Choosing the BDM of the Year
As in previous years, choosing the 2007 Money Management/Tribeca Business Development Manager (BDM) of the Year was a difficult task for the judges.
Following a call for nominations, industry participants put forward the names of BDMs they thought worthy of the award. These nominations represented a wide range of companies from all states.
These nominations were reduced to a final list of 22, which was published in several issues of Money Management, as well as being available on the Money Management website.
Financial planners were then asked to vote for the BDM they considered most worthy of the title BDM of the Year, and score their technical skills and/or product knowledge, practice development and adviser relations on a scale of one to five.
Money Management received a record number of voting forms, which were checked to ensure only financial planners voted.
The number of votes received by each candidate was then tallied and their aggregate score calculated. A number of candidates scored very highly, so separating them was clearly a challenging task for the judges.
Money Management profiled the achievements of each finalist then forwarded this information, along with their scores and number of votes received, to the judging panel.
Each judge individually assessed the final contenders and voted on who should take out the overall award of BDM of the Year. Judges also issued five separate state awards and an award for Boutique BDM of the Year — given to the best BDM from a non-institutional sized fund manager/life company. The winners were decided by consensus.
Money Management and Tribeca Communications would like to thank everybody who nominated and voted for the BDMs, and for their overwhelming interest in and support for the BDM of the Year Award.
We would also like to thank the members of our judging panel for their commitment to a difficult and challenging task.
Recommended for you
ASIC has released the results of its first adviser exam to be held in 2025 with 241 candidates attempting the test.
Quarterly Wealth Data analysis has uncovered positive improvements in financial adviser numbers compared with losses in the prior corresponding period.
Holding portfolios that are too complex or personalised can be a detractor for acquirers of financial advice firms as they require too much effort to maintain post-acquisition.
As the financial advice profession continues to wait on further DBFO legislation, industry commentators have encouraged advisers to act now in driving practice efficiency.
