The Ethics of Competition
When my company joined the ASAE CAE Approved Provider program in 2019, we were excited to offer one of the first ethics courses for nonprofit professionals created specifically to fulfill the new ethics requirement for CAE renewal. I personally felt adding an ethics requirement was a strong step forward for our profession so I showed my support by supporting the provider program.
One of the things we have learned about ethics is that “Self” is the word that leads people down the road to unethical behavior and unethical choices. Whether self is an individual or self is an organization, acting in ways that benefit only you or your own organization is not ethical behavior. Many times, we fool ourselves into thinking our choices are ethical because we find some other justification for what we are doing but ethical behavior does not hurt others or minimize their ability to participate. You cannot justify choices as ethical that squeeze others out or limit individual choices, especially when this action garners benefits only to you or a chosen few.
My colleagues and I that participate in the Rogue Tulips Consulting education program are committed to supporting the professional development of our colleagues because we see it as an investment in the future of our profession. If we help our colleagues succeed and understand the unique role nonprofit management professionals play in society, everyone benefits. We also love making new connections and meeting so many bright and determined people who love what they do.
Because we believe in our profession and its future, I have kept fees as low as possible because I know my market: most people have to pay out of pocket for their CAE education and preparation. We provide an option that is affordable, high quality, and service oriented.
When I offer to talk with my colleagues that want to prepare for the CAE exam, I share with them all the different options and programs that are out there. Why? Because while I always hope they will take one of my courses, it may not be the best one for them. I encourage them to look around, talk to others, and find what is best for them. I think it’s unethical not to share all the options because those who find my courses the best fit will join them. It’s my goal to help people find what’s best for them in the areas of budget, schedule, and style. Why? It’s not about me. It’s about them.
My company has always followed all the rules of being a CAE Provider including maintaining an historic record of all CAE course participants and only awarding credit for real-time participation. We offer a certificate of completion as well and are happy to send additional copies as needed. Despite not being audited, following the rules is the ethical thing to do – as the saying goes, ethics are what you do when no one is looking.
This brings me to the latest changes in CAE education, where there is robust competition offering many options. On Monday, July 24, ASAE released its revised CAE Registered Provider program. In the past, it was called the CAE Approved Provider program.
What the previous program provided was basically a marketing leg up for course promotion, and the new program does the same thing. You get to use the CAE provider logo, ASAE shares marketing text for messaging, you can state you are an approved CAE provider, and you get listed on the website. The benefits of the new program are the same, but the fees are significantly increased as well as a number of new restrictions are imposed with little or no warning or time to respond. This information was shared one week before the new program goes into effect.
Many courses and study groups for the fall are starting up in September, yet they want 30 days to review and approve content by a committee that is not even formed, and the new CAE Registered Provider application does not even open until August 1.
The volunteer application for this new committee is open until August 13 and the committee work begins August 31 according to the Volunteer Opportunities page on the ASAE website. Realistically, I don’t think this committee can get up and running before mid-September between recruitment and training of volunteers. This impacts the ability of organizations that want to be CAE Registered Providers to have their courses approved in a timely manner for fall.
It is not clear what the criteria are for this “content review” and approval. Where is the criteria list? What will be reviewed? How will it be reviewed? Your guess is as good as mine because the materials about the revised CAE Registered Provider program focus on the new revised fee schedule; there is no new information in their other FAQs. Perhaps the criteria are in the new application but we can’t know that until August 1.
One thing that really bothers me is the answer to my question about qualifies for CAE credit v. approved by the new program. The response I received was that you can’t say it is CAE credit UNLESS you are in the CAE Registered Provider program. Yet, the CAE information states:
Any continuing professional education offered by any professional entity may be acceptable toward the professional development requirement as long as it is directly related to association or nonprofit management as defined by the CAE exam content outline [emphasis added] and meets the guidelines outlined below. Please see the CAE Approved Provider page for a list of organizations, in addition to ASAE, that offer education that is eligible for CAE credit.
This is a direct quote from the ASAE website information on the CAE program. It does not state in any way, shape, or form that you “must” use a CAE Approved Provider. Or in the case of the new program, a CAE Registered Provider. You can read it for yourself here.
When I asked for clarification, this was the response:
“Yes, that is correct. Only CAE Registered Providers would be able to promote courses for CAE credit.”
This was the reply despite the definition of qualifying CAE credit being in direct contradiction to this statement. It seems to me that this program is not about quality, but about making more money by increasing fees on a program that is already in place, and it is about limiting competition in the marketplace.
If the CAE Commission was concerned about quality, I would think they would audit or review any education that says it is a CAE course whether they are in the approved program or not, and it would also hold all CAE Approved Providers accountable to the rules of the program.
There is very little transparency and no time was given for feedback on the final program by current CAE Approved Providers. It was just presented to us as a “done deal” with a compressed implementation schedule. The new program is vague, anti-competitive, and in its presentation, it is not about quality of content but it is about asserting control. Shouldn’t a certification program with an ethics requirement demonstrate ethics with transparency and consensus building?
