An Analysis of the Accreditation Debate
The following is also my blog post on Todd And - The Power to Connect.
Recently there has been a lot of debate over the value of accreditation. Are stamps of approval by professional associations really necessary? Based on my quick research of the related blog posts and comments, the arguments on both sides of the question are pretty even. Here’s the score as I see it:
For Accreditation
- Kami Huyse (”The principles learned in the accreditation process are framework that encourage PR professionals to think strategically.”)
- Marie Williams (”Getting your APR establishes the core principles of PR and also forms good planning habits for campaigns.”)
- Stuart Bruce (”I’ve worked with and known far too many talented PR people who simply don’t know what they are doing.”)
- Linda Jones (”The day you stop learning is the day you may as well pack it all in.”)
- Mary Ann Carolyn Dalangin-Tordecilla (”Accreditation is useful because it reminds PR professionals that they are ‘professionals’ and their service should abide by right conduct and manner.”)
- Lauren Vargas (”I agree that during this process I have become a professional, a counselor, in truth.”)
- Scott Baradell (”I think accreditation is a good thing and needs to go further.”)