A momentary break from the tips...
The other day I came across this post from November 2004 on the View From the Corner Office blog regarding the CAE designation. If you haven't read it, you really should -- it asks some good, tough, provocative questions of the CAE program.
If you don't have the time to read it fully, basically the author states that by simply testing the basic skills of association management in the CAE exam, the CAE is relegated to the association industry's equivalent of the GED.
I was stunned by the contempt the author shoveled upon the CAE program. Now, I won't say that the CAE credential is perfect, and the author did bring out some good points -- some of which I'll post on later. But I have to wonder if our mystery author is a CAE. Why?
Because a CAE should know that credentialing activities (like the CAE certification) are fraught with legal landmines, and one good way to invite a lawsuit is to require a person to demonstrate more than the minimum relevant knowledge in his/her field in order to earn the certification.
If our anonymous author is a CAE, then one could argue the CAE program is failing -- at least somewhat -- in certifying that the successful candidate has a basic understanding of association management. However, if our anonymous author is not a CAE, perhaps this demonstrates that the certification is not as elementary as s/he makes it out to be.
In either case, isn't it ironic that the author calls the CAE credential's credibility into question based on a lack of understanding of the fundamentals of association management?
February 25, 2005
CAE = The Association GED?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Jeff,
Thanks for posting. I'm not sure I understand your position on this. Are you suggesting ASAE should insist that CAE candidates exhibit a higher level of mastery regardless of the potential legal liabilities?
Jeff,
In studying for the CAE exam I learned that to require a certification candidate to exhibit more than a minimum competency is to invite a legal dispute. The CAE exam is very similar to the bar exam or the state boards. When a law student passes the bar exam s/he has demonstrated that s/he has obtained at least the minumum competency to practice law. Same goes for doctors and the state boards.
What exactly would make the CAE a higher standard? More preparatory materials? A longer test? A code of ethics? More experience? A Ph.D?
Does the body of knowledge that an association professional truly requires on the job merit those additional requirements? Probably a few of them (as you know, ASAE already recently increased the number of preparatory materials). The devil is in the details, and I look forward to more discussion on the matter.
Jeff,
I've had some time to think over some of your points, and I agree with you on some level -- just not sure what that level is yet. Certainly CAEs should strive for excellence. However, I still don't think there's anything fundamentally wrong with the CAE program. Let me respond to a few of your points at my own peril -- I feel like I'm debating my old college professors with no chance of winning ;-)
First, some low-hanging fruit: As I mentioned in a previous comment, ASAE has expanded the list of authoritative readings, so they have done something along the lines of your recommendation. I think it's a good thing.
I don't pretend to be an expert on whether the examination should be essay or multiple choice, but I will tell you that in my experience, the CAE exam does test one's ability to apply knowledge to real-world situations. I would estimate that around 75% of the questions on the CAE exam require you to apply knowledge to a real-world scenario. The exam consists of very few straight definitional questions. The questions are incredibly nuanced and subjective (to the point of extreme frustration over the shades of gray), but also require you to apply hard facts and best practices.
Let me also submit to you that while the CAE exam tests a lower absolute standard than law and medicine, it is perhaps an appropriate standard for two reasons. One, there is an abundance of research and case studies to draw from for law and medicine which has been compiled over thousands of years, and a dearth of similar materials for association management by comparison, a profession that has existed for just 50 years. Two, most of the skills necessary for association management are not unique to the profession. Why reinvent the wheel by testing knowledge and skills that have been (or can be) demonstrated elsewhere?
I mean no disrespect to you, Jeff, or anyone for that matter, but I observe that the CAE program's biggest critics those who haven't taken the exam, or those who took it umpteen years ago. One can examine a recipe and based on the ingredients conclude that a dish will taste awful, but only after one has consumed it can one truly know whether or not the dish is unpalatable.
Hey, maybe in umpteen years we'll be on the same page ;-)
Jeff and Ben,
Thanks for this beautiful conversation. I honor you both for the depth of the postings and for sticking with it in a respectful spirit of inquiry. Also, while I'm handing out kudos, congratulations on obtaining your CAE, Ben.
I agree with you both. There should be a masters degree in association management, AND the CAE credential does have value. But neither a masters degree nor a CAE guarantees much in the way of performance and certainly does not assure that a person will "do no harm."
What really hacks me off about the CAE designation is how little it takes to get it and keep it. In effect we buy the credits we need by registering (not necessarity attending) ASAE's educational offerings. In other professions, attendees sign in and sign out of sessions as a way of validating attendance -- some even require a post-test.
I have concern, too, about the validity of the test from a metrics point of view. I admittedly know little about test design, but some of our colleagues who do this for a living are appalled by the ambiguity of some of the questions and the process used to develop them. Maybe the latest revision cleaned this up - I don't know.
I took the CAE exam in 1988 (arrgh!). I wrote longhand in a little book for 6-8 hours in nearly illegible scrawl. I could never figure out how they could score what I wrote, but they said I passed, and I was as happy as Ben is now. I'm still glad I have it. The credential does not, in my opinion, say that I know how to masterfully lead an association, but it does say that at least I care enough to consider myself an association exec.
Maybe as "Sue" suggested, we need another level that would go beyond basic knowledge and self identification with the profession.
Thanks again, Ben and Jeff.
Ben and Jeff:
This is a great conversation. Like Jeff, I do not have a CAE, but have considered it several times over the years. One of the reasons that I have never gotten the CAE is that when I talked to people who do have it, they complained that the test questions were vague, and that the multiple choice answers could, many times, ALL be correct, depending on the situation. I also have been told that you have to attend the study groups to have any hope of passing because they tell you how to pass the test. This always made me wonder: are the CAEs being tested on their knowledge, or are they being tested on the test? Like others who have posted, I am not familiar with the revised CAE exam so maybe some of these issues have been addressed. To me, the CAE represents a commitment to doing a good job by taking the time and making the effort to study and perhaps expand your area of knowledge. I have never thought it was anything like passing the bar exam or the medical boards. It's not even close. Like Jeff, I believe that a masters degree in association management is a necessary step to demonstrate the many facets an association executive must have. Association management is interdisciplinary and we should have an advanced degree that demonstrates this.
Is anyone familiar with GMU's Master of Public Administration degree? It has a nonprofit track and I considered going through it a few years ago, but ultimately decided against it.
Failed to mention that I didn't do the MPA through GMU because I felt the CAE was a better option.
I got the CAE primarily for the free food in the CAE Lounge at the annual meeting. :)
Seriously, the benefits I perceive and/or wanted in getting the CAE are:
-showing my professional commitment to the field of association management;
-greater entree to volunteer opportunities at ASAE/Center;
-gaining a more broad-based knowledge of the field outside of the areas I have worked in directly.
That's about it. I'm not sure it will do much for my career other than through facilitating the benefits I listed above. I think those 3 are worth the effort to get the designation.
Post a Comment