Advisors continue to question CSI monopoly

Advisors continue to question CSI monopoly

Advisors continue to question CSI monopoly Industry players submitted a total of 14 detailed opinions prior to IIROC making its decision last month on whether to extend the CSI monopoly; one month later, advisors question about the five-year extension are actually growing.
 
“My problem is more to do with the quality of CSI material which I would describe as ‘uneven,’” Dan Bortollotti, an advisor with PWL Capital in Toronto, told WP. “You can definitely tell there are different authors for different chapters. So you’ll read one chapter and think it’s really good and then read another and it’s quite poor. And you can tell that there is two different people writing it.”
 
While Bortollotti is echoing others concerns about the content CSI delivers, others are questioning whether that course work may be biased in favour of active management.
 
Those concerns haven’t abated since IIAC’s six-page submission from November 2014. Then it made it perfectly clear some of its members had a problem with the value provided by the CSI. Furthermore, it believes competition would produce a better educational offering for its members.
 
“Proficiency is an important regulatory initiative. Overall, members do not believe that CSI has been providing value relative to its cost nor offering the highest quality of education,” said the IIAC submission. “In short, as a matter of principle, we strongly believe that competition drives innovation and efficiency, which cannot be said for the current proficiency assurance model with its exclusive reliance on CSI.”
 
While Bortolotti understands that it might not be financially viable to offer some of the courses in a multiple-provider system, he still believes higher quality must be the goal of any delivery model.
 
“A more consistent and higher quality would be welcome,” said Bortolotti, who’s done at least half a dozen courses or more over the last five years. I don’t hate the monopoly idea if it’s done properly.
“(but) I think the competitive bidding (in 2020) will probably help in terms of improving the quality of writing and how it’s presented.”
3 Comments
  • Patti 2015-10-28 9:54:46 AM
    Agreed I have taken US courses which are much better prepared, less expensive and are consistent. The monopoly of not only the courses but also designation holders, the fees on holding a CIM, FCSI, CIWM have increased substantially since Moody's has taken ownership of the CSI.
    Post a reply
  • Russ 2015-10-28 2:09:04 PM
    I've criticized the content of WP's articles in the past, but this article is a reason to praise you. Thank you for raising this subject. The CSC, at least, should be available from multiple providers, not limited to CSI, a for-profit organization.
    Post a reply
  • kathy Waite Your Net Worth Manager 2015-10-29 10:38:11 AM
    You interviewed my about designations for your magazine a couple of months ago and I said exactly this....monopolies lead to apathy. Same with CFP setting themselves up as the gold standard. Someone in my family has been writing portfolio manager exams and WME recently and has noticed the same as Dans comments. The exams are also unreflective of the course work. Huge sections of the text not examined and one small area multiple questions on.
    Post a reply