new!cmrp!pathways! member!survey!summary! …mria-arim.ca/broadcast/pdf/cmrp-surveyresults.pdf ·...

20
New CMRP Pathways Member Survey Summary as at September 2013 1

Upload: vunhu

Post on 07-Apr-2018

231 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

 New  CMRP  Pathways  

Member  Survey  Summary  as  at  September  2013  

1  

A  Robust  Membership  Response  •  The  MRIA  made  every  a8empt  to  contact  all  

members,  though  those  for  whom  the  MRIA  does  not  have  a  current  email  address,  or  those  who  have  a  spam  filter  that  intercepted  the  invita@on  may  not  have  received  an  invita@on.    

•  The  survey  was  “live”  for  most  of  the  month  of  September  2013.    

•  The  ques@onnaire  was  developed  by  the  PD&C  Commi8ee  and  reviewed  by  several  members  of  the  MRIA  staff  and  external  members  of  the  MRIA.  

•  The  ques@onnaire  was  provided  in  both  English  and  French.  

•  Nearly  30%  of  the  membership  did  take  the  @me  to  respond  but  some  did  not  complete  the  ques@onnaire.    

•  Only  completed  ques@onnaires  were  tabulated.  

•  The  in-­‐tab  sample  was  351  respondents.  •  Understandably  CMRP  holders  were  over-­‐

represented  in  the  sample.  •  No  weigh@ng  was  applied  to  the  results  as  it  

was  felt  to  be  impossible  to  provide  sufficient  specifica@ons  on  the  total  MRIA  membership  to  accurately  manipulate  the  database.  

0%   10%   20%   30%   40%   50%   60%  

Percent  of  MRIA  Members  

CMRP  

FMRIA  

Wrote  CMRE  

Grandfathered  

Male  

Female  

Average  Age  

Supply  Side  Quant  

Supply  Side  Qual.  

Supply  Side  Data/Recruit  

Supply  Side  Other  

Client  Side  

Academic  

Average  Research  Years  

22%  

48%  

3%  

18%  

30%  

53%  

47%  

47  Years  

37%  

12%  

5%  

9%  

32%  

2%  

19  Years  

2  

The  CMRP  has  a  Posi@ve  Image  •  The  CMRP  predominantly  is  seen  to  stand  for  

having  a  good  knowledge  of  and  skills  for  Marke@ng  Research    

•  It  is  also  broadly  thought  to  indicate  that  the  holder  of  the  CMRP  is  commi8ed  to  the  ethics  of  the  MRIA.  

•  It  is  also  viewed  as  being  something  that  took  some  effort  to  obtain  and  that  the  holders  are  proud  of  achieving  the  designa@on.  

•  Secondarily,  CMRPs  are  seen  to  be  leaders  in  the  profession,  holding  superior  knowledge  and  insight.  

•  There  is  rela@vely  limited  associa@on  with  CMRP  being  a  business,  job  or  salary  benefit.  

   THE  CMRP  BRAND  IS  

STRONG  

0%   10%  20%  30%  40%  50%  60%  70%  80%  

Has  knowledge  of  MR  

Has  the  required  skills  

Commi8ed  to  ethics  

Took  courses  /  CMRE  

Proud  of  CMRP  

CMRP  obtains  business  

Leader  in  the  profession  

Superior  knowledge/insight  

Be8er  job/salary  

27%  

31%  

5%  

7%  

6%  

5%  

3%  

3%  

1%  

73%  

62%  

52%  

49%  

47%  

29%  

24%  

17%  

16%  

Best  describes  CMRP   Describes  CMRP  3  

Member  Comments  on  the  CMRP    •  ...I  wondered  about  the  relevance  of  a  core  body  of  knowledge  designa@on  on  an  industry  that  was  then  extremely  diverse  

full  of  specialists  as  well  as  a  few  generalists.    It  is  even  more  diverse  now.      •  It  needs  an  evolu@on.  ...I  think  this  designa@on  has  poten@al.  I  don't  really  know  how  to  go  about  enhancing  its  poten@al,  

but  I  do  feel  it  is  there.    •  When  recently  looking  for  work,  I  was  disappointed  my  designa@on  didn't  give  me  a  compe@@ve  edge  over  others.    I  believe  

poten@al  employers  weren't  even  aware  of  the  designa@on.      •  All  senior  management  should  vouch  for  it.  •  I  think  that  pure  years  of  experience  are  more  than  equivalent  to  a  CMRP.    •  Many  people  see  this  as  something  to  obtain,  like  a  diploma,  while  I  see  it  as  something  to  maintain  and  grow.    •  I've  been  in  the  industry  to  16  years.    At  this  point  I  am  not  going  to  take  a  number  of  courses  or  write    a  7  hour  exam  just  to  

get  some  le8ers  aher  my  name.  •  Very  few  senior  execu@ves  have  the  @me  to  take  prep  courses  and  write  a  full  day  exam-­‐-­‐but  they  are  the  industry  leaders  

and  advocates.  This  needs  a  major  change  in  focus,  or  it  will  simply  die.    •  I  think  it  leaves  out  a  majority  of  the  industry  beyond  just  researchers  and  MR  is  more  and  more  not  about  research  but  

other  sectors  such  as  the  sample  industry  and  technology    •  As  a  qualita@ve  prac@@oner,  it  is  important  that  qualita@ve  researchers  have  equal  advantage  on  the  CMRP  exam.    •  Consider  providing  advanced  cer@fica@on  in  areas  of  specialty-­‐  qualita@ve,  quan@ta@ve,  branding,  meta  data  analysis,  etc.    •  As  an  almost  20-­‐year  veteran  of  the  MR  industry,  I  am  unenthusias@c  about  sijng  the  challenge  exam  or  taking  courses  to  

"prove"  my  degree  of  knowledge  and  professionalism    •  Research  is  more  of  prac@cal  hands  on  experience  than  just  academic  courses  and  an  8  hour  exam.  Create  a  cri@cal  mass  

and  value  for  the  designa@on  first.    •  I  feel  that  those  who  have  earned  it  have  a  different  level  of  knowledge  compared  to  those  who  were  grandfathered.  I  have  

met  some  grandfathered  CMRPs  who  could  not  have  passed  the  exam  based  on  their  competencies.    •  Good  for  the  industry  in  total,  more  than  just  an  individual  thing  but  represents  to  future  of  the  MR  industry    

4  Selected  Illustra@ve  Members’  Comments  

BUT  the  CMRP  Faces  a  Challenge  of  Relevance  

•  There  is  an  equal  division  of  the  membership  in  their  perspec@ve  of  the  CMRP  being  relevant  or  irrelevant.  

•  Of  course  CMRPs  tend  to  be  more  posi@ve  but  not  exclusively  so.  Non  CMRPs  are  split  as  well  but  in  the  reverse  propor@ons.  

•  Even  those  who  were  grandfathered  into  the  CMRP  are  equally  split  in  their  perspec@ve  of  CMRP  relevance.  

•  Supply  side  members  decidedly  see  less  relevance  to  the  CMRP  than  client  side  researchers.  

NOTE:  FMRIA  is  typo  on  table  -­‐    A  primary  objecFve  of  pathway  changes  is  to  

widen  the  base  of  CMRP  holders  to  enhance  the  relevance  of  the  CMRP!    However  it  would  be  a  mistake  not  to  take  other  steps  to  heighten  the  relevance  of  the  designaFon.  

0%  

5%  

10%  

15%  

20%  

25%  

30%  

35%  

40%  

45%  

32%  

45%  

21%  

30%  28%  

39%  

33%  

24%  

43%  

32%  

37%  

25%  

Extremely/Very  Relevant   Not  at  all/Not  Very  Relevent  5  

“Extremely  /Somewhat  Relevant”  •  Recently  a8ained  CMRP,  it  assures  clients  and  

colleagues  that  I  am  a  professional  that  follows  industry  standards  and  best  prac@ces.    

•  Clear  standards  to  qualify  to  signify  that  those  with  the  designa@on  have  achieved  a  higher  standard    

•  There  is  no  other  way  to  iden@fy  myself  as  a  Marke@ng  Research  Professional  Other  designa@ons  such  as  MA  or  Ph.D.  are  too  broad.    

•  IT  provides  a  standard  that  will  eventually  be  recognized  as  a  basic  level  of  competence  in  the  MR  industry.    

•  Provides  tangible  evidence  of  research  exper@se.  More  communica@on/publicity  to  make  the  designa@on  recognized  more  widely  would  be  beneficial.    

•   The  CMRP  designa@on  is  relevant  so  that  I  know  what  my  suppliers  know...  

•  I  think  the  CMRP  designa@on  elevates  the  status  of  the  market  research  profession.  I  would  definitely  encourage  all  the  young  people  who  want  to  make  a  career  out  of  market  research  to  get  the  CMRP  designa@on.  

•  It  s@ll  has  great  buying  power  when  wri@ng  up  proposals.  

•  The  CMRP  designa@ons  solidifies  your  dedica@on  to  the  field,  and  shows  you  care  about  growing  in  the  industry  too.  People  can  s@ll  succeed  in  marke@ng  research  without  it,  but  it  shows  that  one  wants  to  be  in  it.    

“Not  very/Not  at  all  Relevant”  •  Doesn't  make  me  a  be8er  researcher  and  clients  don't  

care.    •  My  clients  are  aware  of  my  professional  skills  and  

entrust  their  projects  to  me  on  the  basis  of  trust  and  successful  conduct  of  studies  over  many  years.    

•  The  CMRP  is  an  industry-­‐created  response  to  a  problem  that  doesn't  exist.    I  have  never  had  anyone  ques@on  my  creden@als  given  my  experience.      

•  I  come  from  the  digital  industries,  and  no  client  ever  requires  it.    I  also  have  a  professional  designa@on  (P.Eng)  and  I  am  an  MBA  -­‐  so  that  provides  me  the  credibility  I  need  .  

•  It  is  meaningless.    Too  many  people  were  grandfathered  in  that  have  no  business  having  any  designa@on    

•  The  designa@on  may  have  some  relevance  to  those  on  the  supplier  side,  but  I'm  currently  on  the  buyer  side  and  I  don't  get  the  sense  that  people  would  view  my  abili@es  differently  if  I  had  the  designa@on.    

•  so  far,  it  hasn't  helped  or  hurt  me.  If  it  is  taken  away,  i  don't  think  it  would  hurt  my  career.  

•  Relevant  to  who?  to  clients?  probably  not.    To  me?  how  could  it  be  when  it  is  a  designa@on  I  have,  not  one  I  am  working  toward.  like  asking  me  how  relevant  my  BA  is,  or  my  MBA.    The  only  reason  I  have  it  is  for  credibility  inside  MRIA.  that  is  why  i  got  it  in  the  first  place.    

What  the  Members  said  about  CMRP’s  Relevance  

Selected  Illustra@ve  Members’  Comments  6  

CMRE  Challenge  Pathways    Current  &  New  

•  The  current  CMRE  challenge    pathway  has  the  following  requirements:  –  University  Graduate  –  Minimum  8  years  experience  –  MRIA  Ethics  Course  –  Pass  the  7  hour,  2  part  CMRE  

•  The  new  version  adds  a  minimum  4  years  experience  working  under  the  supervision  of  a  CMRP  holder.  

•  Posi@ve  and  nega@ve  ra@ngs  are  virtually  equal  for  the  Current  and  New  pathways.  

•  The  average  rank  posi@on  equates  to  about  the  mid-­‐point  between  being  considered  “Very”  and  “Somewhat  Appropriate”  for  use  for  gran@ng  the  CMRP  designa@on.    

   

Extremely  Appropriate  

Very  Appropriate    

Somewhat  Appropriate    

Somewhat  Inappropriate    

Very  Inappropriate    

Highly  Inappropriate    

0%  

10%  

20%  

30%  

40%  

50%  

60%  

Challenge  Current   Challenge  New  

59%  

53%  

7%   8%  

4.6  4.4  

TOP  TWO  BOXES   BOTTOM  TWO   AVERAGE    "Appropriate"  Ra@ng  

7  

“Highly  /Very  Appropriate”  •  Having  exposure  over  the  years  makes  a  person  a  

veteran  of  Market  research  and  they  learn  things  in  a  different  way.  This  should  not  discount  people  from  accredita@on,  but  should  put  people  with  that  much  experience  on  a  different  @er  within  the  system.  

•  It  maintains  the  standards.  I  did  the  7  hour  exam.  It  was  challenging  and  I  enjoyed  it.    It  made  me  feel  like  I  was  pursuing  something  serious  and  worthwhile,  one  that  will  differen@ate  me  from  non-­‐professionals.  

•  This  is  the  path  I  took  and  as  a  mid-­‐career  researcher  I  didn't  see  the  need  to  take  courses  on  material  that  I  worked  with  everyday.  I  had  the  experience,  and  the  confidence,  to  sit  the  exam  and  prove  my  worth.  

•  Experience  is  a  good  teacher.    If  the  person  gains  the  experience  on  the  job  and  can  successfully  complete  the  challenge,  they  should  be  allowed  to  have  the  designa@on.  

•  It  is  clearly  a  logical  choice.    However,  for  those  with  20+  years  in  the  field  who  are  willing  to  pay  a  grandfathering  fee  should  also  be  eligible.  

•  if  someone  has  sufficient  past  work  experience  and  is  able  to  pass  both  por@ons  of  the  exam,  they  have  achieved  equivalent  training  either  independently  or  in  their  work  

“Very/Highly  Inappropriate”  •  For  those  of  us  on  the  client  side  of  the  research  

industry,  we  rarely  write  proposals  and  full  reports,  therefore  I  feel  that  those  por@ons  of  the  test  would  be  the  most  challenging,  and  frankly,  not  very  appropriate  for  me  to  have  to  do.    Ask  me  to  interpret  the  report  and  make  a  strategic  recommenda@on  to  my  business  and  that  I  can  do.  

•  Because  we  don't  do  any  of  this  and  it  only  applies  to  old  school  tradi@onal  researchers  -­‐  has  not  evolved  for  the  new  defini@on  of  Market  Research  

•  The  CMRE  is  the  issue  with  all  of  the  pathways.    The  CMRE  is  not  reasonable  or  a  true  measure  of  knowledge/professionalism.    It  is  a  measure  of  how  well  you  write  THAT  test.  

•  This  pathway  is  completely  inappropriate  as  the  exam  doesn't  truly  test  someone's  knowledge  of  how  to  be  a  fantas@c  industry  professional.  Experience  should  only  be  part  of  the  requirement,  along  with  evidence  of  learning.  

•  Same  response  as  before  -­‐  the  tes@ng  system  is  inappropriate.  The  test  is  not  a  valid  indicator  of  Market  Research  proficiency  at  all.  

What  the  Members  said  about  Current  CMRE  Challenge  Pathway  

8  Selected  Illustra@ve  Members’  Comments  

“Highly  /Very  Appropriate”  •  it  is  nice  to  see  an  op@on  for  people  who  believe  the  

have  the  skill  set  and  do  not  have  the  @me  nor  money  to  validate  through  the  other  pathways.  

•  If  people  have  neither  a  post-­‐grad  program  nor  MRIA  courses  under  their  belts,  then  it  makes  sense  that  the  CMRE  challenge  should  cover  both  the  proposal  and  general  knowledge  components.  

•  Because  it  includes  both  Part  A  and  Part  B  of  the  CMRE.  A  professional  designa@on  implies  that  everyone  has  a  common  standard  knowledge  of  the  profession.  

•  this  is  the  current  method  and  has  produced  some  excellent  and  well  documented  professionals  with  the  designa@on  

•  This  is  s@ll  the  best  way  for  people  with  experience  to  show  their  exper@se.    If  anything,  the  content  of  the  exams  should  be  reviewed  or  modified  to  cover  a  wide  variety  of  experiences,  such  as  qual  expert,  vs.  quant.  

•  I  do  not  think  the  change  from  12  years  to  8  is  substan@ally  different.  

•  It  is  a  slightly  weaker  pathway  now  because  the  experience  threshold  was  reduced  to  8  years.    Otherwise  it  is  appropriate.  

“Very/Highly  Inappropriate”  •  MRIA  should  focus  on  higher  quality  for  CMRP,  not  the  

quan@ty.      The  person  will  not  have  enough  experience,  skills  and  knowledge.    Inexperienced  CMRPs  will  pull  down  standard  of  the  en@re  research  industry.  

•  Why  2  years  under  an  accredited  CMRP?  I  understand  it  improves  the  standing  of  the  designa@on  itself,  but  prac@cally  I'm  wondering  if  this  will  exclude  people.  

•  Eliminate  the  challenge  in  favour  of  the  other  op@ons.  No  instant  CMRP.  That  will  make  the  designa@on  worth  something.  

•  i  don't  think  this  ac@vely  enables  and  promotes  interna@onal  members  as  how  would  they  be  able  to  demonstrate  two  years  supervised  experiences  with  an  accredited  CMRP?  this  person  may  be  highly  skilled  and  qualified.  Also  sec@on  A  proposal  -­‐  if  they  have  passed  this  in  the  examina@on,  they  should  not  be  made  to  re-­‐sit  this  again  if  failed  sec@on  B.  This  does  not  reward  as  a  pass  if  made  to  re-­‐sit.  A  fail  is  a  fail  and  a  fail  should  act  as  a  re-­‐sit  only.  

What  the  Members  said  about  New  CMRE  Challenge  Pathway  

9  Selected  Illustra@ve  Members’  Comments  

MRIA  Courses  Pathways  Current  &  New  

•  The  current  MRIA  Courses  pathway  has  the  following  requirements:  –  University  Graduate  –  Comple@on  of  12  MRIA  core  courses  –  Minimum  2  years  experience  –  Pass  the  7  hour,  2  part  CMRE  –  MRIA  Ethics  Course  

•  The  new  version  adds  a  minimum  4  years  experience  working  under  the  supervision  of  a  CMRP  holder.  

•  The  applicant  will  also  have  to  write  only  Part  A  (a  proposal)  of  the  CMRE  exam.  Taking  the    place  of  Part  B  (general  MR  knowledge)  the  MRIA  will  accept  the  results  of  course  marks  obtained  in  a  more  rigorous  level  of  tes@ng  during  the  comple@on  of  their  studies.  

•  There  is  a  somewhat  lower  appropriateness  response  to  the  new  pathway  but  it  appears  acceptable.  

   

Extremely  Appropriate  

Very  Appropriate    

Somewhat  Appropriate    

Somewhat  Inappropriate    

Very  Inappropriate    

Highly  Inappropriate    

0%  

10%  

20%  

30%  

40%  

50%  

60%  

Courses  Current   Courses  New  

54%  

39%  

6%  

16%  

4.5  

4.0  

TOP  TWO  BOXES   BOTTOM  TWO   AVERAGE    "Appropriate"  Ra@ng  

10  

“Highly  /Very  Appropriate”  •  Courses  formalize  the  learning  and  help  to  fill  in  

knowledge  gaps.    Everyone  taking  a  course  is  exposed  to  the  same  material.    On-­‐the-­‐job  learning  can,  in  some  cases  be  narrowly-­‐focussed  and  /or  may  not  include  the  theory  behind  the  prac@ce.  

•  MRIA  Courses  are  par@cularly  effec@ve  for  those  who  are  already  in  the  research  industry  or  working  full  @me  and  discovered  they  really  like  it.  It  is  a  way  of  a8aining  the  designa@on  without  having  to  drop  out  of  work  and  take  the  post-­‐grad  programs.  

•  It  offers  assurances  that  those  who  take  these  courses  have  successfully  mastered  the  techniques  used  in  market  research  

•  Good  op@on  for  researchers  who  are  from  other  industries/jobs  or  who  have  liberal  arts  degrees  to  become  professional  researchers;  good  for  mid-­‐career  changers  to  gain  necessary  training  without  going  back  to  school.  

•  The  courses  cover  a  broad  range  of  topics,  exercises  and  case  studies  that  a  marke@ng  professional  should  be  knowledgeable  about.  And  then  the  minimum  of  2  years  work  experience  allows  them  to  see  this  knowledge  come  to  life  in  a  prac@cal  environment.  

“Very/Highly  Inappropriate”  •  Courses    to  educate  is  good  but  the  person  s@ll  needs  to  

learn  the  skills  and  achieve  high  standards  of  work  through  prac@cal  experience  in  the  profession  which  only  comes  with  @me,  if  the  person  does  it  right.  

•  I  feel  the  designa@on  itself  is  inappropriate,  therefore,  any  pathway  to  it  is  inappropriate.  

•  Work  experience  is  too  limited,  should  be  at  least  double  what  it  is  now.  Exams  need  to  be  more  challenging.  I  know  clients  who  don't  trust  work  done  by  those  who  got  their  CMRP  via  the  first  two  pathways.  What  purpose  does  that  serve?  

•  MRIA  courses  do  not  come  close  to  replica@ng  the  experience  required  

•  Not  all  the  MRIA  courses  are  applicable  or  appropriate  for  all  members.    It  also  creates  a  pathway  that  may  force  people  to  take  courses  from  the  MRIA  (a  bit  monopolis@c)  in  order  to  obtain  their  designa@on.  

What  the  Members  said  about  Current  MRIA  Courses  Pathway  

11  Selected  Illustra@ve  Members’  Comments  

“Highly  /Very  Appropriate”  •  I  think  the  proposed  changes  will  help,  although  I  

maintain  that  the  costs  remain  high.  •  You  will  acquire  the  general  knowledge  as  you  prac@ce  

in  your  field.  •  It  makes  the  CMRP  more  accessible  and  recognizes  the  

achievements  already  documented  in  their  course  ac@vi@es.  

•  I  agree  that  Part  B  of  the  exam  (General  Knowledge)  can  be  eliminated  since  these  people  have  already  completed  the  MRIA  courses.  

•  Bonne  forma@on  générale  jumélée  avec  une  diplôma@on  et  de  l'expérience  

•  The  MRIA  courses  provide  general  knowledge  so  it  makes  sense  for  this  por@on  of  the  exam  to  be  removed.    I  like  the  fact  that  the  proposal  component  of  the  exam  has  been  retained.  

•  I  don't  object  to  what's  being  suggested;  there's  nothing  offensive  or  bothersome  about  it.  In  short,  I  have  no  strong  feelings  about  this  ma8er,  but  I'm  acquiescent.  

•  The  appren@ceship  style  learning  is  a  great  idea.  Where  do  the  mentors  come  from  though,  what  if  there  is  no  CMRP  where  they  work,  do  they  have  to  leave  or  is  a  mentor  assigned  from  MRIA?  I  s@ll  think  2  years  is  too  short  and  it  should  be  at  least  3  even  if  only  1  of  those  years  is  under  a  CMRP.  

“Very/Highly  Inappropriate”  •  MRIA  should  focus  on  the  quality  of  the  designa@on,  not  

the  quan@ty.      Courses  do  not  provide  experience  on  the  job.    Inexperienced  CMRPs  can  bring  down  the  standard  of  the  en@re  marke@ng  research  profession.  

•  Many  professionals  may  not  have  a  CMRP  designated  professional  accessible,  therefore  some  people  would  be  excluded  from  obtaining  the  designa@on  unless  they  meet  the  10  year  criteria.  

•  Same  as  with  Post-­‐Grad  -­‐  Part  B  is  important.  The  exam  is  currently  long  and  gruelling  (as  it  should  be).  

•  Too  li8le  real  world  experience.  I  do  like  the  appren@ceship  idea.  Am  not  fond  of  commi8ees  approving  this,  please  leave  that  to  someone  qualified  and  paid  to  make  such  assessments.  

•  With  no  general  knowledge  test,  nothing  has  been  done  to  evaluate  the  knowledge  of  applicants,  unless  MRIA  courses  are  different  from  when  I  took  them.    They  would  need  to  have  a  rigorous  exam  to  pass  the  course.    And  MRIA  would  not  have  to  have  an  incen@ve  to  pass  as  many  people  as  possible.  

•  Too  much  weight  given  to  having  a  university  degree,  and  the  applicant  should  have  a  minimum  of  7  or  8  years'  experience  in  the  industry.  

What  the  Members  said  about  New  MRIA  Courses  Pathway  

12  Selected  Illustra@ve  Members’  Comments  

Post  Graduate  Pathway    Current  &  New  

•  The  current  Post  Graduate  pathway  has  the  following  requirements:  –  University  Graduate  –  Graduate  of  an  MRIA  Approved  Post  

Graduate  Program  –  Minimum  2  years  experience  –  Pass  the  7  hour,  2  part  CMRE  –  MRIA  Ethics  Course  

•  The  new  version  adds  a  minimum  4  years  experience  working  under  the  supervision  of  a  CMRP  holder  (effec@ve  as  of  2016).  

•  The  applicant  will  also  have  to  write  only  Part  A  (a  proposal)  of  the  CMRE  exam.  Taking  the    place  of  Part  B  (general  MR  knowledge)  the  MRIA  will  accept  the  results  of  course  marks  obtained  in  their  Post  Graduate  program.  

•  There  is  a  somewhat  lower  appropriateness  response  to  the  new  pathway  but  it  appears  acceptable.    

Extremely  Appropriate  

Very  Appropriate    

Somewhat  Appropriate    

Somewhat  Inappropriate    

Very  Inappropriate    

Highly  Inappropriate    

0%  

10%  

20%  

30%  

40%  

50%  

60%  

Post  Grad  Current   Post  Grad  New  

53%  

41%  

8%  

16%  

4.5  

4.0  

TOP  TWO  BOXES   BOTTOM  TWO   AVERAGE    "Appropriate"  Ra@ng  

13  

•  The  graduate-­‐level  programs  are  the  most  up-­‐to-­‐date  and  intensive  programs  available.  I  would  say  these  programs  and  the  content  delivered  through  them  are  even  more  appropriate  than  a  university  degree  due  to  the  specific  nature  of  the  content.    

•  Those  comple@ng  a  post  grad  program  have  already  achieved  competency  and  their  ability  has  already  been  ve8ed.    

•  The  specifically  designed  programs  to  align  with  the  CMRP,  e.g.  MBIR  at  Algonquin  and  the  RAP  at  Georgian,  provide  tailored  and  in  depth  knowledge,  skills  and  work  experience.  The  graduates  have  a  strong  grounding  in  all  relevant  aspects  of  the  profession.    

•  A  university  degree  establishes  the  individual  as  someone  with  breadth  of  knowledge  as  well  as  some  specializa@on.  The  tenure  requirements  and  courses  provide  this  individual  with  prac@cal  skills.  The  ethics  por@on  is  par@cularly  appropriate.    

•  It  seems  to  be  a8rac@ng  some  promising  people  into  the  industry  and  giving  them  a  good  grounding.    

•  It's  not  too  onerous  and  likely  compares  favourably  with  similar  programs  in  other  unlicensed  professions    

“Highly  /Very  Appropriate”   “Very/Highly  Inappropriate”  •  You  shouldn't  have  to  take  a  designated  research  

program.  This  is  the  beauty  of  research  -­‐  diversity  of  backgrounds.    

•  The  requirement  to  take  the  7  hour  exam  is  redundant  since  the  person  has  already  acquired  post  grad  program  and  has  at  least  2  years  MR  experience.    

•  A  kid  out  of  the  block  is  a  cer@fied  CMRP.  you  must  be  kidding    

•  I  feel  the  designa@on  itself  is  inappropriate,  therefore,  any  pathway  to  it  is  inappropriate.    

•  Work  experience  is  too  limited,  should  be  at  least  double  what  it  is  now.  Exams  need  to  be  more  challenging.  I  know  clients  who  don't  trust  work  done  by  those  who  got  their  CMRP  via  the  first  two  pathways.  What  purpose  does  that  serve?    

•  2  years  of  experience  is  too  li8le.  It  should  be  at  least  5  and  a  sa@sfactory  resume  to  go  with  it.    

•  Not  enough  prac@cal  years  of  experience.  not  enough  years  of  experience  in  the  industry  -­‐  if  the  CMRP  is  a  professional  designa@on,  prac@cal  experience  is  essen@al    

•  More  experience  should  be  required,  not  limited  to  passing  the  courses.    

What  the  Members  said  about  Current  Post  Graduate  Challenge  Pathway  

14  Selected  Illustra@ve  Members’  Comments  

“Highly  /Very  Appropriate”  •  The  changes  make  the  CMRP  more  accessible  and  

recognize  the  efforts  already  documented  in  their  studies.    

•  I  agree  with  dele@ng  the  general  por@on  of  the  CMRE  exam  since  now  the  employment  is  under  the  supervision  of  a  CMRP  and  the  post  grad  program  would  have  covered  that  component    

•  It  makes  sense  that  the  general  knowledge  por@on  of  the  exam  is  removed  assuming  that  general  knowledge  is  obtained  in  post  grad  programs.    I  like  the  fact  that  the  proposal  por@on  of  the  exam  would  be  retained.    

•  I  like  the  idea  of  adding  an  appren@ceship  to  the    program.    I  don't  necessarily  agree  that  Part  B  should  be  deleted  -­‐  seems  like  it  is  a  good  standardized  test  of  general  knowledge.    

•  the  2  year  appren@ceship  style  format  is  an  excellent  idea  and  helps  with  my  reserva@ons  about  2  years  being  a  short  @me.  I  s@ll  think  3,4  or  5  years  would  be  more  appropriate  though.  I  don't  fully  understand  how  the  appren@ce  program  would  work  though,  there  has  to  be  a  CMRP  at  their  workplace?  What  if  they  don't  have  one?    

“Very/Highly  Inappropriate”  •  MRIA  should  focus  on  the  quality  of  CMRP,  not  the  

quan@ty.    Educa@on  does  not  provide  experience  on  the  job.  Given  enough  inexperience  CMRP,  they  can  pull  down  the  standard  of  the  en@re  industry.    

•  There  are  no  where  near  enough  CMRPs  to  mentor  these  people,  especially  in  certain  areas  of  the  country.  will  greatly  restrict  job  opportuni@es  for  new  graduates,  e.g.  those  who  wish  to  work  in  a  small  firm.    

•  Part  B  is  a  cri@cal  element  of  the  exam  as  it  tests  specific  knowledge,  exam  writers  can  easily  hide  their  lack  of  knowledge  and  shortcomings  in  Part  A.    

•  I'm  not  sure  someone  with  only  2  years  industry  experience  will  have  sufficient  understanding  of  how  to  write  a  proposal  to  pass  that  element.  Most  juniors  start  by  managing  projects/wri@ng  reports  and  graduate  to  proposals  at  a  later  date.    

•  Not  enough  emphasis  put  on  industry  experience  and  the  applicant  does  not  have  to  challenge  the  general  knowledge  por@on  of  the  CMRE.    

•  With  removal  of  the  general  knowledge  sec@on,  the  bo8om  falls  out  of  the  founda@on  which  makes  up  a  research  professional.  The  no@on  that  this  general  knowledge  would  not  be  required  quite  frankly  scares  me.  

What  the  Members  said  about  New  Post  Graduate  Challenge  Pathway  

15  Selected  Illustra@ve  Members’  Comments  

Experienced  Prac@@oner  Pathway    

•  This  pathway  is  a  new  approach  intended  to  provide  broader  opportuni@es  for  MRIA  members  to  achieve  the  CMRP  designa@on.  

•  The  Experienced  Prac@@oner  pathway  is  available  to  MRIA  members  with  a  minimum  of  10  years  prac@cal  experience.  

•  Experienced  Prac@@oners  will  be  required  to  submit  a  detailed  applica@on  showing  their  levels  of  experience  in  specific  MR  areas  including  a  specific  descrip@on  of  a  research  project  that  they  feel  best  indicates  their  experience  and  capabili@es.      

•  The  applica@on  will  be  required  to  be  supported  by  2  current  CMRP  holders.  It  will  be  evaluated  by  the  Cer@fica@on  Advisory  Commi8ee  before  the  designa@on  is  granted  on  the  basis  of  having  demonstrated  skills  appropriate  to  a  CMRP    throughout  their  career.  

•  This  approach  achieved  results  that  are  comparable  to  the  highest  rated  CMRE  pathway.  

 

Extremely  Appropriate  

Very  Appropriate    

Somewhat  Appropriate    

Somewhat  Inappropriate    

Very  Inappropriate    

Highly  Inappropriate    

0%  

10%  

20%  

30%  

40%  

50%  

60%  

Experience  Prac@@oner  

56%  

13%  

4.4  

TOP  TWO  BOXES  BOTTOM  TWO  AVERAGE    "Appropriate"  Ra@ng  

16  

“Highly  /Very  Appropriate”  •  I  feel  this  is  the  single  most  relevant  change  to  the  

program,  and  the  one  most  likely  to  make  the  designa@on  meaningful.  This  will  allow  those  who  want  the  designa@on  to  make  a  detailed  case  -­‐  and  experienced,  skilled  researchers  should  have  li8le  to  no  difficulty  doing  so.  I,  for  one,  would  be  amongst  the  first  to  apply  should  this  be  ins@tuted.  

•  this  is  essen@ally  the  grandfathering  approach.    Realis@cally,  you  can't  expect  somebody  like  this  to  take  courses  and  write  exams  -­‐-­‐  their  sheer  longevity/success  shows  that  they  know  what  they're  doing.    Were  I  a  client  who  had  been  happy  with  my  consultant's  work,  but  then  found  out  that  they  couldn't  have  the  CMRP  despite  years  of  experience  and  despite  having  done  good  work  for  me,  it  would  diminish  my  respect  for  the  designa@on  (BTW,  I  HAVE  been  a  client)  

•  Only  the  strong  survive.    This  designa@on  should  be  one  of  merit.    When  you  show  appropriate  growth  in  your  career  path,  it  speaks  to  the  idea  that  you  are  good  at  building  rela@onships  and  building  business.    The  prerequisite  for  these  two  builds  is  founded  on  a  solid  understanding  of  the  hard  skills  per@nent  to  market  research.  

“Very/Highly  Inappropriate”  •  I  think  the  last  thing  the  MRIA  need  is  another  secret  process  

where  only  a  few  members  get  to  sit  in  judgment  of  the  rest.    If  there  is  an  exam  it  is  a  case  of  pass  or  fail.    But  the  applica@on  to  a  board  and  then  some  hearing  is  very  distasteful.    Reminds  me  of  the  secret  way  in  which  fellows  are  selected.    Ul@mately,  I'm  not  sure  of  the  goal  of  this  en@re  process.    Seems  to  me  that  people  don't  undertake  the  CMRP  because  it  is  not  relevant  to  the  industry.    How  will  having  5  ways  in  which  you  can  get  your  CMRP  address  this?  

•  Just  because  you're  doing  something  for  a  long  @me  doesn't  mean  you  do  a  good  job.  There's  very  li8le  opportunity  to  test  that  out  here.  I  don't  care  whether  they  do  courses,  exam,  boot  camp  or  whatever,  but  no  one  should  get  a  CMRP  for  doing  nothing.  

•  There  are  many  CMRP's  who  have  taken  the  ini@a@ve  to  write  the  exam  and  this  pathway  doesn't  honour  that.    In  my  mind,  it  is  too  easy  to  have  this  put  in  place  and  doesn't  show  the  commitment  to  the  designa@on.  

•  Although  there  has  been  an  honest  effort  to  increase  the  level  of  scru@ny  the  candidate  undergoes  this  path  remains  grandfathering  by  another  name.  In  addi@on,  the  proposal  submi8ed  by  the  candidate  outlining  her/his  experience  will  put  too  much  emphasis  on  their  ability  to  spin  a  story.  Aside  from  the  ethics  component  (which  is  important)  there  is  no  systema@c  method  for  ensuring  that  the  candidate  has  the  required  skills  and  knowledge.  

What  the  Members  said  about  New  Experienced  PracFFoner  Pathway  

17  Selected  Illustra@ve  Members’  Comments  

Boot  Camp  Pathway    •  This  pathway  is  also  a  new  approach  intended  to  

provide  broader  opportuni@es  for  MRIA  members  to  achieve  the  CMRP  designa@on.  

•  The  Boot  Camp  pathway  will  be  available  to  MRIA  members  with  a  minimum  of  10  years  prac@cal  experience.  

•  This  pathway  is  a  new  approach  intended  to  specifically  address  senior  MRIA  execu@ves  who  are  cri@cal  to  the  development  of  the  CMRP.  

•  While  the  total  level  of  support  for  the  Boot  Camp  path  is  slightly  more  modest,  there  is  interest  from  the  members  who  are    older  (40+),  although  not  necessarily  those  who  hold  senior  management  posi@ons  in  the  industry.  

 

Extremely  Appropriate  

Very  Appropriate    

Somewhat  Appropriate    

Somewhat  Inappropriate    

Very  Inappropriate    

Highly  Inappropriate    

0%  

10%  

20%  

30%  

40%  

50%  

60%  

Boot  Camp  

41%  

21%  

3.9  

TOP  TWO  BOXES  BOTTOM  TWO  AVERAGE    "Appropriate"  Ra@ng   18  

“Highly  /Very  Appropriate”  •  This  sounds  like  a  good  refresher  course,  and  suitable  for  

those  who  are  not  "experienced  prac@@oners"  but  s@ll  have  some  years  of  experience.  

•  From  a  @me  management  perspec@ve  this  is  a  good  op@on.  I  also  like  the  idea  of  the  MBA  approach,  learning  from  other  experienced  professionals  -­‐  also  provides  a  level  set  on  ethics.  

•  This  combines  the  best  of  all  worlds  where  you  can  get  the  academic  experience  with  the  prac@cal  experience  and  take  care  of  everything  in  session.    Costs  and  ability  to  do  preliminary  study  work  (textbook  prior  to  boot  camp)  would  be  considera@ons.  

•  I  understand  this  path  to  provide  reassurance  of  competence  that  is  equivalent  to  the  MRIA  courses.  I  believe  that  the  weekend  boot  camp  will  be  a  be8er  method  of  iden@fying  new  designates  than  the  courses  provide.  People  who  keep  up  with  the  pace  of  boot  camp  are  demonstra@ng  that  they  can  keep  up  the  pace  demanded  in  professional  work.  

•  Boot  Camps  are  generally  intensive  and  provide  good  depth  of  learning  in  a  short  period  of  @me.  

•  BOOT  CAMP  gives  learners  an  opportunity  to  learn  from  each  other,  to  do  case  work  and  to  share  their  experiences.  Ques@ons  raised  in  this  sejng  will  inevitably  lead  to  more  ques@ons  and  will  likely  benefit  the  group  as  a  whole.  Spending  @me  with  other  researchers  'aher  hours'  will  help  build  and  solidify  rela@onships.  There  is  immediate,  relevant  discussion  that  will  naturally  take  place  over  a  pint  of  beer  or  a  cup  of  coffee  aher  class.    

“Very/Highly  Inappropriate”  •  Very  insul@ng  to  those  who  have  decades  of  experience.    

And  at  the  same  @me,  sugges@ng  that  someone  is  suddenly  creden@aled  thanks  to  a  few  days  away  is  silly.  

•  Even  worse  than  the  experienced  prac@@oner  as  these  individuals  are  likely  to  be  even  further  removed  from  the  reali@es  of  on-­‐the-­‐ground  research...  

•  everyone  should  have  to  write  the  cer@fica@on  test  -­‐  professional  cer@fica@on  requires  proof  of  knowledge  and  passing  the  CMRE  -­‐  again  its  a  professional  designa@on  of  cer@fica@on  that  must  be  earned,  not  a  membership  fee  that  is  simply  paid  -­‐  the  full  CMRE  should  s@ll  have  to  be  wri8en  and  passed  

•  This  is  the  craziest  idea  -­‐  minimum  8  years  experience  and  short  quizzes?  I  can  only  imagine  what  this  would  cost.  It's  basically  a  MRIA  Conference  without  young  people  and  breakout  sessions.  

•  I  honestly  don't  think  you  can  compare  a  4  day  weekend  to  an  8  month  long  intense  post  grad  course.  Aren't  execu@ve  MBAs  much  longer  than  one  weekend  ?  You  would  need  top  notch  coaching  and  stringent  screening.  

•  Sounds  nice  and  good,  however  it  is  hopelessly  flawed  to  think  that  someone  (or  any  employer)  will  be  willing  to  spend  the  thousands  of  dollars  needed  to  fund  an  individuals  a8empt  at  this.    Surely  the  cost  and  @me  commitment  will  be  too  high.  

What  the  Members  said  about  New  Boot  Camp  Pathway  

19  Selected  Illustra@ve  Members’  Comments  

Likelihood  of  Obtaining  CMRP    by  Pathway  Op@ons  

0%   10%   20%   30%   40%  

Experience  Prac@@oner  

Boot  Camp  

Courses  New  

Challenge  New  

Post  Grad  New  

40%  

21%  

10%  

7%  

6%  

Extremely/Very  Likely    to  Obtain  CMRP  Using  Pathway  

•  The  objec@ve  of  the  development  of  new  CMRP  Pathways  was  intended  to  increase  the  level  of  the  membership  that  hold  the  designa@on.  

•  It  is  felt  necessary  to  again  a8empt  to  gain  a  “cri@cal  mass”  base  of  CMRP  holders,  including  the  majority  of  senior  business  leaders  in  order  to  perpetuate  its  existence.  

•  As  such  the  effec@veness  of  the  Experienced  Prac@@oner  and  Boot  Camp  pathways  significantly  exceeds  the  levels  achieved  by  current  approaches,  even  with  modifica@ons  to  make  them  more  accessible.  

 The  PD&C  CommiWee  feels  strongly  that  all  opFonal  

new  pathways  are  worthy  of  inclusion  for  CMRP  qualificaFon  to  achieve  the  desired  base  level  for  the  associaFon  to  grow  the  designaFon  to  be    

self-­‐sustaining.  

 Note:  Asked  only  of  non-­‐holders  of  CMRP  n=181  20