Companies that invest in training and qualifications retain staff longer, argues Bob Young, managing director of CHL Mortgages
The ‘qualification question’ has hit the headlines last week following the comments by the FSA at the Mortgage Business Expo that it will be proposing in the next MMR paper that all ‘mortgage sellers’ attain at the very least the Level 3 mortgage qualification. Of course, active mortgage advisers will already have the necessary letters after their name but this will mean that those who take part in the mortgage sales process, such as lender’s branch or call centre staff, which have not been required to have the qualification up until now, will need to do so.
As always, the devil will be in the actual detail, however it seems to me that when consumers deal with advisers or mortgage staff at lenders then it is no bad thing that they have at least attained a minimum qualification level. Qualifications are vital in financial services and, at a very minimum, they improve customer confidence in the person they’re dealing with while I’m not suggesting that everyone who holds a basic mortgage qualification is a top-quality professional, it does show a level of experience and know-how, and I certainly believe that this can work as a minimum requirement.
This is perhaps an important point that all of us should not forget. Qualifications are absolutely necessary however they are merely the starting point for the financial services professional. Experience cannot be secured by merely passing a series of exams it is gained over time dealing with a variety of different situations and doing the job. Many might suggest that exams plus experience should be enough to equal ongoing competence. I am not one of them. To my mind it is vital that a financial services professional continues to learn through their career not just about their own specialist area but also to go outside that comfort zone and to also learn, for example, how to improve soft skills like customer empathy or to develop management skills that may allow them to gain promotion. Life is a constant learning exercise and given that most of us spend the majority of our lives working, then professional learning should be a vital part of that.
Which brings us to phrases like ‘lifelong learning’ which is often bandied about the industry and, to be honest, I sometimes wonder what it is supposed to mean. In regulatory terms we are talking about ‘continuous professional development’ which should not just be a requirement from the regulator but one that the employer and the employee should also want to achieve. We are not just talking here about the ways and means to climb the corporate ladder but instead we are looking at how we can empower the individual to do a better job and provide a better customer experience.
Ultimately there are benefits for all stakeholders in ensuring that employees have the opportunity to continue to learn and develop. Within any business it is vitally important that the firm recognises and develops the next generation, be they supervisors, managers or executive Board members. Very few people stay in the same job for life anymore so looking at your business are you confident that you could fill the gap if an employee left? Do you have employees learning the skills of their managers so that they could step into their shoes should the vacancy arise? Or would you have to go outside the firm to look for a replacement with all the cost implications that this would bring?
This has been a question which has exercised CHL recently and it is part of our work with employees that we look to help and train our next generation of managers – even if they then choose not to stay with us. We have established a training partnership programme to help us achieve this – do you have something similar in place or are you leaving it to chance?
It should not be forgotten in all this that companies that invest in the training and qualification needs of their staff are much more likely to hold onto those employees for a greater period of time. Of course, there will always be outflow from any business but people are much more likely to stay at a company where they feel valued and where they believe their professional ambitions and needs are catered for. Being unable to promote from within is not just a costly exercise for the firm, but if the business is seen to be one which does not push, train and reward staff then it will see even greater numbers leaving. The problem becomes self-perpetuating.
Therefore, any business must understand and work to help its employees continue to learn and develop, and it must also prove to them that this work actually leads to tangible improvements such as greater responsibility followed by better financial terms, etc. As stated it would be sheer folly for a business to spend time, money and resource helping its employees reach learning, training and qualification ambitions, to then not use these newly acquired skills within the firm. This is a two-way street and while it can be a tricky process to get right, when it is done correctly all parties will feel the benefit.
