Good Afternoon Ladies and Gentlemen,

Allow me to weigh in on this subject. As a current Records practitioner with
five years experience in the field and a M.S. in Information and Knowledge
Strategy, I can firmly state that I agree with ICRM's decision to "loosen"
the requirements to become a Certified Records Manager. In my opinion, the
test itself is sufficiently difficult to "weed" out all potential applicants
(myself included, so far).The proverbial pie for Records and Information
Management is growing, not contracting, and the ICRM, which is the governing
body of the field, needs to reflect this reality.
Best,

Alexander Campbell, M.S.
 Records Analyst
Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Julie J. Colgan
<[log in to unmask]>wrote:

> I'm going to jump in and agree with Robert.  The obscurity of the
> certification can be as much a hindrence to earning potential as it can be
> a
> help - just depends on how you look at it.  I'll also agree with whoever
> said it first ... if you can pass the exam, then it's fine by me.  As
> Deanna
> has pointed out, there is a woeful lack of formal higher education in the
> RIM space, which essentially necessitates signficant professional
> experience
> in order to pass the exam in the first place.
>
> This certification (as amended) isn't, IMO, substantively divergent from
> other certifications in terms of candidate qualifications so for me it's a
> non-issue.
>
> I think much of this fray came about as a matter of word choice.  I don't
> think I would have characterized the change as streamlining "administrative
> hurdles".  Professional qualifications do not equal administrative hurdles.
> That said, I fully support the change and think it breaks down barriers
> that
> may have been quite superficial in the first place (that's assuming we can
> all agree that the exams themselves are adequate to vet a
> candidate's ability to practice successfully in today's world ... but
> that's
> perhaps a conversation for another day).
>
> I'll add, in close, that the streamlining of true administrative hurdles
> (form completion and submission, communications, website functionality and
> ease of use, etc.) is absolutely welcome across the ICRM experience.  Some
> improvements have been made and more I'm sure are coming.  As the numbers
> of
> CRMs increase, it becomes a matter of scalability for the Institute, which
> may have significant consequences if not addressed proactively.
>
> I offer my sincere thanks to the ICRM Board of Regents for their hard work,
> strategic focus and for doing all of the things we elected them to do.
>
> Stay Calm, Carry On (as says the sign over the bar at my favorite local
> pub)
> ...
>
> Cheers,
> Julie
>
> --
> Julie J. Colgan, CRM
>
> [log in to unmask]
> http://twitter.com/juliecolgan
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/juliejcolgan
>
> List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
> Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
> To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already
> present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the
> message.
> mailto:[log in to unmask]
>

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]