Why Qualifications Do Not Guarantee Competency: Is The Dog Grooming Industry Ready for Regulation?

The dog grooming industry stands at a crossroads. As calls for regulation grow louder and qualification frameworks multiply, we must ask ourselves a fundamental question: Are we putting the cart before the horse? 

As someone who has spent years working within this industry and training professional groomers, I’ve witnessed firsthand the uncomfortable truth that many don’t want to acknowledge — qualifications alone do not guarantee competency and our industry may not be ready for the regulation it’s demanding. 

The Qualification Illusion 

Walk into many grooming salons today, and you’ll see certificates adorning the walls. Level 2, Level 3, City and Guilds, OCN, private training providers — the list goes on.

At first glance, you may instantly feel a sense of relief knowing that despite the lack of licencing in our sector, this person has gone above and beyond to ensure they are trained and ready to take on the world of dogs, one brush stroke at a time. 

Yet despite this apparent credentialing, I’ve seen:

• Groomers ignore and/or misinterpret clear stress signals from dogs 

• Inappropriate restraint methods being normalised 

• Social media posts celebrating ‘transformations’ that clearly show distressed animals

• A fundamental lack of understanding about canine behaviour and communication 

How is this possible if groomers are ‘qualified’? 

The answer lies in what these qualifications actually measure versus what competency truly requires. 

The Gap Between Knowledge and Application 

Most grooming qualifications focus heavily on technical styling skills — scissor work, clipper techniques, breed standards, and generic health and safety protocols. While these all have a place, they represent only a fraction of what makes a truly competent groomer. 

What’s often missing: 

Behavioural Literacy 

Understanding a more advanced canine body language, stress signals, and communication cues isn’t just helpful, it’s essential. Yet many qualification frameworks treat this as an afterthought, dedicating minimal time to what should be a core competency in our field. Furthermore, much of the information relating to training and behaviour reference outdated theories that have long been debunked. 

Ethical Decision-Making

When faced with a stressed dog, what does competency look like? Is it completing the groom regardless, or recognising when to stop? Many qualifications fail to adequately prepare groomers for these real-world ethical dilemmas.

Continual Professional Development 

Competency isn’t static. You cannot expect to obtain a qualification and never pick up a book or attend a class again. Like every other industry, the grooming industry evolves as research advances, and best practices will change. Yet many groomers treat their initial qualification as the end of their learning journey.

Critical Thinking Skills

Following a step-by-step process isn’t the same as understanding why each step matters or when to deviate from it. True competency requires the ability to assess, adapt, and make informed decisions based on the individual dog and surrounding context. 

The Regulation Readiness Question 

Given the gaps, are we ready for industry regulation? The uncomfortable answer is: not yet. 

Inconsistent Standards

With multiple awarding bodies, private training providers, and varying qualification levels, we lack the unified standards that effective regulation requires. What does ‘competent’ actually mean when different qualifications teach different approaches? 

Industry Culture 

Perhaps most critically, we have a culture problem. When industry professionals publicly celebrate practices that prioritise aesthetics over animal welfare, when stress signals are dismissed as “naughty behaviour”, and when questioning established practices is seen as trouble-making — we’re not ready for meaningful regulation. 

The Path Forward

This isn’t an argument against regulation, or even against qualifications — it’s a call for better preparation and better education.

Before we can effectively regulate our industry, we need: 

• Unified Competency Standards: we need clear, industry-wide definitions of what competency looks like, developed collaboratively by educators, practitioners, behaviourists, and welfare experts. 

  
  

• Behavioural Education Revolution: canine behaviour and welfare must move from optional extras to core, foundational curriculum. Every groom should graduate with solid foundations in reading body language, recognising stress, and implementing low-stress handling techniques. 

  
  

• Continual Professional Development Requirements: competency requires ongoing learning. We need systems that ensure groomers stay current with best practices, research, and evolving welfare standards.

  
  

• Cultural Shift: we must move from a culture that celebrates completion at any cost to one that celebrates ethical practice, even when it means stopping a groom or referring a client elsewhere (to someone more qualified in a specific area)

  
  

• Better Training Methods: we must also acknowledge the safety risk in allowing trainee students to practice their skills on living, sentient animals and instead offer safer alternatives where mistakes are welcome without the risk in breaching the Animal Welfare Act 2006. 

  
  

• Different Assessment Markers: focus should be on the learners ability to work and communicate successfully with animals, showing comprehensive understanding of canine behaviour and emotional wellbeing. The key learning points should identify the significance of welfare, wellbeing and wellness over and above the style. A ‘qualified’ groomer should be one who can demonstrate safe use of equipment on a living animal while being able to achieve low-stress — if an animal is clean and content at the end of a grooming session, then this should be something to celebrate. Equally, if a groomer identifies when to stop and/or refer a dog during a grooming session, this should also be acknowledged and recognised. 

The Uncomfortable Truth (But I’m Going To Say It Anyway) 

The reality is that some currently ‘qualified’ groomers, like many ‘unqualified’ groomers, would not meet truly comprehensive competency standards. This isn’t their fault — it’s a systemic issue with how we’ve approached education and qualification in our industry up until now. 

Similarly, there are many unqualified groomers who demonstrate exceptional competency through experience, mentorship, and self-directed learning. These may be individuals who have shadowed other qualified groomers, or attended official grooming training without sitting their final exam, or they may very well have watched some good quality YouTube channels and worked up their confidence over time.

There’s good and bad to both qualified and unqualified groomers, that we shouldn’t be so quick to say that either one or the other is to blame for the flaws that currently exist. 

A Call For Honest Reflection

As an industry, we need to have honest conversations about:

• What competency actually means in dog grooming

• Whether our current qualification systems adequately measure it

• How we can bridge the gap between knowledge and application

• What needs to change before effective regulation becomes possible 

This isn’t about criticising existing qualifications or the dedicated professionals who deliver them. It’s about acknowledging that we can - and must - do better to reflect modern science. 

Moving Forward Together

The dogs in our care deserve groomers who are not just technically skilled but truly competent in every aspect of their welfare.

This means groomers who can read their communication, respect their consent (yes consent), prioritise their emotional wellbeing, and make ethical decisions even when it means not achieving the desired style. 

Achieving this level of competency across our industry won’t happen overnight, and it won’t happen through regulation alone. It requires a fundamental shift in how we approach education, assessment, and professional development. 

The question isn’t whether we need regulation — it’s whether we’re willing to do the work necessary to make that regulation meaningful and effective. 

Until we can honestly answer that question with a resounding “yes”, perhaps our focus should be on building the foundations that will make future regulation not just possible, but genuinely better for the animals we serve. 

A Two-Sector Solution: Redefining Our Industry Structure If All Else Fails

Perhaps the only way forward is to accept that there will always be two very different approaches to grooming. Perhaps it’s time to acknowledge what many of us have been thinking about but have been too wary to articulate out loud: we’re not really one industry. We’re two distinct sectors operating under the same industry banner. 

Sector 1: Professional Behavioural Grooming (Welfare-Focused, Holistic, Science-Backed) 

This sector would cater to the average pet dog by prioritising their individual needs. Its focus would, first and foremost be: animal welfare, comfort, and behavioural needs as the foundation of all services.

Here, competency would be measured by: 

• Behavioural Literacy and stress recognition 

• Consent-based handling techniques

• Adaptive grooming approaches based on individual dog needs

• Ethical decision-making that prioritises welfare over aesthetics

• Realistic timeline management that accommodates dog comfort and tolerance 

• Carer education about appropriate expectations based on individual dog needs 

This isn’t about lowering standards — it’s about raising them where it matters most. 

Every dog deserves a groomer who can interpret and respect their limits, and provide care that enhances rather than comprises their wellbeing.

Sector 2: Professional Dog Styling (Technical Skills and Excellence) 

This sector would cater to the show dog — dogs who can comfortably handle more demanding sessions, who are fit and healthy and prepared for show grooming environments where professional stylists can thrive.

Here, focus would be on: 

• Advanced scissoring and creative techniques

• Competition-level presentation and breed standards

• Artistic styling and specialised treatments

• Show preparation and presentation grooming 

The crucial difference? Entry into this sector would require demonstrated competency in Sector 1 first. You cannot ethically perform advanced styling work without first proving you can recognise when a dog cannot or should not participate in such sessions. 

Why This Division Might Make Better Sense

• Different Dogs, Different Needs: the reality is that most pet dogs have some level of behavioural, health or anxiety issues that make them unsuitable for lengthy, demanding grooming sessions. Additionally, many caregivers don’t have the time to commit to the demands of maintaining more complexed styles. Yet we’ve built an industry that often treats every dog as if they should tolerate competition-level grooming, and we don’t do enough to educate humans on the commitment that goes along with expecting a full breed-standard style. 

  
  

• Different Skill Sets: the skills needed to safely groom an anxious dog is fundamentally different to the skills a groomer needs to successfully create the perfect continental poodle clip. Both are specialised skills, but they require different training, different mindsets, and different approaches. 

  
  

• Clear Career Pathways: this structure would provide clear progression routes. Groomers could choose to solely specialise in welfare-focused work, advance to creative styling (Sector 2) or decide instead to advance into more advanced behavioural work (possibly looking at becoming a qualified behaviourist through the ABTC).

  
  

• Better Client Matching: dog carers could make informed choices about which type of service their dog needs, leading to better outcomes, less unrealistic expectations and subsequently less pressure on groomers to achieve a ‘flawless’ finish. 

  
  

• A Division That Also Unites: with two distinct sectors, both being equally considered and respected, groomers might work together to support each other’s strengths. 

Regulation Implications

This two-sector approach would make regulation more feasible and meaningful: 

Sector 1 (Behavioural Grooming) would require: 

• Mandatory behavioural education (such as the education being offered over at The HGA)

• Welfare-first assessment protocols. 

• Stress recognition and advanced communication skills 

• Ethical decision-making competencies 

• Ongoing professional development in Animal Welfare policies and modern science 

Sector 2 (Professional Dog Styling) would require:

• All Sector 1 competencies as prerequisites 

• Advanced technical skill certification

• Specialised equipment training 

• Creative technique assessment

• Understanding of when to refer back to Sector 1 services 

The Paradigm Shift We Need

This isn’t about creating a hierarchy — it’s about making holistic, welfare-focused grooming the baseline standard for our entire industry because that is what is needed to prevent the unnecessary suffering of dogs. 

Every professional groomer should be competent in reading canine body language, lowering stress, and prioritising welfare. No groomer should ever feel pressured to achieve a high level of styling standards if it compromises the fundamental needs of dogs. With a two-sector approach, professional styling becomes the “cherry on top” for dogs who can enjoy and benefit from it. 

Currently, we have it backwards. We train groomers in technical skills first and treat behavioural competency as optional or an add-on at the end of a training course. This division would flip the script, ensuring every groomer can provide safe, comfortable care before they learn to create Instagram-worthy styles. 

Addressing Industry Resistance

Some might argue this creates unnecessary complexity. But consider:

• Medical professionals have general practitioners and specialists 

• Education has primary teachers and subject specialists

• Construction has general builders and specialist crafts people 

Why should dog grooming be any different? The complexity already exists — we’re just not using it to our advantage.

---

What are your thoughts on the relationship between qualifications and competency in dog grooming? How can we better prepare our industry for meaningful regulation?

If you would like to have your say, please spare some time to complete our 'Industry Regulation' survey anonymously here: https://form.jotform.com/251703961482055