I'm not sure that there is a simple answer to that question. Certification and certificate proponents for the many programs will state many reasons that one is "better" than the other. The thing of it is, these are a means to an end, not the end. Getting certified or receiving a certificate does not mean that you are some sort of absolute expert and that you will remain so for all time. As we all know, things change -- and rapidly. But preparing for, and successfully passing, an exam is helpful for a professional who wants to demonstrate an intermediate to advanced set of knowledge about the subject at hand, either broadly (in the case of the CRM) or narrowly (in the case of the ECM suite). That doesn't mean that they can teach the subject. That doesn't mean they are articulate. And that doesn't mean that they can actually implement a program or project. It means that they have enough subject matter knowledge (or test-taking acumen) to pass an examination or series of
 examination, have any required experience, and are willing to fork over the money and time to take the exams.
 
My stance (as a CRM) is that it is the more valuable credential. It forms a foundation of broad records management subject matter expertise that is necessary to properly design and implement a legally defensible records management program, including systems that manage electronic records. To be conversant across the broad range of ECM technology, the other certificates add value if folks are not working in the IT trenches on a daily basis and need to have a knowledge base. The added plus of the CRM is the ongoing education requirement. The technical certificates typically do not require maintenance, so there is some risk of the knowledge base going stale if the holder of the certificate does not maintain currency.
 
So I see the CRM as foundational and the ECM series as supplementary, but the over-riding consideration is that the credential holder must continually engage in continuing education, either formally or individually, to stay current and conversant with a changing regulatory and technical environment. There are many sources for this education, ranging from the somewhat happenstance education found here on the Listserve, to seminars and workshops offered by professional and trade associations in the industry. The bottom line is not so much the credential, as the depth of knowledge and understanding of the subject matter. A credential shows that the holder has achieved a certain level of understanding of, and minimal competency in, the field, where other credentials (such as formal educational degrees or professional licenses) may not exist.
 
One last thought: with regard to the relevancy of certain CRM questions that the original poster referred to in a subsequent post, I think you have to consider not the specifics of the question, but the over-riding context. While knowing what a cafeteria plan is, as such, may not be critical, having that knowledge when performing records analysis is very helpful to understand that we're not talking about food service, but a particular type of benefit program that has particular record-keeping implications. Likewise, we had a question posted here earlier today that referred to "vested" and "non-vested" terminated employees. We're not talking about sartorial choices here, but a very critical issue of retention periods for companies with pension plans. The CRM exam is looking at a very broad range of knowledge, including that of general management concepts. 
 
Patrick Cunningham, CRM

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance