We use cookies to improve site performance and enhance your user experience. If you'd like to disable cookies on this device, please see our cookie management page.
If you close this message or continue to use this site, you consent to our use of cookies on this devise in accordance with our cookie policy, unless you disable them.

Close
In association with

Home > Opinion > FTAdviser Blog > Marc Shoffman's blogs

FTADVISER BLOG

Is the CII just doing its job?

As I sit here and write this blog, I am in the company of graduates of English Literature, European politics and languages, philosophy and theology, and some with no degree. Yet we are all able to be journalists.

By Marc Shoffman | Published Aug 16, 2012 | comments

It is with this reasoning that I have struggled to understand the Chartered Insurance Institute’s policy on all its members having the same level of qualification, which happens to be their own level four one, even if an applicant has an equivalent diploma or certificate from elsewhere.

According to the CII, the policy is meant to ensure standards are consistent across all qualifications and members.

This means any adviser joining the accredited body with a non-CII level four qualification will have to prove their credentials and even take more exams to meet different standards.

What does this say about equivalent bodies? Is the Institute of Financial Services or the Institute of Financial Planning less professional than the CII?

Is it appropriate for the CII to make itself judge and jury over the qualifications of members? After all, level four has been set as the industry standard by the FSA.

Alternatively, is the CII within its rights as a membership organisation to have consistency among its advisers?

Qualifications should not be the only benchmark in any industry but, unfortunately, qualifications seem to be so in the advisory space.

Maybe the problem does not lie with the CII, but with the FSA. It was after all, the City watchdog that set the qualification requirements and made it so that an adviser’s competence is judged by their ability to complete a multiple choice exam ahead of years of experience and client relationships.

While rightly or wrongly, anyone with a pen, paper, dictaphone and a strong liver can be a journalist, the FSA has said only some people can be advisers.

So while it is questionable as to why the CII feels it can set its own standards on qualifications, as hard as this is to stomach, it was the FSA that started it.

The CII may be right to want to protect its members but really the FSA is at fault for creating an environment where professional bodies can behave this way.

COMMENT AND REACTION

Our Columnists

Hal Austin

Hal is editor of Financial Adviser and has been for more than a decade. He has previously worked on a number of local and national publications.

Ashley Wassall

Ashley is editor of FTAdviser and writes on all areas of retail finance. Previously supplements editor at Money Management and editor of a European private equity publication.

John Kenchington

John is editor of Investment Adviser and has written about investments for several years. He has worked at titles including City AM and was recently named in the MHP 30 To Watch list of up-and-coming media names.

Jon Cudby

Jon is editor of Money Management and has 12 years' experience covering retail personal finance. In 2005, Jon was launch editor of FTAdviser and most recently he was head of online content for Incisive Media's financial services titles.

Tony Hazell

Tony is a freelance financial journalist, having been editor of Money Mail at the Daily Mail for a number of years. He has been writing a column in Financial Adviser since 2005.

John Lappin

John is a weekly contributor to Investment Adviser with 15 years’ experience in financial journalism and 10 years writing on the IFA sector. He was formerly editor of an IFA trade magazine.

Most Popular
More on FTAdviser
FTA jobs