Context

Existing evidence suggests that people in the UK do not like talking about money. Their financial circumstances can be negatively impacted as a result of this, along with their personal and social wellbeing such as their relationships, family circumstances, employment and housing situations and mental and physical health.

Conversely, talking about money can support people to make better financial decisions, get help sooner, improve their financial resilience, and bring broader personal, social, economic and societal benefits. In the context of the cost-of-living crisis and the common experience of low financial resilience, the need for good conversations about money has never been greater.

The study

The study was undertaken by the Centre for Business in Society at Coventry University for the Money and Pensions Service. It aimed to explore:

• Why is it good to talk about money?
• What are the barriers to good money conversations?
• What makes a good conversation about money?
• What can be done to promote good money conversations?

The authors used a previously developed definition of what constitutes a good conversation about money: “A good financial conversation is timely; it involves an organisation or individual I trust, respects my privacy; takes place in a manner, location and through a channel of my choosing; and helps improve my financial wellbeing”.

The study primarily involved a review of published research reports, grey literature and academic sources, plus the analysis of four data sets.

Two of the data sets provided qualitative data:

• one from 17 semi-structed interviews with financial services experts and
• the other from four consumer workshops using the LEGO® Serious Play® method.

The remaining two data sets provided quantitative survey data on:

• financial wellbeing and money conversations
• experiences of being declined for credit.

Key findings

• Barriers to having informal conversations about money (with friends and family) include:
  • social norms
  • stigma
  • shame
  • a desire to be independent
  • worry about letting others down
  • low confidence or self-efficacy.
• These barriers can also affect whether formal conversations take place.
• People can also experience several potential barriers to having formal conversations (with organisations or professionals), including:
  • mistrust
  • delays in services
  • poor access to the right channels.
• Potential positive outcomes from having good money conversations include:
  • increased confidence
  • perceived empowerment
  • reduced anxiety and stress
  • improved financial circumstances.
• Enablers of good money conversations reflect who they involve and when, where and how they happen. As such, they depend on having the conversations:
  • with the ‘right’ person
  • in confidence
  • at times relevant to life stage
  • at important moments (and from a young age whenever possible)
  • in an environment that builds trust and
  • in ways that are tailored to meet the heterogeneous needs of individuals and groups.
• Some of the clearest evidence suggests that peer-based approaches can be a particularly effective way to support financial conversations, develop financial literacy and help people feel supported.
• The authors identify a number of general points of learning, including the valuable role played by formal and informal conversations, and the importance of encouraging people to talk about money more routinely and offer better quality conversations. They also identify learning points for specific organisation types, such as financial services or housing providers, schools, support organisations and policy makers.

Points to consider

Methodological strengths/weaknesses

• Although the review is apparently quite extensive, given the number of references, the authors do not indicate how and when they sourced the literature or their approach to assessing its quality and relevance. As such, it is not possible to assess the completeness or robustness of the evidence presented.
• The four datasets the authors have analysed appear to come from earlier studies (the surveys in 2020 and 2012 respectively, the two qualitative studies being undated), rather than new studies designed to address the specific research questions of this study. As secondary analysis, albeit of primary data, this may tend to reduce the relevance of the findings from these data sets to the current study, especially if contexts of data collection were not considered.

Applicability

• The study should be of interest to financial services providers, government, charities, other support agencies and broader stakeholders who develop policy and good practice for working with individuals on financial issues, as well as those who support people with their money directly (on the frontline).

Relevance

• The findings are highly relevant in a context in which financial resilience is especially challenging, due both to the cost of living as well as complexities within the financial services provision landscape.

Generalisability

• The findings relate specifically to the UK, but are likely to apply in other markets, and especially in cultures in which there has historically been a similar level of taboo when it comes to talking about money.