F
rom
the
Chairman
Robin Wood
Chairman
Someone asked me the other day just what use is it to
seek a qualification by examination?
If one looks at the statistics this seems like a very good
question indeed.
An exam covers about a sixth of a syllabus and with a
50% pass mark that means that on the day, if you know
the right 8% of the syllabus you might pass an exam without any knowledge of the 92% you might have got
wrong (and indeed no real knowledge of the 8% you got
right). A formal examination is about as much use to the
cause of risk management and measuring competence
as a chocolate teapot!
But think again........John Smith, account executive, is
visiting a client. He is expecting any one of 12 scenarios
to arise and he hopes that those that do arise he will be
able to handle.
In other words he knows that 8% of what could arise will
arise, but he does not know exactly which 8% and he
knows that to be competent, he will have to deal with
the full 8%.
So the comparison is clear and justified. A well structured
and thought out examination mirrors the uncertainty
of real life and to this end the qualification, properly
constructed, tells us that the practitioner can adapt to
the unexpected and as measured against a standard of
reasonable competence, pass an exam.
So is the system flawed if we are to allocate it such high
prestige?
• Firstly, it is vital that the syllabus itself is specifically
relevant to the job specifications of those it is intended
to challenge. All material for insurance brokers needs
to be signed off by an independent body of practicing
insurance brokers.
• Secondly, advising a client is not a race and it is vital
that there is plenty of time to finish the assessment.
No student should ever feel they are being rushed to
give their answers.
• Thirdly, a student must know what they got wrong.
Without that the whole process becomes a PI liability.
So many qualified insurance practitioners have been
getting things wrong all their careers because
no-one has ever given them the right answer.
What might you ask has this got to do with the new
RWA T&C toolkit now available in the library for
OBELISK users?
The answer is simply that one of the key decisions
any firm has to take when designing a T&C Scheme
is whether or not to support the qualification by
examination process.
But there are so many more subjects that need to be
addressed. Here are just a few:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Record Keeping
Job Specifications
Benchmarking
Buying Training
Learning Needs analysis
Supervision & Monitoring
Attaining and Assessing Competence
What to include in your scheme
And m ??????()Q???
????????????????????????????????P? )???????????????????????????????????I]????????)?????????????????????????????????????????????)???????????????)Q????????????????????????????????????????????)???????????????????????????
%Q%????????????????)??????????????????????????????)$???????????????????????????????????)??????????????????????????????????????????)???????????????????????????????????????????)%?????????????????????????????????????????)???????????????????????????????????????)%????????????????????????????????????????)??????????????????????????????e??
???????)?????????????????????????????????????????)???????????????????????????????????)???????????????????) ????????????????????????????????????????????????)????????????????????????????????????????)??????????????????????????????)$??????????????????????????????????????)??????????????????????????????????????????)?????????????????????????????????????????????)???????????????????????????????????????????)??????????????????)Q???I]?P? ?Q?????????????= 1%M,???????????????)??????????????????????????????????????????????)???????????????????????????????????????????????))???????????????((