In the workforce, credentialing has become the superseding notion used to determine ones’ qualifications to do the job well.  Having spent several years working in corporate, non-profit, government, and education sectors and working with an array of people with diverse knowledge, background, credentials and skills, one could argue that credentialing alone should not be what is used to determine if someone is qualified to do a job.  To demonstrate my point, how often have you worked for or with someone who has a lot of credentials following their last name, however, he/she did not perform their job well?   You might have even trained them on how to do their job.  I am most certain that all of us had this working experience at some point in our adult life.  This is exactly why we should not recruit based on whether or not someone has the "right” credentials. 

If we think from a financial and marketing perspective, credentialing is a quite clever marketing genius strategy for those who provide such services, especially if the credentials have to be renewed periodically at a financial cost.  Just because someone studied for an exam to earn credentials and passed the exam, doesn’t always mean that he/she can translate what they learn and apply it effectively into a real-world situation.  Having real world experience in a given field and the ability to demonstrate effectiveness in the field is better than having credentials alone and still not be able to do the job well.  As the saying goes, "Everyone looks good on paper." 

I challenge you to rethink your talent acquisition strategies, when recruiting and hiring employees.  Work experience, knowledge and skills should also matter, in addition to credentials.  If a person has the work experience, knowledge and skills, but doesn’t have the credentials that you are looking for, don’t always count them out as "not qualified," when in fact he/she can work towards acquiring the credentials while on the job.  Or, you can also hire someone with both experience and credentials.
 

For those of you who are looking for job opportunities, how many times have you read an extensive job description that matches your work experience and the skillset that you possess and then you get to the Qualifications section and you don’t meet the qualifications listed?  I think it would save time in your job search to look at the qualifications section first, because you might not be considered if you do not meet their qualifications or it would be better if companies listed the Qualifications first in their job description.  I believe that organizations miss out on selecting great candidates, when they only look for credentials to meet qualifications.  I want people to keep an open-mind and think for a second, if you are a recruiter, have you ever hired someone who met the qualifications that you listed in your job description and he/she could not perform the responsibilities required to do the job well?  This is usually when either restructuring positions take place, termination, or there is high employee turnover.   Often times, this is also why we usually see the same position posted again later. 

​

I’m not saying, don’t seek out the qualifications that you are looking for in a prospective candidate to hire.  What I am saying is, do not hire someone based only on meeting the qualifications that you list in your job description, when he/she has experience doing the job responsibilities that you list in your job description.  When selecting candidates to hire, work experience, belief in the company’s mission, and cultural fit should matter as well. After the interview process, the interviewer should consider these questions: Will this person fit well within the culture of the organization?  Does this person have working experience doing some of the tasks that will be required of him/her on the job?  Is this person trainable and willing to quickly learn new skills, new processes, and work towards having the credentials that you are looking for? If the credentials that you are looking for has to do with a life-saving skillset needed to be a medical doctor, nurse, or scientist, then I understand where credentials would be more heavily weighted to determine ones’ qualifications.  However, even in those occupations, I’m sure you will also find that there are some who are still questionable hires.  

​

Credentialing in my opinion is somewhat like social badges, which are used to give someone kudos for either achieving a certain goal, or engaging frequently in a specific activity.  The social badges are awarded and then placed on the individuals’ social media page for all to see, which displays the name of the company who provided the social badge.  So, now you are providing free marketing for the company that provided the social badge.  Just keep in mind, some of the most intelligent pioneer inventors do not have credentials behind their last name and some of the most life changing, intelligent people have honorary degrees. How much weight does that have to you? 

​

Credentials shouldn’t be the only thing that gives you “a seat at the table.”  I want to open your mind to thinking outside of the box.  When experience is met with opportunity, you might be surprised at how awesome the outcome could be.  These ideas about credentialing are just somethings to think about the next time you are checking for credentials to determine ones’ qualifications for the job.  Learning is always by design.

​

By Bryce Thompson

 

​