As reported by PR Week recently, a poll of agency heads has revealed that a third believe graduates with PR degrees are less attractive than those who have studied other subjects.

When questioned about the value of PR education, 34 per cent of respondents on the PRCA PR Leaders’ Panel said that these qualifications actually make graduates less attractive. But on a more positive note, 70 per cent felt that a university education is more important than fifteen years ago.

Their argument is that a number of universities do not offer students ‘quality degrees’ and as a result, they produce under-performing PR graduates. They claim that these degrees do not equip graduates with the necessary skills to work at a professional level.

In all honesty, not all qualifications guarantee that a graduate shall be able to perform. This is difficult for many to accept but nonetheless, it remains a fact. It leads one to wonder if education or a formal qualification is a prerequisite for a successful career. Personally, I believe that a good PR education and accreditation is vital to true professionalism. Its not a guarantee of a ‘dream job’ but its a good start.

I think in order to work well, one must understand the basic principles and fundamentals of their chosen profession. In this case, the history and ethics of public relations and how it works as a management function.

PR veterans I have consulted on this issue claim that there are numerous talented PRs, who putting it bluntly- have no idea what they are doing. They might be great at spotting a pitch angle or writing a killer news release, but they cannot grasp how it all fits into the big picture. Indeed, there are PR graduates who understand the big picture, but find it difficult to draft even a simple news release. It is that big picture where the discipline of accreditation is invaluable.

Some argue that organizations such as CIPR (or PRSA in the US) are too slow to keep up with the latest developments in the communications realm and are always going to be some steps behind anything new. However, it is a non-issue in terms of accreditation as the principles of new PR/social media/PR 2.0 remain unchanged. It is only the tools and tactics that differ. The assumption that this whole “listening/conversation/dialogue/not controlling the message” concept is new, is a big reason for PR’s poor reputation. If such individuals had been accredited they would comprehend the big picture and not make this mistake.

Yet another argument is that accreditation will discourage young people from ‘trying out’ a PR career. I definitely don’t believe that this is true. Accreditation doesn’t put high caliber people off entering law or accountancy – many do ‘try out’ these professions and then quit because they don’t enjoy it or can’t hack it. Why shouldn’t the same be true of PR?

If we really want to be perceived as management advisers, with a seat on the board, then we need to be as educated as the lawyers and accountants at the table.