I have a (bad) habit of blog commenting disproportionally in disagreement that agreement.

The CFP® marks are not the equivalent of an educational degree, a professional designation, or a title.

And

“Designation” refers to a degree or title awarded to individuals who pass certain education and examination requirements of entities such as universities and associations, thereby attaining a degree. “Certification” refers to the approval by a certifying entity of certain qualities for specified goods or services offered by individuals or organizations. The requirements for a certification of services, such as financial planning, typically include rigorous education and examination programs.

This is important because, unlike the vast majority of professional designation granting organizations, the CFP Board is not a membership organization or school. The CFP Board’s stakeholders are the public consumers of financial planning as much as it is the CFP® certificants. Professional membership organizations and educational institutions generally have a primary obligation to their members, students, and alumni. This interferes with objectivity when it comes to standard setting, regulation, and enforcement. The CFP Board exists for the actual purpose of standard setting, regulation, and enforcement; their primary obligation is to preserve the credibility CFP® marks.

The CFP does not mean the planner is competent or acting in your best interest (yes, they require a fiduciary responsibility now, but they didn’t a year ago. And, they don’t have enforcement powers so many brokers with the CFP are not acting as fiduciaries). However, it shows that the planner is serious about learning and can take a holistic view of your finances and actually understand the various issues.

Those without the CFP (or Chfc, CPA/PFS) are showing me that they don’t take the profession seriously.

The key question is still finding an advisor who has a fiduciary obligation to their client in all that they do. Some planners have the fiduciary requirement for the plan, but switch hats and take the suitability when they sell the product. So ask them if they are a fiduciary in ALL interaction with you.

People should not discount an adviser based on his/her credentials. That is actually the point of my series (as you’ll see more of tomorrow).

The credential basically offers some proof to the public that the person does indeed have some expertise in some areas.

I learned much more by doing than by studying for these tests. I was no better/worse the day after I took the exam than the day before…but clients probably felt a bit more at ease knowing an independent body had validated their trust.

Because it doesn’t teach those particular skills, and in fact you were a (hopefully) successful advisor prior to gaining the CFP – as are almost EVERY candidate for the CFP, isn’t it fair to say that people shouldn’t automatically disregard a great planner just because he or she doesn’t have the CFP?

I go back and forth on this question, I even got into a “discussion/fight” with a guest poster on another blog and then apologized on my blog:

http://www.myjourneytomillions.com/articles/random-letters-after-an-advisors-name-isnt-the-end-all-but-it-may-help/

Just some random thoughts from a guy who can’t make up his mind!