With the unanimous passage of the mandatory credentialing resolution, we decided to shift the topic from the most commonly debated “should we do it” to “how can we do it" assuming for the sake of this discussion that we are but aware that some do not agree that we should or can. There have been a large number of discussions on the former but decidedly few on the latter. I am optimistic that we can differentiate the two and not fall into the other topic which has been discussed ad nauseam.
I have
previously spoken about the positive nature of mandatory credentialing. It is past time to get serious. Some would argue that many of the current difficulties facing the profession could have been avoided if we had been serious about this earlier on when we had the numbers and the motivation. Others have even suggested that the
recent resolution on mandatory credentialing is more symbolic and will not be followed with purposeful action. Personally, I feel that if we let this fall by the wayside this time, we will quickly lose any remaining credentialing credibility once and for all. This could very well be the last stand for mandatory credentialing.
This has been a topic for years, decades even. So why has so little progress been made? Looking at how we have handled the situation, it seems obvious to me. We are failing in the push to mandatory credentialing because we have not been strategic in its implementation and have sent mixed messages.
There is a need to address the possible exception to the RMT/CMT before continuing. The professional degree/certification appropriate for their position is a concept I would like to address quickly. Not everyone is an MT (transcribe, QA, teach, develop curriculum). Some are IT professionals, managers, business owners, etc. I would not expect a software engineer developing EMR products to have a CMT. It would make no sense; however, there are degrees/credentials appropriate for that field. I do not see this as a cop out. Many professional credentials take a lot more education. Some will have both, but all should have one or the other depending on the work they perform.
So how can we strategically move mandatory credentialing forward? It should be handled in several steps, in the following order.
AHDI Governance
“Lead by example” is a commonly used term. You cannot hope to persuade someone to do something that you are unwilling to do. We should require every board member to be credentialed with the RMT, CMT, or a professional degree/certification appropriate for their position. A director cannot effectively share the Association’s message of mandatory credentialing if they have none. It is a hypocritical message that is obvious to anyone paying attention.
Action Item- I think the board would be showing significant initiative and leadership to put a resolution forward stating this. Lead by example.
ACCP Approved Programs
I think the major weakness in the ACCP approval program is its lack of insistence that ALL instructors and program developers be credentialed. It is also the primary target of legitimate criticism. How can an Association that promotes mandatory credentialing not make it mandatory where they have the authority to do so?….. Quite frankly, they cannot and maintain credibility.
In the academic setting, an educator is required to have a proven education level above the student. There is a required teaching degree or masters for secondary education. At the undergraduate level and beyond, the doctoral degree is required with some exceptions for a masters. The theory is simple. You cannot hope to educate someone to a point above your level of expertise. I think this is perfectly applicable for the MT training programs. Currently there is no way to gauge an instructor’s expertise outside of certification.
As confusing is the educator who pushes students to work towards their credential while not having it themselves. It sets a mixed message of do what I say, not what I do. Again, a hypocritical message.
Will this mean we could lose some ACCP-approved programs? Yes, unless they step up the quality of their program. Is that a bad thing? No, it strengthens the credibility of the ACCP program and shows everyone that the Association is serious about credentialing.
Action Item- I look forward to the ACCP committee quickly enacting mandatory credentialing for ALL instructors and program developers. Now would be an excellent time to announce this change and give a year’s notice for everyone to be credentialed.
Employers
In order for mandatory credentialing to have a real chance, there must be employers on board. While Omniscribe requires all MTs to be credentialed, this is a rarity in the profession. Many only suggest it or possibly require it for QA. Asking companies to only hire credentialed MTs is asking them to take a gamble. Their thinking must take into account if they will have enough employees to meet client demands.
Very legitimate and conversation-ending questions from any company are “If AHDI feels credentialing should be required, why is it not mandatory that all instructors be credentialed in order to get/maintain ACCP approval?” and “Why are there directors without credentials?” They can see it is a hypocritical message. They know that it is much easier for the AHDI to make these changes than for the company to redevelop their business plan. Hence, the previous steps. Lead by example.
Action Item- This is a good test of our partnership with MTIA. Ask each employer to set a deadline for when they will hire ONLY credentialed MTs. Then we will see the true worth of our partnership, who is serious about credentialing, and who is giving lip service.
Legislators
I do think we are going to the legislators way too early. We are not solidified as an industry on this topic. What percentage of MTs are credentialed? What percentage of employers require it? Those answers would shut down discussion with any thinking legislator because it shows that this push is not yet industry supported.
Having a non-credentialed MT discussing credentialing with a legislator is hypocritical to a level that even a politician can see. In order to be able to look honestly our legislators in the eyes and ask them to support mandatory credentialing we need to have stepped up as a profession, as educators, as employers, and finally as professionals.
Action Item- Steps 1, 2, & 3.
So there you have it, my idea for making mandatory credentialing a reality. Will it happen? Honestly, I am not sure. When the first two steps happen, then I will feel more optimistic. The statement made there says to everyone that AHDI is serious this time. It gives true momentum.
So how can you make these steps happen? Contact your delegate and national director and tell them that you want this to happen. Sometimes people need a nudge to do the right thing that is going to hurt a little in the beginning.
Your thoughts?
Chad C. Sines, MS, MBA, AHDI-F
Director of Client Services and Security
