Since not everyone made it to the last call, Dick Wagner offered an insight that is worthy of much wider consideration and may help move the discussion forward.
[By the way, the next call is August 8th at 2:00 p.m. Eastern. Call in number is 1-518-825-1300.]
This is my understanding/re-statement of this notion.
Dick’s thought is that, by nature, leaders lead. So, when leaders of the profession become governors or directors of CFP Board, they naturally want to lead the profession in a direction. However, the real mission of CFP Board is to protect the marks, assuring they represent integrity and education. In other words, the CFP Board has a stewardship or even bureaucratic role—it is not within their mission to try to lead the financial planning profession anywhere.
The CFP Board has no role in speaking on behalf of planners—they clearly do not represent certificants—and repeatedly so state. They are only the guardians of the marks. They should not be taking positions on current legislation or regulation.
Much of the mischief into which the CFP Board has wandered (which lead to those comments about “there must be something in the water”) seem to flow from their desire to lead rather than simply preserve the integrity of the marks. If the Board hewed to its proper mission and remained focused only on integrity of the marks, we would have never had the CFP Lite fiasco or (at least most) of the current DEC/COE issues.
So my take is that the current mess—which is only the latest installment in a sorry saga—has two root causes: the Carver model under which the Board has abdicated its fiduciary responsibilities to certificants which resulted a series of CEO’s making decisions good for them and bad for certificants, and the mis-guided desire to lead a profession rather than maintain the integrity of the marks.
--Barry
Barry L. Kohler, JD, CFP®, CLU
BDMP Wealth Management
100 Middle Street
Portland, ME 04101
Voice/Fax: 207-541-2307 Email: bkohler@bdmp.com