gpt

About half of Hong Kong people have already consulted AI before buying insurance or selecting funds. Yet about half of the financial advisers serving them use AI less than once a week, or have never used it at all. McKinsey quantified the gap between clients and advisers in its latest survey, released in Hong Kong on September 8 — and found that the size of the gap depends on the type of clientele an adviser serves.

The survey found that only 34% of advisers who primarily serve mass-market clients use AI at least once a week. The proportion rises to 58% among advisers serving affluent clients and reaches 69% among those serving high-net-worth clients. In other words, the wealthier the client, the more likely they are to be paired with an adviser who is already comfortable using AI. Mass-market clients, by contrast, are most likely to be served by the group with the lowest level of AI use.

The gap matters because advisers remain indispensable for many Hong Kong customers. McKinsey global senior partner and Hong Kong managing partner Kevin Sneader said at the event that about 80% of customers buying major life insurance, health and wealth management products still rely mainly on financial advisers. The reasons are largely practical rather than emotional: 43% want someone to understand their or their family's specific circumstances; 41% want help avoiding mistakes when making major decisions; 35% need immediate answers to complex questions; and 34% want someone to take responsibility after the purchase. AI cannot yet fill these roles, meaning the problem of advisers failing to keep up with AI is not something clients can solve on their own.

How are clients using AI? McKinsey global senior partner and head of sales and distribution for financial services in Asia Hu Ziliang cited data showing that clients most commonly use AI to identify their financial or protection needs (35%), compare products (34%) and make purchasing decisions directly (30%). Asked why they chose AI instead of consulting an adviser, 58% said AI was more objective and consistent, 53% said it had more extensive knowledge, and 39% said it was less sales-oriented. Objective comparisons, broader knowledge and less sales pressure were traditionally among the strengths advisers used to build their professional image. AI has now moved ahead on all three fronts.

Low usage does not mean advisers are resistant to AI. McKinsey global senior partner and head of client experience and AI transformation in Asia Yu Zijian said advisers were more likely to cite a lack of suitable AI tools than discomfort with using AI as a reason for not adopting it. The only exception was new-client acquisition, where advisers were notably more reluctant to involve AI. This suggests they are trying to protect frontline client relationships rather than rejecting the technology itself.

McKinsey's incentive for adoption is clear. Sneader said advisers who use AI effectively see productivity rise by at least 50%, while their business growth is more than 50% higher than that of ordinary advisers. At present, however, the benefits are concentrated among advisers serving affluent and high-net-worth clients. Advisers serving the mass market — the group serving the largest number of customers across Hong Kong — have the lowest adoption rate and the weakest incentive to upgrade. Sneader summed up the emerging divide in Hong Kong by saying it may not be a gap between people and technology, but rather a gap between advisers who use AI to improve their services and those who have yet to integrate it into their work.