Having been a CPT trainer for several years, I have witnessed many interesting phenomena in those classes.
Some participants are only physically present (i.e. mentally absent). I had seen several senior executives of large banks who were "sleeping" (eyes kept closing) for the whole 3 hours. They just consider CPT as "Counter-Productive Time".
Some people carried anger to the classes as they felt they were "forced" to take a "too basic", "useless" course. My question is: Have you spent at least some minutes to select a suitable course for you? (A failing person keeps on complaining without doing anything to improve his situation.)
Once a time a funny guy told me that his 3 criteria for picking a CPT course is:
- C - Cheap
- P - Provide attendance record
- T - Take it easy
I still remember many years ago adult education was so treasured by those citizens who did not receive too much formal education. Today people are wasting their time and social resources (including CEF) by getting around real attendance.
Of course, the world is not full of negative things. I had also met many participants who were friendly, eager for learning, asking sensible questions and giving positive feedback. I appreciate and salute their attitudes.
CPT is a world wide phenomenon. Professional bodies demand this to demonstrate their professionalism. Yet, it is proven fact that it is another story in the Hong Kong securities industry.
ReplyDeleteLearning is (most) effective if it is an initiative act rather than a forced act. Besides, people gain their technical knowledge/skills from work experience not necessary from attending formal classes. Reading/research/thinking in fact is most peoples’ daily work. Compulsory CPT is simply a way to give education institutes business opportunities.
If really wants to raise the standard of practitioners and image of the whole industry, why not implement something like periodic licensing test. Or simply to raise the standard of the LC exams to a level equivalent to university degree. (I maintain that entry should be open to all sort regardless of education background.)
While there are senior executives taking a rest at the cost of his employer, there are people lacking the opportunities to attend more than 5 hours because … there is no company sponsorship, his pay is just enough to keep him alive, work load etc.
CPT is a joke and a headache.
ReplyDeleteA firm has to put in unproportionatae resources to make itself in compliant. Money is wasted.
The problem accelerates in the case of a very large firm with many small units. You can hardly to organise occasions that suitable to all people (note that some delinquent staff will never be available at a particular time for say they have to visit their clients). It is a tiring exercise for speakers who are not full time trained lecturers e.g. compliance officers. Some firm tape record the initial lecture which is to be shown in later classes. Some firm with advanced technology will put up learning material on the intranet, staff are required to view the stuff and then do an online quiz to prevent funny things happen to his work station.
I have noted advertisement for compliance officers, the prospective compliance officers have to organise CPT or to deliver CPT. I thought this is a wide spread erroneous phenomenon that an organization will be in full compliant once a compliance officer is on board without acknowledging that to employ a compliance officer is a control to make the firm complies.
Many firms like to tell the regulator that they have asked their compliance officers to give the staff a compliance training. It seems that training can resolve every compliance problem. This is just putting the compliance officers on fire.
ReplyDeleteMany compliance officers are afraid of public speaking, not to say how to make a compliance training effective. Some of them just know reproducing the regulatory stuff in the slides, without integrating the rules with the actual practices. They just want to deliver the homework.
Yes. Requiring a firm to have a compliance officer hoping (1) a firm's operational standard will rise (2) hoping that compliance officers will act without any constraint is a naive thought of the SFC. [the industry should insist on professional insurance for compliance officers]
ReplyDeleteCompliance officers are afraid of public speaking because they know very clear that the audience is not interested in the topic and will in fact feel it is boring stuff. Even a speaker with excellent skills will not solve the problem. Recall what you mentioned about the senior bank executive and the IFA firm. I trusted you were not to blame for the situation.
I kind of agree that training will not solve the problem.
ReplyDeleteThe number of people really enjoying CPT classes is minimal.
I just feel that resources on earth is wasted.
___________________________
I was approached by a senior personnel the other day asking me whether training conducted by him to his colleagues is considered CPT (in his case). I am of the view that:
(1)While lecturing and teaching is acceptable. Training conducted to subordinate is considered daily routine which the senior executive doing from time to time.
(2) He said there was formal attandence record and handout was distributed. I was of the view that (i) the class was so small that it could hardly be classifed as lecturing or teaching. The numbner of staff involved was less than 10 (it is a small unit). Besides, the lecture was not open to public e.g other staff of the company. The formality would not changed the nature of the exercise.
(3) He said that the practice was accepted while he was with the previous firm. The complianc officer there simply could care less or he could do nothing about it (I was very certain that if there was a way out, the compliance officer there should refuse to accept that.)
This executive while not against CPT, yet was finding way to avoid that.
I wonder why 5-hour CPT is so horrible that people in the field are trying to avoid?
YM
ReplyDeleteTotally agreed that it is a painful exercise to compliance people especially during prepation of training material which involves comments by different counterparties including business people!?
In fact, having sleeping attendees perhaps better than talkative attendees (talking among small circles; talking mobile, etc.) as they even disturb those who really want to listen what you are talking!
No matter what the audience does during the seminar, I believe it is most effective if it is interactive.
ReplyDeletePeople are inert to the extent that they dont care to put forward questions concerning their daily work.
I support the previous practice that licensees to declare whether they have attained the required CPT rather than putting the burden on the firm (and the compliance people).
In fact, I also suggest that licensees to attempt aptitude test yearly, failing that, they have to attend training courses or suspend until succeed. To kill two birds with one stone.