IFA CEO resigns
Penny Mudford has resigned as chief executive of the Institute of Financial Advisers after less than a year in the role.
Tuesday, October 1st 2013, 4:49PM 
15 Comments
The Institute of Financial Advisers (IFA) has announced that chief executive Penny Mudford will be leaving IFA at the end of the year.
Mudford, who has a background in the professions, was brought in to further develop the role of IFA to lead the financial advice profession. She says that IFA is a well-established professional body and the focus for the Institute now needs to be on developing professional career pathways for financial advisers and providing support for our members who work in the financial advice profession.
Board chairman Julie Berry says “Mudford’s contribution to IFA has been valuable and has continued our focus on leading the profession”.
While the board is disappointed to see Mudford leave after only a short time it acknowledges the contribution she has made to strengthen the Institute and her commitment to continue to the end of the year.
“We understand Penny’s move is for professional reasons and we wish her well into the future,” Berry says.
The Institute’s Appointments Committee will commence the process of seeking and recommending a replacement to the Board.
| « Fixed interest a fine balance for advisers | IFA working on pro-bono offering » |
Special Offers
Comments from our readers
On 1 October 2013 at 6:08 pm Informed said:
Both the PAA and the IFA have lost CEOs in the last year. The boards must look at themselves in what can be a thankless and demanding role. There should be one professional entity clearly. On 1 October 2013 at 7:14 pm brent sheather said:
This is a guess but I reckon she just read "after the panic" by Gareth Morgan.. On 2 October 2013 at 9:56 am Independent Observer said:
I'd suggest that members of the IFA ask their Board:
Why IFA Execs aren't lasting?
What do I get for my subscription?
On 2 October 2013 at 10:18 am Amused said:
With the industry now regulated associations like the IFA and PAA must demonstrate continued relevance beyond what is now required by law for an adviser to be able to operate his/her business. Advisers are wanting to see value for money to belong to association or else they will simply cancel their membership. On 2 October 2013 at 11:05 am R1 said:
Perhaps she does not see a bright future for the organisation? A major justification for the existence of the IFA for members could well be its ability to get them AFA status without having a proper qualification. PREDICTION: The IFA will lose its ability to manufacture dubious CPD credits for its members and so have no relevance - membership dries up . . . . On 3 October 2013 at 8:02 am Bill said:
Brent, why quote Gareth Morgan ?
The same guy who some years back said the NZ dollar would go to US 30 cents
And the same guy who came into the fund management industry boldly declaring he would/could show existing fund managers how to do it ?
Then when his fund underperformed he sold out !
He sold his customers to those very fund managers he was so critical of - not very admirable
I think perhaps he's yesterday's man
On 3 October 2013 at 9:42 am Brent Sheather said:
Hi Bill
I quote Gareth because he has a number of attributes which differentiate him from many others in the industry, as follows:
1. He is honest
2. He is educated, with a proper degree ie a PHD in economics
3. He doesn’t need to rip his clients off and is fee based
4. He is not encumbered by membership of various organisations and thus is able to speak the truth.
That’s probably enough. I’ve known him since the early 80’s and happen to like him.
Regards Brent
On 3 October 2013 at 9:58 am concerned stakeholder said:
Hi R1
Are you really voicing your own thoughts? The rhetoric sounds so much like the sort of thing that Brent Sheather would say it would almost make one think that you are one in the same person. Or perhaps its you Alan who works for Brent.
On 3 October 2013 at 11:19 am Bill said:
I remember a well known planner telling me as soon as he got his AFA, he did not see any more need for the IFA so he cancelled his membership
He felt his AFA status more than replaced his CFP
Brent, I don't think Gareth did anything admirable for our industry.
Like many others, he came in, he talked the talk but his investment results didn't walk the walk.
and before long he left.
PS I am not a fund manager, nor am I a fan of active managers
On 3 October 2013 at 1:14 pm R1 said:
I will take that as a compliment 'concerned stakeholder'. I have to confess that I do agree with many things Brent says, but not all. Perhaps you are Nigel? On 3 October 2013 at 3:51 pm Ron Flood said:
"PREDICTION: The IFA will lose its ability to manufacture dubious CPD credits for its members".
Once again, a comment from a nobody posting under a non-de-plume with no evidence backing up this claim.
Any attempt to have one professional body in this country has little show of getting off the ground whist we have so many advisers posting unprofessional comments under some form of non-de-plume.
At least with Brent you know where he is coming from and he is happy to put his name to his comments. Why express your views under a non-de-plume unless you are a 'whistle blower' who needs some form of protection?
On 4 October 2013 at 8:25 am Murray Weatherston said:
Ron, given what the Code Committee has announced yesterday, R1's PREDICTION was almost right on the button. Whoever s/he is, s/he must have either had "inside info" or made a lucky guess. On 4 October 2013 at 9:46 am Carey Church said:
Murray,the documentation released by the Code Committee says that 'A consequence of the new definition of structured CPD is that professional bodies no longer have an express role to play under the Code.
Nevertheless the Committee still anticipates professional bodies (however defined) will play an important role in assisting their members manage and satisfy their CPD obligations.'
To me, this means that professional bodies no longer have a 'default' position where they are uncontested with providing CPD, therefore, the CPD that they provide has to add value and be cost effective in comparison to everything else available in Australasia.
Surely this is a good thing?
My interpretation of the CPD changes is that it has significantly 'widened' the opportunities for AFAs to get access to good quality, relevant CPD.
I'm with you though, that I think that the Code Committee deserves a gold medal with what they have done in reviewing all the submissions.
I am however, disappointed that this thread has degenerated into personal bickering and not focussing on the issue that we should put our agendas aside and seek to become a united body.
Ron Flood, I do agree with your comments as well, I would like to see people posting under their real name all the time.
On 4 October 2013 at 10:22 am R1 said:
My prediction was based on the assumption that the Code Committee and FMA will do the right thing for investors this time round rather than look after the vested interests of some in the industry.
Perhaps that was a lucky guess or I just see the writing on the wall more clearly than some.
The next thing I hope for is that our universities will offer short course, CPD-aligned modules based on sound research that will provide clarity about what best practice is for the advisor industry. I am sick of wasting my time surveying the current CPD offerings for anything that 'fits the bill'.
Have seen some stuff in Aussie but the cost is prohibitive and I don't think we should have to rely on that bunch.
Sign In to add your comment
|
|
Printable version |
|
Email to a friend |
Along with many other advisers that I know, I have real issues with paying $900+ every year to be a member of the IFA just to retain my CFP and CLU status. I disengaged from any involvement with the IFA a long time ago for a number of reasons, including discontent at the personal 'fiefdoms and agendas' of the elected people at the top.
Having had a personal engagement with Penny, where I was most impressed with her professionalism and determination, I was optimistic that she was the person who could do something about the issues that exist.
What is happening at IFA? Is it a toxic employment environment? How long did Peter Lee last? How long did Joe Grayland last?
Is it time that we do something about this organisation and the leaders? I have no desire to be 'politically involved', but I am prepared to put in blood sweat and tears behind the scene to get ONE INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION, where egos can be catered for, but that works for all of us. We have lost Penny - which is a major defeat.
Is anyone else prepared to work together to get some kind of sensible industry organisation happening???