We got a large number of comments responding to last week’s epinion concerning the brouhaha brewing over SHRM’s decision to start offering its own certifications, in competition with HRCI. [See the original post here.] None of the comments is positive and most of the negativity is directed toward SHRM.
 |
Two readers cleverly turned the sample question against SHRM. (See “Back at You” below.) Here are the responses:
I am appalled that these two are having such a dispute. They should find common ground for the benefit of Advancing the Profession. Grow Up!
I have been SPHR-certified for several years and the news that I passed the assessment was some of the greatest news ever. It is sad to witness two professional organizations behave in a manner that the solution could be exam question number 1. Such behavior by SHRM does not strengthen our profession. On [the issue of] Walmart is the largest employer; you might add that they are the largest violator of many of the key HR issues.
For all the time, sweat, and money spent to prepare, take, and pass the HRCI PHR exam, I’m in no hurry to give SHRM more $.
Is that a competency question!? Embarrassingly ridiculous! What is SHRM trying to do? Put the profession to shame? And by the way, competency questions have always been present in HRCI exams, and SHRM has been a main preparation material provider. It is a shame that the profession is being caught between two organizations’ differences. Irreconcilable at this point?
I have held my PHR Certification for 22 years, and I am very disappointed to hear of the split between SHRM and HRCI. It was difficult 22 years ago to have the certification be recognized for its importance. It is very satisfying now that the certification holds the prestige that it was always meant to have. I never thought that I would see two professional organizations who have worked together for HR professionals around the world suddenly put our best interests aside for some kind of a dispute. Our careers should mean more to them than any conflict. Please do not forget the importance of being certified as a Human Resource Professional.
That competency question is kind of ridiculous. Will two of the answer options always be so obviously incorrect? If so, it certainly undermines the value of the certification.
Replies:
- I agree. Furthermore, the HR profession has enough hurdles. SHRM is supposed to be a partner. A partner should be more dedicated to the profession. Additionally, if SHRM is so business minded, there were many business mistakes in this action plan.
- I totally agree! This is the easiest HR question ever!
- I agree—the example certainly does not give me great comfort in this change. More than anything, I am disappointed in the transparent “tit for tat” between the two companies. SHRM has handled this very poorly. But then, I have been questioning the direction of the organization for some time now.
- [The writer] is absolutely correct: This squabble resulting in two certifications for the same skill set categorically undermines the efficacy of BOTH certifications. HR is supposed to resolve conflict, not create and wholeheartedly participate in it. It is challenging enough for HR professionals to be taken seriously by the critical disciplines of any organization. The SPHR certification has helped significantly for HR to be viewed as a profession. How seriously is that acronym going to be taken with “new” certifications that don’t even distinguish KSA’s as do the PHR, GPHR and CA/SPHR? Do you think for a moment that a “separate but equal” certification for the ABA or a CPA would be taken seriously? This power struggle is totally embarrassing to those of us (I suppose I can only speak for myself) who are (were) proud that our chosen field has made impressive inroads toward being viewed as legitimate.
Great summary, Stephen! I appreciate your even-handed approach based on direct conversations with the principals.
What I still don’t understand, though, is why SHRM didn’t feel obligated to consult its membership about a move that affects us so personally. SHRM says that its new certifications will be technically superior to HRCI’s; but does a marginal technical improvement justify all the disruption and talking down our HRCI credentials? It strikes me as fixing something no one else thought was broken, with those of us in the profession carrying the risk of higher costs, lower employer acceptance and a less credible professional association.
A number of HR professionals are concerned about this divide, and some consider SHRM’s board as a major part of the problem. Of course, as in any conflict, there are different sides to consider.
Completing the survey at http://www.stopshrm.org will help determine the interest level of the membership, and whether further action should be taken.
Perhaps if all parties would review the “best answer” in the sample “SHRM competencies” question [Improving communication and working to ID the core conflict], we would get much further in resolving this critical issue.
Back at You
Two readers cleverly tossed the sample question back at the two organizations:
Reader #1
I thought the competency question was entirely relevant; it just needs clarification and focus: Two colleagues (SHRM and HRCI) are in conflict. HR should intervene by:
- Letting them each take their ball and go home.
- Bang their heads together.
- Make them shake hands and apologize.
- Inform them that failing to work together on creating a common future that supports their mission and membership will divide the HR community without cause, damage their brands, and might cause additional splinter groups to form that will weaken the entire profession, and that instead, they should negotiate a peace treaty and engage in a dialogue that improves outcomes for everyone.
Replies:
- Well said!! This has created nothing but confusion and who will know what a SHRM-CP is anyway? We already have the competencies built in by HRCI. Everyone I speak with is very concerned.
- Well Said
- Great question and answers. Sounds like SHRM/HRCI have already done #1-#2 but not necessarily in that order. I am back to my original opinion that SHRM wants total control and is in it for the money especially by the way they have handled this poor announcement and execution thus far.
Reader #2
Two professional HR organizations have a conflict. HR professionals should intervene by:
A) Discontinuing their memberships in both.
B) Building a new professional HR organization, focused solely on sharing best practices, not on selling certifications.
C) Making more of an effort to reach out to colleagues, perhaps through LinkedIn and other networks, and share knowledge and experiences.
D) All of the above.
Reply
- No one is a member of HRCI. We are HRCI certificants, not members. SHRM is a trade association, with membership and lobbying activities and the like. HRCI was formed to manage a certification process based on a Body of Knowledge. SHRM’s job is to share best practices. The crisis would disappear immediately if the SHRM Board were to return to its own competencies and stop promoting its own, branded products. If there were still concerns over how well HRCI is doing its job to identify the best HR practitioners, then we can address those as members of the profession, whether we are members of a given trade association or not.
The same reader in a later post:
The answer to the question “Is the new certification body, a division of SHRM, adequately “firewalled” from the organization?” is a farce. The National Commission on Certifying Agencies, the entity that accredits HRCI’s certification program, requires that professional certification programs be managed by a “legally or administratively autonomous” entity. Legal autonomy is clearly preferable to administrative autonomy. HRCI is and has been the HR profession’s legally autonomous credentialing entity for decades. The SHRM Board, through its predecessors, was instrumental in creating HRCI for the very purpose of legal autonomy. That the current SHRM Board has disagreed with HRCI on an issue and responded by creating a new, reportedly administratively autonomous entity should be all the proof needed that the SHRM Board’s actions are not legitimate. I do not see how the NCCA can accept any assurance by the current SHRM Board that the SHRM Certifying Commission will be autonomous in any way. A registered trademark belonging to the SHRM Board is embedded in the name of the Commission and in the names of its products. Hopefully the average HR professional is able to see this fact and will respond to the SHRM Board’s actions appropriately.
I am very disappointed in SHRM. This appears to be a typical play for power. If they weren’t happy with the “competencies” covered in HRCI’s exam, I am sure that there are meetings galore to discuss this. This is childish and silly for grownups—maybe we need to send them to a mediator and then to their separate corners?? How would HR Professionals handle this in the workplace??
I fail to see how a test question, like the example given, with two ‘correct’ answers and two obviously incorrect answers, can provide credibility to a certification. Perhaps the two parties should invite a certified HR person in to apply the correct example answers to the situation.
It appears as if the leadership of SHRM is lacking some key leadership and managerial competencies.
It looks like the certification process has now come full-circle. It started out as a SHRM (then ASPA) function and at times through the mid-80′s the SHRM board of directors played an active role in reviewing the examination and processes. HRCI was created by SHRM or through SHRM at least in part to provide some separation between the two. SHRM didn’t want to create or perpetuate any perception that it controlled the certification process. I guess that thinking is no longer valid, or never was.
HRCI and SHRM are acting like two parents in the middle of a divorce who are arguing over the children. As an HR professional I do not appreciate being treated like a trophy and being devalued overall in the process. HRCI clearly has had its issues. Their “gold standard” has turned into their gold cash cow as evidenced by the rising failure rates for folks taking their exams requiring a new exam and new set of fees. SHRM too has its issues, like surveying thousands of us as to what concerns we had about HRCI’s testing process and what we would like to see change, only to twist those honest responses to serve as SHRM’s justification for taking over lock, stock and barrel. Here’s a novel thought: how about both SHRM and HRCI work to communicate better with each other to identify the core issues in order to better serve the HR professionals that they both profess to value?
If you’d like to share your thoughts, please leave a comment below.
A number of HR professionals are talking action and asking for your opinion. A simple survey has been created to allow for feedback that can be used to petition SHRM to stop this activity. The website is http://www.stopshrm.org.
I am proud of my SPHR certification, which I have held for almost 15 years, and have regularly encouraged my team members at work and the students I have taught to pursue certification as part of their professional development. As a member of SHRM, I am also wondering why the membership wasn’t invited to weigh in on this change BEFORE anything was decided. Based on SHRM’s bylaws, shouldn’t a change such as this be put in front of members for a vote? Who elects the board of SHRM? Don’t we? If so, then we have a clear way to express our dissatisfaction with how OUR professional association is being run. Just as the board of any publicly traded company can receive a yes or a no vote from shareholders, we can vote no on every board member to show our lack of confidence in their ability to govern our professional standards in an appropriate and representative way.
This is why I decided long ago to earn my advanced degree, which is valid even if my college/university goes out of business. Versus a certification that my employer leadership doesn’t really know much about.
I am one of those who is appalled at this power struggle. If resolving conflict is a “core competency” for HR, how can these two organizations fighting to be the gold standard for measuring competencies not model the way by resolving theirs? I was also underwhelmed by the SHRM certification “letters” – SHRM-CP, seriously? That is more about promoting SHRM than either the profession or the professional credentials.
The longer this drags on the more transparent it becomes. It’s not about advancing the profession at all – it’s about generating more revenue for SHRM. They have endorsed, encouraged, supported, and recognized HRCI certification for many years. For them now to suggest they are concerned about the competency of the test questions to the extent that a completely new test and certification is warranted is simply laughable. The SHRM board of directors should be embarrassed and ashamed! I am very disappointed in SHRM. Not only are they tarnishing their own reputation, but they are diminishing the prestige and value that those outside the HR world have finally begun to place on HR certification. I have no intention of taking the new exam. If there was another large orgnaization out there besides SHRM, I would not renew my membership with them.
Thank you fellow colleagues. You’re right on point with your responses. Perhaps our sentiments of disappointment, dissatisfaction and disgust with this public embarrassment to the HR profession will cause these two entities to rethink their actions. Albeit, it might be too late. We need a new SHRM Board, indeed!
Hoping this doesn’t set back the respect that the HR profession has earned.
I’ve been SPHR certified for years and am about to come up on re-certification. To be honest, this conflict makes me question why I bother. If our leadership organizations cannot get it together, what’s the point? My employer does not require certification, nor reward it. So tell me why I do this?
I feel shaken by the discord between SHRM and HRCI. Many hours and dollars were spent to prepare and obtain a PHR certification. What is the value of it now and should I renew it? This discord reflects negatively on the HR profession. Both organizations should be model examples of “what to be” vs. “what not to be”.
I just passed my PHR exam the end of last month, and like many others, I spent over a year working in HR and studying in between lunch hours and weekends for almost a year. I am quite disappointed to see SHRM try to replace the title that I hold as a high in my career. I spent a lot of money on SHRM’s materials self study program and it was very helpful in preparing me for the test but, in all honesty, I think it should be a separate entity from HRCI.
SHRM’s actions regarding the certification process and their relationship with HRCI is an embarrassment to all HR professionals and is destructive to HR’s overall reputation. What it appears to be is a ploy by SHRM to add revenue by requiring (or trying to require) HR professionals to pay for another credential. It took decades for PHR, SPHR, GPHR, etc. to be recognized as the professional standard for HR professionals, much as the CPA is recognized for the accounting profession. Does SHRM really think that just because they put it out there that their credential will be immediately accepted and preferred? While SHRM states that educational offerings may offer credentials from both agencies, how long will that last? SHRM has seriously damaged their credibility, so little credence is bring granted to their current assurances. For the sake of the profession, we must all hope – and urge SHRM to work with HRCI to resolve this and get back to providing support for the profession they were designed to serve.
Business is business. But given the hrci has been doing it longer I’m sure their certifications will be more valuable.
All,
Here’s a thought. How can SHRM measure our ability to “apply” HR knowledge in our workplace? Although the vignettes are situational; one small event change can determine the way you handle the situation. If we are going to be tested on competencies; we should really be tested on “critical” thinking (in addition to HR law knowledge) because that’s what determines our action in any situation. It’s tough to measure “critical” thinking.
If it’s not broken – don’t fix it!
Professional certification sets us apart from the Administrative Assistants and non-HR professionals who were labelled HR. I worked hard for my SPHR certification and am respected and recognized because of it. What’s the benefit of the new credential??? Competencies??? Competencies are already in the HRCI material and our employee base and managers couldn’t care less what’s covered in the certification materials – they just want to know that we’re knowledgable and that we stay current with the ever changing compliance landscape. A new credential will only help confuse us all – the suggested certification doesn’t even have HR in it – what’s a SHRM – CP??? Or did you forget the A in CPA???
Certification doesn’t guarantee quality. How many certified accountants are terrible? Quite a few. Same for HR certification regardless of who provides it.
The HRCI-SHRM debate comes down to credibility to business leaders and employers. What do they value? Do they even care? Seems that not getting that perspective before making any abrupt change in direction might have been wise. Ironically, many CEOs and top business executives actually don’t care about HR certification because it’s not a strong independent/3rd party who’s only responsibility is to test and certify for standard knowledge and understanding.
Certainly neither side can ignore that two certifications will benefit the HR profession. The fact that there’s even an inside profession debate does not bode well for where this is going.
I am extremely disappointed. As HR struggles to build credibility and gain a seat at the table, SHRM’s greedy impulse has really taken our profession backward. They are lowering the bar at a time when we should be elevating it. They are making our certifications meaningless.
It’s a shame SHRM and HRCI came to this…many HR pros I have spoken with feel it’s pure greed on SRHM’s part. SHRM realized how much revenue they could’ve been making on the exams and prep materials themselves, cutting out a middleman/partner…now they have put HR professionals in a quandary. Do I have to go through hoops again for another certification? The materials and exam questions cover competencies. I don’t know many HR pros willing to go through this again…it’s hard enough keeping up with training and recert credits.
Thirty five years ago, I received an advanced degree in HR Management. That was back in the early days of the evolution and maturation of the HR profession. I was proud to receive my SPHR designation because it certified that I had mastered and retained the body of knowledge expected of a person in my field. Now, suddenly my professional society seems to be saying that my certification is irrelevant. I can’t accept that any more than I can accept the fact that the president of my professional society doesn’t have an SPHR designation, but rather is a CPA. Where’s the relevance there?
After carefully reviewing all the comments and negativity between both SHRM and HRCI it clearly shows that they are not getting along well and that many of my HR Colleagues who have worked hard to obtain their Certification are facing challenging decisions.
I am sadden to see that the organizations are unable to settle this dispute.
I have over the years wondered if I should get my PHR or SPHR, but after only needing 25 course hours remaining on my Ph.D in Org Mgmt Specializing in Human Resources, I will first focus on my Ph.D then perhaps just then I will consider getting my PHR/SPHR.
I hope they get this resolved.
I am glad I’m not the only person appalled by SHRM’s clearly selfish and money-centric pursuit of what they seem to think is a more credible certification. I just obtained by PHR a month before the announcement of the new certification, and I automatically felt like it meant less even though I worked so hard to get it. I’m not impressed with the idea of competing certifications, nor am I impressed with how SHRM has blasted HRCI for not wanting to be involved with something that doesn’t benefit the profession. HRCI clearly had it right from the beginning, and it seems most HR professionals agree that a new certification is unnecessary and unfounded.
Have always felt SHRM “certification” was more about the money than anything else. In contrast while World At Work’s certifications may be expensive the skills proffered are not nebulous regurgitation. Much more comfortable with my skills and experience than going through the PHR/SPHR testing with all the expense and the continuing cost for “currency”.
I worked hard to get my PHR. Please don’t ruin it for those who are proud of our achievements.
SHRM needs – and has needed a new BOD for quite some time. There was an unsuccessful movement a few years ago to address that, but unfortunately, this debacle only proves that those leading/participating in that effort were totally correct. Could that group reorganize? The fact that the Pres/CEO is a CPA – not SPHR certified has been sending a message that SHRM itself does not value the certifications. And we are surprised? I am not renewing my SHRM membership. I just renewed my SPHR a few weeks before this matter became public and would have done so, even in light of this situation.
Why are so many focusing on the business structure Between SHRM and HRCI? It’s a business and as such can be changed, revamped or discontinued. I think the important aspect of this change is would SHRM accepted HRCI course credits toward maintaining one’s certification. I recently participated in an online course and the sponsor did not know if they would still be able to provide credit for the once acceptable courses to maintain certification. I think this is the bigger issue that HRCI and SHRM should work out.
Though this question seems so simple, many appear not to be aware of the Obvious, and it is the question that I have been asking, but not getting the answer to
Currently, HRCI credits and certification is recognized as legitimate continuing education with the Department of Education. Today individuals can get legitimate grants and “scholorships” to be able to gain a continuing education certificate in HR and several universities across the country
In fact, several universities even have programs working with the government which allows the unemployed to change their fields and gain education in specific fields through the workforce investment act.. HR being one of the certificates provided. HRCI is the acknowledged industry accreditation..and is currently the sole provider of such a designation
So, will SHRM be able to do the same? do they have the authority? and why do they want to create something that is already there? Outside of money?
it’s bad enough that most don’t even realize that SHRM and HRCI were not even the same business.. that HRCI was a separate entity.. and has been almost from it’s inception..
it would be amazing if we could have this question addressed, but they have avoided it.. and currently I am banned from asking questions like this from the SHRM LinkedIn group.. Guess they really don’t want curious minds to know.. or enjoy the opportunity for transparency?
Excellent blog! Do you have any tips and hints for
aspiring writers? I’m hoping to start my own blog soon but I’m
a little lost on everything. Would you suggest starting with a free platform like WordPress or
go for a paid option? There are so many options out there
that I’m totally overwhelmed .. Any ideas? Thanks!
We heard about the ‘new’ certifications at a PIHRA conference in August. I had brought an employee to the conference just to have her meet at the SHRM booth and get her application going. I for one was very confused when they began talking to her about these new certifications when I think the PHR, SPHR, etc. are very reputable. SO much confusion around these. Your members’ comments above are very helpful. I agree…NO ONE asked SHRM members before moving forward on this.