GOING PUBLIC! talks about Kundentypologisierung and criticism of the HASPA (‘disgusting’). Berlin, November 10, 2010 – in the last few weeks, several publications on the customer type of the Haspa were read. Approach the Haspa was described as “disgusting” to mark form pages of consumer protection and it was talking about to try themselves in the brain of the customers “get to mucus”. Associations have then same publicly distances itself from typologies. GOING PUBLIC! is still the customer type and recommends future still in the financial advisory services the use of the ADAPt typology.

A consultant must adjust to a customer and find a communication level with this consultant. While it is consulting on the highly personal goals and desires of the customer. For, a consultant must of course understand what values are important to the customer and how he thinks. The consultant is successful, then customer and sales orientation run end up in the same direction. In the general criticism of typologies is the instrument with the use of the instrument is confused.

Of course, you could selectively manipulate through psychological tools customers and draw as decisions unfavorable for him towards. But basically, any competitive edge could be used in this form. The claim therefore better to ignore the internal settings of the customer, does not do justice to a high quality of advice. Everyone responds daily to the values and attitudes of his opponent and attempt to estimate the character partly unconsciously, sometimes deliberately. That is exactly what is described for example with knowledge of human nature. This necessary customer orientation is ultimately by employees of the consumer centres constantly required and certainly even daily practice. A typology of customer makes thumbnail professionalisiertes and manageable by the customer of the General knowledge of human nature. The typology may be an important step towards the better advice, provided that it is used ethically and morally impeccable based on. The generalized rejection of typologies and thus ultimately the rejection of professional knowledge of human nature should be cosponsored the consumer advocates therefore only of a small part. From the perspective of GOING PUBLIC! It is not in the interest of the end customer / consumer, a camp battle”to lead. Rather, a constructive discussion between consumer protection and financial consulting firm about a socially accepted image of real financial advice should”develop. Includes both the aspect of sufficient expertise, as also of communication dealing with the end customer. Target must be a solemn trust and mutual benefit, long-term consulting relationship for consultants and end customers.