△ MENU/TOP △

Holtz Communications + Technology

Shel Holtz
Communicating at the Intersection of Business and Technology
SearchClose Icon

Licensing PR

Steve Phenix, author of the Phenix Rising blog, has trotted out the notion of licensing PR practitioners. Distressed by the low regard in which PR is held, Phenix is exploring a number of ways to rehabilitate the profession’s image.

In my nearly 30 years in the business, I’ve seen the licensing idea brought back to life (not unlike a Phoenix) again and again. The outcome of licensing would certainly be beneficial, since the license would be required for PR professionals to be able to ply their trade and all PR professionals would be held to the same standard. Anyone violating the standard could lose his license. Phenix suggests (for the US, anyway) a state-by-state PR version of the bar associations that test, license and censure lawyers.

The testing that results in the license is the biggest problem with the licensing idea. Lawyers are tested on their knowledge of the law. The law is complex, but it’s also well defined in books that record the laws enacted by federal and state legislatures. Accountants also undergo testing to ensure they understand the principles of accounting. There’s just one way to keep books. (Legally, anyway.) Doctors are tested to ensure they know what they need to know to properly diagnose and treat illness. These professions are all very black and white in knowledge and practice. Sure, there’s room for creativity and flexibility, but within some very sharply drawn lines.

Not so in the PR profession. Any communication challenge can be appropached a thousand different ways, and it takes just one creative thinker to come up with a thousand-and-first. What will work with an target audience in Los Angeles may not succeed with one in Mississippi. Culture plays a part. You just can’t test PR the way you can test accounting.

Yes, there are accreditation programs in PRSA and IABC (among other organizations), but these are accreditations instead of certifications for a reason. They tend to be subjective in their approach. While it’s possible to determine someone came up with the wrong approach to a PR assignment, there is simply no one right approach.

Of course, there have always been people on both sides of the issue. Given the news reports of PR malfeasance that just don’t seem to stop (Burson Marstellar is at the center of the most recent), perhaps it’s time to drag out the licensing debate and hash through it one more time. Perhaps something good will come out of the discussion.

02/10/05 | 4 Comments | Licensing PR

Comments

  • 1.Excellent points.

    What if we created a baseline set of standards that are acceptable to each region? What say we adopted ten mutually agreed upon, inviolable rules? For example: No agency may pay a pundit, be that in cash, gifts or even the standard wine & dine. After setting these rules in stone, then any agency that violates these rules would be subject to censure and possible revocation of license.

    Then, in turn, each region adopts a secondary coda that outlines its local standards.

    Steven Phenix | February 2005 | Austin, TX USA

  • 2.Good thoughts, Steve. I guess the question then is this: How do you test (the equivalent of "passing the bar") on just these points? It sounds like more of an agreement of members to adhere to the standards. Do you grant a license on that basis? If so, why are some qualified for the license and others not? Testing is what determines that a licensed professional has shown proficiency that warrants the license. And if not, how is it different than joining IABC or PRSA and agreeing to abide by the code of ethics?

    Awaiting your thoughts!

    Shel Holtz | February 2005 | Portland, OR

  • 3.Then what say we all test to become licensed PR professionals? I'm by no means a professional educator, but if a squishy science like psychology can vet their candidates through testing, why not PR? What about insurance or real estate agents? What do their tests look like? Couldn't this be like getting a driver's license? If opposing car (CEO) abruptly cuts in front of you (lies to an analyst) do you (a) evade, (b) drive through the obstacle or (c) bail out of the vehicle? Get too many answers wrong, then you're not allowed to drive. After passing the test, you know full well that doing 90 mph in a school zone (paying a pundit) will get your license revoked. It's a goofy metaphor, I apologize! But still, is this do-able in our industry?

    Steven Phenix | February 2005 | Austin, TX USA

  • 4.That's the $64,000 question, Steve! The issue is objective (or imperical) vs. subjective subject matter. There's one answer for real estate and insurance agents and 1,000 possible approaches to a communication assignment. ("Well, you could do a face-to-face engagement, a video news release, a brochure...") and then for each of those there's the approach you take (serious, light, informatl, from the CEO, from the subject-matter expert...). That's a lot different than saying "You'd use this kind of policy in that kind of situation."

    Or, I suppose, we could address testing only on ethical behaviors...

    Shel Holtz | February 2005 | Santa Clara, CA

Comment Form

« Back