Continuing professional development: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
The case, ''par excellence'' of the box-ticking culture than modern risk management has become.
The case, ''par excellence'' of the box-ticking culture than modern risk management has become.


Once upon a time, somewhere, someone in a self-regulating professional trade body conceived the worry that by the daily practice of one’s professional calling in a live environment, an [[Mediocre lawyer|attorney]] might grow stale, out of touch and dangerously unlearned in the ways of {{sex|her}} calling. A counter-intuitive idea, but there you have it: it is a good thing for people to challenge orthodoxy.
Once upon a time, somewhere, someone in a self-regulating professional trade body confected a worry that the daily practice of one’s professional calling might render an [[Mediocre lawyer|attorney]] stale, out-of-touch or dangerously unlearned in the ways of {{sex|her}} calling. A counter-intuitive idea, to be sure, but there you have it.


So was born “[[continuing professional development]]”, a stipulation whereby [[Mediocre lawyer|solicitors]] must periodically re-educate themselves on germane issues. It is not greatly onerous — a few hours, spread over a year, is all you need — though across an entire profession that is no small demand on total capability. Law firms beheld a great marketing opportunity: a jaunty breakfast seminar for their in-house clients, followed by [[networking]]: a chance to renew acquaintances over a salmon bagel.
So was born “[[continuing professional development]]”, a stipulation whereby [[Mediocre lawyer|solicitors]] must periodically re-educate themselves on germane issues. It has caught on amongst other  professional bodies: teachers, soldiers, healthcare professionals, accountants, architects and engineers have similarly misconceived programmes. To be sure, keeping up with your CPDs is not all that onerous — a dozen or so hours, spread over a year, is all you need — though across an entire profession that is no small demand on total capability. Law firms beheld a great marketing opportunity: a jaunty breakfast seminar for their in-house clients, followed by [[networking]]: a chance to renew acquaintances over a bagel.


Make no mistake: free bacon sandwiches are great. Most jobbing solicitors need no more incentive to show up than that. If the room is large and dark enough there is scope for a few winks. ([[Freshfields]] London has an excellently dingy auditorium, by the way, with premium snooze opportunities at the back). In brighter forums, it is a chance to catch up on Twitter, [[LinkedIn]] or follow the [[cricket]].  
Make no mistake: free bacon sandwiches are great. Most jobbing solicitors need no more incentive to show up than that. If the room is large and dark enough there is scope for a few winks. ([[Freshfields]] London has an excellently dingy auditorium, by the way, with premium snooze opportunities at the back). In brighter forums, it is a chance to catch up on Twitter, [[LinkedIn]] or follow the [[cricket]].  


In all other ways it is a total waste of time.
But there is no practical way to ensure a [[CPD]] hour is well spent. Who can say if it is vocational, useful, relevant or whether, having signed the register, young sir spent any part of it in the room, let alone paying attention? The Americans had a crack at this by interposing a random number, to be read out at a random moment, which all candidates needed to quote in their compliance attestation to prove they were at least conscious. But even then, only one brave attorney need sit through the whole ordeal for the greater good of the whole.


Of course, there is no practical way to ensure a [[CPD]] hour is well spent. Who can say if such an hour is vocational, useful, relevant or whether, having signed the register, young sir spent any part of that hour present, let alone paying attention? The Americans had a crack at this by interposing a random number, to be read out at a random moment, which all candidates needed to quote in their compliance attestation to prove these elements. But even then only one brave attorney need sit through the morass for the greater good of the whole.
Let’s pretend for a moment you do show up, and pay attention, to a topical talk for your CPD points. Will it make a difference? Will that be the thing that staves off a bout of professional negligence? No-one who has spent an hour before a wizened solicitor mumbling through a dense [[PowerPoint]] deck about the transaction reporting regime under [[MiFID 2]] will say it does.
 
Let’s pretend for a moment you do show up, and pay attention, to a topical talk for your CPD points. Will it make a difference? Will that be the thing that staves off a bout of professional negligence? No-one who has spent an hour before a wizened solicitor mumbling through a dense [[PowerPoint]] deck about the transaction reporting regime under [[MiFID 2]] could believe that.


But hurry along - the blueberry and bran muffins are going fast.   
But hurry along - the blueberry and bran muffins are going fast.   

Revision as of 13:27, 1 August 2017

The case, par excellence of the box-ticking culture than modern risk management has become.

Once upon a time, somewhere, someone in a self-regulating professional trade body confected a worry that the daily practice of one’s professional calling might render an attorney stale, out-of-touch or dangerously unlearned in the ways of her calling. A counter-intuitive idea, to be sure, but there you have it.

So was born “continuing professional development”, a stipulation whereby solicitors must periodically re-educate themselves on germane issues. It has caught on amongst other professional bodies: teachers, soldiers, healthcare professionals, accountants, architects and engineers have similarly misconceived programmes. To be sure, keeping up with your CPDs is not all that onerous — a dozen or so hours, spread over a year, is all you need — though across an entire profession that is no small demand on total capability. Law firms beheld a great marketing opportunity: a jaunty breakfast seminar for their in-house clients, followed by networking: a chance to renew acquaintances over a bagel.

Make no mistake: free bacon sandwiches are great. Most jobbing solicitors need no more incentive to show up than that. If the room is large and dark enough there is scope for a few winks. (Freshfields London has an excellently dingy auditorium, by the way, with premium snooze opportunities at the back). In brighter forums, it is a chance to catch up on Twitter, LinkedIn or follow the cricket.

But there is no practical way to ensure a CPD hour is well spent. Who can say if it is vocational, useful, relevant or whether, having signed the register, young sir spent any part of it in the room, let alone paying attention? The Americans had a crack at this by interposing a random number, to be read out at a random moment, which all candidates needed to quote in their compliance attestation to prove they were at least conscious. But even then, only one brave attorney need sit through the whole ordeal for the greater good of the whole.

Let’s pretend for a moment you do show up, and pay attention, to a topical talk for your CPD points. Will it make a difference? Will that be the thing that staves off a bout of professional negligence? No-one who has spent an hour before a wizened solicitor mumbling through a dense PowerPoint deck about the transaction reporting regime under MiFID 2 will say it does.

But hurry along - the blueberry and bran muffins are going fast.