cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Advocate II

? Fee-Based Fast Lane for Endorsement Processing?

Multiple threads in the Certification discussions address the frustrations of candidates seeing long waits for certification after submitting endorsement forms. In the thread CISSP Endorsement Wait kicked off by Kevin @kevinmorrison, William @denbesten suggested (ISC)2 add an option to pay an extra application fee  for a fast track of a week or less to be certified after the endorsment submission. William and Alec @AlecTrevelyan both said they would pay such a fee. Amanda @amandavanceISC2 told us she had passed the idea on to management staff within (ISC)2.

 

Note that there are precedents for such a paid line-jumping service. In fact, in the USA Southwest Airlines, which has open seating instead of reserved seats on every flight, offers two fee options to jump to earlier in the boarding line for each flight. When you buy your ticket you can pay a fee for automatic check-in for boarding group 24 hours before the flight, and then at the airport a second fee to jump in front of even those who paid that first fee. 

 

This thread is for Community members to comment on the idea. I wish the Community had a survey option available such as both Yahoo! Groups and Groups.io have; this would be a perfect use.

 

For my part, I am against (ISC)2 implementing any form of this idea. William suggested it could work if they used the accumulated fees to pay for more staff. I don't believe they would do so, and I further believe that the pressure to meet the promised deadline would cause the staff to short circuit the review process, rubber stamping without adequate review all rush-fee marked packages.

 

What do you think of the idea?

 

Dr. D. Cragin Shelton, CISSP
Dr.Cragin@iCloud.com
https://CraginS.blogspot.com/
My Community Profile
My LinkedIn Profile
13 Replies
Highlighted
Newcomer II

Re: ? Fee-Based Fast Lane for Endorsement Processing?

It seems like every certification has a fee. I have not heard of line-jumping for any of them. What would be the reason to "jump to the head of the line". You are conditionally "approved" for your cert and as long as your paperwork is in order you will get it (eventually). We need to find out what is the root-cause of the "long lines" and address the issue from there.

 

I'm currently not in favor of line jumping because it gives the advantage to the individual with more money to get ahead, some people are paying for everything out of their own pockets and a line jumping fee would be an additional burden.

 

Thanks,

 

Warren Mack, Ph.D., CISP

Community Champion

Re: ? Fee-Based Fast Lane for Endorsement Processing?

I think in order to reduce the charge of this being a money grab, ISC2 would have to justify just how the extra fee was being used (i.e. it would go towards a staff member working an extra 2-5 hours on the paid member's application). Without clear explanation it gives the appearance of intentionally stalling the process in order to make more money.

You also run the risk of this becoming a have vs the have-nots argument. ISC2 would have to clearly lay out why the process takes so long and how this fee would be used for improvement of the whole process as well as speeding up an individual application.

Newcomer III

Re: ? Fee-Based Fast Lane for Endorsement Processing?

I am not in favor of a Fee for a fast lane.

 

I fear the impression of persons "buying" their way to attain their certification.  Also, there is the possibility of incentivizing "paying for the faster certification" which would delay others gaining their certifications through the normal channels. Hate to say, this would leave a bad taste in the mouths persons seeking (ISC)2 designations and label (ISC)2 as money grubbers.

 

My feeling is that we should spend more time gathering more reviewers and streamlining our existing processes.

Newcomer II

Re: ? Fee-Based Fast Lane for Endorsement Processing?

I am not sure that fee-based expedited certification validation makes sense either. It also would create a potential “two tier” certification process which we shouldn’t want to encourage. 

 

Instead, lets focus on how to rationalize and make more efficient the verification process for endorsements. What are the principal delay points, and how can these be addressed?

Contributor II

Re: ? Fee-Based Fast Lane for Endorsement Processing?

Between fees fur study material, fees for exam registration, fees for AMFs, potential for fees for activities that earn CPEs (ignoring all the free CPE chances for now. I'm sure thousands of hours of vendor-sponsored SANS webcasts have been streamed in furtherance of free CPEs), I think we already pay enough in fees.

 

Frankly, I wish they'd just make the process faster.  BUT, and perhaps it is because I haven't had a job that "required" me to be certified, I don't really think that waiting is all that big of a deal -- and I'm someone who will pretty much pay whatever to not have to wait in line or be harassed at the airport.  I think the move to computer-based tests with instant pass/fail feedback was important. I'd have hated to go through a pencil-based exam and then not know for weeks whether I passed. Waiting for the "official" certificate isn't that big of a deal, imo.

-- wdf//CISSP, CSSLP
Community Champion

Re: ? Fee-Based Fast Lane for Endorsement Processing?

I am against any additional charging or two tier processing.

 

For folks that are waiting on a certification that could kind of be worrying about processing times are processing times, it's frustrating but more resources would be needed from ISC2s standpoint - could be worse though the UK passport office a few years back had a 3 month backlog for passports - I live overseas and had pretty much filled mine up so I booked an appointment and flew back to London.

 

Perhaps an official ISC2 'processing' communication for an employer/potential employer would be the way to go - that to me gets into fast food costs at the top.

 

If there really was a need to should be case by case - and how about having the requesting organization foot the bill by policy? Any fast track fee should be costing no more than a nice steak dinner in a casual diner, if the organization wants to get the decision, well at the very least it's tax deductible*.

 

*Depending on where you are based.

 

 

Community Champion

Re: ? Fee-Based Fast Lane for Endorsement Processing?

Is there anyone who started the process to get their cert wasn't aware of the wait time on the other end?  I would hope that they were just as educated on that as all the other requirements to the process.

 

Personally, I used that time to strategize what I would do once the official piece of parchment landed on my doorstep.  I also reviewed blogs for those who were in process to offer comment and guidance to help them in their pursuit. It gave me another great perspective on the process.

 

Anything worth having is worth waiting for.

Newcomer II

Re: ? Fee-Based Fast Lane for Endorsement Processing?

Much wisdom here.
Community Champion

Re: ? Fee-Based Fast Lane for Endorsement Processing?

> CraginS (Contributor III) posted a new topic in Certifications on 10-29-2018 05:49 AM in the (ISC)² Community :

>   For my part, I am against (ISC)2 implementing any form of
> this idea.

While I certainly sympathize with those waiting (and waiting, and waiting, and ...)
I'm with you. I think it's unfair, when AMFs should cover reasonable service, and
I don't think it would work to fix the problem.

====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer)
rslade@vcn.bc.ca slade@victoria.tc.ca rslade@computercrime.org
The political and commercial morals of the United States are not
merely food for laughter, they are an entire banquet. - Mark Twain
victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.htm http://twitter.com/rslade
http://blogs.securiteam.com/index.php/archives/author/p1/
https://is.gd/RotlWB

............
This message may or may not be governed by the terms of
http://www.noticebored.com/html/cisspforumfaq.html#Friday or
https://blogs.securiteam.com/index.php/archives/1468