FASEA chief executive Stephen Glenfield told ifa the authority “does not have an interest in making people fail” and had taken on feedback from advisers struggling with the pressures of a full-length academic exam in some cases for the first time.
“The more advisers get through the better – it’s better for the advice industry if you have people who have demonstrated they know what they’re doing,” Mr Glenfield said.
“The feedback we’ve been getting from people who haven’t done an exam is around how do I prepare, what resources should I use, what’s it going to look like. It’s an exam competent advisers can pass, so we’re wanting to encourage them to do it because those that are turning up are doing really well.”
Mr Glenfield said based on current registration numbers, FASEA expected that over 60 per cent of advisers on the ASIC register would have passed the exam by the end of the first quarter of 2021.
“As of the end of November there were close to 11,250 that had passed, and the pass rate was about 89%. Over 1000 sat in January whose results are being marked, and we have over 2000 registered for March, with registrations still open until 5 March.
“Based on past performance, about two thirds of the FAR will be through by the end of the March exam, which is looking really positive.”
Mr Glenfield said FASEA had also taken on board industry feedback that guidance given to failing advisers around their results had been too vague, and had so far contacted more than 70 re-sitters to provide personalised exam coaching.
“We’ve been trying to reach out and talk to them about how they are going about the exam and try to work out is there something that is proving a barrier for them,” he said.
“We’re constrained by how many we can [assist] but we’ve reached out to over 70 already, so we are trying to help where we can.
In terms of the feedback we’ve had a look at that. There’s three main areas in the exam – legal requirements, ethics and client behaviour and if you haven’t passed you get told which of those three areas you are underperforming. With people who don’t pass it tends to be across all three, so they have read that [feedback] as not as deep as they would like.
Mr Glenfield said for those that had sat the exam from January 2021 onward, more granular feedback would now be provided.
“For those that are unsuccessful, it will delve deeper within each of those areas and say these are the parts you need to work on. We had to design a program around that and it took some time, but it will be there for January [sitters],” he said.
However, he added the vast majority of advisers had nothing to be concerned about and those that hadn’t attempted the exam yet should do so as soon as possible, with only a handful of sittings left before the new compliance deadline of 1 January 2022.
“The focus tends to go onto those who weren’t successful, but nine out of 10 advisers are getting through. We are trying to help those who have been unsuccessful as much as we can, but for most people you are not going to need that,” Mr Glenfield said.
Stephen Glenfield will address ifa’s Business Strategy Day 2021 on 30 March. Register now to secure your place at this two-day virtual event.
The tribe has spoken
Glenfield desperately trying to avoid being labelled “the Grim Reaper” of Financial Advisers before FASEA pulls down the shutters.
70 you have REACHED out to, how kind and considerate of you. What about the other 1,000’s who have failed and received not feedback, not even knowing if they failed by 1 or 40 marks. FASEA couldn’t care less about Advisers and the FPA, AFA and the government have failed this Industry.
I’ve been a successful adviser for 35 years. I have NEVER had the slightest hint of a client complaint. To the contrary I have hundreds of clients that would write me a glowing reference tomorrow.
This exam is not only an insult and a FARCE for advisers like me but a showstopper. Why on God’s blue and green earth would I or others like me at age 60 something pay tens of thousands in time and uni fees to complete a wholly un-needed qualification? Just for a few more years in the industry? It simply isn’t fun anymore with the heavy hand of compliance causing 8 hours in the office for every hour or two client-facing. That is just wrong and not in client best interest.
These clowns at FARCE-IA should be booted and replaced with professionals who understand that an adviser with 35 excellent years behind him “knows what he’s doing” (as article states).
These taxpayer funded under-achievers causing all this hardship to our industry should get jobs that truly enhance GDP and REALLY serve taxpayers and get OUT of the way of financial professionals who KNOW what they’re doing – being of real service to their clients! Where had all the reason and common sense gone in Australia with know-nothings calling the shots?
I couldn’t agree more. I’m a younger adviser with a masters in FP and I passed the exam in 2019 on the first go. I am a believer in education and higher standards. But regardless, I am sitting here gobsmacked at the appalling treatment of older advisers by FASEA. PS. Agree it’s not fun anymore. 8 hours for a 2 hour meeting is spot on. I know young advisers who are leaving the industry because they are over it, even some who passed the exam and have approved degrees.
These advisers are part of the 11,000 co-hort that Grenfield is seeing as a success story because they did the exam…
I am 58 and grappling with this myself.
I passed the FASEA exam first time and now am contemplating what to do.
I will be 64 when i complete the degree after being in the industry for 20 years.
All of a sudden since FASEA i know nothing and unless i do the exam i have my occupation and business taken away.
I feel robbed, cheated, frustrated and lost my self worth and self esteem.
It is such a hard decision because i don’t want to quit, but i have to question the economics of keeping on going.
6 subjects at an estimated 120 hours per subject ( probably less when i start) costing around $10k plus the usual 40 hrs CPD per year ( which usually runs out to 50 by the time you get the allocations right) , then i can think about talking to clients.
The system wasn’t perfect before but it is totally broken now and discriminates against older planners, although the legislation says it doesn’t breach any human rights norms i feel many would disagree as the impact statement was deemed not required.
Any way, i am not Robinson Caruso here.
Good luck all.
So, they can’t pass an exam on CURRENT Laws that they are supposed to be operating under ? Can’t answer questions in the client’s BEST INTERTESTS when faced with case-study questions of ethics – and they are CURRENTLY dealing with people’s life savings ? You must be kidding me ? FASEA would be better of instructing these guys on how to fill in the form to exit the industry. We who are left and consumers, will be better off.
it’s not what you think, try the exam. bet you haven’t done an SoA ?
While I agree this exam is a croc, I studied for 30 hours over a weekend, then sat exam on the Monday & passed.
If you can’t pass it with the time we’ve had to study and potential for multiple exams, then you should be exiting the industry…
Yes the exam is a waste of time….but if someone doesn’t pass this first time….!! It’s open book to the extent of the regulations and the rest is common sense. Stop appeasing the product comm jockeys and get them out
I’m not aware of any feedback that’s been provided to advisers who have failed the exam
Why could they not provide this feedback and guidance last year to advisers who failed and suffered mental anguish? Better to get planners to pay 2 or more exam fees? In their endeavor to get as many advisers through as possible now, will they be reducing the level of competence needed to pass the exam?
They already knew that some 10,000 to 15,000 would not sit the exam…but they were budgetting on 30,000 exam fees….
What rubbish
It’s disgusting and nonsense
Industry genocide facilitated by a pathetic indulgent regulator
That’s a rather bitter comment. Whilst I question the industry application of sitting such an exam, the exam was easy. 20-30 hours study and you pass. To only think 15 years ago you could walk off the street with little more than a certificate and give financial planning advice, often to the detriment of the client. We have come along way for a good reason.
Quite a different tone from FASEA. Originally it was studied disdain, now they are actually being helpful. Thank you.
I had unfortunate experience of siting last exam, it was nothing like the practice exam or the so call FASEA training courses, i found it interesting looking around the around the room and to see the Stunned mullet look on people & the swearing under the breath it highlighted my thoughts exactly. with nearly 30 yrs of experience with bachelor degree and completed the so called professional qualification offered by the Financial planning associations which appears to be not worth the paper they are written on.
i found it even more insulting when i received an email from FASEA at 2.22pm of Feb 2 (i note that was when the final exam was on) regarding Q &A from Pre Exam briefing which it was interesting that it mentioned about studying “Behavioral Finance”. Really. to much focus on Austrac & AML & non real live experience though its important how does this improve the poor service in past to clients. The exam was clearing written by academics &/or advisor whom have not advised a client ever or for a longtime.
Not sure why this exam is relevant. It would been much better to have this as course of Via Kaplan etc with exam on on each topic with an assignment over 3 months.
Note FASEA do you release the 3 moth rule may not allow advice whom fail to resit in time considering you take approx 8 Weeks to provide results not sure why it takes so long as round 85% of the question are multiple choice on on line system, in effect you should be able to get a pass or fail just based on the computer based questions or the 3rd option is if not passed on that basis further review required on the written response
Their will be number of advises whom business we destroyed in they don’t pass by end of year in effect if sat the Jan exam you only have 2 more shots at the exam. You will have blood on you hands.
The bad behavior of few. & the Banks/AMP exec. whom still got the large wages and now the shareholders are paying the poor clients whom got screwed and these people have moved on to the next disaster.
Passing the FASEA exam does not make you ethical.
The exam is easy. Pointless, but easy. 89% pass rate says as much.
As for the initial help from FARSEA, here’s Chapter 7 Corporations Act, here’s the bibliography of the Ethics course.
Go read these 15,000 pages of rubbish and see how you go.
Nice work FARSEA you are finally acting like you should have 3 years ago with proper exam guidance.
What an absolute FARSEAcal process this has been.
Also given I have recently received a distinction in the FARSEAcal ethics course.
Why am I now having to sit another 1/3 of this exam on the exact same stuff I just passed ???
Why, because morons run this process.
Canberra bubble bureaucratic morons with zero real world experience and love wasting our time and money.
Did Melissa Caddick sit for and pass the FASEA exam? Bet she did she’s pretty smart.
Advisers should have little faith in these blokes marking the exams correctly…. they couldn’t even get the first example practice exam right they had incorrect answers on estate planning
it’s a hard sell when there’s other professions that pay more and with lower career/financial risk…
If that fail rate is too high they’ll be questions so everyone gets a Gold Ribbon hey. Is this more about FASEA trying to not look like a complete failure? (hijacked by Academics and fools not consulting with planners) as opposed to being fair across all candidates and recognizing that this entire process was flawed from the start. Universities moved away from exams “like this” years ago. If you get too many failing or just not turning up it’s going to raise question isn’t it, so let’s get everyone except the excepted fail rate across the line. We’ll have an acceptable fail rate and in 2 years time this will be history.
I’m sure you are aware of what they say about Academics. “Those who can do and those who can’t teach. It’s a classic and so true. Particularly relevant in this situation where they are completely out of touch with reality.
So 3000 of the 10,000 have written or are about to write – 7,000 or so havent yet bothered…all the marketing isnt likely to bring them in – they are leaving the industry….
As someone committed to staying, I hope so!
FASEA overplayed their hand. We all have limited time to work with.
If I have X hours that I need to dedicate to study in the coming years, do I waste those hours to tick boxes on something I aready know?
Or do I use those X hours on new skills to differentiate in a rapidly changing world?
FASEA makes plenty of sense to the self employed who have invested into their business, their livelihoods, as they need to make it work. I wish them success.
For the rest of us, in my view FASEA is born from the regulator, fixing yesterday’s problems, ergo the study is backward looking. It is a sunk opportunity cost, and so many of us will look elsewhere.
Feed back to vague??? It was non-existent.