The demand for transparency in finance is often described as generational, but that framing can be misleading. It suggests a preference rather than a response. In reality, the next generation’s insistence on transparency reflects the environment in which they learned to evaluate trust, authority, and credibility.
They grew up with access to information, visibility into institutions, and a constant stream of competing narratives. They are accustomed to questioning sources, comparing perspectives, and challenging explanations that feel incomplete. In this context, opacity does not signal sophistication. It signals risk.
This shift is increasingly evident in how organizations like Parkhill engage with younger wealth holders, whose expectations are shaped less by tradition and more by clarity, logic, and accountability.
Transparency as a Baseline Expectation
For younger wealth holders, transparency is not an added feature. It is a baseline expectation.
They are less comfortable accepting decisions that are presented as settled without explanation. They want to understand how conclusions were reached, what alternatives were considered, and where uncertainty exists. This does not mean they expect certainty. It means they expect honesty about limits.
Financial systems that rely on implied trust rather than demonstrated clarity struggle to meet this expectation. Explanations that once felt sufficient now feel evasive, even when technically accurate.
The Decline of Deference
Previous generations were more likely to defer to expertise. Credentials carried weight. Authority was assumed. Advice was often accepted without deep interrogation.
That deference has eroded.
The next generation is not rejecting expertise, but they are redefining how it earns credibility. Insight is trusted when it is explained rather than asserted. Professionals who make their reasoning visible tend to earn more confidence than those who rely on reputation alone.
This perspective mirrors how Parkhill’s CEO and founder, Mark Bianchi, has shaped the company’s approach over time. Rather than positioning expertise as something clients should simply accept, the emphasis has been on helping people understand how decisions connect and why certain paths are chosen over others.
Transparency and Decision Ownership
Another driver of transparency is a desire for ownership. Younger wealth holders want to feel responsible for decisions, even when they rely on experienced professionals.
Ownership requires understanding. When decisions are opaque, responsibility feels abstract. Transparency allows individuals to engage meaningfully without needing to master every technical detail.
This participation builds confidence and reduces resentment. Decisions feel shared rather than imposed.
Technology Has Changed Expectations Permanently
Technology has reshaped how transparency is defined. Real-time access, documentation, and traceability are now common in many areas of life. Finance is no exception.
When information is difficult to access or explanations are fragmented, systems feel outdated. Transparency today is not only about disclosure. It is about coherence. Systems that require constant translation lose credibility with audiences accustomed to direct engagement.
The Link Between Transparency and Accountability
Transparency is closely tied to accountability. When reasoning is visible, decisions can be evaluated fairly. When it is hidden, accountability becomes difficult to assign.
The next generation is particularly sensitive to this dynamic. Having seen institutions falter under scrutiny, they place greater value on systems that can withstand examination without defensiveness. In finance, this means decisions that can be explained clearly long after they are made, even when outcomes differ from expectations.
This expectation has influenced how Parkhill frames long-term strategy conversations, placing emphasis on decisions that remain intelligible over time rather than those that merely optimize the present moment.
Transparency in Charitable and Impact Decisions
Charitable activity is another area where transparency matters deeply. Younger generations are less interested in symbolic giving and more focused on effectiveness. They want to understand how impact is measured, how funds are used, and how decisions align with stated values.
Opaque giving structures raise skepticism. Clear frameworks invite engagement.
When philanthropy is transparent, it becomes a platform for collaboration rather than a source of doubt.
Trust Built Through Process, Not Performance
Transparency shifts trust away from outcomes alone and toward process. A decision that produces a disappointing result can still reinforce trust if the process behind it was clear and thoughtful.
This perspective allows for learning rather than blame. It recognizes that uncertainty is unavoidable, but confusion is not. Financial relationships that embrace transparency tend to be more resilient because expectations are aligned from the start.
What Transparency Requires in Practice
Meeting the next generation’s expectations does not require oversharing or constant explanation. It requires intentional communication.
This includes defining roles clearly, articulating tradeoffs honestly, and documenting reasoning in a way that can be revisited. It also includes acknowledging when information is incomplete or when conditions change.
Through his work with families navigating transition, Mark Bianchi has found that transparency matters less in certainty and more in whether the reasoning behind decisions is clear and accessible.
A Shift That is Still Unfolding
The demand for transparency is not a passing preference. It reflects a broader shift in how trust is established and maintained.
Financial systems that adapt by prioritizing clarity and coherence are more likely to engage the next generation meaningfully. Those that rely on opacity or tradition alone will struggle to maintain relevance.
Transparency does not eliminate complexity. It makes complexity navigable. For a generation accustomed to evaluating information critically, that distinction matters.
As wealth transitions continue and new decision makers step forward, transparency will increasingly shape which financial relationships endure and which quietly fade.
