I was considering the merit of setting an exam - if the "student" passes he is good to go, how he achieved the standard is irrelevant. This could be applied to any walk of life and any exam. If a lawyer were to pass the bar exams then he should be good to practice.
The weakness in that argument is that any exam tests only certain aspects of the training a student has received. The exam may not reveal certain weakness and may not cover the whole syllabus. We take a certain comfort that because the student has covered an approved course he has been exposed to all the material whether or not it is assessed at exam level.
Some professionals go a stage further and require the student to undertake a period of mentoring after passing their professional exams.
Perhaps mentoring is an answer. Pass the IMCr, however you can, demonstrate 25 hours of IT in your log six months after and five hours with an instructor and you are good to go with a full IR (the numbers are arbitary).
Bookworm - thanks for clarrifying your position.