Flora Dong spent over two decades advising ultra-high-net-worth families at Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, and UBS before founding Ardenwood Advisors in 2025. Her practice centers on families whose wealth, businesses, and members span continents, particularly across North America and Asia.
Artificial intelligence is creating new questions across many industries, and wealth management is no exception. For Flora Dong, Founder and Managing Partner of Ardenwood Advisors, one of the most interesting questions is not simply what artificial intelligence can do, but how advisory firms should determine where the technology may be useful and where human judgment should remain central to the process.
After more than twenty-five years in wealth management, Dong has experienced several periods of technological change. Her perspective on artificial intelligence developed further after attending a three-day AI Executive Education Program at Stanford, where industry leaders discussed the opportunities, limitations, and organizational considerations surrounding the technology.
“I came away thinking less about individual AI tools and more about how firms decide where technology belongs,” Dong says. “The technology is moving quickly, but that does not remove the need to understand the problem you are trying to address.”
For Dong, that distinction has become an important part of how she thinks about AI and its potential role within the advisory profession.
What Stanford Changed About Her Thinking
Dong arrived at Stanford already interested in artificial intelligence, but the program gave her an opportunity to consider the subject from a broader leadership and operational perspective. Rather than focusing exclusively on the capabilities of individual products, the discussions examined how organizations might evaluate AI, where human oversight remains appropriate, and what firms should consider before changing established processes.
One idea that particularly resonated with Dong was the distinction between automation and augmentation. Automation generally involves using technology to perform a task that previously required human effort, while augmentation involves technology assisting a person who continues to exercise judgment, review information, and make decisions.
“I think that distinction is particularly relevant in wealth management,” Dong says. “The question is not only whether technology can assist with a task or make a process more efficient. We also have to consider what level of human involvement remains appropriate and what responsibilities continue to belong to the people using the technology.”
Depending on the circumstances, potential applications of AI within an advisory firm may include supporting certain administrative processes, organizing information, assisting with preliminary research, or helping employees work with large amounts of information. Dong believes that evaluating any particular application also requires considering the firm’s policies and procedures, information-security requirements, regulatory obligations, and the appropriate level of human review.
Starting With the Problem Rather Than the Technology
One of Dong’s strongest takeaways from the Stanford program was also one of the most practical. With new AI products and capabilities appearing so frequently, organizations can focus on what the technology can do before clearly identifying what they are trying to accomplish.
“I understand the temptation because there is always another capability to evaluate,” Dong says. “I keep returning to a more basic question, which is what problem we are actually trying to address.”
Dong believes that question should lead to a closer examination of the existing process. A firm might consider how much time a particular workflow requires, where delays occur, what information is involved, what level of accuracy is necessary, and where human review currently takes place. Establishing that understanding can provide a clearer basis for evaluating whether AI or another technology may be appropriate.
She also believes leaders should remain open to the possibility that technology may not be the answer in every situation. In some circumstances, an organization may determine that an existing process can be changed without introducing a new AI application.
“Sometimes the appropriate approach may involve new technology, while in other situations the issue may be addressed through a process change, additional training, or better use of an existing system,” Dong says. “I do not think adopting AI should become an objective by itself.”
AI May Change How Advisors Spend Their Time
Another question Dong has been considering is what happens if AI reduces the amount of time required for certain activities.
The most obvious answer might be that advisory firms can simply accomplish more. However, Dong believes additional capacity can raise broader questions about how professionals allocate their time and what their organizations are ultimately trying to accomplish.
“If technology reduces the amount of time required for a particular activity, that creates choices about how the resulting capacity is used,” she says. “Different firms will make different decisions depending on their business models, their employees, their clients, and the particular processes involved.”
Dong’s perspective has been shaped in part by her work with families whose financial circumstances may extend across multiple countries and generations. Those relationships can involve coordination among investment professionals and, depending on the family’s circumstances, attorneys, accountants, and other professional advisors.
Working with those families has made her cautious about assuming that completing something more quickly necessarily makes the overall process more effective. Some situations require time to understand the different considerations involved, particularly when multiple family members, generations, jurisdictions, or professional advisors are part of the discussion.
Human Judgment Remains Part of the Process
Dong is particularly interested in how advisory firms determine where human review should remain within AI-assisted workflows. AI systems can process and organize large amounts of information quickly, but she believes firms still need to consider how outputs are reviewed and how responsibility is assigned.
For an RIA, the use of AI may also intersect with issues involving confidential information, cybersecurity, supervision, recordkeeping, compliance, and other regulatory responsibilities. The significance of those considerations will vary depending on the particular application and how the technology is being used.
“I do not think the relevant question is simply whether AI can perform a task,” Dong says. “You also have to consider whether the application is appropriate for that task, what review may be necessary, and who remains responsible for the work.”
Dong expects those boundaries to continue evolving as the technology changes. Some applications may lend themselves to greater automation, while others may be more appropriate as tools that assist employees who continue to evaluate the information and exercise professional judgment.
Cross-Border Circumstances Add Another Layer
Dong’s perspective on artificial intelligence is also influenced by the international nature of much of her work. The families she works with may have businesses in one country, investments in another, and family members living elsewhere, creating circumstances that can involve multiple professional advisors and different legal, tax, and cultural considerations.
Technology may help professionals organize information related to those circumstances, but Dong does not view information processing as a substitute for understanding the individual family involved.
“Two families can appear very similar on paper and still have very different objectives and priorities,” she says. “Technology may help organize information, but understanding the context surrounding that information remains important.”
Her cross-border work has reinforced the idea that financial circumstances cannot always be understood in isolation. Different family histories, cultural perspectives, business interests, and generational expectations can influence the way families approach financial decisions. The existing foundation of Dong’s practice reflects this emphasis on understanding each family’s objectives and circumstances before discussing recommendations.
The Advisor’s Role May Continue to Evolve
Dong expects artificial intelligence to change portions of the daily work performed within financial services. Certain activities may become faster, existing workflows may change, and new responsibilities may emerge around evaluating, supervising, and documenting the use of technology.
She is more cautious about predicting exactly where those changes will lead.
“The more capable these systems become, the more important it is to be clear about what we are asking them to do,” Dong says. “Someone still has to evaluate whether the information is appropriate in the context of the particular situation.”
For Dong, artificial intelligence does not eliminate the importance of understanding a client’s objectives and circumstances. Instead, it introduces another set of tools that firms must evaluate within their existing professional and regulatory responsibilities.
Finding the Appropriate Role for AI
Dong is reluctant to make definitive predictions about how artificial intelligence will reshape wealth management because the technology continues to develop rapidly and questions surrounding implementation, security, supervision, regulation, and appropriate use continue to evolve.
She nevertheless believes advisory firms should understand the technology and consider where it may have an appropriate role.
“I do not think firms need to choose between exploring AI and recognizing the importance of human judgment,” Dong says. “Those ideas can coexist. The more useful question is where technology can appropriately assist people and where experience, context, oversight, and professional responsibility remain necessary.”
That perspective has left Dong interested in AI without assuming that every new capability requires immediate adoption. For her, evaluating the technology begins with understanding the purpose behind its use and continues with questions about oversight, measurement, and accountability.
“The tools will continue to change,” Dong says. “Our responsibility is to keep asking why we are using them, what they are intended to address, and where a person still needs to be involved.”
As artificial intelligence continues to develop, those questions may become just as important for advisory firms as the capabilities of the technology itself.
Important Disclosure
This commentary reflects the personal opinions, viewpoints and analyses of the Arden Global Family Offices employees providing such comments, and should not be regarded as a description of advisory services provided by Arden Global Family Offices or performance returns of any Arden Global Family Offices client. The views reflected in the commentary are subject to change at any time without notice. Nothing in this commentary constitutes investment advice, performance data or any recommendation that any particular security, portfolio of securities, transaction or investment strategy is suitable for any specific person. Any mention of a particular security and related performance data is not a recommendation to buy or sell that security. Arden Global Family Offices manages its clients’ accounts using a variety of investment techniques and strategies, which are not necessarily discussed in the commentary. Investments in securities involve the risk of loss. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
No advice may be rendered by Arden Global Family Offices unless a client service agreement is in place.
