I admit it. I’m completely on the fence about the Association of Change Management Professionals (ACMP). The second annual ACMP conference is coming up in April and I’m not quite sure what I think about it—yet. Let’s look at their mission.
The Association of Change Management Professionals (ACMP) provides oversight and management of a professional certification program for change management professionals leading the people-side of change. With this program, change practitioners, HR and OD professionals, project managers, and other change professionals can earn their ACMP (Change Management Professional) certification.
Evidently the ACMP governance and certification standards will be presented at the conference this April. I won’t be attending this conference and I will pay close to attention to what they produce in terms of governance and standards because it will ultimately affect RIVERFORK.
Why am I on the fence about ACMP?
Are certification standards resume fodder or do they provide meaningful professional accreditation against a standard of excellence? Are certification standards meaningful in terms of identifying skilled and qualified professionals or do they create bureaucratic B.S.? Do standards provide relevant and worthwhile measures to assess a high standard of excellence? Or do standards create pointless administrative constraints?
And who should set the standards? Do we really have any ‘masters’ in the field of change management that should be setting standards? Especially given the dismal results noted in the blog post, The Insanity of Change Management. Will standards pigeonhole much needed creativity and innovation in the stagnant field of change management?
Most of the best project managers I’ve ever known never bothered with Project Management Institute (PMI) PMP certification and they didn’t get a job because they had PMP on their resume. They were hired because they had a network of people that knew the depth of their skills. I’ve also known plenty of people that are ‘certified’ in this or that change management methodology and couldn’t get a thirsty man to drink water in the desert.
I like the idea of networking and establishing community. But standards? Why? Why now? I’m more inclined to say let’s get some more time in the saddle, get more international involvement in ACMP, and then look at standards of excellence. Right now, ACMP feels like an organization used to promote a few consulting and training firms. That’s not okay. An organization in it’s second year should be learning, observing, innovating, growing—not setting standards.
Convince me otherwise readers. What are your thoughts? What do you think of ACMP communicating governance and standards in April 2010?
