Should PR professionals be licensed?
There are numerous debates on whether or not PR professionals should be licensed in order to practice within the public relations industry.
The industry certainly has voluntary standards and various codes of ethics that practitioners aim to adhere to but besides individual morals and values, there currently isn’t something in place that holds PR practitioners accountable.
It is also debateable to say that even if a practitioner was to be licensed, it wouldn’t necessarily mean that they are competent practitioners.
It seems like the debate stems from a legitimacy issue and that PR professionals should be on par with doctors and lawyers.
Is this really the case? Is knowledge, education, skills and common sense not enough anymore?
Amelia KennedyYears in the PR industry: 9
Abbotsford, BC
Tags: codes, license, pr, public relations, standards
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:34 am
I personally do not believe that just because you are licensed, you are credible. However, many people in the general public may find a connection between being licensed and being credible / good at what you do.
So, I feel that this could be good for us and our industry. I would gladly do whatever it takes to become licensed. In the mean time, we can work toward our PR accreditation with CPRS, and use that as a means of portraying a more professional and credible image.
June 3rd, 2009 at 10:13 am
Would a potential client choose a licensed PR professional over an unlicensed one? Probably, as the concept of a licence provides credibility and value. But before I wade into the debate I would say this… I think the general public (sometimes clients, too) is foggy about what exactly Public Relations is and the kind of value it provides as a communication tool - it’s not as straight forward as a licence to practice medicine. If a doc doesn’t have a one, we likely won’t go there. With PR, a licensed credential would be more significant if it was preceeded by public education about what PR is, how it’s practiced and the potential value it can offer in telling peoples’ stories. Educated audiences would give worth to a licensing process.
June 3rd, 2009 at 10:17 am
Given the complexity of this issue, it would be important to weigh - and evaluate - the perceived market benefits against the effort. The structure of licensing and the management of those credentials is a huge task and requires third party auditing. In order to have any credibility the licensing needs to be rigorous, have the support of major educational institutions, have a process for deadline with complaints and non-compliance - and have the legislative right to a scope of practice. These tasks are expensive, complex and would be very difficult for a voluntary organization to undertake.
June 8th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
In my view, accreditation is more crucial than licensing. It is more rigourous and shows competence as well as professionalism. If everyone who worked in PR worked towards accreditation, PR would be seen as more as a true profession. Our industry tends to attract more than its share of non-trained PR people who sell themselves as PR professionals. Peer-based accreditation confirms your knowledge of best practices in PR and maintenance of that APR or ABC also proves your commitment to the profession.