What do you think of the proposed Adviser Ratings System?
What do you think of the proposed Adviser Ratings System?
“I am not familiar with the adviser ratings system. However, I think generally a service that provided ratings for advisers could be very useful but it could also be potentially dangerous.
It really depends on the ratings and who is doing the work to provide the advis-ers with the ratings.
I would presume that advisers were given a star rating by the plan they present and how they deal with clients.
The potential danger is that the ratings can be quite subjective. If it was me, I would certainly want to see the criteria before being assessed.
I think you would need a pretty big spread of what the advisers would need to do to qualify and there would need to be a good range of interested advisers.”
Gerry Lenihan CFP
Nexus Personal Planners
I don’t know if I agree with it. Not many groups would rate people in their own industry and I don’t know any industry that actively does that.
I see this as something for the consumer to do and not for the industry or in-dustry groups.
As advisers, we already have a body – the Financial Planning Association (FPA) – that should already govern the quality of planners through the certified finan-cial planner (CFP) designation and continuing professional development (CPD) program.
Using a ratings system creates elitism. Professionals will attract clients if they are truly professional. Clients are discerning and will rate planners them-selves. The system has the potential to damage reputations if not used with dis-cretion.
Brian Dunn, FPA Senior Associate
South Australia branch manager
D & D Tolhurst
“I see it as being a clever commercial enterprise. For example, you could apply this system to the legal profession, the medical profession and the accounting profession – not to mention other professions as well. When you think about it, the first person who thinks up the idea has the opportunity to make a great deal of money, provided the practitioners support the concept. If I was still prac-tising, I would not participate. My clients would have the integrity to judge my work. I would not submit myself for assessment by a commercial commentator.
One of the problems with the system is that there is inevitably a value judge-ment made, which is a qualitative assessment not a quantitative assessment.
It is my view that if advisers across the country decide that it is not in their interests to support such a system, then it will fail and consumers will be left with their natural judgements about who they feel comfortable with.
If, on the other hand, the promoters of this scheme are able to create suffi-cient anxiety amongst financial planners, so that they think they must be part of this rating system, then they just may be successful in convincing the advi-sory community to support them. It will be interesting to sit back over the next 12 months and see what unfolds.”
Wes McMaster CFP
Former FPA Chairman
I think it is a great idea and quite simplistic for people to understand, since many are still unsure about who to talk to and who to trust.
However, I believe there would have to be great care taken in allocating a rat-ing and an examination of any group awarding the ratings.
If you disagreed with the rating published on paper, there would be a length of time while that is circulating. There can be problems with that issue if people looked at the ratings and based a decision on that. However, if these (issues) are properly dealt with, I still think this would be a good idea.
Wendy Jackson CFP
Wendy Jackson Pty Ltd.
