Subcribe to Financial Advisor magazine
More information on our advertisers

OTHER PUBLICATIONS

FA green

Private Wealth.com

Journal of Indexes.com

Nick Murray interactive

Exchange Traded Funds report

 
 AIG
Date 3/19/2010
Time 4:03pm ET
Trade 34.80
Change 0.00
% Chg 0.00%
Open 0.00
High 0.00
Low 0.00
Volume 51,294
Intraday 
Powered by JoomlaGadgets
Online Extras
April 06, 2009
Restoring Trust In The CFP Mark
A painful truth is that many financial practitioners are sales people masquerading as planners or advisors in an industry whose ethical practices have a shameful track record.
By Somnath Basu   
The financial crisis and brutal economy have decimated more than people’s nest eggs—they also have soiled the reputation of many a financial advisor who are seen to have breached the public’s trust.

Case in point: the disturbing results of a Harris Interactive poll asking Americans whether they trust the advice they’re given from various professionals. Financial advisors lagged behind doctors, dentists, nurses, lawyers and accountants. Only mechanics, real estate agents, insurance agents and stockbrokers were found to give worse advice. And the poll was released two years before the bottom fell out of the market. Imagine what the numbers would be like today. A November 2008 Gallup poll about honesty and ethics in 21 professions ranked stockbrokers 15th—a thin margin above car salesmen.

What can be done to repair the considerable damage? It’s quite simple, actually: require at least two to three years of intensive post-graduate work for certified financial planners that’s as rigorous as medical and law school, complete with a board exam and the involvement of educational accrediting bodies that add rigor to the education process.

If there’s a desire to specialize in annuities or other areas, then another year of schooling should be added to the mix. But the curriculum must be prepared by academics and not industry practitioners, such as those who set up the CFP board and its topic (or product-based) curriculum.

Most practitioners have little knowledge or background about the field of education or the importance of a holistic approach to program and curriculum development, instructional methods or content structure and delivery. Merely having a representative member from an accrediting body in a group of practitioners attempting to create an academic program is not viable. Furthermore, any program needs to be in the purview of an accrediting body with its compliance issues and which could be handled by the roughly half a dozen regional bodies such as the Western Association of Schools and Colleges. For most purposes, certificate programs are generally excluded by these educational governing bodies.

Parity For Physical And Financial Health
How can CFP practitioners possibly be taken seriously when they’re able to earn their credentials after only seven to nine months of completing their undergraduate studies? It’s important to remember that the requirement of a bachelor’s degree was instated only for those credentialing after 2007, before which many planners could hit the pavement straight from high school or even beforehand.

General medical practitioners need about 12 years of education, medical specialists need as many as 15 and lawyers require about 10 years when factoring in undergraduate and apprentice work. It certainly would help if the federal government acknowledged that financial health is as important as physical health, especially during tough times when the mind-body connection exacerbates financial worries. What’s needed is a grassroots movement to force regulation of the industry’s ethics and competency, as well as close monitoring of fiduciary responsibilities.

The SEC and NASD should test whether brokers understand what products are suitable for clients and make sure this requirement is stringent enough to reduce or eliminate the number of broken American dreams. Consider, for example, that about 70% of a Series 7 Exam (licensing exam for stockbrokers administered by FINRA (nee NASD) focuses on the legal side of the business and what financial professionals need to know to protect themselves from liability, while the other 30% focuses only on the jargon and definitional aspects of investments.

There’s no attempt in the exam to test for any analytic knowledge, basic investment theories and application strategies to determine whether the future financial advisors have even a rudimentary knowledge of investment product suitability. This education is supposedly left to the corporations who have little motivation to teach all the right material since that may adversely affect their own profitability.

Another idea worthy of consideration would be a re-certification exam taken every 10 years because the financial-services industry is so dynamic. It would work much like state departments of motor vehicles requiring that drivers periodically test their knowledge about rules of the road and eye-hand coordination to earn the privilege of being able to remain behind the wheel.

Ending The Pursuit Of Greed
Many students who seek to earn a CFP view their education requirements as a burden, preferring accelerated programs as the path of least resistance to considerable earning power. And it’s not simply a generational difference. It’s the nature of a myopic culture that places short-term gain ahead of lasting excellence.

Scores of impatient individuals are not only zipping through the curriculum in three to six months or choosing self-study but also are without a bachelor’s degree when they join wirehouses and financial institutions, which cannot be trusted to adequately train them. Some have even dropped out of high school to share in the spoils and exerting as little effort as possible leading up to their licensing examinations such as the FINRA or state insurance board exams. Consequently, they’re ill-prepared to adequately address client needs.

A painful truth is that many financial practitioners are sales people masquerading as planners or advisors in an industry whose ethical practices have a shameful track record. Stockbrokers and insurance agents who earn commissions from buying and selling stocks, insurance and other financial products realize that a CFP credential will help grow the volume of their business or branch them into other related and lucrative products and services.

But they’re unwilling to devote the time necessary to achieve a sound education that will help attain their goals, and would rather sell variable or whole life products than simple term life, even when the suitability argument overwhelmingly suggests so, for a higher payday. More often than not, it is the financial institutions they work for who reward such behavior with higher commissions rather than salaries that encourage such behavior and create the vicious cycles that are now the norm.

The time has come to put quality assurance ahead of greed and check all egos at the door. Far too many CFP practitioners and financial intermediaries (i.e., financial planners, financial advisors, chartered financial consultants or financial counselors) are escaping scrutiny right now because public outrage has been directed at large financial institutions such as Citigroup, Merrill Lynch and AIG rather than individual money managers. But it won’t take long before this anger spills from executive suites onto individual practitioners.

The way to resolve this issue is for the industry to step boldly in the direction of more meaningful professional education that raises quality standards and infuses investment advice with credibility and confidence.

Somnath Basu, Ph.D., is program director of the California Institute of Finance in the School of Business at California Lutheran University where he’s also a professor of finance. He can be reached at (805) 493 3980 or basu@callutheran.edu.

 
Comments
jrobinson   |2009-04-22 22:58:48
I commend Financial Advisor for bringing the debate over the credibility of the CFP designation to the forefront. Judging from the volume of responses to Dr. Basu’s and CFP Board of Standards CEO Kevin Keller’s editorial commentary, the topic has obviously touched a nerve. In December 2008, an op-ed piece I penned for Advisor Perspectives entitled “In Defense of Faux Planners” stimulated similar reader discussion (http://www.advisorperspectives.com/newsletters08/In_Defense_of_Faux_Planners.html). The piece was written in response to former FPA President Dan Moisand’s many public references to non-CFP financial advisors as “faux planners” and to express concern over the lobbying efforts of organizations such as the FPA, the CFP Board of Standards, and NAPFA to make financial planning the exclusive domain of CFP certificants. Since I specifically referenced the CFP Board of Standards in my commentary, I sent the article to Mr. Keller at the time of publication. Similar to Dr. Basu’s letter, my position challenges notion of the CFP standard on two fronts – first, that attainment of the designation necessarily leads to superior ethical conduct, and second that the CFP program is the highest academic path to financial planning proficiency.



With respect to the former, at the beginning of his rebuttal to Dr. Basu’s editorial, Mr. Keller states, “When it comes to ethical behavior and a commitment to putting clients’ interests first and providing financial planning services with a fiduciary duty, CFP certificants lead the way.” Unfortunately, the notion that CFP certificants are somehow more ethical than their peers in the financial services industry is unsubstantiated. I know of no empirical data to support the claim that CFP certificants are any more ethical or less likely to violate client trust than either Investment Advisor Representatives (who are held to a fiduciary standard by the SEC) or Series 7 registered representatives. One needs only to consider such high profile examples as Judith Zabalaoui, James Buchanan, and Bradford Bleidt, to understand that if the threat of going to prison does not deter unethical behavior, the threat of having one’s CFP designation revoked is not likely to weed out the bad apples either*. Ironically, it could even be argued that the perceived credibility of the CFP designation may even aid such nefarious individuals in committing their fraudulent acts. While the CFP Board should be commended for adopting a stringent code of ethics and for encouraging its members to adhere to a fiduciary standard, it seems naïve to suggest that ethics standards are a primary motivation for advisors to attain the designation. As Dr. Basu suggests, many advisors “…realize that a CFP credential will help grow the volume of their business or branch them into other related and lucrative products and services.”



Further, Mr. Keller’s contention that, “The sad truth is that anyone can call himself a financial planner,” should not go unchallenged. Under current SEC rules, Investment Advisor Representatives are the only financial advisor class that may hold themselves out as offering financial planning services under federal law, and the reason they may do so is that they are held to a fiduciary standard. Traditional commission-based Series 7 registered representatives may not legally hold themselves out as financial planners unless they are also dual-registered as IARs. Most states also have regulations that limit the ability of small RIA firms (those with less than $25 million in client assets) and other individuals who fly below the SEC radar to legally represent themselves as financial planners. While I wholeheartedly agree with Mr. Keller that the fiduciary standard should be expanded to include registered representatives and even insurance agents, as the Madoff scandal clearly demonstrates, the real problem is enforcement, rather than the presence or absence of either a code of ethics or the fiduciary standard.



In terms of academic standards, a review of the CFP curriculum tends to support Mr. Keller’s rebuttal that it is broad-based and not product oriented per se. However, as Dr. Basu acerbically articulates, the position advanced by some CFP proponents that the designation represents the sole legitimate academic path to financial planning competency is equally questionable. Speaking directly to some of Mr. Keller’s comments, I believe he exaggerates the CFP program’s academic standing and screening criteria. Dr. Basu is quite correct in pointing out that the College for Financial Planning is not academically accredited and there are no admissions standards other than a nominal three year industry experience standard (three years as a clerk in a brokerage firm will qualify). Mr. Keller defends the curriculum by stating that, “Topics include economic concepts such as supply and demand, fiscal and monetary policy, time value of money concepts…” The mere fact that that no prior college level academic experience in finance is required is testament to the fact that the coursework is largely 101 level material. To illustrate this point by example, economics represents one small chapter of the Investments section of the CFP curriculum. In contrast, econometrics and statistics alone was a semester long 300 level course in my undergraduate economics studies. This is not to suggest that the CFP program does not provide adequate training and preparation for a career in financial planning, but to assert that the CFP designation trumps a graduate or even undergraduate degree in finance or economics is difficult to defend. This was my counterpoint to Mr. Moisand’s bellicose labeling of non-CFP certificants as “faux planners”.

In fairness, some of Dr. Basu’s ideals on the educational standards for financial planning certification seem a bit extreme as well. For instance, I can’t imagine subjecting doctors, attorneys, or even business school professors to periodic recertification exams. Further, unlike all of the aforementioned professions, most financial advisors are already subject to some form of industry mandated continuing education requirement. Frankly, most informed, non-industry related persons would probably agree with Mr. Keller that the CFP curriculum adequately prepares certificants to provide financial planning guidance to the public. Of greater concern, however, are the powerful lobbying efforts by Mr. Keller’s organization and the FPA to make the CFP designation a regulatory prerequisite to providing financial planning services. Those of us with accredited degrees in finance and/or economics who already practice financial planning under fiduciary standards as IARs should recognize this wolf in sheep’s clothing for what it is – a backdoor maneuver to eliminate non-CFP investment adviser competitors. For my two cents, I agree that there should be some sort of regulatory standard for financial planning competency, and I do not oppose establishing the CFP designation as the minimum educational standard – as long such legislation clearly acknowledges that those of us who have invested the time and money in attaining accredited degrees in finance and economics meet and exceed the standard as well.



Thank you for the opportunity to contribute this commentary. I hope it constructively adds to the debate.



Regards,

John H. Robinson



Mr. Robinson is a Honolulu-based independent, dual-registered financial advisor. He holds a degree in economics from Williams College and has written and published numerous professional papers. A paper he co-authored entitled, “Reality Check: The implications of sustainable withdrawal analysis on real world portfolios” was awarded the CFP Board of Standards' 2008 Outstanding Paper Award. He does not hold the CFP designation.



* Judith Zabalaoui was arrested in Louisiana earlier this year on charges of masterminding a Ponzi scheme. The media references her as a CFP who was hailed as one of the “early pioneers in fee-only planning”. James Buchannan was an Arizona CFP who stole $5 million from his church and fellow parishioners. Bradford Bleidt was a Boston-based RIA and CFP who embezzled millions of dollars from 125 clients including a number of local churches.
Ann  - CFP Mark - Not a Degree   |2009-04-20 11:55:53
Hi Bill,

The CFP® is a registered mark; it is NOT a degree.

Best.
Ann Miller; RN, MHA
[Executive Director]

www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.com
www.HealthcareFinancials.com
www.HealthcareFinancials.wordpress.com
Bill McDonald, CFP  - problems yes, but a strong step in the right direc   |2009-04-20 06:32:08
Author is a CFP professional who has taught the case studies/capstone module for several years at University of North Carolina Charlotte.

I am encouraged to hear a lively debate on this topic. It strikes me that Mr. Basu is grossly uninformed about the CFP, but his article serves to bring this debate to the forefront. It has been my contention for many years that:

CFP CERTIFICATION OUGHT NOT BE A POORLY RECOGNIZED, RARELY FOUND COMMODITY, BUT THE MINIMUM (YES MINIMUM) REQUIREMENT FOR THE DISPENSING OF PERSONAL FINANCIAL ADVICE!!!!!

All of his bloviating about the integrity of the CFP process is, frankly, nonsense. This argument, "Most practitioners have little knowledge or background about the field of education or the importance of a holistic approach to program and curriculum development, instructional methods or content structure and delivery. Merely having a representative member from an accrediting body in a group of practitioners attempting to create an academic program is not viable." smacks of the type of self important rhetoric most college professors spew into their undergraduate students' impressionable minds. I teach and I practice. I solve real problems for real people and teach others how to do the same. Are we really willing to concede that the only people who can set up the requirements to enter a profession ought to be those who KNOW NOTHING ABOUT IT???!!!

However, I do consider the CFP to be a generalist's degree. The author is correct that there are not enough opportunities to 'specialize', nor are most planners humble enough to recognize that calling in a subject matter expert can not only best serve a client but can stregthen the planner/client relationship. We need to stop being so insular and insecure about that!
panorth  - Low Bar?   |2009-04-17 08:47:26
I worked in business management for over twenty years before passing the CFP exam in 2003. I know the difference between something that is easy and something that is hard. Passing the CFP exam is difficult no matter who you are. Those that comment that the exam is a "low bar" obviously have never taken it, or even seriously looked into the level of difficulty.
fonarkin  - sorry   |2009-04-13 18:15:48
in my view cfp is just not that rigorous or challenging. frankly, I do not think it gives enough knowledge to manage investments. comparing cfp to lawyers or doctors, as one of the posts does, is laughable - obviously mr. dmpatrick, school was not your thing. due to great marketing, cfp is often sufficient to acquire a profession of financial planning, but trade schools keep you longer in class. i my opinion, cfp is great because any run of the mill broker or insurance agent is a little better than used car salesman. so any designation is like a life line. i hear and read so much absolutely terrible advice out there that i have nightmares about all these poor clients who end up using the advice. there has to be something better in the industry. sorry, but anyone who finds 30 hrs of education challenging should not be let any where near financial profession.
Ann  - Basu is Correct   |2009-04-10 04:19:56
Good Day,

Dr. Basu and Dr. Carolyn are corrrect.

There is nothing new here in Basu's article; nor the defense of the CFP Board of Standards; "same old, same old."

But, for a different perspective, visit this link:

http://healthcarefinancials.wordpress.com/2009/04/09/i-jealously-shake-my-fist-at-somnath-basu/

Best
Ann Miller; RN, MHA
[Executive Director]
www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.com
marmstrong  - How about some accuracy?   |2009-04-09 09:05:53
I would expect nothing less in a rebuttal from the CEO of the CFPBOS. In
an effort to oversell the difficulty of obtaining the "Mark" Mr Keller states "
Quote:
It also ignores the rigorous CFP certification examination (almost
Darwinian in nature) that nearly half of all first-time takers fail:Quote one need only visit the CFP Boards website and see that they statistics
for first time takers are significantly different ranging from a pass
rate of 55 to 70. Here is the
link http://www.cfp.net/media/survey.asp?id=9#2

Furthermore the 30 hours of biennial CEs required are hardly difficult especially when the CFB Board chooses to be very lax in enforcing its own standards.

It isa very old line that anyone can call themselves a financial planner and
yet that really is not the case, legally. Each state has requirements
which may prevent just anyone calling themselves a planner.

There is no reason to lump job holders such as stock brokers and financial
advisors with holders of a designation such as the ChFC unless one
is attempting to be insulting. If my information is correct people
who have completed the CFP educational requirement through the American
College do very well on the CFP exam.

In addition in the nearly 30
year history of the CFP BOS I am not sure what efforts that they have made
to promote the creation of a state recognized profession
of "Financial Planner". Now that the "Fiduciary" word
has become the cause celebre the CFP Board comes out with
the standards.

In August 06 Mr Keller was stating that there existed a Fiduciary relationship long before it was on the drawing
table.

While I disagree with Dr Basu's posting on many different levels I think that Mr Keller's repsonse is equally
disappointing and incorrect.

IN fact when I saw the title "
Restoring Trust in the CFP Mark" I thought that it may have been
an article dealing with the current CFPBOS and seeking redress their.
CarolynMcC   |2009-04-09 08:14:25
The profession of financial planning is in it's infancy. As a physician, former educator, and financial planner, I have to agree with Dr. Basu's remark that the experience requirement in inadequate. For us to create a profession, we need consistent standards to document the experience one has obtained to earn the marks. Furthermore, the lack of an organized venue to gain experience has left a large gap in creating clear career paths for financial planners. This is the link missing in creating a true profession.

My 50 year dream is to create residency training program fashioned after the training physicians receive after medical school. This would truly elevate the profession and provide the public with financial planning professionals who can truly address their needs. If we can dream it, we can do it, although many would say it does not need to be done...
thayes  - Basu rebuttal   |2009-04-09 07:29:27
While Dr. Basu has been busy contemplating the true meaning of imaginary numbers, and teaching junior how to calculate alpha, a great many CFPs and insurance "sales people" have been dealing with the REAL financial problems that people face and trying to help them to achieve their financial goals and objectives. Surely he knows that markets sometimes go down, as well as up. Because they recently went down, our motives are now suspect and we need to return to school for more education? And who has the conflict of interest?
eleanorblayney@mac.com  - Consumer Advocate for CFP Board   |2009-04-09 04:04:10
Dr. Basu’s hard drive to CFP® professionals unfortunately lands right back in his own court: How can the professor “be taken seriously” when it seems clear he is unaware of what it takes to attain and maintain the CFP® marks? He asks his readers to remember the days before 2007 – the date when a college or university degree became prerequisite for the CFP® license – when “planners could hit the pavement straight from high school or even beforehand.” I followed his directions and thought back to that time – a period when I was actively involved in helping to build the CFP® professional through the drafting and publishing of professional practice standards and had the opportunity to meet and talk with many of my CFP® certificant colleagues at professional conferences and meetings. Try as I might, I cannot remember encountering a single teen-aged CFP® professional. Perhaps they were all off studying for their drivers’ licenses – a test that Dr. Basu holds up as an exemplar for demonstrating competence.

Putting aside my alternating amusement and affront at Dr. Basu’s remarks about a designation that I am unabashedly proud of, I would like to comment on two points in the article that should be taken seriously.

First is Dr. Basu’s call for a “grassroots movement to force regulation of the industry’s ethics and competency, as well as close monitoring of fiduciary responsibilities.” Speaking for the CFP® certificant community – and not for the undifferentiated masses of “impatient,” “greedy,” and “share-spoiling” sales people that Dr. Basu talks about – I can assert that this movement is already well underway within the financial planning profession itself. In 1993, CFP Board brought together practitioners to develop an enforceable code of ethics that would set standards for the CFP® professional that were higher than those of any other financial designation. The code, along with practice standards, have been subsequently revised, and now carry a fiduciary obligation for CFP® practitioners who provide the public with financial planning services. The difference between what Dr. Basu calls for, and what has existed for almost twenty years in the financial planning profession, is that such regulation is neither forced nor grassroots, but was initiated and championed by CFP® professionals themselves.

Second and even more important, is Dr. Basu’s discussion of the breach of public trust in the financial services sector. There is no doubt that the American consumer is confused and scared as a result of our recent economic woes. He or she does not know where to turn for competent, trustworthy advice. What’s needed to address this crisis of confidence is not more misinformation of the sort that Dr. Basu provides in this article, but the facts of the CFP® marks. The public needs to be aware of what it takes to be a CFP® professional, what CFP® professionals do, and the questions they must ask to find the right professional for their financial needs. Yes, increased competence and integrity are desirable, and this will always be the case. But needed, too, are more CFP® professionals in this country; at present, the supply is seriously inadequate to the needs of consumers. However, because it takes time, study, and commitment to become a CFP® practitioner, this imbalance cannot be rectified simply or immediately.

I would like to reference another Harris Interactive poll to place beside the one Dr. Basu cites as evidence of the public’s distrust of financial planners. This one, done late last year as the economy was turning south, examined the correlation between the American consumer’s confidence in his or her financial future, and the level of comprehensive financial planning that the consumer had undertaken. The study found that nearly 9 out of 10 respondents with a comprehensive financial plan believed they had a clear financial direction and felt optimistic about their future, a number almost 50% higher than those without professional planning advice. Clearly, CFP® professionals are doing a lot of good out there. This is a result that I can hang my hat on as a CFP® professional – a result that I observed over and over again in my twenty years of practice, as clients would leave our conference room saying what is also said to another type of trusted advisor, their doctors: “Thank you. I feel a lot better now.”


Eleanor K. H. Blayney, CFP®
Consumer Advocate for CFP Board
President, Directions, LLC
efm  - Fiduciary breach   |2009-04-08 09:23:34
Mr. Keller's (and others) comments about the high integrity, for the most part, may be dispensed away with this fact. The Board and NAPFA have all participated in a fraud upon, at least, all consumers in the state of California through the direct statements that their planners should continue to violate the law but simply keep quiet about it. NAPFA said that they always knew what the law was but figured they would never get caught and, if they did, they would simply get the law changed. That is being a fiduciary???? (Everything plus much, much more is on file with the Board since 1995.)

Of the 8,000 CFPs in California and several hundred NAPFA members, there is only ONE (not a misprint) who is fully licensed and legal to offer comprehensive fee services. There are about another 35 states with similar types of required licensing. Same results.

It is disingenuous of those to dispense commentary about fiduciary duty, honesty, transparency, education and more where the illegal activity of the bulk of CFPs has led to a violation of their responsibility to their clients. And abysmal advice or none at all. That is essence of being a fiduciary???

For those pundits of the above commentary, do your homework. All this stuff about ethics and a “new beginning” has a very sandy underbelly belying a breach that has been apparent to the truly informed for well over a decade.
eddieboi   |2009-04-08 06:53:21
This article was clearly written by a "buy term, invest the difference" coolaide drinker, who sees no value of any kind to permanent life insurance. For him to make a blanket statement like thhis shows that he has no real understanding of what we do. No 1 type of insurance is proper 100% of the time.

I know of many advisors that aren't CFP's because they can't pass the final exam. I understand making the exam difficult, but I think this proffessor is full of himself.

He's a professor, because he can't make it in the real world in which we practice. His little sterile environment proves him right 100% of the time.
Please login to write comments.

3.26 Copyright (C) 2008 Compojoom.com / Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved."

FA green magazine March 2010
Click Here

Private Wealth cover 0310
Click Here

Quick Poll

Do you expect a market correction by June 30?
 
Managing Retirement Income: Part III
An investment in stocks of companies that provide both high- and growing-dividend income can benefit a retirement portfolio undergoing the duress of withdrawals.
Read more...
 
Overlooked Lending
Small business owners remain caught in a credit squeeze. Here's how advisors may be able to be able to help such clients.
Read more...
 
Getting Technical
Few financial advisors go into business because they love spending time thinking about their back-office and technology, but often find themselves dealing with too many back-office distractions. Yet streamlining your practice doesn't have to be difficult.
Read more...
 
A New Plan
A client with a need for income had her retirement assets slashed more than 40% to $500,000 as a result of the 2008 market crash. Here's how one advisor helped.
Read more...
 
Managing Retirement Income: Part II
Some retirees don't realize that their spending plans are too simple—and flawed. An "endowment" spending policy may be a better choice.
Read more...
 

Discussion

Should all advisors fall under one self-regulatory organization and could that happen on Mary Schapiro’s watch?

Join the Discussion

 





 


Financial Advisor magazine on twitter

LinkedIn-logo