View more on these topics

Rob Reid: Professional bodies need to tighten up CPD

Firms looking to take control of their costs should ask what they are really getting from each of their options

Providers often wonder why advisers do not use them, with many putting it down to a lack of understanding of their proposition. But while this is sometimes a correct assumption, even more telling is the increased costs of dealing with different solutions. We only have to look at the number of email encryption systems to see the inefficiencies in multiple processes.

As the need for savings in fixed costs becomes paramount across all firms, intermediaries should be focused on how they can take cost out of the process by automating as many tasks as possible.

A current issue comes from the many companies out there unable to deliver data electronically because of old legacy systems. Such a block to lower cost straight through processing is entirely unhelpful when one of the key elements of an adviser’s proposition should be ongoing service to their clients.

There are other tasks all intermediaries have to undertake to keep their business current and compliant, and keeping costs under control in these areas are important too.

One significant task is the recording of continuing professional development. In the past, most CPD was recorded on paper and had to be copied if your records were subject to an audit. If you were a member of several bodies that all sought proof of CPD, then that meant multiple copies.

When online recording finally arrived, many advisers picked one system, with the arrival of the statement of professional standing often making each firm’s relevant issuer the sensible system to adopt.

Ideally, it should be possible to import those records and their attachments into another professional body’s system. However, I can confirm that is not so at present. The Chartered Institute for Securities and Investments, in particular, demands members use its system – not paper – for records, yet it does not enable adequate importing facilities.

The next difficulty comes in the form of the CPD reporting period. For the regulated firm, it is usually done per the calendar year but with the professional bodies it is the renewal date for membership.

This means it is possible to have a complete record from the point of view of the regulated firm but an incomplete one in respect of the professional bodies, depending on when major CPD events fall date wise.

When it comes to firms taking control of their costs, does membership of several professional bodies make sense? Firms have to ask themselves what each provides in terms of development and recognition – from the public, not the profession.

Where membership is a cost and nothing more, I can see this evolving into a major issue for some bodies.

So the selection of a professional body is just as important as the selection of a provider for a client’s investment.

What we really need is an independent portal that not only allows the recording of CPD but also acts as an effective development tool. That portal could then enable a dashboard to provide a snapshot of compliance as to the level of CPD completed for several bodies in distinct timeframes.

Or the bodies could work together to provide a similar solution. We do not mind which option proceeds but we cannot support the status quo. Being dogmatic is never smart.

Robert Reid is partner at CanScot Solutions LLP

Recommended

Piggy-Bank-Savings-UK-700x450.jpg
2

FOS and Pensions Ombudsman agree new complaints handling deal

The Financial Ombudsman Service and The Pensions Ombudsman have finally signed a deal to clarify how complaints are dealt with after more than two years in the making. FOS and TPO first said they were holding discussions over a new ‘memorandum of understanding’ in September 2015 after confusion over where their respective jurisdictions ended. This […]

Global regulator to launch probe into ETF systemic risks

The International Organization of Securities Commissions is to expand its probe into the ever-growing ETF industry as systemic-risk fears mount. The Madrid-based regulator launched an investigation earlier this year looking at liquidity risks for mutual funds and index-linked funds, such as ETFs. Early next year the organisation is expected to discuss its recommendations to promote […]

21

Neil Liversidge: Mistrust shows how public are coached against IFAs

In future, I shall delete all emails announcing surveys alleging advisers are not trusted by the public. They are deceptive and demoralising drivel. Who answers surveys anyway? When approached by survey-takers in the street I employ the kind of high-speed body-swerve of which most professional footballers would be proud. Those conducting telephone surveys are told […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 5 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Too right re’ email encryption Rob. Time taken to open a normal email – a fraction of a second. Time taken to open an encrypted email – anything up to 10 minutes of mucking around with passwords and links, only to find that the supposedly hyper-confidential enigma-protected message, the opening of which would have taxed Alan Turing and Bletchley Park, is actually a just another routine non-descript non-critical piece of bureaucratic tripe.

  2. In addition it also seems that professional bodies tend only to accept CPD from their own events or selected provider events.

    If for example one attends a seminar held by (say) the Economist, the Spectator or the IOD on a relevant topic (say the economy or the effects of Brexit) it is often not admitted as CPD. One wonders why not – if proof of attendance can be provided.

    • Jacqueline Lockie 13th December 2017 at 3:10 pm

      Hi Harry,
      That’s not the case with CISI. You can log it on the CPD system then attach your cert of attendance. If you define it as relevant for your job, not just a general update, then you just select the relevant CPD button. That’s it, all sorted.

  3. Always an enormous relief to know you are not alone with certain views you hold or experiences you have had.

    I also get exasperated at “secure” emails and have lost count of the times my patience has been used up to the extent that I tell the senders to write to me instead.

    Also battled with CISI who were under the impression I would take an afternoon off to transpose my CPD from a rival publication piece by piece onto their website. By the time they offered to carry out this task themselves I had obtained my SPS from the CII.

    Great idea to have a central agency recording it all and acceptable to every institution.

  4. Jacqueline Lockie 13th December 2017 at 3:07 pm

    Regarding Rob Reid’s article of 6th December and his comment about the CISI CPD system, a number of statements in this article are incorrect. On our CPD system you can change your CPD year-end by up to 11 months, so it can be aligned with whatever date you wish. You can import your CPD log from PFS and other sources, there is an “Import from external providers” button if you log into your MyCISI account. The uploading of timely CPD records by all our CFP professionals is required by the Financial Planning Standards Board for audit purposes. If members need guidance or assistance with our CPD platform, please do contact us and we will help.

Leave a comment