Does accreditation really matter in public relations practice? How age and experience compare to accreditation

Many scholars and practitioners have suggested accreditation as one way to enhance the professionalism of public relations practice. But, others have questioned whether accreditation really makes a difference and whether experience is a sufficient substitute for accreditation. This study found that, although accredited practitioners were significantly older and had significantly more years of experience compared to their non-accredited counterparts, differences between the groups with respect to seven work categories and five professional competencies remained even when age and years of experience were controlled. The affected work categories were account/client management, strategic planning, public relations program planning, project management, stakeholder relations, issues management, and crisis management. The affected professional competencies were the four-step strategic planning process; ethics and legal issues; communication theory; business literacy; and advanced communication skills. In short, this study refutes the argument that age and professional experience are sufficient substitutes for accreditation in public relations. In fact, they are not.

Research highlights▶ Accredited practitioners were significantly older than non-accredited practitioners. ▶ Accredited practitioners had significantly more years of experience compared to non-accredited practitioners. ▶ Differences between accredited and non-accredited practitioners remained even when age and years of experience were controlled. ▶ Age and professional experience are NOT sufficient substitutes for accreditation in public relations.