Don't you hate it when two organizations you respect and enjoy are on opposite sides of the fence - and you feel that you have to "take sides"? I suppose this is one of those times.
I do respect SHRM. In particular, I have had wonderful experiences with members of the Iowa SHRM Council Board and the Central Iowa SHRM. Over the last few years, however, (in my capacity as Director of Certification for the Iowa SHRM State Council) I have worked closely with the HRCI. I have become acquainted with their work and with the seriousness of their efforts. So yes - I am saddened (and considerably surprised) by the national SHRM's move to create its own certification. Here are my reasons: 1. Independence Call me old fashioned but I like the idea of a "separation of powers" between those who develop and maintain a certification exam and those whose business model includes preparing candidates or providing recertification credits. Here is why:
2. Continuity SHRM has not yet shared with its members a strong enough reason to justify such a major shock to the system. Confused candidates or certified professionals may stop trusting the certification process in general, regardless of who offers it. Do SHRM's hopes for a "competency based" test convince me? Not yet - at least not until I receive more in-depth information. The word "competency," after all, involves a complex combination of skills, traits, attitudes, and knowledge. Is SHRM really going to test competencies? Or just knowledge of competencies? I guess we'll need to wait and see, but a truly valid and reliable competency based test is extremely hard to build. SHRM might need to incorporate in the testing processes the review of real work products (an analysis of portfolios, perhaps?), and other time consuming (and likely costly) methods. 3. Secrecy SHRM is our association - we, the members, should have a say in something as important as the launch of a new professional certification. Instead, SHRM chapters have been operating in the dark, working hard to promote the current certifications to employers and candidates. Frankly, I feel betrayed. So here is my message to the national SHRM. You play a valuable role to your members and to the HR field. Right now, however, you are sharing a poor example of strategic planning, communication, and cooperation. HR professionals should be able to play nicely in the sandbox. I wonder if these competencies will appear in the new certification exam? An important "postscript": I plan to keep my SPHR certification, which I very much value. I'm proud of this certification and grateful for all the doors it opened for me in the HR community. For the record, I do not plan to seek the new SHRM certification. In fact, the idea of "transferring" a certification (something SHRM has suggested) makes absolutely no sense (perhaps it only makes sense in the minds of marketing colleagues). Do I plan to obtain further HRCI certifications? Absolutely - GPHR is next on my plans, as soon as I take care of tenure requirements at my university.
5 Comments
I completely agree with you and think you make very valid points. I am disappointed in the manner in which this has been handled and I too feel betrayed by SHRM. It will be interesting to see how this unfolds. I also plan to kee my SPHR certification current and will have to think carefully before renewing my SHRM membership next year.
Reply
Jonathan Webb
6/5/2014 03:20:22 pm
I am disappointed as well in this announced move. SPHR certified since 2004, I considered the independence of SHRM and HRCI as adding credibility to the certification. Forgive the analogy, but it seems as though SHRM has gone the way of major sports entities: MY LAKERS and MY DODGERS are no longer available to me unless I pay for cable access :( This feels like a monetary centric move. In my arena, I plan to retain the SPHR certification and pursue HCS certs.
Reply
Laurie Geoffroy
6/12/2014 02:44:50 am
I am in agreement. Ironically, I am in the middle of my SPHR re-certification. I was really surprised at SHRM's move and even more confused by the lack of substance and clarity behind the decision. In this case, I am staying the course and recertifying with HRCI.
Reply
Michael D. Dake, SPHR
6/19/2014 02:02:19 am
I agree with your assessment. Let's not forget that there is a wide gap between what happens on a local or state level in SHRM organizations and the SHRM Board. This is a hostile takeover to capture market share. A proper response to any perceived shortfall in the HRCI's credentials would have been to advocate openly for change. If HRCI is falling behind, then publicly challenge it to improve. The SHRM Board's plaintive cries of "we have talked to the HRCI board for years" ring hollow. Why were these problems not brought to light last year? Because they were board-to-board communications and they did not want to "air dirty laundry"? Absurd, when the actions taken blindsided the whole profession and destroy 40 years of value stored in HRCI.
Reply
Cathy SPHR, PMP
7/8/2014 01:35:59 am
I was hoping the SHRM BOD would hear to the outcry of their members and find some way to resolve this new certification issue. They proved at the conference they are continuing with amateur hour and will not listen. For all of you who have worked to achieve your current credential and want to stop this devaluation of your efforts and those of you who want to be part of a society that retains its credibility the time to act is NOW. The SHRM BOD needs to go. This means we have to work to remove them and replace them with a group who is competent enough to work with HRCI to resolve this.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
About the Author
Dr. Cris Wildermuth is an Assistant Professor at Drake University, where she coordinates and teaches at the Master of Science in Leadership Development. Archives
January 2021
Categories
All
|