The Personal Finance Society has criticised the Chartered Insurance Institute for not engaging with its board on today's strategy consultation prior to publication.
Today (October 15) the CII published its ‘Shaping the Future Together’ consultation, but the PFS claimed its board had not been consulted on the proposals.
President Sarah Lord, who was consulted individually by the CII, said she “regrets that the CII did not engage with the PFS board collectively on the drafting of the consultation document and the CII did not bring the document to the PFS board for input”.
She went on to say the PFS - which the CII has been trying to deregister - was considering "options for alternative legal structures" which would better protect and promote the interests of PFS members.
Nevertheless she encouraged members to respond to the consultation and said the two bodies would continue to explore areas of collaboration for their mutual benefit.
In its paper the CII acknowledged some PFS members were “unhappy”.
“We know that some of our members are unhappy with the relationship as it currently stands,” it said.
“We believe that the organisations are best served by recognising the commonalities and interdependencies of the personal finance and insurance sectors - albeit without losing sight of either as discrete professions with their own needs and requirements – and therefore, that a future of ongoing positive collaboration [...] would be in the best interest of our members.”
Lord said in response: "The PFS board believes in the light of the CII board’s attempt to deregister the company that the status quo is no longer an option and welcomes the implicit recognition of this in the consultation document.
"We encourage all members to contribute their views on the relationship of the PFS and the CII by responding to the consultation."
In its consultation, the CII proposed a number of improvements to its education offering in response to Lord’s initial feedback.
One referenced the need to make its qualification pathways “clearer and simpler”, as well as look into the option of supplementing them with “certificated programmes”.
Other suggestions included making its content “more relevant”, introducing a new learning and experience assessment, making it “easier and fairer” to convert previous study to CII qualification pathways, and adding more career development tools.
The PFS has not clarified whether it thinks these proposals are enough to bring the CII’s education offering up to speed with the rest of the industry.
But in a statement responding to the plans, Lord said: “The PFS board is disappointed that over the last few years the CII’s education offering, including the qualification framework and pathways has not kept pace with the needs of the profession and welcomes the opportunity for PFS members to input their views on improvements now necessary.”