Beyond Certification

Forum Outcomes

The outcomes of the NOCA Credentialing Leadership Forum can be downloaded below.  I'm getting ready to dash out of town now, but I'll try to comment on the outcomes soon.  In the meantime, what are your thoughts?

Download Forum_outcomes.pdf

Why before How

I got a disturbing, but unfortunately not unusual, call last week.  An association president who read Considering Certification? Your Guide to Making the Decision called expressing the realization and concern that his organization has been focusing all their efforts on HOW to develop a certification but hadn't really thoroughly considered WHY!!! 

This happens all too often, in my opinion. Boards assume certification is wanted, needed and/or valued.  Boards assume certification will do great things for their industry or profession.  Boards assume they will make big revenue on certification.  ALL RISKY ASSUMPTIONS.  Hopefully I'll be able to help the board more thoroughly consider IF certification is a path they should pursue.  Now, someone tell me why the consultant they've been working with for months hasn't raised this "minor" question?   In fairness, the individual was hired to guide creation of a program, not to assess the feasibility for developing a program.  This begs the question, however: Isn't it the job of a consultant to ask the questions that our clients don't know to ask?

The WHY should always precede the HOW.

Feedback on Certificate Standard

For those of you who are members of ASTM International's subcommittee drafting the standard for certificate programs, remember that your ballot is DUE TODAY, Sept 13, 2008!!! 

If you are not a member yet, read on... If your organization plans to or currently offers certificate programs, or if you in any way would rely on an American national standard for certificate programs, I encourage you to join ASTM's subcommittee E36.30 to provide feedback on the draft.  The more feedback we get, the better the standard will be.

According to the current draft, a certificate program is defined as:

• A non-degree-granting structured learning experience that is designed to meet specific and pre-determined learning outcomes and for which individual achievement of intended learning outcomes is measured.

This, of course, is distinguished from a certification program which does NOT have a structured learning experience linked to its assessment.

Of course, you can contact me to inquire about the standard and/or provide feedback.  And I'll be soliciting feedback on this blog.  However, I encourage you to join the subcommittee as a voting member.  It is open to everyone and you can join here.  The cost to join is $75.  Join the main committee E36 and the subcommittee E36.30.  Don't let the names of the committees distract you; these are the RIGHT committees. 

Providing comments over the next week or so will ensure your feedback gets considered in the first revision of the draft standard.  I'm the lead on the revision so feel free to contact me with your feedback. 

Appeals vs Complaints

Twice this week I've been in discussions about what is the difference between an appeal and complaint.

An appeal is a written request for reconsideration of a determination made by a credentialing body. For example, an applicant may appeal the denying of his eligibility status or a certificant may appeal the determination to revoke her credential.

In contrast, a complaint is a request, other than an appeal, made to a credentialing body, for corrective action relating to the activities of that body or regarding those it credentials.  For example, an individual may file a complaint that a certificant is acting in a manner that violates the profession's code of conduct.  These types of ethics-related complaints typically must follow a formal complaints policy and procedures.  However, also keep in mind that it's important to have a process to consider, resolve and track all complaints.  For example, a candidate may complain that he didn't get his eligibility letter in the published time-frame.    Do you have a system to track and resolve these types of complaints?  I've found many organizations don't!

So, even though the two are often lumped together, as in "you need to have policies and procedures for appeals and complaints" keep in mind that they are, in fact, separate processes.

New to Certification?

ASAE & The Center are hosting a virtual Credentialing Symposium October 27-30th.  The program is targeted to those considering developing a certification program or have a new or immature program.

It will be held online over four days via webinars, pre-recorded content and online chats, and you will have the opportunity to connect with fellow executives and get your questions answered by a group of experts in certification.  Some of the topics will include: the credentialing options (by yours truly), minimizing legal risk, marketing, industry quality standards, psychometrics in plain english, and trends in certification.

For more information and to register, click here.

Forum Thoughts

As is often the case, I found the participant discussion idea sharing at the end of the conference to be very  interesting and informative.  Here are just a few thoughts that provide the basis  for future discussion and certification innovation.  Thank you to NOCA for providing this opportunity!

• Conference participant comments challenged some of our basic certification tenets, for example;   Should our examinations, expecially in the health related professions,  be based on evidence-based practice even it is not yet reflected in current practice?  Reliability, validity  legal defensibility  are the basis for our  present test development process  grounded  on a role delineation study of current practice , the examination should always reflect practice not drive practice.  Practice may be driven by research and education , but not the examination.   Are we truly living up to our public protection mission if we are reflecting what is rather than what should be? 
• Are we doing a good job of ensuring that our certification programs  are relevant to the current/future marketplace? Are the broad-based certifications relevant to future practice?     While state licensure, again especially in the healthcare arena, continues to rely on national certification examinations to assess minimal competence in a particular discipline, is there a need for more focused content specific modular examinations in addition to the core examination that meet the needs of  the rapidly evolving marketplace and a new generation of certificants?

Posted by Guest Blogger Chris Reidy, Senior Director, Commission on Dietetic Registration of the American Dietetic Association

NOCA Credentialing Leadership Forum Round-Up!

The NOCA Credentialing Leadership Forum brought together a great mix of leaders from the credentialing community: board administrators, vendor partners, and credentialing consultants.

Dr. Les Wallace delivered a wonderful keynote address which focused on leadership in the 21st century.  Citing Charles Handy, Dr. Wallace emphasized that the model for leadership has changed: the prevailing paradigm for leadership in the 20th century was that of the "heroic" leader--an individual who knew all and could solve every problem.  Now, effective leaders are "transformational"--they approach problems with an eye towards developing their team's capacity.  This, per Dr. Wallace, is legacy leadership.  Rather than focusing on "success", which is simply the accomplishment of management goals, leaders need to focus on "significance" which Wallace defined as making a lasting impact.

Following the keynote address, and using panel discussions, the group discussed major trends in credentialing focusing on the regulatory environment, the international arena and the growth of the credentialing industry. 

In the regulatory arena, one major trend discussed is the increased reliance by state boards on private certification bodies, primarily due to budgetary restraints, and consequently,the higher level of expectations placed on the certification community.

International credentialing considerations discussed included, most obviously cost, but also:

cultural (is the target market credential hungry? are there frequent security breaches in the target market?);

legislative and legal (how heavily regulated is credentialing in the target market?  do you have legal counsel actually practicing in the target market?  how sound is the intellectual property protection in the target market?);

operational (data protection and translation).

Lenora Knapp, Ph.D., led a great discussion on growth.  Dr. Knapp identified a variety of issues associated with the growh of the certification industry including:

1)  The broadening of the industry as a whole as it has grown beyond its historical healthcare roots;

2)  The growth of the scope of knowledge and skills accompanied by the decreasing lifespan of knowledge;

3)  Enhanced interest in certification, in part driven by technological change;

4)  A shift in certification from solely the protection of the public to the elevation of an occupation;

5)  A greater need for skilled labor due to globalzation;

6)  Greater need for credentials to demonstrate knowledge due to shifting demographics;

7)  More informed stakeholders.

Much of the group discussion centered on fact that with the imminent retirement of the baby boomers, there will be a tremendous shift in the makeup of the work force and this poses a challenge but also provides an opportunity.  As younger workers typically change jobs every 18-36 months and view their careers as "portable", they are in many ways quite receptive to pursuing a credential.  At the same time, however, their decisionmaking is less influenced by what an employer tells them "they should do" and more influenced by a critical analysis of the return on the investment a new credential might bring.   Thus, the key differentiator for credentials will be quality.

Participants were then given the option of which smaller breakout session to attend. I attended the regulatory breakout session facilitated by Paul Grace.  After about an hour of spirited discussion, the group passed several suggestions on to the NOCA Board for consideration.

If you weren't able to make the First NOCA Credentialing Leadership Forum, you missed a great event but more information about the discussion will be coming out soon!

Sara Blair Lake, JD, CAE, Managing Director of the American Board of Audiology and Guest Blogger!

Impact of Growth on Quality

Next panel up at the NOCA Credentialing Leadership Forum: Denise Fandel, Board of Certification; Lenora Knapp, Knapp Associates International; Chris Smith, LERN

They suggested the following as influences on the growth of credentialing (disclaimer:  more were discussed than listed here, but, hey, I just can't type that fast.)

• Rapid pace of change in the workplace. Scope of knowledge and skills is more broad and the lifespan is shorter.
• Greater recognition of certification by the public. 
• Shift of the purpose of credentialing from just protection of the public to advancing the profession.  (I'm not sure I agree with this one.  This isn't a new shift.  Yes, healthcare credentialing has traditionally been focused on public protection, yet many other segments have had industry/profession-focused certification programs for decades.)
• Greater need for skilled labor in other parts of the world, and the need for ways to identify them.
• Technology is making it easier to develop certification programs, to market them, and for individuals to apply for them.
• We are on the cusp of a strong demograhic shift.  Boomers leaving the workforce, and leaving a shortage of qualified workers.

Some implications of the growth of credentialing discussed were:

• Prevalence of certification has made braindumps lucrative...and this is impacting the perceived value of certification.
• Environment is becoming more competitive - from legitimate or non-legitimate (diploma mills) and outside of U.S. borders (other countries certifying U.S. individuals).
• More informed consumers are asking more questions of us. They have more options.  They are demanding more. 
• More competition plus more informed consumers means they are going to be asking for proof of what we are promising.
• Perishable just-in-time credentials (developed quickly and disposed of when no longer needed) are being developed.

Chris focused on the impact of generational transitions and the fact that the Boomers are retiring and questioned whether we are prepared for this to happen.  What do the new generations look like?  What will they value?  He thinks ROI.  Chris stressed that we've got to start paying attention to the young population (Les Wallace indicated earlier that >1/2 of the population is <25 years old). So, Chris suggests we all get the younger generations involved.  I take a look around the room.  Some Gen Xers present (myself included) but I don't believe any Millenials were.  This has to change.  We can't keep talking about them; we need to include them in the discussions.

Forum Themes

What a day!  We wallowed in certification – even the side conversations I heard were about certification.  We heard about it, we blogged about it, we talked about it, we posed questions about it, we strategized about it, and we offered solutions about it: it was All Certification All the Time.  Wonderful stuff: thanks to NOCA and the sponsors.

So what were the main themes?  From my perspective, the main themes were that we (as the certification industry) needed to

• provide information to all stakeholders both internal and external
• address the challenges provided by regulators, legislators, accreditators; both here and abroad, i.e., internationally or globally
• research our field: who is doing what and how and where can we find/share information (see first bullet)
• emphasize the quality of certification over the quantity of certification (not a gladsome song to a CFO’s ear perhaps…)
• use technology to help us deliver more, better, faster
• promote workforce development and diversity – especially intergenerational
• credential the credential-ors (that’s us), and I did hear someone say something about a grandfathering program!

And there was more (which you may have already read about from my fellow bloggers, or which you may soon read about). 

You shoulda been there: see you next time, maybe? 

                                               Guest Blogger Louise Wehrle

International Discussion

Here at the NOCA Credentialing Leadership Forum, Robert Pedigo from Castle Worldwide and Paul Grace from the National Board for Certification in Occupational Therapy make the following points about the challenges of international credentialing:

America has a testing culture that differs from other parts of the world.  Europe, for example, has an established guild system and in general Europeans are not very trusting of a test's ability to verify knowledge and skills. 

Data privacy laws are very different elsewhere than in U.S. so operationalizing an international certifying system is challenging. 

Differing culture norms create additional challenges.  In some parts of the world it is not unethical to share test questions, for example.

Certification marks are challenging to control internationally. 

It's difficult to establish foreign equivalency of educational experiences.

Their key advice was to do your homework.  Talk with others who have navigated international credentialing with the same geographical region as you are investigating.  Also, be sure to get legal counsel experienced in international affairs. 

Interestingly, there was little to no discussion of the opportunities in international credentialing.  Assumed, perhaps?