The summer is winding down as I write this. Usually, this is a quiet time for my business—and for business in general. Kids are coming home from camp, families are going on vacation and back-to-school preparations are in full swing. Usually, all of these things take a toll on the volume of interviewing. But this year, more advisors are interviewing than ever before. That does not mean that they all will move (unfortunately for me), but one does not happen without the other. Generally, an advisor makes a move when something at his or her current firm is providing a "push" out the door, while at the same time the new firm can provide a compelling "pull" to entice the advisor. The turmoil among the major firms is providing plenty of "push" to at least get folks out there talking. The real reason that an advisor moves—generally, a combination of the "push" and "pull"—can usually be found in one or more of the following scenarios.

The Seduction of the Upfront Check: Let's face it, deals have never been better; at the same time, deferred compensation tied to a firm's stock has never been lower. The combination makes for a powerful argument. Many advisors are poor managers of their own money and had counted on their company's stock to make them wealthy over the long term. These deferred compensation plans kept them happy and loyal. It also encouraged many of them to spend most of what they earned. With the deferred portion diminished to a fraction of what it was worth a year ago, it makes perfect sense to get equity out of an advisor practice that can capture over 200% in a total package.

But it's not just the desperate that are seeking these deals. The top advisors are getting about 150% up front in cash. For a $1 million producer, that's $1.5 million, all at once. That same producer is netting about $450,000 per year—so this money is more than three years' worth of W-2 earnings, in one shot! That's incredibly seductive.

The Weakening Ties between Branch Managers and Advisors: Talk to senior management at every firm and you will hear them complain about the shortage of branch-management talent. In an effort both to save money and to maximize the talents of the best branch managers, the wirehouses have created a structure where one branch manager is responsible for several branches. Fewer talented managers—and the best ones spread thin over either "supersized" branches or several different branches—sets the stage for less attention, help and service to the advisor. Of course, cynics out there will grouse that this type of coaching and leadership is no longer the branch manager's function anyway. Managers are now more compliance cops than sales coaches. With corporate loyalty wiped away with stock value, personal loyalty wiped away by diminished skills, an adversarial compliance relationship, and less time to help build business, the ties between advisor and manager have never been more frayed. It's no wonder that advisors are using that as a reason to seek greener pastures.

The "Push" of the Scandal. Every several years, the financial services industry seems to find some new way to get itself in trouble with lawmakers or regulators. Or it just loses a bunch of money. It's some combination of funny and pathetic. From limited partnerships, to the Internet bubble, to the research/investment banking ties, to the current subprime woes, an industry devoted to the creation of wealth somehow manages to lose an awful lot of it. Sometimes it directly involves the retail broker, sometimes it doesn't. Recently, the private client businesses of each of the major firms have been the pillars of the parents' earning reports. So advisors, who have enough to do in turbulent times just trying to keep their clients happy, end up having to spend an inordinate amount of time defending their firms' reputations and explaining to clients that their money is safe. With every piece of bad news that appears, a few more advisors say: "That's it, I'm out of here." For instance, one $1 million producer told me about a seminar that he was conducting on basic retirement planning. After a half-hour presentation, the next 45 minutes were spent explaining how any company could lose tens of billions but still be trustworthy enough to handle clients' mere millions. He began interviewing the next day.

Indifference and Neglect of Senior Management. Advisors want to be led, and they want to be inspired. They want to feel that the people at the top of the retail sales force pyramid understand what they do every day. If senior management does understand, then it can anticipate and remove obstacles, and doing business becomes easier. Most advisors talk about the bosses in simple terms: They either "get it" or they don't. The best leaders in this business operate with transparency and communicate with their sales force consistently, regardless of whether the news is bad or good. Recently, we saw one very respected head of sales have three different open calls with his sales force, talking candidly about the auction-rate issues and what would happen down the road. Yet, at another major firm, the leader was mute, leaving the advisors to wonder what was going on. Senior managers in the brokerage industry make millions. In good times, advisors do not begrudge them what they earn. In bad times, they do. It's very similar to the relationship that the advisor has with clients. In good times, fees are rarely questioned because the clients are making money. In bad times, clients want advisors to justify those fees since they feel that they could lose their money on their own.