News

RFAs should be qualified: Survey

Tuesday 19th of February 2013

There are no qualification requirements for advisers to become registered, but if they want to become authorised financial advisers (AFAs) they have to pass the National Certificate in Financial Services Level 5.

But an industry-wide survey by training body the Skills Organisation (formerly known as ETITO) has found about two thirds of respondents thought the level 5 qualification should be the minimum level of qualification for RFAs as well.

The survey included AFAs, RFAs, advisers who operate in Qualifying Financial Entities (QFEs) and some non-financial advisers working within AFA firms who are not operating as AFAs, such as lawyers and accountants.

Overall there was no desire on the part of the majority for additional qualifications in the field; but respondents were divided over a range of issues including the need for a higher level entry qualification.

Roughly a third wanted it at a higher level, a third did not, and the remaining third of respondents were undecided.

The Skills Organisation survey also found mixed views on the relevance of level 5’s content to the AFA role and the need for ongoing learning beyond the level 5 qualification.

The Level 5 qualification was rated second in terms of usefulness behind only the Diploma in Personal Financial Planning or Risk Management, with the Master of Finance or applied Finance seen as the third most useful.

Of all the groups surveyed AFAs found level 5 the least useful (24%) and preferred the diploma (39%), while RFAs were happiest with level 5 (36%) and had the lowest rating of the diploma (21%).  

 

Comments (6)
alan clarke
In terms of complaints, a disputes scheme official told me recently the complaints are coming from life insurance and mortgages, not investments ! Presumably the complaints are mostly in the RFA arena. The words "financial adviser" infer some sort of qualifications, so they should change the title, or require some qualifications
0 0
11 years ago

W K
@old timer: We are of the same mind, and I think we are not alone. This idea was suggested to the previous Minister in charge, Simon Power. Only need some cow sense to work that out. @btw: Agreed. Wondered who paid for the "survey" or more accurately, the "shifting of responsibilities".
0 0
11 years ago

Craig Knox
Old Timer i concur - specific qualification by industry would be useful. Time in the saddle while useful can always be improved with relevant and highly targeted study.
0 0
11 years ago

W K
Good Luck guys. I also suggested to Simon Power, the then Minister, advisers should have some form of identification on their name card, eg. life insurance adviser / life & general insurance and mortgage broker / general insurance agent / life insurance and investment adviser, etc. (can be salesman, consultant, representative or whatever, and of course, advisers have to pass the respective exams first). He heard me, but didn't listen. Either 30 years' experience isn't enough or too small a fry to be bothered.
0 0
11 years ago

alan clarke
Exactly my point. A customer hearing the words financial adviser may infer (most probably does) from that some sort of qualification. Infer or imply - an English teacher might see a difference, but Joe Bloggs consumer won't
0 0
11 years ago

Andy Phillipson
Andrew and WK - I totally agree. Get rid of the RFA designation, and reconsider the AFA title to denote the specialist training: Investment, Retirement, Estate Planning, Mortgage, Personal Risk, etc... I wouldn't trust my doctor to perform brain surgery. I have never classed myself as a Financial Adviser - that is a big package to carry. I deal with Mortgages and personal risk, and am suitably qualified (30 years experience and a relevant diploma). I fail to see how the ETITO courses or current offerings can give me a better in-depth understanding of the products or markets. There are suitable courses available already through Massey and even polytechs. Let's use those rather than wasting more taxpayer funds and our time and money!
0 0
11 years ago

Comments to GoodReturns.co.nz go through an approval process. Comments which are defamatory, abusive or in some way deemed inappropriate will not be approved.