In the world of continuing competence and recertification, the ideal can seem unattainable. How do we design a recertification program that ensures our credential holders remain as competent as they were when they first achieved that credential? How do we make sure their skills have kept pace with environmental changes? How do we make sure they haven’t forgotten their core skills, even if they have subsequently focused on a subspecialty?
Organizations that have structured their recertification programs as a paragon of continuing competence:
- Keep Practitioners on pace with industry changes.
- Make sure Practitioners retain core competencies.
- Allow competency assessment in the mode most suitable to the competency in question.
- Acknowledge the practical work Practitioners perform. If they already demonstrate competence somewhere, they don’t have to take a separate test to prove it.
- Balance the need to master core competencies with the tendency to practice in narrow subspecialty areas.
Reading these guidelines might lead you to conclude that your continuing education-based recertification program will never “get there;” the goal is too lofty. That may be the case: You may never have the resources or even the mandate to develop a program that conforms to the optimal standard of continuing competence. That doesn’t mean you can’t make small enhancements to your program that will move you in the right direction. No matter what your reason for wanting to improve, if you have the drive to be the best you can be, there is always room to improve.
The following sections describe some of the incremental changes you can make to enhance your program. Each can build upon the next, so whether you intend to implement only one of these changes or establish a longer-term strategic plan that builds incrementally, the list will hold up.
We have identified three goals, each with its own track. Consider choosing one of the three and following each step in the process:
- Goal 1: Make recertification more meaningful and relevant.
- Goal 2: Make sure people are doing it.
- Goal 3: Align competencies with demonstration modes.
This article focuses especially on the first goal, which is to move the recertification process from an administrative burden to a motivator for improved practice. Note: This article assumes that you have a basic recertification program in place that requires a certain quantity of continuing education credits to be accumulated within a defined period. That’s not the only starting point, but it covers most programs.
How to Make Recertification More Meaningful and Relevant
Definition: Ensure Practitioners are encouraged to gain knowledge that is of interest to them.
Credential holders tend to be busy people. They often prioritize convenience over relevance when determining how to obtain their recertification credits. How can you tip the scales in favor of relevance over convenience?
We can think of a few levels of relevant recertification:
- Level 1: Build a database of relevant content.
- Level 2: Classify activities according to content areas.
- Level 3: Distribute requirements according to your credential expectations.
Continuing Competence Level 1: Build a Database/Marketplace of Relevant Learning Content
Where do your Practitioners go to find relevant learning content? Do you offer a place for them to search for activities? If you don’t have a place for them to go, consider how you might build one. You’ll make it easier for them to find content, and you might just be able to steer them towards activities that are good for them, not just easy to find or participate in.
| Approach | Requirements/Level of Effort | Benefits |
| Level 1a: Curate the database using your existing tools and sources. | This requires you to allocate some time from your staff or volunteer population to build your database. |
You can build your database quickly and do not need to negotiate special relationships with other organizations. You can evaluate the course offerings while you curate, so you may not need a separate approval process. |
| Level 1b: Crowdsource activities from your community to build your database. |
This requires you to have the technical infrastructure to accept community-recommended activities. You will also need to allocate staff or volunteer time to evaluate crowdsourced options. |
You can build your database with less emphasis on finding activities and more on allocating resources to evaluating them. |
| Level 1c: Establish an “Approved Provider Program” that invites specific organizations to submit activities for approval. |
This requires that you have the staff and/or volunteer time to:
|
This approach harnesses the commercial incentives educational publishers have to participate.
|
Continuing Competence Level 2: Organize CE Activities by Content Area
Once you have a database of activities, you can use it to help Practitioners find activities that meet their interests. You can start by classifying content according to the categories that make sense to your community. In a credentialing program, the job task analysis provides a built-in content classification scheme. You may also have other resources, such as a body of knowledge or a competency model in your industry that guides your classification. There are several stages of content classification to consider:
| Approach | Requirements/Level of Effort | Benefits |
| Level 2a: Ask credential holders to select the content area when they enter the details of their activity. | You will need to develop the list of content areas to choose from. This can be a list of exam domains or a highly granular list of competencies. | With relatively little program effort, you will start to gain data on the content areas your credential holders seek out. You can use this data for input into your curating and crowdsourcing activities. |
| Level 2b: Evaluate the selection during audit or review. | You will need to have staff available to audit activity submissions and determine whether credential holders select the correct areas. |
You may discover confusion in your community regarding a particular competency area. You may identify activity submissions that do not meet content requirements. |
| Level 2c: Classify activities during the curation/crowdsourcing process. | Requires that those curating and proposing activities are aware of the content classifications. | Establishes the content of the activity for everyone, so no additional data entry is necessary. |
| Level 2d: Ask Approved Providers to classify learning content when they submit coursework for approval. |
Requires that you capture the classification scheme during the approval process. Requires that your Providers develop an accurate sense of how their content maps to knowledge categories. |
Enlisting Providers in the classification process more broadly enculturates the value of the content scheme. The activity approval process can confirm content mapping when evaluating other factors, so the mapping process does not need to add significant labor. |
Continuing Competence Level 3: Promote the Content and Activities You Think are Most Valuable
The third level brings the work you have done in the previous levels into your program requirements. You won’t just be asking people what they learned; you’ll be encouraging (perhaps even requiring) them to focus on content in the ways you prescribe.
This level can be tricky because it is especially dependent upon what you think of as “valuable.” Some of the possibilities include:
- Require (or encourage) activities that address specific competencies.
- Require (or encourage) well-designed activities.
- Require credential holders to distribute their learning across categories.
| Approach | Requirements/Level of Effort | Benefits | Example |
| Level 3a: Encourage specific competencies. |
You will need to have a governance model to define “core competencies” and communicate them with your community. You will need to create a weighting mechanism to grant extra credit for activities in certain areas. |
Using incentives instead of requirements helps test your hypotheses about the relevance of core competencies. If successful, you will inspire desired behavior with less rancorous resistance. |
You receive double credit for courses that cover Hand Washing. |
| Level 3b: Require specific competencies. |
Your governance process and communications strategy must exceptionally thorough to avoid practitioner resistance. You will need to build a requirements model that ensures recertification candidates submit activities that meet content requirements. |
You will ensure that our certified community engages the content you believe is required to maintain competence. | You must complete four credits in Hand Washing. |
| Level 3c: Encourage well-designed activities. |
You will need to define standards of educational content, like delivery modes and assessment methods. You will need to build a weighting mechanism to grant extra credit for activities that meet your desired standard. |
You will promote desired behaviors without risking backlash from your practitioners. | You receive double credit for activities that have a practical assessment. |
| Level 3d: Require well-designed activities. |
You will need to communicate standards especially clearly to justify their value. You will need to adjust your application process to include rules that prevent incomplete submissions. |
You will have greater confidence that your credential holders have mastered the materials. | You must complete an activity that has a practical assessment. |
| Level 3e: Require content distribution. | You will need to determine the proportion of activities in each content area. | You will prevent credential holders from ignoring core competencies. You will ensure that credential holders who move among subspecialties possess knowledge in areas other than their current subspecialty. |
To recertify, you must complete the following:
|
LearningBuilder: Helping to Optimize All Levels of Recertification
Anyone interested in improving their recertification process can implement these steps. However, it can be especially expeditious to accomplish these tasks within a tool designed for continuing competence. LearningBuilder has the functionality to implement your next steps iteratively. If you are already using LearningBuilder, you may have already implemented one more of these strategies. Consider the following:
Content Classification
- Single list: this is a field on a workflow you can probably add yourself. You can control the list of topics, and you can use the workflow editor to add the classification field wherever you want it.
- Hierarchical list: Use LearningBuilder’s Competency Model feature to build a multi-level representation of your competency scheme. You’ll need to purchase this module separately. When you acquire it, you can manage your competency model and use LearningBuilder Workflow Editor to put the selector where you want it.
Activity Database/Marketplace
- Curated list: You can grant staff and volunteers permission to add activities to the list that then become available through the activity search feature.
- Crowdsourced list: This requires two parts: a workflow to manage the evaluation process and some advanced work with our configuration team. You’ll have a form for a person to enter details about an activity. That feedback will then become available to other users in the system.
- Approved Providers: This can be two different flavors, depending on your choice: Some programs approve each activity, while others approve Providers who are then able to submit courses without a separate approval process. Choose wisely!
Encouraged/Required Activities
- The Workflow Editor will allow you to specify formulas for specific content. You’ll need some advanced work from our team to establish the formulas, but once in place, credit will be applied automatically.
- LearningBuilder’s Requirements Model will allow you to configure the minimum units in one or more categories.
“Gotchas” and Lessons Learned
Just as “the perfect is the enemy of the good,” “complexity is the enemy of understanding.” The more complex you make your rules, the less likely your community will understand and follow them. Here are some of the rules and requirements we recommend you stay away from:
- Proportional rules, like “Fifty percent of your credits need to be in Topic A.” If 50% is a ratio of a fixed number (e.g., 50% of 50 annual CE credits = 25 CE credits), state it as the numeric result: “Twenty-five CE credits must be in…”
- Time distributions, like: “You must obtain five credits in Topic A each year.”This quickly becomes complicated to track.
Conclusions and Next Steps
To implement the guidance above, first consider your current position. Could one more step bring you closer to an organizational possibility you once thought unattainable? Even the longest journey begins with a single step. . .
If you are a current LearningBuilder customer, reach out to your Customer Success lead to discover how we can best support you. If you are not yet part of the LearningBuilder family, you will likely find it easier to implement these steps within a platform designed to do so. If you would like to become part of our LearningBuilder community, please schedule a call with us to see how we can deliver a solid foundation for the future of your credential program.
But wait! We aren’t done: if you are interested in exploring other ways to level up your continuing competence program, consider the following alternatives:
- Goal 2: Make sure people are doing it.
- Goal 3: Align competencies with demonstration modes.
Stay tuned: These articles are coming soon to the Heuristic Solutions blog!
