Amongst the clarion calls for higher professionalism, one consistent theme is heard from the lay observer. Why did so many of the leaders of the troubled banks not possess banking qualifications?
The recognition that this sector, with its baffling array of complex financial products and instruments, may be led by people who do not understand them caught the attention of the Treasury Select Committee when it first investigated Northern Rock.
It emerged again in last month’s hearings of current and former Chairmen and CEOs of leading financial institutions. One of the items consistently picked up on was the silence when these erstwhile leaders were asked to comment on qualifications.
Examinations became discretionary in some parts of the sector
The Securities & Investment Institute led a determined, but ultimately unsuccessful, campaign in 2006 to avoid the wholesale banking qualifications becoming discretionary. In November 2007 the former requirement to hold recognised approved benchmark qualifications for those advising on trading/managing investments for institutional clients was abolished.
However, the vast majority of banks chose to carry on using qualifications because they realised that qualifications, widely recognised as a benchmark, externally set and assessed by a third party, are the most cost effective means by which minimum standards can be safely satisfied.
The problem is that once qualifications become discretionary, those firms or networks who look for short term cost savings reduce their training and examination requirements.
The FSA’s current Retail Distribution Review is, however, a really positive step from the regulator in recognising the importance of compulsory higher level examinations in this part of the sector.
Why are examinations needed?
An examination is a serious and objective test, set and marked by a respected third party. In the world of work, where financial practitioners seek recognition as professionals, an examination offers a clear line distinguishing those who have at least achieved a minimum threshold of knowledge and understanding to equip them in their work.
An examination set and assessed by independent practitioners, through professional bodies, assures stakeholders that the organisation setting the examination is committed to ensuring that each individual candidate has to demonstrate in a secure, invigilated environment that they have achieved this standard and that they have not hidden behind the high reputation of their firm, or of their colleagues.
Until 2005, the FSA directly managed the list of Approved Examinations and there were strong links between the FSA and professional bodies. When the FSA delegated the management of examinations to a new organisation (the mainly government funded Financial Services Skills Council) the link was weakened.
The new arrangements enabled firms to develop their own ‘appropriate’ examinations in-house, providing that these met the FSSC examination standards. However, although a number of firms carefully considered this option, they soon recognised the complexity and academic rigour needed. As a result, firms continued to use examinations offered by professional bodies operating at depth in specialist areas of financial services.
Firms still demonstrate their strong support for qualifications that are practical and rigorous by providing hundreds of volunteers to assist with the curriculum and syllabus development of individual examinations that bodies like us offer.
Against the backdrop of deep public unease, the case for examinations to be set by a respected third party, through practitioners, associated with organisations committed to the professionalism of individual practitioners, has never been greater.
Examinations are a core, but initial, part of professionalism. This Institute stands for helping people attain initial competence through rigorous examinations, combined with maintaining that competence through a range of activities which can also include higher level qualifications and where the crucial component of promoting trust permeates all that it does.
SG

Ruth Martin , Managing Director, Securities and Investment Institute ..now she is an unbiased third party isn’t she?
Haha, no vested interest there is there?!
I failed my FSAs 3 times, CFA Level 1 twice then gave up, and am consistently one of the best performers on my floor. Go figure.
Pointless article. Performance rules.
I agree with Henry this time.
Henry has met his match! HaHa
Henry is a failure.
We were thinking it; he said it.
Henry, you are such an attention seeker. Your comment above reeks of a desire to get people to respond with ridicule. Henry, Why do you want this?
i think Henry is a fictional figure produced by the editors of efinancial to encourage people to respond to the rediculous comments of “Henry”.
Anyone with brains and a proper job would not feel the need to hang out on a careers website 24/7, pretending being the big earner, and having the need to share this news with anyone and everyone.. as opposed to spending the time having a life..
Actually, can the examinations help avoid the current credit crisis? Many people in the know actually thought they were doing the right thing. Academics have lots of theories and they often disagree with each other. Of course, if you mean higher ups should know something and not just leave details to their underlings and focus on business strategy, that is a different story.
Not only that…but if you haven’t even passed the FSA exams you are not even going near a trade in a top bank. FSA exam is a minimum.
we all have to do the FSA exams anyway – everyone in an approved role must take them
what are you suggesting then?
As it happens, I teach bankers for the CQF, and one I enjoy is “Logic For Quants” :)
Ruth might benefit from taking it.
Ruth acknowledges that the large firms still require people to take exams, yet it is those same firms that made the worst mistakes.
Sir Fred Goodwin is a Chartered Accountant, indeed his position as a fellow of several important groups would have allowed him to influence what the exams contain.
So much for exams.
People did not do the things they did because they had not passed exams. City people are on average the best educated work force in the world. They failed because the regulatory bodies did not do their job because they lacked the skills, and did not see actually doing regulation as their job.
Where is Henry’s “guest” column?
Thats a very brutal level of honesty Henry…You couldnt correctly answer 70 out of 100 multi guess questions on elementary finance….Ill bet 2 short planks when put next to you look like a super computer!
Henry is the Stig. EFinancial careers gunning for some London paper coverage!
i agree with dominic – for example – to qualify as an actuary in uk is the toughest route to a professional qualification around, but blow ups like equitable life still happen. actuaries can do some really dumb stuff, errors etc are not so transparent because it takes years to show up (e.g. >20 years for a pension fund)
“I teach bankers for the CQF, and one I enjoy is “Logic For Quants” :) …”
Ah, Dominic, as a headhunter, I understand it all now. In your logic class I bet you classic things like..”you are quant…you are the lifeblood of a bank / hedge fund and you should demand 90k basic + guaranteed cash bonus.”
Hehe. I was more just a bit of a rebel back on the 2004 grad scheme. Had just come out of Cambridge University finals and couldn’t be remotely bothered to do even more exams. Just wanted to party every night with the international grads who’d come over. About 25% of our lot failed their FSAs.
Anyway, that’s not the point, just think it is comic that someone from SII of all places is advocating exams, when they’re very well known to have zero indication on performance. Do you think if the banking CEOs had SII banking qualifications this mess would have been magically diverted?!
I find myself agreeing with dominic and henry…..
I feel dirty.
I read this website just for Henry…
Agreed, article is irrelevant. I reluctantly also agree with Henry.
Still – I think Henry is a made up character.
It is incredible the level of info you give in such few words: uni you went to, year, money, women, failed exams not because of stupidity but because of heavy partying. A real show off. I trust there is no one in the world who could be this cocky. Hence I think you are a fake. I hope you are a fake anyway….
Just want to make it clear that Henry’s identify is completely and utterly unknown to us. Nor can we vouch for his authenticity/lack of it. And we are still waiting for his guest comment.
Come on Henry ..
I think Henry is either a girl or is gay. Which bloke starts a sentence with ‘hehe’! Oh Henry you big camp flirt. Chase me.
AS, i agree
we know so much
virtually the bank the kid works for (fairly easy to work out), his uni, his total comp progression through time, the desk he works for
I just bloomied his first name, filtered by the bank he works for and that he is in the UK and found nothing that could be the guy, i reckon if he is real he isn’t called henry.
(jesus – a very slow friday afternoon)
I’m very real – Henry is not my real name, but from my writing style several of my friends (at different banks) have quickly figured out who I am. I may CityBoy style reveal myself after I eventually leave the industry.
Will write guest column this weekend, is impossible to getting round to it at work.
Butch – I’m a bit metrosexual ;-)
Have a good weekend all…
henry u joka….I thought u were just chilling all day, doing minimal work, etc…so u got plenty of time to do that guest column! Now go get me a latte, quick sharp!
Is this you Henry?
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7b1077ac-0a57-11de-95ed-0000779fd2ac.html
haha, i think we can safely say henry is not a trader..i know for a fact that if you fail your fsa THREE TIMES! Most if not all banks will have your contract terminated! My permanent offer was conditional on passing at most second time round..Also HENRY why would you do the CFA Level1 as a currency trader..completely irrelevant you just look at a graph all day, why would you need to learn about discounted cash flow of companies!
Hehe. Thx Fellas xoxo