{"id":41590,"date":"2018-07-24T11:53:04","date_gmt":"2018-07-24T01:53:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/?p=41590"},"modified":"2018-07-25T07:36:21","modified_gmt":"2018-07-24T21:36:21","slug":"adviser-exam-poll-results","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/2018\/07\/24\/adviser-exam-poll-results\/","title":{"rendered":"Adviser Exam Poll Results"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\t\t
Are you confident you could achieve at least a 65% pass mark for FASEA's proposed Financial Adviser Examination?<\/strong><\/div>
    \n\t\t
  • Not sure - I need more details (47%)<\/small>
    <\/div><\/li>\n\t\t
  • No (27%)<\/small>
    <\/div><\/li>\n\t\t
  • Yes (26%)<\/small>
    <\/div><\/li>\n\t\t<\/ul>
    <\/div><\/div>\n\t\t\n<\/div>\n\n

    The jury is still out on whether advisers think they’ll be able to achieve at least a 65% pass mark in FASEA’s proposed Financial Adviser Exam.<\/p>\n

    As we go to print, the prevailing view is that more information is needed before many advisers can determine whether they think they’ll be ok to pass the proposed exam.<\/p>\n

    It’s rare that a ‘Not sure’ option is the most popular response, as it is for this poll question, which bears out the fact that FASEA needs to release more information about the exam before many advisers can make up their mind about it.\u00a0 At this stage, about half of those voting (49%) think they need more details, 28% don’t think they can achieve the minimum pass mark and only 23% think they can.<\/p>\n

    A couple of clarifications:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. The proposed FASEA Financial Adviser Exam is not product-specific. The Authority is proposing an exam that it will require every authorised representative to sit and pass, irrespective of whether they consider themselves specialist risk advisers, holistic planners, derivatives experts or any other planner\/adviser within the authorised representative spectrum. This doesn’t mean there’s not a valid debate that can be explored about whether there should be separate exams for advisers who specialise in specific areas, but FASEA’s intention is to test all advisers in the generic areas of:\n
        \n
      1. Corporations Act (emphasis on Chapter 7 \u2013 Financial services and markets)<\/li>\n
      2. The FASEA Code of Ethics<\/li>\n
      3. Financial Advice Construction \u2013 suitability of advice aligned to different consumer groups<\/li>\n
      4. Behavioural Finance: Client and consumer behaviour, engagement and decision making<\/li>\n
      5. Applied ethical and professional reasoning and communication<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n
      6. We indicated last week that you\u2019ll also need to pass the exam on your first attempt, unless you can prove exceptional circumstances, such as illness. This was observation was based on some ambiguous wording in FASEA’s exam consultation paper. The Authority has since confirmed that individuals can sit the exam up to three times without needing to prove exceptional circumstances.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        Would one or both of these clarifications sway your thinking on your ability to pass FASEA’s proposed financial adviser exam? While we await more details from the Authority, such as some test exam questions, our poll remains open for another week if you want to add your voice to this debate…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

        The jury is still out on whether advisers think they’ll be able to achieve at least a 65% pass mark in FASEA’s proposed Financial Adviser Exam.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":41656,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,49],"tags":[4247],"class_list":["post-41590","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-compliance-regulation","category-polls","tag-feature"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/41590","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=41590"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/41590\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/41656"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=41590"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=41590"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=41590"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}