So these last few months of preparing for my upcoming June test are all for.... what?

Great blog as always - So true on all counts, but most specifically the impact on the reputation of our profession, as well as undermining their own credibility with the way they have handled this. They have just completely undermined the profession they are here to support. I guess no one at SHRM bothered with the basics of the change mgmt process?

I feel the worst for the newest members of our profession. I have my SPHR, and I've earned my seat at the "adult" table because of the value I've worked with my team to bring to our organization, our culture and our clients. But as a newer HR professional, getting your PHR demonstrates your commitment to the field to ensure you have knowledge of the depth and breadth of HR regs, ethics, etc. If you were already prepping for testing, I would say do it, because for right now, that is still an industry standard. Any many HR pros will still be using this as hiring criteria until more information on whatever this new process is rolls out.

I am a firm believer in the recertification process because laws, regs, etc., are ALWAYS changing and as leaders, we should be in a constant learning process, whether it's formal training or finding the right HR blogs where you get consistent information you can use effectively for your own culture. Ironically enough, I JUST received my recertification in the mail TODAY from HRCI.

It will be interesting to see how this continues to plays out, but I'll be keeping my SPHR regardless of what other exams they decide to throw our way.

I would share a word for patience and moderation. Some of the comments are not on point from my understanding to date. Currently certified folks can absolutely keep their PHR, SPHR, etc. They are not going away. No one will be transferred as indicated in #1 above unless they want to. HRCI will continue to support and maintain its current certifications. Now SHRM will offer its own. #2 above - If you are scheduled to take the exam SHRM actually encourages you to still do so. Then if you want to transition to the SHRM certification you can do so for free. # 8 above I have to agree - the roll out could have been much better orchestrated. It does seem to be perhaps a sad parting of ways between the two entities and granted, there are many unanswered questions but let's ensure we understand the facts and implications before we stir an already brewing pot. Hang tight; that's my two cents.

Recruiters will be the bellweather.

Almost 15 years ago when I first explored certification, I asked an HR executive about the value of the certification -- translation: will it help land a job? He responded that most CEOs and business leaders don't know (or care) about certification. But, the recruiters do -- and a SPHR after your name will help you get to the top of the pile of resumes. All things being equal, a recruiter will rank a certified HR professional over an uncertified professional with the same experience. And, I've watched that behavior play out in my organization and others time and time again.

So here we are...has anything really changed? Business leaders are (more than likely) not aware of the SHRM/HRCI certification split this week -- nor do they care. Which leaves the drama squarely within the HR profession. Will we choose sides? Create a tug of war of SHRM/HRCI through blogs and twitter? Move a qualified candidate to the bottom of the pile because they don't have the "right" certification? *That* is the unspoken concern and the real risk.

So, look to the recruiters to see where they trend: a "competency based certification" or a certification with name recognition? My prediction is that they will use both certification designations as a "check the box" and pull both resumes to the top of the pile just like you would if you had two qualified candidates from prominent, but different schools (e.g., MIT and Stanford).

Spot on, Kris! Many professionals wonder what's next. I agree with Laurie - next move is HRCI's to make.

This is discrediting to a profession that is already "ill-viewed" in the business world. I don't see any winners out of the whole situation. I am afraid that SHRM approached the "problem" (?) from the wrong angle: if "competency" is perceived to be the issue, isn't the solution somewhere else than several strata of certification? The message is so controversial: HRCI was for so long intertwined with SHRM, and overnight is said to be irrelevant. What should HR people and their employers think? It has to be an evolving issue.

Amen!