We’d love to have your comments on the current state of accreditation in Canada.
A big thank you goes out to all the advisors who took the time to fill out our first annual certification survey. The response was surprising in that we had an extremely solid response. The boss seemed genuinely surprised at the number of replies, so we couldn't ask for anything more.
This was the first time we tried this. And there are tweaks to make for next year—if anyone has any comments on ways to improve the survey, please, let us know. We’d love to hear your thoughts. But as we get ready to print up the results of the survey in the next issue of WP, we would also love to collect some longer, more complex thoughts on the certification regime in Canada. So here's the chance.
There was no room in the survey to tap out longer responses on attitudes toward the state of accreditation in Canada as concerning the advisor industry. If anyone out there has any ideas they'd like to vent on the current state/structure/reality on the designation industry in Canada, please, fill in a comment below, or email your thoughts to [email protected]. We’d love to hear what you have to say. The comments will be included in the upcoming print issue of the magazine.
Some things we’re curious about:
1. Is the wide array of designations a good thing? Is the competition between granting institutions and designations a good thing? Is this healthy competition? Or are their too many designations?
2. Have the accreditation organizations done a good job training the Canadian advisor force? It is arguable that Canada has one of the best trained advisors forces of any major developed economy. Or are there serious oversights in the current structure of the system for accreditation?
3. What about the course and classes? Is the price right? What about course content? Are advisors learning what they need to know? Is the time demanded manageable? What can be done to tweak the existing system to make it better?
If anyone has any thoughts on any of these questions, please, let us know. We'd love to run some of the responses in the next issue of WP. And again, thanks to everyone who filled out the survey. Hope you'll be back next year!
This was the first time we tried this. And there are tweaks to make for next year—if anyone has any comments on ways to improve the survey, please, let us know. We’d love to hear your thoughts. But as we get ready to print up the results of the survey in the next issue of WP, we would also love to collect some longer, more complex thoughts on the certification regime in Canada. So here's the chance.
There was no room in the survey to tap out longer responses on attitudes toward the state of accreditation in Canada as concerning the advisor industry. If anyone out there has any ideas they'd like to vent on the current state/structure/reality on the designation industry in Canada, please, fill in a comment below, or email your thoughts to [email protected]. We’d love to hear what you have to say. The comments will be included in the upcoming print issue of the magazine.
Some things we’re curious about:
1. Is the wide array of designations a good thing? Is the competition between granting institutions and designations a good thing? Is this healthy competition? Or are their too many designations?
2. Have the accreditation organizations done a good job training the Canadian advisor force? It is arguable that Canada has one of the best trained advisors forces of any major developed economy. Or are there serious oversights in the current structure of the system for accreditation?
3. What about the course and classes? Is the price right? What about course content? Are advisors learning what they need to know? Is the time demanded manageable? What can be done to tweak the existing system to make it better?
If anyone has any thoughts on any of these questions, please, let us know. We'd love to run some of the responses in the next issue of WP. And again, thanks to everyone who filled out the survey. Hope you'll be back next year!
