Nowadays, the majority of topics on the community tend to be about issues being faced --- often mentioning a lack of member support --- & one of the community moderators has to jump in to assist.
So I have to ask: was this community actually intended to supplement (ISC)2 support? (Because I was under the impression that it was to facilitate the sharing of information and ideas, and promote interaction among IT security professionals.)
It would be understandable if the issues were limited to what (ISC)2 support wasn't able to address --- what's disturbing is that many have stated that (ISC)2 support never responded at all.
If community posts aren't used to gauge criteria such as member satisfaction, I'd suggest that (ISC)2 conduct a survey for the same --- and use the results to determine the priority with which to address issues.
@david-shearer, do have someone update the resolution status of the issues mentioned in this post, for a better idea of where we stand. Thanks.
There are serious issues with the roll out to the new system. (ISC)2 needs to get on with trusting their local chapter officers to be able to correct things for other members in the region in the system with an override capability when their automated systems fail. What is the point of having local chapters if the officers in the chapter can't clean up the system. Massive centralized control always fails. No organization has the resources to manage that many records unless they have a legion of administrative people. It is to the point of absurdity that in 2019 we are using e-mail and other hand jam methods to maintain training records.
This was the "greeting" I received this morning when I checked in:
4 of the 5 new posts were about issues with ISC2. Instead of what the community was designed for, as @Shannon mentioned, it's a glorified help desk.
ISC2. Can't you do better?
It is sad that the sentiment of members is so low when it comes to membership services, but that "channel" is there by design isn't it? Are they understaffed? Do they lack automation? I don't think people call support and tell them what a great job they are doing, maybe we should once in a while, we only hear about the problems.
The lack of support showing in the public record is tarnishing the Gold Standard and @david-shearer needs to be acutely aware of that because that impacts the entire membership.
@AppDefects wrote:It is sad that the sentiment of members is so low when it comes to membership services, but that "channel" is there by design isn't it? Are they understaffed? Do they lack automation? I don't think people call support and tell them what a great job they are doing, maybe we should once in a while, we only hear about the problems.
The lack of support showing in the public record is tarnishing the Gold Standard and @david-shearer needs to be acutely aware of that because that impacts the entire membership.
I think prior to the "digital transformation" they were adequately staffed, but due to the numerous issues caused by the "upgrades" and these issues requiring the membership to constantly keep having to contact member services they are now woefully understaffed.
Well, as a member who's been in for 5+ years, I see many of these issues affecting others.
When I joined, it took them about 4 weeks to process my application (I tracked that, as I was curious and was comparing them to ISACA which was about the same amount of time). Now its taking them about 8 weeks to do this. Not sure the time on receiving my actual certificate, as I didn't track that. When I got my last set of certs, I don't recall it being too long.
I saw the rollout of the new CPE portal, and haven't had too many issues myself. Tho I didn't like that my ISSA Chapter meeting CPEs got changed to ISC2 Chapter meetings. I don't like that one item I was audited for, while I answered that audit, it still shows up in red. Very annoying. And I've seen the issues from others to get in to the portal. Happened with one of my co-workers who recently got his first ISC2 cert.
Then we have the matter of the switch of the AMF fees. While I will be paying less per year, I didn't like the fact I had to pay out more this year to get in line. I think this was handled poorly, and should have been done differently, unless ISC2 is so hurting for money that had to do it this way.
I just got through and talked to member services and to their credit, they informed me that I am OK regardless of what the (ISC)2 member Portal shows right now. The fact is that the recent updates to the system means things will not get straightened out in some cases like mine until next week. That is OK with me now that they have confirmed I am actually good to go.
The roll out should have gone much smoother but at least they have real people that you can talk to at (ISC)2 Member Services to get things straightened out. You just have to be patient.
@Frank_Mayer wrote:I just got through and talked to member services and to their credit, they informed me that I am OK regardless of what the (ISC)2 member Portal shows right now. The fact is that the recent updates to the system means things will not get straightened out in some cases like mine until next week. That is OK with me now that they have confirmed I am actually good to go.
The roll out should have gone much smoother but at least they have real people that you can talk to at (ISC)2 Member Services to get things straightened out. You just have to be patient.
Verbal confirmation good luck with that
They actually gave it to me in writing as well.