The term robo-advice should not be used when selling online services to customers with a product recommendation, according to LV=.
Phil Brown, the firm's head of retirement propositions and change, said: "Robo-advice is not the right expression and is certainly not something you should say to a consumer."
Speaking at a conference in London, organised by business media firm Marketforce, Brown believed there would be scope for the product to develop in the pensions landscape for those who do not seek advice.
He said since pension freedoms rolled out in April 2015, drawdown had become a mainstream product, but 45% of the product sales took place without advice.
"With drawdown there are particular risks the consumer is taking and we are concerned that they may not understand and manage those risks. Advice is probably appropriate."
However, Brown said robo-advice should be blended with human intervention, adding: "The human contact is quite necessary in the advice process. I don't think the retail customer is ready to think a machine is able to do everything for them."
Brown said firms had to understand consumers' behaviour when seeking product suggestion.
"You can't dictate how they look at your website or why they contact you or why they are interested in looking at different parts of your website," he said.
Brown suggested breaking down the consumer's research process into different sections. For instance, customers could start with education and engagement where they learn about their options for retirement without having to log in or leave personal data.
He said in the next stage customers could obtain an advice report outlining suitable products with follow-up from advisers, and finally arrange a product set-up.
"You literally have to let them find their own way through the service and ensure they are picking up enough information to consider whether they do or don't need advice because not everyone needs advice," he added.
