I recently had the privilege of beginning to watch the first Godfather movie on a flight I was on. Unfortunately, the flight was much shorter than the total length of the movie, and I am going to have to pick it up again where I left off. And yes, in case you are wondering before you read on – this is the first time I have ever watch any of the Godfather movies.

Why do I bring this up in an HR blog?

The movie starts out with an individual coming to the Godfather with a request. The Godfather initially turns him away because this individual is not a “friend”. The individual has not kept in touch, has turned away past interactions, and is only now coming forward when he needs a favour.

Think about your networks, whether online in LinkedIn or otherwise offline? How often do you nurture those connections and keep ongoing “friendships” with your contacts? Sure, there are likely a few people who have contacted you purely out of professional interest, and you have accepted an invitation. But, think about in the past year how many people have come to you through electronic mediums and asked a favour of you – for you to make a referral, for you to help him/her find work, or for you to recommend sales leads or purchase a product. Now, prior to that contact, how many of those same people called just to say hi, invited you out for coffee or sent an email just to check in, in the year prior to that? Probably a bit of a disconnect there!

Point is… As old as the Godfather movie is, I believe the Don was on to something back then. I believe that he valued relationships. He understood that in friendships, you give and you get. The power of your network is only as strong as the relationships you nurture – and, if you expect to call on your networks for any reason in the future, you should build up your social bank account today.

Now, I have yet to finish the movie as well as the overall trilogy to see how it all ends, but I am looking forward to drawing further comparisons.

Btw – I’m free for coffee or lunch, so just give me a call!

Back again… However, it is interesting that I have probably had more people start to follow my blog in my absence that I think I had sign up while I was actively posting. Or, maybe I’ve just been watching it more. In any case, now that I have started at my new company and am “back in the game” again, I am hoping to get back on top of current issues and keep the posts coming.

Top of mind for me right now is the flip flop that that HRPA is doing regarding practical qualifications for the CHRP designation. It is top of mind for me because I just wrote the May 2009 NPPA then read shortly after that the HRPA, after two more NPPA sittings, will be reverting back to the experience related practical requirement. While I understand that as a provincial professional body the HRPA went to the NPPA for national standardization, I would assume over the short time that the examination was in place, that a lot of controversy was raised regarding the validity of the designation based entirely on written examinations.

While in theory, the NPPA exam is based on practical experience, it is possible to write and pass that component having only studied and never held a position in a human resources function. So, let the debate begin… I’ve been in some recent forums dedicating bandwidth to both sides of this topic and there are two leading conversations happening – first, the experienced professionals agreeing with the move back to a practical assessment of professional experience; and, second, generally more junior individuals now clamouring to write one of the next two NPPA sittings to get the certification before an experiential requirement comes back into effect.

From a designation perspective, and providing a professional standard that employers and non-HR professionals can have confidence in, I think I lean more towards an assessed experiential requirement versus the written NPPA exam. While I understand the desire for individuals entering the HR professional to get a designation behind his/her name, I don’t think that in the long run the profession is gaining any ground by so easily granting designations without experience. Would you want a surgeon that has only studied textbooks and has not done internships and residencies? Would you want an engineer to design our skyscrapers when he/she does not have practical experience? What about chartered accountants having experience, your real estate lawyer having written prior contracts or the person who wired your house having gone through an apprenticeship program? I believe that the reputation of certified HR professionals have a standard to live up to and an obligation to employers to have a certain experience base that comes along with the designation. That is not to say that HR professionals without a designation are not valuable, but rather that a minimum of required professional experience be shown to ensure certified professionals bring the level of confidence that one would have of a doctor, a CA or a lawyer.

So… As the HRPA reintroduces the practical requirement to the CHRP, and I spew my comments and opinions above, let’s start the discussion on practical versus written.