One of the things I’ve long admired about the research industry is its commitment to making things better. From the high level of knowledge-sharing that I see at industry conferences to proactive efforts on training and education and thwarting potentially damaging legislation, researchers and the organizations they belong to all seem to be working toward a common set of goals: make research more effective as a business tool; strive to define and refine best practices; and show government and consumers that there is a marked difference between true marketing research and the sham versions of it used by dishonest marketers.
Further evidence of this drive to thrive should come late this month, when the Marketing Research Association (MRA) is scheduled to have finalized the Professional Researcher Certification (PRC) program. Though the PRC program was established and will be administered by the MRA, it is the result of months of hard work by a committee of researchers from all segments of the business (end users, research design and analysis, and data collection and related services) - whose members represent the various industry associations (MRA, the Council for Marketing and Opinion Research, the American Marketing Association, the Interactive Marketing Research Organization, etc.) - and educators from the University of Georgia and the Marketing Research Institute International.
Grandfathered in
The first phase of the program will be a two-year period during which interested researchers can apply and be grandfathered in, as long as they meet the criteria. After the two-year period, applicants will have to take a test in addition to submitting the necessary documentary proof of their level of professional education and achievement.
The three certification segments are: data collection, research suppliers/providers, and end users. Within the segments are sub-groups. For example, data collection sub-groups include mall, telephone, online, and ethnographic research. And within the subgroups are job titles such as facility owner, facility manager, etc.
Applying for certification will be a four-step process:
Step 1: Applicants will view the list of certification segments to determine the area in which they would like to apply for certification.
Step 2: They complete and forward the application to MRA headquarters.
Step 3: The MRA certification staff will review the application.
Step 4: If appropriate, the certification staff confers certification. The staff will also advise the applicant on the requirements to maintain that certification and, if the applicant chooses, to advance to the next level of certification.
One guiding principle of the program is to consider both an applicant’s education and his or her experience when determining the level of certification they qualify for and any advancement criteria. In instances where the certification staff feels it cannot properly gauge an applicant’s qualifications, the application will be submitted to a certification review committee made up of industry volunteers for further consideration.
Once a certification level is conferred, the researcher has two choices: he or she can maintain a certification level by accruing contact hours through taking relevant, approved courses; or he or she can advance to new levels by earning a specified amount of continuing education units.
While there are definite standards that must be met for the education component of the process, the MRA has wisely left broad the list of acceptable outlets by including entities such as the MRII or the research program at the University of Georgia along with association-sponsored events and training from firms like the Burke Institute or RIVA.
Improve the view
The idea of certification is not a new one, having been bandied about in various forms many times. But a few years ago, as the MRA board of directors searched for ways to enhance the external view of the profession while also improving from within, the drive for certification gained renewed energy.
Another impetus was the increasing level of government attention toward a profession that had long operated under the radar, says Elyse Gammer, MRA operations officer. “For many years few people in government paid attention to this industry. But as the amount of money spent on research has grown and the number of laws dealing with privacy has increased, the government started paying more attention. One of the things that spurred the board on was the increasing likelihood of government regulation. We felt that our profession would be on a much better footing in the eyes of regulators if we self-regulate. So the goal of showing the government that we are self-regulating rose in importance to almost equal the goal of elevating the level of the profession in the consumer’s eyes,” Gammer says.
Gammer and MRA Director of Programs Linda Schoenborn worked with MRA Executive Director Larry Hadcock and a horde of other staff and volunteers to create the PRC program. Hadcock, who has experience developing certification programs for other associations outside the research industry, says the process usually takes three years. “There is normally a big learning curve to develop a program. But this program was the fastest I’ve ever been involved in putting together. One, we had Elyse and Linda, who are knowledgeable about the profession and the industry organizations. And two, we had an outstanding group of volunteers who gave us a lot of hours of work. And as a result we were able to put the program together in nine months,” he says.
“Everyone involved was inspired to work on it because they saw the value in what we were doing and were so supportive of the whole idea,” Schoenborn says.
Spread the word
The MRA is searching for a PR firm to help spread the word about the certification program. In addition, at industry conferences, efforts will be made to hold events of interest to the mainstream media, during which the PRC program will be mentioned, in the hopes that the public will eventually become familiar with the idea of certified researchers. And as the industry responds to suggers and other problems, spokespeople will urge the public to look for certification as a way to tell the legitimate researchers from the bogus ones.
Hadcock says that one hoped-for fringe benefit of the program is to stem the tide of declining respondent cooperation. “One of the underlying issues is still the problem of respondent cooperation. We feel that as the program matures and researchers are keeping their skills up, using best practices, we will see some return in the form of an increase in respondent cooperation,” he says.
More information on the program can be found at www.mra-net.org