got the best response yet with more than 1,800 respondents. This says something about the interest HR professionals have in the topic.
The main story here is that opinions on the senior designation are complex. Consider the essential question — “Do we need a senior designation?” “No” has a slight edge over “yes,” but the margin is much smaller than the “not sure” response. This suggests the level of interest in a senior designation likely depends on the specifics of the proposition at hand. There is a greater interest among those who would likely be eligible for such a designation. Specifically, if you have more than 15 years’ experience and are at the middle management or executive level and do not currently hold the Certified Human Resources Professional (CHRP) designation, you are two-and-a-half times more likely to think the profession needs a senior designation than if you have less than 10 years’ experience, are in a non-managerial position, and hold the CHRP (44.2 per cent versus 18 per cent).
If there were to be a senior designation, the preference would be for one aimed at HR professionals with about 10 years’ experience at a managerial level with a focus on experience and achievements. This was also the standard for grandfathering into the CHRP when it was introduced.
Many respondents took the opportunity to comment on the CHRP and the need to reassess how the designation is awarded. These comments reiterated a key finding of the previous survey — that the value of the designation would be enhanced by the addition of an experience requirement.
takes a look at the extent to which HR professionals are put in situations where they feel their professionalism is being compromised. Results will be published in the June 16 issue.
Claude Balthazard is director, HR excellence, at the Toronto-based Human Resources Professionals Association (HRPA) of Ontario. He can be reached at (416) 923-2324 or email@example.com.