Samson Osero

Recent publication of a Parliamentary Bill to establish the Institute of Certified Managers  has rekindled the longstanding debate on whether or not management is a profession. 

If it is, does it warrant formation of both a professional body and an examinations board?

For an occupation to become a profession, it must have a common body of knowledge; a certification system of the knowledge; methods of using the knowledge for the public good and mechanisms for enforcing an ethical code of conduct.

Notwithstanding these tenets of professionalism, here are critical issues that the mover of the Bill, Gladys Wanga, Homa Bay Woman Representative needs to address before it becomes law.

The brief title of the Bill does not indicate the name of “the profession” for which standards and practices will be regulated.

Neither does the statement of the objects and reasons for the Bill specify “the profession” in question.

This lack of clarity on the “profession” will be a recipe for interpretation problems, especially in the absence of a recognised management profession.

Section 31 and 33 of the Bill have not provided the meaning of a “Certified Manager.”

Without a specific interpretation of “Certified Manager”, the Bill assumes that  all managers regardless of their profession would be eligible members of ICM.

A blanket eligibility to a “professional” body is a mockery to any worthwhile profession. 

Membership of ICM

The Bill proposes a membership classification consisting of fellows, full member and associate member.

Membership criteria for entry into an unspecified “profession” would disenfranchise many people who consider themselves as managers.

For instance, on which type of membership will an owner-manager of a small business be classified.

Employees at different levels of management hold designations such as general manager, departmental manager and operations manager. On what basis will such employees be “Certified Managers”?

Potential ambiguities on membership criteria of “Certified Managers” would make ICM a non-starter in the Kenyan sophisticated market economy.  

Section 5 of the Bill states that one of the functions of ICM is to develop and regulate the management profession.

To regulate a “profession” which is not recognised as a legitimate profession is putting the cart before the horse.

Using the acronym “Certified Manager” does not professionalise management for regulation purposes.

The clause makes reference to management professionals who are not defined in the context of the proposed “profession”.

A professional is associated with a particular specialised area of expertise. For instance, a doctor practices medicine while an accountant pursues a career in accountancy.

From the Bill, the career of management professionals is not mentioned. To be in a profession that is not identified with a specific career is like being a jack-of-all-trades and master of none.

Professional examinations 

A professional examinations body like KASNEB meets certification needs of the accountancy profession. HRMPEB certifies HR professionals.

To establish a Certified Managers Examinations Board which is not linked to a particular profession is to denigrate the purpose of professional examination bodies.

Section 20 (1) (b) of the Bill states that CMEB will prepare syllabi for professional examinations in managerial practice.

Since boundaries of the body of knowledge and skills in management do not exist, it will be foolhardy to develop and implement a curriculum for “Certified Managers”.  – The writer is HRD Consultant and Author of Transition into Retirement, [email protected]