For the past 6 months or so, I have been seeing a dramatic increase in the help wanted advertisements, both on line and in print, requiring a PMP or a PRINCE2 credential as a clear pre-requisite to applying for the job.
And my question is, by making a knowledge based credential with no proven connection to producing more successful project managers resulting in a form of licensing? And is this good for the practice of project management?
Licensing is generally considered to be a classic form of protectionism. How? By limiting those who can practice, it provides the government or more accurately, those vested interests who lobby governments, a way to artificially reduce the number of practitioners, with the hopes and expectations that by limiting or controlling the numbers, those who are licensed can charge more money.
This is all done under the noble sounding auspices that the government is “protecting” the health and safety of the consuming public, by preventing incompetents, charlatans and frauds from practicing.
There is no shortage of credible research showing that in very few instances, does licensing result in any more protection than the “free hand of the marketplace” in weeding out incompetents, charlatans and frauds, and not only does licensing not protect the consuming public very effectively, it consistently results in higher prices, with little or no increase in benefits.
Now, given the PMP, PRINCE2 are NOT licenses, but voluntary credentials, is the proliferation of help wanted advertisements REQUIRING a PMP or PRINCE2, effectively resulting in the same effect?

For the past 6 months or so, I have been seeing a dramatic increase in the help wanted advertisements, both on line and in print, requiring a PMP or a PRINCE2 credential as a clear pre-requisite to applying for the job.

And my question is, by making a knowledge based credential with no proven connection to producing more successful project managers resulting in a form of licensing? And is this good for the practice of project management?

Licensing is generally considered to be a classic form of protectionism. How? By limiting those who can practice, it provides the government or more accurately, those vested interests who lobby governments, a way to artificially reduce the number of practitioners, with the hopes and expectations that by limiting or controlling the numbers, those who are licensed can charge more money.

This is all done under the noble sounding auspices that the government is “protecting” the health and safety of the consuming public, by preventing incompetents, charlatans and frauds from practicing.

There is no shortage of credible research showing that in very few instances, does licensing result in any more protection than the “free hand of the marketplace” in weeding out incompetents, charlatans and frauds, and not only does licensing not protect the consuming public very effectively, it consistently results in higher prices, with little or no increase in benefits.

Now, given the PMP, PRINCE2 are NOT licenses, but voluntary credentials, is the proliferation of help wanted advertisements REQUIRING a PMP or PRINCE2, effectively resulting in the same effect?