Have you ever wondered what the benefits of applying to become a Chartered Chemist are? Or what the process is? Here, some RSC members share their experiences of working towards this designation.

A city CChem?

I have always felt that becoming ‘chartered’ in any profession is an important step. It means you are recognised as an experienced, diligent professional by a trusted body. The process differs across sectors, but is always thorough, measureable and meaningful.
 
So, ~3 years ago when I decided to leave my job as a pharmaceutical chemist and move into a desk-based job in the city, I wondered whether any opportunity to become a CChem had disappeared along with my fumehood. Although I was still involved with chemistry, my role had become much broader with involvement in marketing, finance and various other projects. So, in 2010 I decided to find out. I made a couple of calls to the RSC and spoke with Kim Smith and Sarah Harrison who were able to offer excellent advice. Firstly, as I had graduated as a chemist 10 years ago (and had been working in the field ever since) I may be eligible to apply to the ‘Direct Programme’ which meant that a two year PDP process was not necessary. As long as I was able to build a ‘portfolio of evidence’ demonstrating the twelve professional attributes required for the CChem award from my recent experience, the Direct Programme was feasible for me.
As it turned out, the admissions committee deemed me eligible for the Direct Programme, and so I started the process in late 2010. From the date of acceptance you have 1 year to complete the portfolio and, to my slight shame, I ended up needing all of that time. Part of this was due to my workload (I spent ~3 months of that year working abroad), but I also underestimated the depth of the process. I do not mention this in a negative sense, however, as any meaningful professional award needs to be thorough, but prospective candidates should be aware of this.
 
Building the portfolio itself took time, but I was able to complete the 12 sections by incorporating experiences from both my current and previous job. Indeed, the split between lab-based and non lab-based evidence was ~50/50. In a slight twist of fate, I was also able to dust off my lab coat when I went on secondment to an automotive catalyst company in California for a few weeks. This experience proved to be a valuable addition to my portfolio. Another important part of the process was obtaining relevant and accurate testimonials. I was very fortunate as a number of colleagues (both past and present) were willing to take the time to support my application, and for that I am very grateful.
 
So, as I posted off the completed application (with literally hours to spare), I wondered what the outcome might be. I genuinely had no idea, and came to the conclusion that there wasn’t much point thinking too hard about it. I just hoped that my passion for the subject came across, and that it was clear chemistry still played an important role in my day-to-day job, albeit on a computer rather than a Buchner funnel, and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.
 
Fortunately for me, the committee agreed and signed off my application in early 2012. I would encourage others in my position to pursue the award – the practise of chemistry takes many forms and the RSC clearly recognise this fact. I’d be pleased to hear any thoughts / questions on the subject.
 
Trevor Keel, May 2012
Posted by Trevor Keel on May 3, 2012 9:38 AM Europe/London

Past Posts

Share this |

Share to Facebook Share to Twitter Share to Linked More...

Leave a comment?

You must be signed in to leave a comment on MyRSC blogs.

Register free for an account at http://my.rsc.org/registration.

Comments