I wanted to get this out as a new post so it could be more easily found.

There will be opportunities for in-person conversations with the CFP Board at the upcoming Retreat to have meaningful discussions and address some of the concerns that have been posted.

On Tuesday, June 3, 11:45 - 1:00,  Under the Trees: Join CFP Board Chair, David G. Strege, CFP(r), CFA, Dan Candura, CFP(r), Former Chair of the Board of Professional Review and current Board member, and CEO Kevin R. Keller, CAE, for an informal conversation focused on the recent changes with the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission and the new Rules of Conduct and Code of Ethics that take effect on July 1, 2008.

On Wednesday, June 4, 7:30 AM - 8:45 AM: CFP Board invites you to join them for continental breakfast and a brief presentation by CFP Board Chair David G. Strege, CFP(r), CFA, and CEO Kevin R. Keller, CAE, on CFP Board's strategic direction and activities.  They will be joined by Martin Kurtz, CFP(r), AIFA(r), Former Chair, Board of Professional Review, at an open-mike Q&A session following their presentation. CFP Board is interested in hearing your views on issues that concern you and learning from your input. You will also have the opportunity to get your questions answered by the panelists.

Kevin Keller and David Strege will present the Mission and Strategic Plan of the CFP Board for about 10-15 minutes.  Then along with answering questions we want ideas on how the CFP Board can better connect and communicate with CFP(r) certificants. 

For those of you coming to FPA Retreat, I hope you will take advantage of these opportunities to learn more about CFP Board

I wanted to note that Dave Strege has uploaded a letter that he received from Tamara Monroe, past Director of Professional Review. Tamara has indicated support for the changes made by the Board, particularly having the staff attorney present during ratifications. She further states that she recalls meeting resistance from the BOPR (now the DEC) members regarding past recommendations for changes that she felt in the long run turned out to be for the better.

I have a great deal of respect for Tamara and her perspective. It had occured to me to contact her with regard to these discussions, and I honestly thought she would be supportive of the DEC members' decision to "push back" on this issue. Her clear support of the Board's actions leads me to more clearly recongnize two important dynamics:

First, that the Board and staff have, and have had, closer ties than the relationships between  staff and the sub-boards as well as the Board and its sub-boards; and

Secondly, that the Board and staff firmly believe that they should be responsible for imposing whatever change is necessary to promote what they feel to be best, without first securing feedback from the sub-boards themselves and irregardless of the opinions of the members of the sub-boards.

This second point is, of course, the point of contention between the ex-DEC members and the Board of Directors. [I include the Board of Examiners as well because issues have been raised indicating that the BOE experienced similar problems with the BOD.]

In a recent letter to the ex-DEC members, Dave Strege expressed his concern about the communication of the CFP Board of Directors to the DEC. 

The problem is not the communication from the BOD to the DEC.

It is the lack of communication with the DEC.

Members of the sub-boards feel that they can provide valuable insight into issues regarding the processes and procedures with which they are intimately involved. We, as members, have for some time felt left out of the decision-making process, and rightly so, apparently, based on the comments made by Tamara.

As members of the DEC, we did not want to be communicated to. We wanted to be communicated with.

When there is no two-way communication, simply orders given, the Board loses both valuable input and understanding of the decision by those directed to carry out the order. In other words, the Board has given orders for the DEC to fix something that we weren't even aware was broken!

I continue to maintain the belief that if the Board had asked the DEC to work with staff to develop ways to "fix" whatever it was that was broken, we would have done so, and developed a mutually effective process as well as strengthened our relationship with the new staff.  As it is, and always seems to have been, the process has put the DEC at odds with both the Board and staff.

--Diana