Study launches to prove advisers are ethical

A research project being conducted by Western Sydney University aims to find out how financial advisers feel the Financial Adviser Standards and Ethics Authority (FASEA) education mandate has impacted them, while providing a ‘principled morality score’ to chart development.

The survey offers advisers detailed feedback and the opportunity to engage with the university on the financial adviser exam. This level of feedback is intentional, says Michelle Cull, assistant dean and senior lecturer at the university, who is driving the project.

The survey asks advisers about how they have found FASEA’s ethics course and their experience of studying for the national exam, and if it has affected them. Advisers have been disappointed in receiving no feedback from the ethics exam, and while this project isn’t the exam, it offers more information.

The survey covers two major areas: a ‘defining issues test’ and an attempt to understand how FASEA’s mandate has impacted advisers.

The defining issues test is a standardised moral development model developed in 1974 by an American psychologist. The standardisation of the test means scores can be applied across multiple disciplines and professions, allowing a proper comparison of adviser ethics compared to other professions. Cull wants to prove that advisers are, largely, ethical and want to do the right thing, with a few bad apples tarnishing the reputation of the majority.

The survey questions are set up to gauge the strength of agreement to a statement by the adviser, as to how ethical they believe themselves to be.

Cull needs high participation rates from advisers, with the Financial Planning Association agreeing to award CPD points to members who complete the survey.