CPD a problem for risk advisers

Why does an "experienced" life adviser not need to keep up with all the life, disability and medical product changes each year - there are many and from multiple providers. How can they competently give advice on insurance products they don't know about or fully understand?
Show me an adviser who can advise clients on all they need to about ACC and WINZ benefits and how these interact with private insurance, who is completely competent in all aspects of compliance and handling client claims (who knows the provisions of the applicable Acts), who fully understands all the variations of trauma conditions - even just the big three/four, who can work out how much a client will receive after tax and offsets if they are disabled, who actually reads policy wordings regularly, who can quantify the present value of an expected future income, show me an adviser who has a realistic understanding of the costs of serious disability, show me an adviser who has nothing to learn then perhaps there are no opportunities for on-going learning - I've not met such a person.

I agree with Tash. We had a similar discussion at the IFA breakfast this morning where several of us agreed the complexity of risk could be greater than investment. There is plenty of CPD opportunities for those that consider themselves as professionals.

Tash, couldn't have said it better. In addition, if insurance advisers are offering advice on life insurance, should they not have a working knowledge of Estate and Asset Planning, and changes and proposed changes to these areas of law?

The opening salvo in Tash's post is incorrect. Nobody suggested that Risk Advisers should be exempt from CPD, and there's no question John, that the consequences of an erroneous risk solution can be far more devastating than those of a suspect investment solution.
CPD should address the requirements of all advisers, while many of the items mentioned should form part of the fundamental knowledge requirements to function as a Risk Adviser.

RFA's need to step up. Even your local plumber has to earn CPDs. Well said Tash!

The issue isn't weather risk advisers should do CPD, but getting quality CPD. Yes we should have a CPD regime and be competent when giving advice. Also too, we need to be up to date with the changes in our industry and made by product providers. Under the rules product doesn't qualify as CPD as it's looked on as 'sales' training because it's specific to that provider. It is important that we risk advisers understand the finer points of the products we recommend too. As Tash says we can always learn more, but please don't generalise. Some of us do read policy wordings, understand ACC & WINZ implications and can cover tax and offset rules while understanding the implications of good estate and asset planning. Completely competent all of the time, maybe not. Knowing when we're not and knowing to where to look and who to ask so we do get it right, yes most of the time. This is where the specialist adviser working with other specialist advisers to get the right answers for clients becomes critical. The one stop do everything adviser competently is a myth. The sooner we have an effective review of the RFA designation with defined authority for specialised advise that is truly client focused, the happier I'll be as a professional in this area. See you Tuesday John.

I suggest that there has been some slightly off-topic reaction to this article and to Susan's previous article.

The original article was based on comments I made to Susan where I said that there was really no CPD that would add to my value to clients. Clearly, responsible risk advisers must keep up with product changes - to not do so would be the extreme of professional irresponsibility. In my case, I spend about 35% of my work time analysing life and health insurance products for my Strategy research service. I attend some insco presentations where I think that they will add value. I avoid those that are "promotional;" rather than "instructive". Recognise too, that there is some debate as to whether "training" provided by the insco will qualify as structured CPD!

So. responding to Tash, no-one is suggesting that "experienced" risk advisers should not keep up to date with changes in product. As for the various knowledge and skill needs she spells out in her second para, I think that many of the grey haired and wrinkled advisers out there probably meet all of her needs - and keep up to date with the changes as they occur. I certainly do.

I disagree with John's assertion that there are "plenty of CPD opportunities for those that consider themselves as professionals." Other than product-based sessions, I struggle to find anything that will add value to my clients. Having said that, please recognise that over my 46 years as an insurance adviser, I was a sponge in earlier years. In addition to taking all the industry learning available in my first 20 years, I attended many courses in accounting, law and other associated disciplines before CPD was even thought of, let alone become a requirement. Most of that learning better equipped me to add value to my clients.

So, in summary, I have no argument with the need for risk advisers to be competent on an ongoing basis. I do however, find it difficult to find meaningful (to me) CPD, other than product information provided by insurers.

Please accept this post as an attempt to bring clarity to the situation. It is not meant to be an egotistical rant.

Cheers

I'm with Graeme on finding good CPD. Most offerings seem to be some sort of promotional service provider pitch, insurance company sales pitch or the next great sales idea.

An industry issue is lack of understanding of the basics. All the product knowledge in the world won't help if you don't have a strong set of principles to work from.

Having a good knowledge of what can happen and what financial responses are available is a good first step. Having a strong link between cause and effect in your advice is a very good second step. Understanding (and communicating) what happens at claim time is the third. Get these three right and the minutiae of policy detail becomes less of an issue, the choice becoming very clear (not all polices are created equal).

When you buy a car do you speak to the mechanic who services it or the sales person who relates what it can do to meet your needs? You don't need minute detail about what the CPU does or what paint system it has, you want to know how it looks, drives and fits the dog.

Insurance companies sell "car parts", you need to sell "the car". Remember, you're in a people business. The subject we work with is hugely emotional and sensitive. Be an adviser, not a mechanic.

From everything I see with 75% of new business really churned existing business there need only be one question on any learning course.
Prospect / client has cover - do I sell around that and earn a small commission or do I churn the lot and earn the big commission
If the official answer is the 2nd option - utopia
If it is not - exit plenty of advisers to the real estate business