As Planned, the ITIL V3 certification scheme and appointment of APMG as the ‘official accreditor’ is giving rise to more Examination Institutes (EIs) for ITIL:   From just two – EXIN and ISEB till the V2 era – APMG itself came to the fore front as an EI to which Training Organizations go for Accreditation to become an ATO.

Loyalist Certification Services (LCS) in Canada became another Accredited EI soon. And the number has increased quickly to add:

  • DF Certifiering AB (DFC)
  • CSME

You can see the details on the official ITIL site:

The point in my post here is slightly different :

Along with the addition of more and more EIs – APMG should focus on making the whole accreditation and certification process streamlined and consistent.

My experience with two earlier EIs have been widely different, and APMG as an EI has been also different in its approach. Look at the types of accreditation offered by EXIN and APMG for a comparison. It is almost impossible to do an apple to apple comparison there. While the EXIN scheme provides a lot more flexibility in terms of options and packages, thus providing a lot of benefits toearly stage Training providers, APMG (and to some extent ISEB) remained a bit more less in terms of options and flexibility.

Now go to ever-important factor of cost of Accreditation – the difference between the APMG option and EXIN option really amazed me.

When I compare the basic option for one to start with initial accreditation requirements, the difference was not in some percentage- But the APMG option required an investement 4-5 times higher compared to the options I got from EXIN!

While it is important to give the management control to the EIs in terms of flexibility, options and pricing – I think it is important to have some level of governing framework out there.

Any thoughts and experiences to share?