I have no problem with changing the name - 'Purchasing' is too limited in its scope and no longer reflects the profession.
I have argued for the introduction of Chartered Member status for many years, indeed I recall advocating it when I was on Council back in 1998/2000! However, although I am in favour I would like to understand how all this fits together:
- How does this link with the whole discussion on CIPS Licence? Has the Licence now been dropped? If the Licence is still alive and kicking, will external stakeholders understand the difference? Will becoming 'Chartered' also require completion of the Licence?
- The 'academic route' is a bit vague. What sort of postgraduate qualification will be deemed acceptable? Will it have to include Purchasing/Procurement specialisms?
- Given that FCIPS is considered the highest grade of membership, will FCIPS be contingent upon also being a Chartered Member? Would it not be very confusing for external stakeholders if someone held "the highest level of membership" yet wasn't Chartered?
- Is the intention that members will be charged different rates or additional fees to gain Chartered Member? - that should have been made clear.
- Is there going to be a review of the CPD system, for example, the current system, as I understand it, has Silver and Gold, can you be 'MCIPS Chartered with Silver CPD? I think there needs to be some clarity as to what CPD requirement needs to be met to become Chartered?
So I voted 'Yes' and 'Yes' but I hope I haven't voted for something that ends up being shaped in a way, which, had I known, I would definitely have voted 'No'!