It has been exciting to see people with different views sharing their ideas and opinions even if it has been quite heated at times. I was chatting to a journalist who had observed that over the last year more voices have risen up from within the Paraplanning community.
At the start of the year I shared some ideas about how a professional standard might work and drew some lessons from the world of nursing.
A professional standard should show evidence of both knowledge and behaviour. As a member of both the Personal Finance Society and the Chartered Institute for Securities & Investment I have taken exams and obtained qualifications. I have committed to undertake Continuous Professional Development (CPD) and adhere to a code of ethics. This is not just necessary to maintain my designations, but is necessary to be professional in the way I do my work. I need to know (and continue to know) my stuff and behave ethically!
One question being asked is do Paraplanners need a standard at all? I don’t think that we ‘need’ a standard in case we go off the rails. However I do think that we would benefit from a standard to demonstrate our competence. My view is that we need a standardised definition of the core competencies that should be demonstrated by a Paraplanner at different levels. I would suggest that Junior, Senior and Specialists would be a good place to start.
This view has been cemented recently as we have been recruiting for a Junior Paraplanner to join our team at EQ. There are a wide range of people describing themselves as Paraplanners and it can be difficult to work out who could be suitable for the role. Having some kind of benchmark would make this task – and the task of developing people within a firm – a lot easier.
I’m undecided as to whether a compulsory certification is the right way to go – mainly because I don’t want cost to be a barrier to entry (there are enough barriers such as lack of opportunities already!).
So what might this standard look like? I think that the existing exams provide a good way of demonstrating knowledge. They are well recognised and supported. I’m less convinced about the paraplanning exams/qualifications on offer as I don’t think they really assess the ability to do the job in a realistic way.
CPD and mentoring would be useful ways of developing and verifying skills. There is a cost to this and I think this could be delivered by the existing professional bodies funded by membership. Quite how this would work should be led by Paraplanners on the ground.
I think that the upcoming Paraplanners PowWow is a great way of taking the pulse from the wider community. There is a desire within the PFS and CISI Paraplanning groups to work together to ensure that the professional bodies develop, and offer, support that is useful. In my opinion, having a standard, or agreed definitions, would be beneficial in shaping this. What do you think?
- Dan Atkinson was the 2014 IFP Paraplanner of the Year. He is a Chartered Financial Planner and is senior technical consultant at EQ Investors and was co-chairman of the 2016 CISI Paraplanning Conference. Follow Dan on Twitter via @DanAtkinsonUK.
— Dan Atkinson (@DanAtkinsonUK)