Name Change

[gee4]

You are so right Jackie.  Spelling/grammar is one of my pet hates too.

Surely any publication would be proofed before going to print?

[matg]

Hi Jackie

Winter 2009 - oops!  I think because it was released in January 2009 - which is effectively winter, it does say winter 2009 - am doubting myself now though.

All of the answers I posted came from IPA so I am unable to comment on them further.

I do not know who is on the board.  I would suggest that you contact IPA directly to request this information.

Many thanks

Matt Griffin MIPA
Wales Regional Coordinator
Institute of Professional Administrators

[JessW]

Matt

I used to be in Central London, but now would either be Central London (because that is where I work) or Kent.

Jess

[Jackie G]

Matt

Questions about who is on the board are things you are likely to be asked in your new role.

I would make a point of finding out!

Jackie, Peer Moderator

[matg]

Hi Jackie

I agree, and I will ask Kerrie when I meet with her in a few weeks.

In the meantime however, I suggest you contact IPA directly if you would like to know who is on the board.

Thanks

Matt Griffin MIPA
Wales Regional Coordinator
Institute of Professional Administrators

[itsme_calista]

I don't like it.  I trained hard to be a Secretary, not an Administrator, I find the term administrator undermines the skills I have.  Administrators generally are not required to have the higher level skill set such as Level 3 & 4 qualifications, shorthand, audio etc.  Although I do appreciate there are  administrators who do have these skills.

I'm a PA, but my boss generally needs an administrator rather than a PA.  I find the job I have now dull and a waste of my time and effort.

Whilst I appreciate that "surveys" show the moving trend to rebrand jobs as administrator etc, I personally find that it is because they want the skill base but aren't prepared to pay out for the title!

[gee4]

I agree Callie.  

Not all job titles reflect the nature of the work we do and it also depends on the company and their culture.  I find the title 'Secretary' a little old-fashioned - it reminds me of someone taking shorthand and typing it up.  I don't think I've ever had a role like that.

My current job title certainly does not reflect the role I do.

[itsme_calista]

I wrote loads last night on this and the login timed out and I lost the lot!

I've given this some consideration and I'm actually quite disappointed at the decision to change the name.  I also don't get the logic behind removing the "qualified".

Surveys may well point to a reduction in the usage of the word Secretary, however I suspect that if you ran another survey you would find that employers are actually watering down the skillsbase by employing 'Administrators'.

I used to work in an IT training centre and have seen so many times where someone completes an ECDL and then a temping agency will employ them in roles such as 'Administrator'.  They can also join the IPA and needn't take part in any CPD.

At the some time, someone who has studied the more traditional route of OCR Text Proc/Word Proc and NVQ quals could be employed in the same role and have the same level of membership of the IPA.

There is no incentive for the first person to become 'qualified' and the employers are 'dumbing down' the field as they no longer appreciate the underlying skills needed.  I've had temps who had worked in the field via agencies for many years, but couldn't file, work out VAT, answer a telephone.  Shorthand and touch typing are taught in very few places.

The CfA website states "As the national standard setting body for Vocational Education in Business, Administration and Governance, the CfA (Council for Administration) leads the UK's drive for world class skills."  Surely this should mean that the word 'qualified' is part of their and therefore the IPA's whole purpose.

Office Professionals would have been far more encompassing title than Professional Administrators.  I am not an Administrator, I am a Personal Assistant and I've worked damn hard to earn this title, I have 20 years experience, have invested my time and money in CPD. I have Level 3 qualifications in Text/Word Proc, MOS Expert qualifications, NVQ 3 in Business Adminsitration,Shorthand, Audio.  I have specific qualifications in Marketing Support, Recruitment Practice, Psychometric Testing (albeit expired).  I'm now looking for a Level 4 qualification to carry on the learning.

I am not an Administrator, I am much more than that, and I wish that it had been recognised by the IPA.

[gee4]

I think the days of the traditional Secretary are long gone.  As you say shorthand and touch typing are taught in very few places and emphasis is entirely on a more common sense approach as well as being pro-active.

It's a shame that so many of us have such fantastic qualifications that are neither recognised nor heard of.  I still surprise people when I mention MOS certification.

I read your other posting Callie but unfortunately cannot comment as I haven't gone down the route of NVQs but I hope you get some good advice.

[itsme_calista]

Thanks Gee, I know you say you haven't been down the NVQ route, however just take a look at the qualification brief and let me know your opinion.  Do you think that it comes across as a Level 4 (Degree equivalent) qualification?  It seems so basic.

[matg]

Hi itsme_calista

I completely agree.

It is important for those working in administrative and secretarial occupations to equip themselves with qualifications in areas such as business management, marketing, finance and human resources.  In this, the ever-evolving workplace, the statement ‘survival of the fittest’ should be given much contemplation.

In their publication, ‘Administration and Business Skills Development Plan’, the CfA identified two core administration markets that cover the 4.7 million administrators currently working in the UK.  The CfA anticipate that one-third of these will require additional expert skills and knowledge to work in a specialist administrative and secretarial role.

In a 2006 Skills Survey 97% of employers agreed that the administration function is critical to the effectiveness of their organisation.  98% of employers agreed that the administration function is an important support mechanism, and that training and development is important in delivering an effective administration strategy.

However, just over half of those employers had a strategy to support the continuing professional development of workers in administrative and secretarial occupations.  Of these, less than one-third regarded this as a priority.

I do not object to inexperienced and/or unqualified members joining the IPA.  They should, however, be prepared to work towards becoming qualified.  One of the key roles of the IPA is to ensure that members are able to identify opportunities for professional development.

As an NVQ Assessor specialising in business and administration training, I have also followed the NVQ route, and would encourage members without formal qualifications to consider this option.

Just a quick point, the NVQ Level 4 is not equivalent to degree level, at least not since 2006.  An undergraduate/first degree is Level 6.

Consider an HND in Business as this covers many key functions including: marketing, financial management, human resources, business strategy etc. and can be ‘topped-up’ easily to achieve the BA (Hons) in Business (or equivalent).

Check out the website for Stratford Business School as they offer this via distance learning.  It’s a great way to learn, and very affordable.  This is the route that I followed.

Many thanks

Matt Griffin MIPA
Wales Regional Coordinator
Institute of Professional Administrators

[gee4]

Just in reply to this and maybe getting off the subject...but from recent experience and while attending interviews, it has come to light that having experience in business management, marketing, finance and human resources, is not always advantageous unless you specialise in that area.

As I was once told at interview, "you are not qualified in any specific area".  What was meant by that was, that even though I am a qualified PA, I may have only dabbled in business management, marketing, finance and human resources but realistically I am not a dedicated Marketing Assistant, Finance Administrator or HR Administrator.

So while that maybe be advantageous for some, it's not always what an employer is looking for.  That is why I have found it difficult to be a PA in various industry sectors - not all companies recognise that you have tranfereable skills and can adapt.

[matg]

Hi gee4

From my own experience, these are areas that most office professionals deal with to some extent.

While I am a believer of the expression 'a little learning is a dangerous thing', the point I was making is that 'dabbling', in most instances, will not be sufficient.  

Formal training leading to a recognised qualification will serve most office professionals well and make them stand out when applying for jobs.

Also, the HND I referred to does cover all of these areas while qualifying the candidate in Business Management.  Candidates can, if they wish, specialise in any of the areas you mentioned.  This provides a solid foundation for the BA (Hons) and even MBA!

Matt Griffin MIPA
Wales Regional Coordinator
Institute of Professional Administrators

[gee4]

Matt I have dealt with these ad hocs tasks but on a lower level.  My point is you cannot be qualified in all of those fields.  Heavens you would be studying for years and still employers would wonder why you are not qualified in any one field, but several.

Northern Ireland doesn't work that way.  You are either one thing or another eg. Medical secretary or HR Administrator, not both, and when applying for jobs you have to self yourself as the job you are applying for.

I consider myself an all-round PA and have transferable skills.  I did not train to be a Marketing Administrator as I don't want to work in Marketing, nor did I train to be an HR or Finance Administrator as I don't want to work in HR or Finance.  

However I can work as PA to any Manager or Director which does not require me to have qualifications in Finance, HR or Marketing - those roles are completely separate from what I do and indeed in my role as a PA.

My company has an HR department, a Marketing department and a Finance department with all their own staff so no requirement for me to carry out any tasks relating to those functions.

When starting out years ago all you needed to be a Secretary was shorthand and typing, not HND's and PhD's or Marketing Degrees.

[matg]

Hi gee4

I agree that you cannot be qualified in all of those fields to the extent where you become an expert in each one.  

There are recognised qualifications that cover all of these areas in the context of being an office professional, like the BTEC HND or IAM Advanced Diploma, for example.

Alternatively, there are short professional development courses that would provide underpinning knowledge.

I appreciate that most office professionals on the forum are one thing or another.  I've always considered myself to be an office professional in the post-compulsory education sector, and I have worked as a PA for education providers in the private and public sector.

In my opinion, it does help to have knowledge of marketing, finance, HR etc.  Granted, the knowledge I have of these are all within the context of the sector, i.e. education finance etc.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one gee4

Matt Griffin MIPA
Wales Regional Coordinator
Institute of Professional Administrators