Push to define may actually confuse
Very fewpeople in the industry would have failed to notice the push to higher education standards that have been going on in recent years, especially after it received a stamp of approval from the Australian Securities and Investments Commission via PS 146.
Such a push can only improve the overall professionalism of the industry and ultimately protect the interests of consumers, however, it has also put in place the groundwork for enormous confusion.
This has come about because the diverse groups that seek to offer advice have also decided to launch a range of designations which identifies them as being qualified and professional.
By this time next year the investing public will be able to pick from a Certified Financial Planner (CFP), Certified Financial Adviser (CFA), Certified Practising Accountant or Chartered Accountant, both with a different Financial Planning Specialist (FPS) designation. These will be administered through the Financial Planning Association, Association for Financial Advisers, the CPA Australia and Institute of Chartered Accountants respectively.
Add to the mix that none of these designations is exclusive of any other, and a financial planning practitioner could have all or any proudly displayed on their office wall alongside any other certification they may have earned.
The problem with having a range of designations available is that it becomes difficult for any of them to become truly widespread and regarded as the peak mark of financial planning excellence in the industry.
Each designation reflects the backgrounds and biases of the holder and in their eyes is a necessary thing, but in the eyes of the investor, what is the difference?
A similar situation exists in the US where a number of designations exist. Despite a few of them having a stronger place than others, they have not further defined the market but actually made it more difficult for consumers to discern between the marks and those who carry them.
It is unfortunate that the wide range of players in the industry feel the need to have a range of planning designations, however, in terms of driving the professionalism of the industry, it may indeed lead to new ways of designating planners.
But, if it does not provide clarity for consumers in selecting an appropriate financial adviser, then those efforts have failed, which would seem to be an odd occurrence in what is universally regarded as an industry which is set to grow by leaps and bounds in the next decade.
AUTHOR
Jason Spits
Recommended for you
Large wealth management players are increasingly taking an opportunistic approach to their M&A deals rather than a strategic one, while a fear of missing out is driving smaller players to consider selling up.
More than $2 billion in investment activity was recorded for Australian fintech firms last year, according to KPMG, with the GDG/Lonsec acquisition proving to be a notable deal in the second half.
Praemium has stated it is seeking accretive acquisition opportunities in the area of non-custodial solutions where it believes it can further grow its dominant market share.
Iress chief executive Marcus Price has shared how he is seeing “massive tailwinds” in financial advice in Australia, with the firm turning its attention to digital advice following the completion of its transformation project.
