholten, Founder, BR Insights B.V.

Key Discussions: Moving from Theory to Practice

The webcast commenced with an exploration of recent insights from behavioral science, emphasizing nudges towards ethical behaviors as subtle interventions that facilitate ethical decision-making while honoring individual autonomy. The discussion highlighted the importance of psychological safety in creating a workplace where employees feel safe to voice concerns.

A key point was the concept of "corrupted barrels," which shifts the focus from blaming individual "bad apples" for misconduct to recognizing systemic issues within organizations that may enable unethical behavior. This approach underscores the need to address cultural and structural weaknesses that could contribute to unethical practices.

The panel also explored the role of ethics education in financial services. Moving beyond compliance checklists, panelists advocated for integrating ethics into daily decisions. The Center for Ethics in Financial Services’ Trust Certificate Program was highlighted as an essential resource for professionals looking to build and restore trust. The Trust Certificate Program is designed to provide financial professionals with a deep and actionable understanding of trust and its underlying mechanisms. Participants will learn about the science of trust and how to apply various frameworks and models to real-life challenges.

The webcast concluded with an interactive Q&A, reinforcing the message that cultivating ethical behavior requires more than rules; it requires a deep understanding of human behavior, an ethical organizational culture, and committed leadership.

More from The College

• Learn more about the Center’s Trust Certificate Program.
• Access information on the Center’s research on trust's role in financial services.
   

Index funds have become a dominant feature of investment portfolios. This year, investments in index, or “passive” funds surpassed active investment strategies for the first time in history (Morningstar, 2024). Moreover, individuals in the U.S. are now more invested in the markets than ever before, according to 2023 data from the Federal Reserve. While these investing shifts have brought numerous benefits, there may also be unintended consequences, including vulnerability to the effect of unethical business practices on retirement portfolios. Systems-level asset management is one way to safeguard portfolios against systematic risk.

Index Investing Takes Center Stage

An index fund is one that tracks the performance of a financial index, such as the S&P 500, by investing in all the stocks or bonds of that index. These funds were initially created in the ‘70s to make it easier for investors to diversify their portfolios, thereby reducing their risk exposure. Over half a century later, ease of access has led to a preference for index  strategies, surpassing fifty percent of the market share of all funds in 2024. Moreover, the trend is buoyed by widespread retail investing in financial markets, including through indirect investments in 401(k) retirement accounts (WSJ Article, December 2023).

While an active management strategy attempts to beat the total market returns through trading securities to outperform benchmarks, the goal of an index strategy (sometimes called passive investing) is to match the return of “the market,” as defined by the selected index (e.g., FTSE, S&P, Dow, etc.).

The benefits of index funds include expanded access to capital markets for those who may not have the expertise, or time, to manage an actively traded portfolio. Additionally, index investing not only allows ease of access to portfolio diversification, but also appeals to those who believe an investor can’t reliably “beat the market” through single stock ownership. And finally, index funds can be more cost-effective than actively managed funds because managers tend to charge lower fees when tracking an index, thus putting more money back into investors’ pockets.

Systematic Risks Remain, Despite Widespread Diversification

Despite the widespread popularity of diversification through index funds, investors remain vulnerable to systematic risk. When investors diversify through index strategies, they seek protection against volatility in their portfolio because of idiosyncratic risks that arise when putting all your eggs in one basket. For instance, if an investor is overweighted in healthcare stocks, the financial loss resulting from policy change that impacts healthcare would be greater. By diversifying, investors put their eggs in multiple baskets for protection against these specific risks unique to individual sectors or stocks.

Even with diversification, however, portfolios remain vulnerable to systematic risks, such as inflation, war, recessions, and other geopolitical or macroeconomic trends. These are risks that impact the entire market. While diversification protects against idiosyncratic risks, its widespread adoption by investors hasn’t improved exposure to systematic threats. As investors have embraced diversification, what determines their portfolios’ long-term value will be the economy’s intrinsic value, not the relative value of each company in the portfolio. (The Shareholder Commons, 2022). Furthermore, because more individuals are invested in financial markets today than at any time in history, systematic threats could lead to broader financial challenges.

Yet, as Jon Lukomnik and James Hawley argue (2019), the structure of the asset management industry—including the proliferation of undifferentiated products and complex fee structures—combined with the pervasiveness of index investing, has led to portfolios that overlook systematic risks. This makes investors vulnerable to long-term economic threats such as geopolitical issues and climate change (Lukomnik & Hawley, 2019). This threat is particularly pernicious when planning for retirement, which is necessarily long-term. 

A Systems Lens on Investing Can Address Unethical Business Practices

In recent years, there has been an increasing negative impact of commercial activity on society, also known as externalities. There are numerous statistics to demonstrate this point; one stark example is that by 2050, the continued expansion of global commercial activity is likely to deplete access to critical freshwater resources by one half of the Earth’s total capacity (Albert, et. al., 2021).

Systems investors analyze financial markets by taking into consideration the effect of corporate externalities on the financial, social, and environmental systems on which our capital markets rely. Neglecting externalities can exacerbate risks to these systems. Viewed through a systems lens, this type of market analysis recognizes that the externalities of one business impact the potential success of the entire market through negative feedback loops, thus affecting an entire portfolio. A diversified investor recognizes that externalities produced by one company creates costs borne by other companies in their portfolio. Diversified index investors often own the entire market, and therefore will be financially impacted by these externalities.

We have seen these consequences in the global financial crisis of 2008 to 2009, ultimately resulting in overall financial market instability. As these risks created by companies externalizing costs materialize, asset values may sharply decline, leading to broader market disruptions and increased financial volatility.

This may sound like environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing or responsible investing, but it’s different. While ESG investors create portfolios that integrate environmental and social considerations with financial returns, systems-level investors seek paradigm shifts on issues that can bring about widespread change to benefit the entire market. (Flamer, 2024). On one hand, a responsible investor might, for instance, exclude companies from a portfolio because of personal values (e.g., gun manufacturers) or select ESG funds that generate social and environmental rewards (e.g., green energy). System-level investing, on the other hand, attempts to affect overall market returns through opportunities to influence enterprise risk and return, with an eye towards the long-term resilience of capital markets (Burckart & Lyndenberg, 2021).

The example above about depleting freshwater resources can demonstrate this distinction. Traditional financial analysis deems environment-related costs like clean-up initiatives as expenses to be minimized. For instance, a shareholder in any one beverage company has an incentive for that company to spend just enough on clean water initiatives to ensure that company’s access to clean water, even if those expenditures create externalities that negatively impact others (e.g., by dumping toxins into a different water basin).

A systems-level approach identifies industries in which water use is most intensive (e.g., chemical manufacturing, agriculture, beverages), conducts a portfolio-level analysis of their water footprint to analyze the relevant feedback loops. Then, the analysis identifies the weakest performers within them for engagement. Because such an investor has portfolio exposure to numerous companies that need fresh water, they will support water management practices that do not deplete access to water for other businesses.

In this way, the feedback loops of the ecological systems are integrated into financial market analysis.

Strategies for Investors

Putting these considerations into practice requires strategic effort by asset managers and owners. The dearth of analysis about systematic phenomena could be a blind spot in long-term investing.

To improve the resiliency of the financial markets, asset managers need skills in both searching for new investment opportunities and stewarding existing assets in index funds, contends economist John Kay (2015). His critique of the industry is that “chasing alpha” through fee-generating buy/sell trades to try to anticipate market expectations is shortsighted because it overlooks opportunities to meaningfully assess drivers of asset value (Kay, 2015). Trading might benefit enterprise-level risk/return, but doesn’t address market-level systematic risks. Investment stewardship activities can be used to shift the perspective of corporate managers toward the portfolio-level interests of diversified shareholders.

One prominent approach is beta stewardship, which is investment stewardship that prioritizes reduction of corporate externalities. While stewardship through ESG integration seeks opportunities for a double bottom line (do well financially by doing good for the planet), beta stewardship recognizes that such an approach is not enough, because systematic risks affect the overall market, not just one company. Thus, even if some companies in a portfolio benefit from issuing green bonds or buying carbon offsets for sustainability projects, discrete efforts will not be enough to solve the impending environmental challenges that all businesses confront.

Beta stewardship involves analysis of the feedback loops in economic systems, and advocates that companies manage business consistent with systems-level effects. A recognized example of beta stewardship is Climate Action 100+, an investor-led initiative targeting the world’s largest corporate greenhouse gas emitters to take steps to avoid externalities that affect economic growth, food production, infrastructure, and water supplies.

Another organization that provides systems-level analysis is The Shareholder Commons. Among their proposed beta stewardship practices is the concept of guardrails, which are measurable and universalizable parameters for corporate activities that cause externalities borne by the overall market. One example of a guardrail is reducing corporate overuse and misuse of antibiotics/antimicrobials in animal agriculture and human health care and hygiene products (The Shareholder Commons, 2022). Antimicrobial resistance is a threat to human health; this occurs when microbes transform over time, no longer responding to disease treatment through antibiotics. Current health care and business practices accelerate this trend. Each single company has an incentive to continue antibiotic and antimicrobial use at current levels because it can enhance production processes, even if they contribute to long-term resistance among the entire population. Developing a standard approach and commitment across companies through guardrails aims to move the needle on an intractable systems-level challenge.

Planning for the Future

Some may think strategic efforts toward systems analysis should be limited to pension funds that manage large, defined benefit programs. But the well-documented shift towards defined contribution plans, such as 401(k) retirement plans, means individual retirees are more invested in the market today than any time in history (Blackrock, 2024). I believe a systems-level lens on managing assets is needed to benefit all investors.

All investors have a role to play in planning for the future:

• Asset managers should prioritize systems-level approaches by examining case studies that describe a business case for systems change and integrating these approaches into their stewardship practices.
• Financial advisors should probe managers on their approach to protecting against systematic risk, and how systems investing factors into their analysis.
• Individual investors should select managers and financial professionals that think critically about long-term performance, and the effects of systematic market risks on retirement plans.

We can achieve these objectives by identifying organizations that have published their stewardship codes and engagement practices, as well as those that promote transparency relating to corporate governance priorities.

Additionally, the financial industry should invest in high-quality research that can further demonstrate how ethical business practices contribute to financial resilience. Now that’s a basket we would all be willing to put our eggs in for the long-term. 

Footnotes

Burckhart, W. & Lydenberg, S. (2021), 21st Century Investing: Redirecting financial stragies to drive systems change.  Berrett-Koehler Publishers

Lukomnik, J. & Hawley, J. P. (2021), Moving Beyond Modern Portfolio Theory. Routledge.

Lukomnik, J. & Hawley, J.P. (2019), The Purpose of Asset Management, Pension Insurance Corporation.

https://www.pensioncorporation.com/content/dam/pic/corporate/documents/news-and-insight/insight/2017/the-purpose-of-asset-management-v4.1.pdf.downloadasset.pdf

Kay, J.A. (2015). Other People’s Money: the real business of finance. Profile Books.

Albert et. al. (2021). Scientists' warning to humanity on the freshwater biodiversity crisis. Ambio, a journal of environment and society, 50(1): 85 - 94. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7708569/

Flamer, C. (March 14, 2024). ESG vs. Systems-Level Investing. The Institute for Corporate Governance, Kelley School of Business. Retrieved October 28, 2024. https://icgblog.kelley.iu.edu/2024/03/14/esg-vs-system-level-investing-featuring-caroline-flammer/

South Pole Carbon Asset Management Ltd.(2020, June 16). An Investor Guide on Basin Water Security Engagement: Aligning with SDG 6. https://assets.ceres.org/sites/default/files/An%20Investor%20Guide%20on%20Basin%20Water%20Security%20Engagement_%20Aligning%20with%20SDG%206.pdf

The Shareholder Commons (2022, September). Antimicrobial resistance and the Engagement Gap: Why investors must do more than move the needle, and how they can. https://theshareholdercommons.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/AMR-Case-Study-FINAL.pdf

The Shareholder Commons (2024). Stewardship Practices. Retrieved October 28, 2024. https://theshareholdercommons.com/system-stewardship/#stewardship-practices

Hannah M. (December 18, 2023). More Americans Than Ever Own Stocks. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/finance/stocks/stocks-americans-own-most-ever-9f6fd963

Blackrock, Inc. (2024). Larry  Fink’s 2024 Annual Letter to Investors: Time to rethink retirement. https://www.blackrock.com/corporate/investor-relations/larry-fink-annual-chairmans-letter 

More from The College

• Get Involved with the American College Cary M. Maguire Center for Ethics in Financial Services
• Read Our Latest Retirement Insights

Listen in as our team of thought leaders provide insights on behavioral science discoveries, discuss ethics education programs, and provide a look into the Center for Ethics’ strategy on ethics education.

This Financial Planning article highlights Filabi’s presentation on the ethical concerns of AI in financial services. The concerns include transparency, data privacy, racial bias, and over-reliance on AI-driven tools. Filabi emphasized the importance of human oversight, long-term thinking, and the need for regulatory accountability in AI use. She also discussed how historical biases in data, such as big data used as inputs into AI-enabled underwriting, can lead to unfair discrimination, an issue already being addressed by some state regulators and the NAIC through testing and risk management frameworks.  

More from The College

Read on to discover additional insights on Filabi’s presentation!

To learn more about AI in financial services, you can explore further with research from the Center for Ethics in Financial Services.
 

This panel discussion, led by Kevin Crawford of Northwestern Mutual, highlighted AI’s current impact, its future potential, and the ethical implications tied to its adoption.

Filabi emphasized the importance of managing AI systems ethically and transparently. Drawing from her policy background, she raised concerns about the potential for AI to reinforce faulty data or human biases, warning without proper oversight, AI could lead to significant harm. Filabi illustrated this by questioning the fairness of using AI for underwriting that relies on private data from individuals without their consent, stressing the misuse of AI in such ways could have severe consequences. While recognizing AI’s potential to improve fairness and efficiency, she noted these benefits can only be realized through ethical management.

Ethical Concerns Surrounding AI

Filabi also discussed the potential of generative AI to enhance financial education, particularly for underserved populations, by increasing access to critical knowledge and fostering trust in the financial industry. However, she warned this opportunity comes with ethical responsibilities, as AI systems must be competent and transparent, and misinformation or misuse of personal data could erode trust. Bennetts responded there’s a challenge to maintaining privacy in an era where AI systems often access personal data without user awareness. He expressed concern people have become complacent with these invasions of privacy, accepting them as part of daily life. Bennetts also noted while AI has the potential to serve as an equalizer, it may also deepen inequality if access to technology remains uneven, particularly for those without the resources to understand or use AI effectively.

The Path Forward: Ethical Management of AI

Ludwig echoed these concerns, emphasizing the need for AI literacy. He highlighted professionals and consumers alike must understand how AI operates and where their data is being used. Ludwig pointed out AI's growing complexity could create a divide between those who master the technology and those left behind, reinforcing the need for clear, accessible education on AI systems.

Filabi turned the conversation to regulatory developments, noting states like Colorado have taken first steps with comprehensive AI laws aimed at protecting consumers and ensuring fairness in AI-driven decisions. She stressed the importance of setting clear standards on data quality and transparency to help regulate AI’s impact on financial services.

In her final remarks, Filabi emphasized professionals must remain accountable for their use of AI, even in the absence of robust regulation. While AI holds great promise for advancing fairness and efficiency, its success depends on responsible, transparent management. The panel concluded with the consensus that AI, while a powerful tool, must be approached thoughtfully to ensure that its implementation in financial services serves the greater good and enhances trust in the industry.

More from The College

• To learn more about AI in financial services, you can explore further with research from the Center for Ethics in Financial Services.
• Learn More About Our Center for Military and Veterans Affairs
• Read Our 2024 Military Summit Recap

Managing director of the American College Cary M. Maguire Center for Ethics in Financial Services, Azish Filabi, JD, MA sits down with The College’s Chartered Advisor in Philanthropy® (CAP®) Program director and assistant professor of philanthropy Jennifer Lehman PhD, JD, CFP®, CAP® to discuss the ethical considerations advisors and other financial professionals must make when offering philanthropic planning services in a new continuing education (CE) opportunity available on Knowledge Hub+.

Filabi kicks off the discussion by reflecting on her history as a professional, stating that she has always worked to ensure organizations have the right governance structures in place and the right tools in place so they can consider ethics in their own personal decision-making as well as the impact they’re having on society.

She goes on to discuss the work performed at the Center for Ethics in Financial Services, stating the importance of the group’s research mission and outreach. In reference to this research, Filabi explains the purpose as “learning about the challenges that leaders and individuals are facing with respect to ethics so that can reflect back on the work that we do.” By completing this research, Filabi believes that the Center for Ethics will be able to provide the industry with valuable lessons relating to ethical concerns in the field.

Trust in Financial Services

One of these key lessons focuses on the topic of trust in financial services. Filabi shares that “Everyone I talk to highlighted trust as being a key factor in effective work that we do because it's essentially the glue that brings it all together. Some people went as far as to say that they're not in the business of selling financial products. They're selling trust because people have to trust us as professionals to be able to have their money in our good hands. Because trust is so important to financial services, the Center offers a certificate program on Advanced Strategies for Building Trust to help leaders access tools and frameworks to address this challenge.”

Lehman ties this back to the mission of The American College of Financial Services as a whole, stating a goal of providing applied financial knowledge and education, promoting lifelong learning, and advocating for ethical standards to benefit society. As Lehman points out, philanthropy is a key part of the profession tied to social impact.

Filabi weighs in on this, providing a description of ethics in the industry. She emphasizes the importance of doing no harm and acting in accordance with legal requirements while navigating opportunities. However, she points out that this is a more simplistic view on ethics. When providing her perspective, she states, “We at the center like to think about ethics, not only about the compliance and legal challenges that people face in their day to day, but about the gap between these minimum standards that are expected of us and the day to day challenges that people face in their work…what is the standard that clients expect from you so that they can trust you that might not already be codified in the law?”

How Do We View Ethics in the Context of Philanthropy?

Filabi continues by tying this to the field of philanthropy, discussing concepts such as conflicts of interest, duty of care, and loyalty. She admits this to be a challenging balancing act that also requires financial professionals to consider social impact as part of the equation.

Filabi contends that the importance of social impact is especially critical for the philanthropic sector in recent years. She supports this assertion by stating, “Government budgets are really crunched, and so that means that the philanthropic sector is playing a huge role in addressing some of the business and (societal) challenges that we face in the economy, and I think that should be part of an understanding of ethical duties and obligations as we think about social impact.”

“Government budgets are really crunched, and so that means that the philanthropic sector is playing a huge role in addressing some of the business and (societal) challenges that we face in the economy, and I think that should be part of an understanding of ethical duties and obligations as we think about social impact.”

Lehman and Filabi go on to discuss several additional topics relating to ethics in the philanthropic sector including the Donor Bill of Rights, what an organization should do if a donor’s values don’t align with the organization’s values, key items to consider when weighing the ethical implications of our choices, and more in this discussion, available exclusively on Knowledge Hub+!

To access this learning opportunity and other valuable CE, visit Knowledge Hub+.

More From The College:

• Gain philanthropic and legacy planning knowledge with our CAP® Program.
• Learn about the American College Center for Philanthropy and Social Impact.
• Join the waitlist to be notified when enrollment opens for the TPCP™ Program.
• Learn about the American College Cary M. Maguire Center for Ethics in Financial Services.

The article uses the Center for Ethics’ Trust in Financial Services Study (2021 Consumer Survey) to explore the drivers of trust in consumer financial services. By contextualizing the Center’s research within existing academic research, the study highlights how both corporate reputation and a consumer’s personal values play a critical role in establishing and maintaining trust in the financial services sector.

The Importance of Building Trust

The research, based on responses from nearly 1,700 U.S. consumers, examines trust levels associated with seven types of financial service providers including national banks, credit unions, and online-only financial institutions. One of the key findings is the stark contrast in how trust is built among "familiar non-customers" and "customers." For familiar non-customers – respondents who don’t have a relationship with a firm but are familiar with the services provided – trust tends to be influenced by external indicators such as reviews, third-party recommendations, and the overall reputation of the institution.

This dynamic is especially important for digital-only providers, who are newer to financial services; trust is often built through indirect experiences for such firms. In contrast, for customers who already have established relationships with a provider, trust is more deeply rooted in personal interactions. These customers value shared ethics, protection of their interests, and personalized services, particularly from institutions like credit unions, national banks, and investment firms.

Values Associated with Trust

The study underscores the need for financial institutions to differentiate their trust-building strategies for these two groups. For institutions aiming to attract familiar non-customers, focusing on reputation management and enhancing their public image is critical. By prioritizing transparency, aligning operations with core values, and offering tailored customer experiences, financial service providers can strengthen trust with clients. Conversely, when maintaining existing customer relationships, reinforcing trust through personalized, value-aligned services are key. In addition, these customers consider whether firms are actively protecting their interests.

These findings offer valuable insights for financial institutions looking to navigate the competitive and increasingly digital marketplace. Moreover, the research offers practical guidance for building, maintaining, and repairing trust differentiated by the type of financial entity and the type of customer in the relationship.

More From The College

For further details on the research findings, you can access the full report in the Financial Planning Review. 

Pattit, J. M., & Pattit, K. G. (2024). An empirical exploration of the drivers of trust in consumer financial services.
Financial Planning Review, e1190. 

For more information on the Center’s research on trust's role in financial services, get our full report.