There's no doubt that joining a professional organization is beneficial to one’s career development. These organizations can help you clean up your resume, find a job, match you with continuing education opportunities, provide you with a way to socialize and network with industry peers and more. Being active in a professional organization gives you credibility, connections and, perhaps most importantly, an opportunity to shape your industry. But with a responsibility that great, one has to wonder if these organizations are too generous with their membership requirements.

Becoming a member to many of these groups is as simple as paying your dues (financially, at least). The Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) allows anyone to join, whether they're in PR or not, including students. The same goes for the AIGA (for our graphic designer and interactive friends) and The International Public Relations Association. Herein lies the problem: If you let any warm body with a valid credit card in, what does this do to the eventual overall integrity of the organization and the industry?

I've noticed a recent boom in "networking" with the down economy, and many out-of-work professionals are investing in memberships to industry organizations in hopes of finding their next job. Of course there's nothing wrong with this --  afterall, that's a main role of these groups. But what happens when say, half of the board of a given organization is unemployed? This isn't as far fetched as one might think. These commitments take precious time, and often those that are un (or under) employed are those most able to pledge their time. Yet without their finger on the pulse of the working world, do they become out of touch? Can they effectively contribute, lead and be a voice for the field if they themselves can't find work?

Additionally, with the advent of the "social media professional," many who aren't traditionally trained in public relations are hopping on the PR train. It might be out of a true desire to learn about the field and educate themselves about public relations, and that I can commend. But again, how do we ensure that the group's mission is carried out in capable, experienced hands when the doors are open to literally anyone? I've even heard the same kind of things from friends in graphic design and Web design. Thanks to the advent of newer technologies, true "designers" are becoming more and more scarce, and many so-called designers are simply modifying templates. Should these people be allowed to participate in a group meant for those who are pure designers? 

While doing research for this blog, it seems only the Chartered Institute for Public Relations (the U.K.’s answer to the PRSA) seems to have a set of guidelines. Anyone looking to join that group must submit  a transcript showing they have completed the required amount of CIPR approved courses from approved universities --  and with a certain grade, to boot! In any other industry besides the creative, there are rules. Only registered nurses in good standing can join nursing associations. Only verified military personnel can join military groups, and you wouldn't see state bar associations letting in people who simply like the idea of being a lawyer. Even the American Society of Interior Designers (ASID) realized the need to make membership more exclusive.

Five years ago, membership was open to anyone who paid the fee and expressed an interest in interior designing. After seeing the level of professionalism and quality decrease with so many amateurs and wanna-be's flooding their organization, they instituted strict guidelines for membership. Members must now provide transcripts of approved courses of study and must pass the licensing exam for interior designers every two years. Even "Emerging Professionals" must show proof of at least 40 credit hours successfully completed.

Think about it: The ASID, at worst, risks an ugly throw pillow or two. The PRSA, with its lax guidelines, risks the abandonment of the public's trust.

Are we being too lenient with the membership guidelines? I say yes. While I certainly believe in opening up these groups to students and new professionals, I think it’s more than fair to limit voting, organizing, committee and board positions to those meeting a certain requirement (for example, at least 5 years of full time experience, with references, making exceptions for those with extensive course work in the field).

What do you think?