Slashdot Mirror
IT Certification Less Important Now?
lpq writes "IT certifications, popular after the dot-com bust, seem to be hurting careers now according to this article in the current Eweek.com issue. Guess employers are getting hip to the idea that those who don't have experience or can't "do", get certified..."
UNIX and all will be fine.
There is nothing in the article stating IT certifications are hurting careers. To summarize the real article:
I personally think certification is bullhockey, but I don't necessarily hold that someone has a certification against them. Doing so (subtracting value for certification) would be akin to disrespecting someone for having a college degree, and that doesn't make sense.
So, if you have certs, it isn't going to hurt you. What will hurt you is not having skills companies are looking for (unfortunately, the article is really a little thin on what those skills are. The article does list some very broad categories that are "growing" (whatever that means): Applications Development/Programming Languages, Project Management, Training, Webmaster and Security).
Bottom line, as it probably should be, you're going to get evaluated and paid for performance, not pieces of paper.
Some companies like people with certs. Some don't.
Some companies like people with advanced degrees. Some don't.
Some companies like people in suits. Some don't.
Do what you want, be how you want, and network. That's how you get a job (and more likely how you get one that you'll fit into).
.sigs are for post^Hers.
I don't know about the rest of the Slashdotters here, but I still see lots of job postings that ask for the alphabet soup of certifications. Now though, as opposed to around the time of the Dot Com boom, I see lots of "certifications requested" or "certifications a plus" rather than "certification required".
So now what? All the new bloods have to wait until all the experienced folk die off before they can get a shot at the industry?
Do you see what I did there?
pay premiums for non-certified IT skills grew three times faster than for certified ones
What I would like to know is, does this growth mean non-certified employees are getting paid MORE than certified ones.
If non-certs start with low pay, then it is just natural that they will get a bigger pay rise once they have proven themselves.
Please stop entering code 2,2,7,6,6,4
That could indicate that certifications are less important to these companies... if they were all getting paid the same salary at the beginning of the six month period. But since we don't have that information, this study is pretty much worthless...
"This is a clear indication that employers are not placing the same emphasis on certification that they once did.
I wish I got paid to make ridiculous statements...
employers have figured out that trusting somebody else's opinion of what somebody is or isn't capable of might not be the best measure of their actual abilities? Being able to pass a test on how to do something isn't the same as actually being able to do it in a work environment; it's often much more important to look at somebody's experience to see if they're capable of doing the job you want to give them. I just hope that IT companies aren't just realizing this. This fact shouldn't have to be re-learned in every industry.
I've always pictured the color of OS zealotry as a sort of bright flamingo pinkish hue
Like all silly blanket statements, this one boils down to the type of certification you're talking about. Some are just tests.. Some actually require you to do something.
Certifications will certainly not hurt you. Some may not do you any good, but none of them are harmful.
I really would tend to agree with this. I graduated in 2k right before the bubble burst. Flying high doing the consulting gig, had a grand time. But I never understood the need for certification - my old company pimped several that they wanted to push (siebel, etc.) but I pushed back. Seemed like a waste of my time. I preferred (and still prefer) to let my skills do the talking instead of jacking around taking some prefab test that any monkey could study for and pass. ymmv. (btw, sorry for the FP. seriously, my first evar. promise i won't do it again. heh.) -BCM aka brian welch
It depends what you're looking for. If you're hiring based primarily on COST, go for the cert. If you're hiring based on PERFORMANCE- go for the degree holder. He'll cost you more per year- but less per project.
In other words, this is the cheap labor debate all over again. Those who are short sighted (looking only at the money-per-unit-of-time number) will go for the cert still.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
It is absolutely disgusting to say the least that in some areas qualified people are turned down for jobs because they lack a piece of paper
+(norad) if you rearrange the letters in mother in law, you get woman hitler
That means they know how to point and click, but are afraid of Linux.
About ten years ago, I got my assorted MS certifications, taking 10 different tests at a cost of $1,000 total. I was new to my current job and found that while it didn't immediately raise my salary, it did get my foot in the door.
Within six months, I was our company's first SQL Server admin. A year after that, I was the sole developer on the newly formed Web Services team. Long-term, the certifications were a very wise investment.
Still, the bottom-line is that people were most impressed by my performance. Being able to study and pass ten different tests probably reflects on my sometimes insane degree of focus, rather than full comprehension. I barely passed my NT certification and only now fully understand the wacky security model.
It all comes down to who is making the decision. I have found in research and university settings the people doing the interviewing and making the hiring decisions are well aquatinted with the details and technology involved. Thus, they can effectively interview someone and make an informed decision on how much competence that person may or may not posses.
Contrast to many (not all) businesses, especially large ones, where techno-clueless HR reps or upper level management are handling this duty. They cannot tell the difference between someone who can BS a bunch of buzzwords and someone who actually knows what they are talking about, so certifications are their crutch.
In hiring decisions I have been involved in, MCSE was sometimes viewed negatively. Not because of any anti-MS bias, but because generally people who cheerlead that aspect of their resume seem to have little else to offer.
Finkployd
More /. crap about how you don't need a degree or any sort of qualification to get a job in IT. That's right, kids! you can walk straight out of school and into a job based entirely upon the crap you've done in your spare time!
Almost every company on the planet wants a degree before you start, and any extra qualifications are a bonus.
I started out a little more than 10 years ago, with BSD, and the old Cisco and Livingston routers. I didn't know much about certification. Microsoft started doing their certification program shortly after that, and I don't know when Cisco started.
Over the years, I've thought about getting myself RH or Cisco certified, and then thought better of it. I've seen people with Cisco certifications that couldn't route themselves off a one NIC host. I've met other certified people that didn't understand variable-bit subnet masks.
I don't think not having these certs has hindered me, as I don't generally work for the types of places that have that as a requirement. I think not having a college education hinders me a little bit, though, but I tend to not work for those places, either.
Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.
...the value depends on the credibility of the certifying authority. Microsoft Certifications have become almost worthless because MS was printing money with the MCP program in the 1990's. Now the tests are (a little) harder, but the barrier to getting certified is still really low in the MS world. Result? MCSE is basically worthless to have these days.
On the other hand, TFA points out the going-rate for certain Cisco certifications is on the rise. Not coincidentally, some of the Cisco certs they refer to are among the hardest to get. MCPs are easy to get, are more common, and thus do not denote any exceptional level of expertise.
Of course, I'd rather hire somebody with a mile-long list of successful projects they've accomplished than an alphabet-soup of certifications. In every hiring scenario I've been involved in so-far, I have always put the people who have DONE something ahead of the certification monkeys. Of crouse, if somebody with experience and "hard" certifications comes along, it doesn't hurt matters.
Who did what now?
Who wants to pay for a M$ qualification every six months? I know I don't. If you really want to impress employers, get a computing degree, and perhaps join a professional organisation like the British Computer Society. At least then, you'll have letters after your name in a non-proprietary format, and be able to have a chat in a BCS forum when you feel like it. (If you want to).
This has certainly helped me out in the past (especially 'whipping out' my BCS membership card in an interview). Personally, I'd feel embarrassed mentioning any M$-accredited qualifications to a prospective employer, but each to their own.
certs do nothing, 4 days of classes whoopee
go to a 4 year college, and you meet your new boss / coworker who will get you that nice job
much easier
You just can't win in this game, it seems.
*sigh*
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
He's right, no one will ever hold any qualification against you because any qualification is better than none. I've experienced first hand how these things have no bearing on your ability to actually do anything useful on a computer... when I was in college (that's the UK one, so I mean 16-18 years old) I was forced to take a City&Guilds "Key Skills" certificate, I actually think I failed because it was tantamount to a "I know how to do very specific things in M$ apps that I would never use for anything" certificate. My teacher knew so little about computers that when i showed her how to see envirnmental variables in command line she was really shocked - she nearly passed out when I showed her that the securtiy on the college systems were that bad that even as the lowest level user I could add admin privalages to my account. This qualification in my opinion is worth nothing. But it has not negative value. QED.
*''I can't believe it's not a hyperlink.''
...where I am at now I can't even get looked at without a Bachellors degree at a minimum ...
It is obviously very unlikely that you hold a college degree.
When I was in high school, working at a computer store, I though maybe an A+ certification could help me get paid more and maybe look 'more experienced' to potential clients.
Then I looked at the requirements.. It's a joke. To be certified in A+, you're basically acting like the sole set of computing solutions is the Windows platform. The example tests had questions that seem to attempt to lock you into the idea that only Microsoft products exist and all computer hardware is used to run Microsoft software. So, I decided not to waste my money to get certified.
It looks to me that if someone is willing to waste their time to get A+, the lowliest of certifications, that they probably are not worth much for their time. I think about 80% of the average Slashdot readers could pass the A+ exam no problem just by taking the exam. So, imo, the certification doesn't say much other than you waste your time.
I mean.. if someone put 'passed driver's license test' on his resume, wouldn't that maybe make you think he was 'special?' A+ is the 'special' persons' computer certification. It says, 'even though Bob doesn't look like he can function like a normal Internet user, he actually can because he's A+ certified.'
--- We need more Ron Paul!
bad for business and now new employees so unless you already have certification getting it now is harder the door is now shut for most , and theres less and less chance of getting it , but if you have then your lucky think you only have to look at the following company employs 200 technitions the company gets them all cretified a week later 90% of them resign why because they now got cretified thay get a better job now after that the company will only employ people that have already got cretification or train staff to that level without actualy getting them certified end result it is not worth the investment traing staff to the level and better than cretification works better if you actualy dont give them that cretification prevents you loosing them to the compertition so having certification does not mean your better than a guy who has not it just means you have a peace of paper that says you should know about it but that causes a diferance in pay the lucky ones that have the certification get more than those without even if the work they are needed to is a higher level than the certification so yes now we have the situation that is worse for those without like 25 years of experance and writing the dam software that the certification is about puts you as a second class citisen because you did not go on the course to tell you how to use what you wrote so would not qualify for the 10% or more extra pay that beeing certified offers in some companies so certification is bad for the industry , and bad for the employee unless thay have certification plus costs , the cost of getting certification is higher than the pay will allow a employee without to fund it themselves so having certification only servers to tell the employer that you knew how to use xyz back in 199? so do you know how to do xyz in vista , well its not xp you know , but your microsoft certified so should
That's odd, because they've never been really valuable to anyone in the industry I knew. The MCSE in particular was always a good sign that the candidate had no practical computer skills.
Skills and expirence always trump paper.
But paper often gets you in the door for the interview.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I am currently in an undergrad degree program in Information Systems. I have been looking at getting one or two certs to suppliment my degree. The main reason that I am looking at getting a cert or two is to document my skills.
But the other day I was talking to two people and it really blew my mind. He had all the Plus certs, a variety of MS certs, and was working on the CCNA. But what shocked me was when they recommended a good book. They said that I should buy a certain book because it would only teach me what I needed to know to pass the test and nothing more. I was quite shocked at that mentality. I can understand why certain certs have lost value, especially if cert candidates just want to get the cert and not to understand the material.
Does that attitude draw the line between a degree and a cert? I have spent nearly four years trying to learn everything that I can, even to running my own projects on the side -- like a honeynet -- for courosity's sake. I know that my outside exploration won't get the 'alaphabet soup' recogonition, and so I have thought about a cert to prove that I know how to do something. But if that isn't the case, then why bother.
I must admit that as a future grad, I am quite reluctant to get a cert if it has no value and if an employer won't look at it. At the very least I am thinking about getting my Oracle and MAYBE my CCNA, but I don't know if it is worth it.
What do you guys think?
The views expressed are mine own and do not express the views of my employer.
My "certification" is a field other than IT. I won't state what it is for fear of bringing down the wrath of wanabe editors. My certification, a BS, has been both a plus and a minus in my career. I paid too much for it, as most people do, and I don't feel I have made back what I invested in it. On the other hand, I learned much I otherwise wouldn't and I think my employers have benifited, which has mademy job easier.
Was it a good thing? I'd say yes.
Here will be an old abusing of God's patience and the king's English.
Do people know anything about the OCP certification? Is there respect in the industry for it? I'm 2/5 through the process (DBA) and would like to know if it's worth the effort and $$.
Seth
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
In a sense, they do hurt careers. I am fighting for a career in the tech field. I have no certifications, but I can do the job better than every certified person where I work. Does this mean that those who get certified aren't that good? No, not at all. But what it does mean is that employers need to stop looking for the capital letters at the end of your name before they will consider your resume. Though I wasn't alive before 1981, employers used to hire someone based on a high school diploma. Now, you have to have a degree, certification and experience. Well guess what, you can't get any experience if you can't get a job in the field. Employers used to train you to do the job you were hired to do. It was called being an aprentice. It still exists in some fields, but not many. So yes, certification does hurt people that can do the job but don't have those precious letters after their name.
Click Click Bloody Click PANCAKES!
I'm no network engineer -- which is OK... I'm good at other things.
I was at our colo the other day, and it occurred to me to wonder about some technical question, something about broadcast addresses, I think. Well, a fellow at the colo had just finished explaining to me that he knew a lot more than I did, because he was a "CERTIFIED CISCO ENGINEER."
So I thought I'd ask him. I can't even remember what the question actually was. I just remember that as he answered, the stream of bullplop was growing wider and wider. Finally, I was wanting to run from the room screaming as he explained to me that when you change the network settings in your computer, those changes take a while to have an effect. That, he says, is called "TIME TO LIVE."
Well, I'm a wimpy geek, so rather than laugh in his face, I said, "Thank you very much for the information," turned around, and departed quick, fast, and in a hurry.
I think of this now whenever anyone tells me they are a certified engineer.
this discussion... EVERY time this comes up on slashdot, people make the same stupid assumptions and generalizations and trot out the same tired lines.
".. those who don't' have experience or can't "do", get certified...""
Yes, I'm sure they do... but SO DO plenty of people who CAN "do." This is not an "either / or" situation people, where you either have experience, are smart/talented/whatever, OR you get certified. Some very smart, talented people realize that *some* employers do put significant weight on paper credentials, and choose to get certified as just one more part of the overall picture.
Evaluating job candidates is, at best, very difficult... any tool that give an employer any visibility into a candidates abilities is a Good Thing, IMO. No, just being certified by itself doesn't mean you get the job... but if you have to weigh two otherwise equally qualified candidates, and one has passed a difficult certification exam and one hasn't, maybe that tips the balance. Or maybe you have a guy with 2 associate degrees, two relevant certifications, and 4 years of experience, vs. a guy with a bachelors degree who's just out of school... it's not an obvious choice... again, you have to look at the *whole* picture.
Are certifications a panachea; for employers or employees? No, but to suggest that they have no value is just ignorant.
// TODO: Insert Cool Sig
I find that there are more things (well at least 2) that are far more important than qualifications or indeed experience, let alone ability. Can you guess? If you said "cost" and "empty promise to achieve agreed result" , then you're on my side of the cow when it comes to milking it. You may even be sitting on a "stool".
The one phrase that will cover up any lack of experience , ability , or qualifiaction when it comes to job getting is:
"U send me ur qualification 4 ur outsourced job plz."
The ZCE hasn't earned even one extra dollar for me, but that's not why I have it. I needed wall art for my home office.
Certification is rather useless for ascertaining skill level, but does filter out the lowest classes of developer. I use certifications to skip really basic interview questions... for that, the ZCE is super useful. If you interview a lot, it's worth investing in.
All I know is this:
When I had 8 years IT exp. and no certs, I made $35000/yr
Now I have 9 years and a simple (I'd even say thow away) MCDST cert, I make $60000/yr.
Maybe I'm the excepttion though.....
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
In college psych there are 3 things I still reference on a daily basis. One of the biggies was, correlation isn't causation. You are right, just because the average person with a cert might make less than those without does not mean certs cause you to make less.
During the last few years there have been many diploma mills out there. What these numbers lead me to believe are those with real skills didn't have any need to prove it with a 6 week class and a cert. However, this isn't always true. We get up to 5% a year bonus for certs at my job. So most people assume to take one or two a year for that reason.
Certs aren't inherently bad. They are just a symbol of aquired knowledge. By that line of reasoning they are no more fundamentally evil than a degree from a state university. However, in practice, these short term training programs became about who paid most for questions closest to the real test.
I could throw in a antecdotal story of someone having cert x and being dumb as a rock, but I don't really need to. We all know one. And if you don't know one, you probably are that person. 2-8 week cert programs were a fad that HR depts ate up like so much confection spread upon my naked body. It couldn't last forever. PHB's are starting to realize Microsoft certs are a dime a dozen, Novell certs are losing steam (they are changing markets too quick and their customers aren't keeping up with their training), and Cisco certs are still somewhat valueable. But what is valueable now (and will probably always be valueable in the long term) is experiance.
Just a side note... Has anyone seen those Vonage ads on slashdot pwning the fad technologies of the week? It's nice to see sed and awk are still in style 8-)
If an officer ever threatens to taze you, say you have a pacemaker.
Certifications matter if your company needs them to fulfill some contract obligation. Other than that, nobody seems to care. If your company works on contract basis with certain types of large companies or the goverment, it is probably useful to have certifications.
Please sign petition to restore sanity to our banking system!!!
http://financialpetition.org/
I've met a few people who have the certificates, but don't have the in-depth knowledge or experience to really cut it.
I've also known a few people who have both of those things in spades, and still have the certifications too.
(And of course I've known people fitting the other two possibilities)
Contrary to popular belief round these parts, having certifications in IT subjects does not automatically mean that a person has no real useful knowledge or experience; it is entirely possible to have both. The submitter might do well to think about where his clear bias comes from...
(Disclaimer: I have no certifications myself; I never seem to quite find the time to go for them, despite my employer being willing and indeed keen to fund them)
It's official. Most of you are morons.
Certifications are still very important if your employer needs to maintain a quota of certified staff in order to qualify for their technology partnerships. For recruiting, we note them, but rarely do certifications enter into the decision process. If anything, they form a lesser equivalent to a college degree, some documented form of effort & dedication to their career. However, once hired, there is some pressure to get one and register with the necessary partnership program.
Do you want to know why certifications are less and less required? Computer related degrees are on the rise. There are now more computer hardware ,security ,and comp network degrees now.
you dont have to get a comp sci degree now.
Example I have a networking administration and computer technology associates and a bachelors in managment of computer technology .
There are more and different degrees in computers now. Its harder to get a degree then it is for a certification.
More employers are requiring degrees
I decided once to go for an A+ certification. Figured it would be a snap, since I've been fiddling with computers since forever. But studying for it meant memorizing stuff like the stages of a laser printer print cycle (cleaning, conditioning, writing, transferring, fusing) and I soon used up my brain's capacity for meaningless crap. Oh well...
Guess employers are getting hip to the idea that those who don't' have experience or can't "do", get certified..."
Me, I would take a cup of ambition before certs as the I/T - Tech business is one where you will continue to learn some 30 - 40 years. Part of the job is to be able to contiunally learn and then being able to use what you learn. And companies can't afford to totally train a person up, the person wanting/needing this training needs to get with it and drive most of it from $50 books. And then practice it. An often undervalued trait when being interviewed.
As tech info and Mom's home made cookies have one thing in common, they go stale fast. They may even type cast you which can prevent you from moving forward. "Hey, we can't take our only CNE and move them to Window's" ring a bell? Could happen to a MSCE doing a UNIX/Linux cert.
Another hint, don't waste your neurons on fads like NET. NET2 and NEW NET and what comes next. Study the core stuff like RPC and sockets. Stick to the basics and the standards. I learned C 25 years ago now and still use it today. Moving to C++ was easy as it was to Java. I didn't go through too many fads and learned this early with Basic/Pascal/Prolog. Pick your language carefully as it takes time to become "proficient" and "professional".
So the above merits some truth.
I've recruited many IT people over twenty+ years. I've never paid much attention to certification; I look more for attitude, and particularly the ability to realize that a problem may well have more than one solution. The fill-in-the-blanks kind of certification simply doesn't accomodate such choice.
As an employer I've know this for years... as have those companies big and small I have worked with. Thats why 'Must Consult Someone Experienced' initials after a candidate's name always set alarm bells ringing.
Jolyon (the only initials I proudly boast are for my Certified Unix Network Technician certificate)
Please read my Canon EOS tech blog at http://www.everyothershot.com
I manage developers for a living, and for me, mentoring is the most valuable thing. Especially if someone doesn't have a whole lot of "on the job" experience. I would think IT would be the same way. But I don't think mentoring is really done much anymore.
When I first started programming, I came into a company as a full-time "apprentice" programmer. I made *barely* 20k per year, but I was learning under incredible people. It was invaluable.
As a manager now, I look to who people have worked with. Do I know those people? Who does the applicant say they have learned from?
Certifications don't tell me anything. I really wish that IT and CS people these days had the humility to be mentored by people greater than themselves. But I hardly see it anymore.
I mean I have been in software development for almost 15 years, and I have never been officially "certified" in anything. I had THOUGHT about it many times, then realized that, "HEY! I already get paid well for my skills." Is this more of an issue for tech support, IS, and networking infastructure folks?
That tells you a lot about certification lol :)
with all the outsourcing there will be no IT jobs left to get certified for
It's not -1 Flamebait! It's +5 Funny. You just didn't get the joke...
Rule of thumb: Anything that allows you to "level up" is out to fuck you, take your money, or both. Examples: School, military, corporate hierarchy, catholic church, world of warcraft, scientology, etc.
Personally, I do agree that scraps of paper are best left for janitors. (I don't have anything against janitors, but they're paid to pick up paper, I'm paid to develop software.) That's not the same as saying that people shouldn't learn new skills. I believe that technology advances fast enough that anyone who is working full-time is physically incapable of learning at the necessary pace at the same time and therefore companies should pay for a sabatical to get people back up to speed.
(I also believe that stagnation is why many people do their best work shortly after leaving college and then just brain-rot in-situ for the rest of their career. Sure, the brain is at peak efficiency in the mid-20s to early 30s, but good mental exercise and a strong drive to stay fresh should keep the brain useful maybe even into a person's 40s.)
Certifications, as "proof" of skills, are worthless as they really show very little more than your ability to regurgitate some standard set piece of information. The battery test for ANY examination is whether you could modify "Eliza" or "Animals" - two very primitive decision-based systems - to pass the exam using nothing more than the course material. If the answer is "yes", then the examination requires no actual thought or understanding. A skill, as opposed to mechanical labour, requires a high level of thought and understanding.
(This is not to under-value so-called "working-class" folk - I sincerely question whether they are "working-class" because that is where they want to be or because that is where society has placed them. Sure, some will enjoy mechanical work, but I doubt in anything like the numbers that are there. Besides, society can't afford to have people do low-grade work. To keep the US and Europe solvent, we need a much higher percentage of people in highly skilled work. Although ignorance is not the same as stupidity, we really can't afford either, but we can afford ignorance far less.)
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
I liked what I read somewhere one time... "IT Certs are for getting past the HR droids." If someone has MCSE on their resume, you KNOW that they don't understand the software... they just know the GUIs. The worse ones are the folks who put it on their business card; you can guarantee that they will be the ones stumped by the most basic problems. MCSE's are generally negative points when I look at people's resumes. Other product specific ones are ok if the person will be doing a job with that software, but you know that the person probably isn't that flexible when the firm drops that software.
I'm in the Mac support business- have been since 1995. What's a "certification"?
I came, I saw, I left. It looked better in the brochure.
I can clearly see how if someone came in with no experience and they had a cert you might say, "Whatever, you just studied for the test."
But if you had 2 candidates that were equally experienced, equally able to prove their ability, etc. and one of them had a cert, I would give that guy the edge b/c it shows that they were willing to put in some time and money studying for it (for something in their field).
I think it shows that they actually care about themselves and their career to some extent. Much like a masters degree except to a lesser extent.
Would people out there really punish someone for going out and getting certified?
The A+ certification seems to be the requirement to get hired as a technician anyhwere these days. More or less, it's become the high school deploma of IT.
Sometimes I comment just to hear myself typing.
In fact, I just got done interviewing some odd 12 ppl (mostly from technosource; another perot style company if you ask me). All but one failed miserably. The one was interesting, but missed some rather trivial questions. I used to love interviewing ppl, but now I see lots of lies coming out. At my prior job, we interviewed soemthing like 4 ppl for a job that required some linux kernel work. No biggie; it should be nice and easy. All 4 claimed to have it; Of course, 3 of them could not figure out how to code strcpy (and one did not know what a pointer was even when shown it).
/etc.), IPC(pipe, socket, mutex, semaphore; asked for others esp interesting variations on sockets and he had none). Finally, the one that I loved was a trick question on compilers. To be honest, you would only know it if you have done the dragon (pretty much a CSer which he claimed), but he was wrong. After arguing with me, he tried it and then called me back to argue with me; finally, he finished up by calling my boss and complaigning that I was wrong.
The last one was the most interesting. some of the question that I asked was how to create a new process (you spawn it ; I mentioned fork/exec and he did not know how to use them or how they operated), or how do you start a process during the boot-up (put in a batch file within etc; where at? anywhere in
What was funny is that I had laid out all these questions and the expected answers for him and said that we can tell who comes from unix and who comes from windows. He answered 100% on the windows; In addition, it was obvious from how he answer that he was a CIS or something else, not the CSer that he claimed;
So from here on out, I always check hard core. Far too many ppl lying about their background.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Dodgey stats get made worse by really bad /. summaries.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Of all the certifications on the market right now, the only one I can see that bears any actual real-world value is the CISSP, and it's not easy to get nor keep. I hope to have mine by the end of the calendar year, and I'm getting my employer to pay the $500 testing fee any buy all the training materials for me.
I work at a major educational institution, and they require at least two common certifications (A+, Network+, MCSE, etc.).
The problem here is that the people doing the hiring are not IT people and know nothing about IT. They're HR people. They see the certs and say, "Okay, this is going to be our baseline. We're throwing out resumes if the applicant doesn't meet this requirement." This is...silly. In just the past year, I've worked with at least two unique and completely incompetent people (I mean really incompetent. Can't map a Windows shared drive and get confused when you tell them you're going to give them a "URL" incompetent.), both of whom were A+ certified. Neither lasted more than three or four months. They got their feet in the door, yes, and probably because of the certs. However, once it was clear they didn't know what they were doing, they were gone, certs or not.
Would the equivalent tests be worth while today?
Being able to study and pass ten different tests probably reflects on my sometimes insane degree of focus, rather than full comprehension.
Like a degree, it also reflects your ability to do as you are told. The average Microsoft publication is so insulting I'm unable to read it for more than ten minutes. It's mostly shine on sales literature with push this and push that. Rarely do they explain basic principles or cite actual industry standards and reference application. Anyone who can deal with that and learn from it can digest just about anything on command.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Ok, ok:
How do you get a Microsoft Certified Desktop Support Technician (MCDST) off your doorstep?
Pay him for the fscking pizza, of course!
First of all, I have no certificate. Not a single one. Not even an ECDL.
I still never had any trouble finding a (good) job. More often than not, I was not looking for jobs, jobs came looking for me. And more often than not, it came because someone who knew me already worked there.
The reason for this is obvious (besides old fashion nepotism). During and after the dot-com hype, a billion companies sprung up that "certified" you for this or that, but the true value of those certs is quite uncertain. Mainly for 2 reasons.
First of all, the good ol' fashion school reason: Learn - write - forget. We all did it. Learn some crap by heart, write it down and free the allocated memory as soon as it's no longer needed.
And also because a good deal of those "certifying" companies hand out the cert to whoever shells out the dough. Hey, it's competition. And who do you take your money to? The company that actually makes you work for your cert, or the one that hands it to you? Supply and demand, ya know?
Certs were important because HR managers had no clue what was important in the IT world. They still don't. But they learned that certificates ain't a 100% reliably tool to measure "how good you really are".
So what they do now is they turn to their employees. Do you know someone who's good and would work here? There are actually some companies that have programs to reward you for bringing good people into the boat.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I've been on the hiring end of the stick a few times, just enough to decide that it's in my best interest to toss away any resumes that have nothing but certifications listed in the education section.
I think most people who've done a few rounds of hiring will easily note that people in that category simply don't have the required knowledge. Nor do they have the work ethic. A university degree certainly doesn't guarantee intelligence, but it does guarantee you that a person can make it through four continuous years of hard work.
Another point of note is that I once worked at a testing center where they administered many of the popular IT certification exams. It became obvious very quickly that those certifications are designed merely as a money making tool for the companies that produce them. They give you an idea that the person you're hiring can memorize screens and their uses, along with a few technical concepts, and their applications, but that's all they do. (It's also fairly common to find bootleg copies of the exams on the internet).
In the future if I see a long list of certs I'll probably just toss the resume away without going any further. There's no shortage of people out there, but there aren't that many good people, just more and more people with certifications and educations from silly little diploma farm colleges.
I know that I'm not the only who thinks this way too... so yeah I'd say it could hurt.
"Sorry, that's all I remember from my classes..."
-Dilbert
Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
sia.animenfo.com
Feel free to contact him there in any way possible.
Everything eWeek runs is crap!
Look for their story on the double-free CVS flaw... the CERT advisory was from 2003 yet they wrote in 2004 that an exploit would be available 'any day'.
Get your Unix fortune now!
Though I would say I did it less for becoming a DBA and more for being a developer or architect with strong DBA skills. I found the OCP has the problems that most paper certs do , and not everyone in the Oracle world respects them. But it's a good way to force you to learn the product (assuming you do spend time learning beyond the exam-cram stuff).
Having said this, I took the cert before the course requirements were mandatory. If you're paying for this yourself, I'm not sure the courses are worth the thousands of $$$ if you're a good self-learner. OCP won't give you THAT much of a salary increase.
-Stu
My company is paying for my to get RHCE certified. I guess it cant be such a bad deal since I dont have to shell out a dollar for it. I have seen a lot of talk of the MCSE and A+ on here being crap, but would this certification benefit me at all? Or should it be something I should completely leave off the resume in any future job searches?
This is one research company's findings. ONE.
brooke? is that you?
I just peed my pants... TY for the laugh! (emphasis on WOW as if it allows you to "level up" in RL, er I mean.. Real Life.)
How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
I work for a firm that pimps warez and services for the evil empire. Although we have numerous successful deployments that involve dozens of servers, hundreds of users, and geographically seperated sites, there are some contracts that we can't bid on simply because no one in the company is certified. Even though we can get the job done, and even though 99% of our business comes via word of mouth from satisifed customers, there are contracts (mostly governmental / Fortune 500) that we can't even come close to.
Having said that, I have worked alongside numerous certified individuals, and more often than not, they are the least competent people out there. The knowledge that comes from being interested in something and wanting to truly figure out how it works will always be more valuable and genuine than the knowledge that comes from a lesson plan.
Yet having said that, certifications are a good, but sometimes frustrating way to codify what you know. Like for example, who cares how ntbackup works? No one uses NTBackup in the real world. But none the less, you need to waste brain power learning how it works if you want an MCSE.
After going to school for only 1 year without obtaining any certs I was extremely worried about ever finding a job. But believe it or not certs actually put more pressure on obtaining a job since they will expect a lot more out of you. Although the plus side is you will be making more money faster but hey for me right now just breaking into the field I can say that with only a degree backing me you can definetly make it in the world of IT with very little experience. And trust me I will definetly go and get my certs at a later time but right now it just feels good to have a job. Another thing to add is that the other 3 in my department that have this job also have no certs, but they are regretting not having any since now they really do want a better job after being here for almost 10 years now.
It seems like at one time a certification was a sure thing that you had a basic understanding. Certifications have evolved from basic understanding and through marketing changed to expert knowledge and now back to a pretty piece of paper that you can hang on your wall. The people who provide the certifications like CISCO or Microsoft made their own certification useless by passing people who cram for the exams. Any employer that hires strictly on certification deserves what they get. Certifications are a volume business. Several hundred dollars for a certificate. Who cares if you have knowledge. The Interview questions and the consensus of the interviewers are vital to hiring a new employee. Employers need to get of their butt's and put more emphasis on the interview process.
NT
pay premiums for non-certified IT skills grew three times faster than for certified ones
I have to ask, that figure didn't happen to come from the non-certified statistics department did it ?
Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
I would be careful: "Knowing UNIX" and "Memorizing a bunch of inane specific trivia" are two very different things. Assuming your memory is finite, why would you waste it on memorizing how to do "a", "b" or "c" in a shell?
Given the wealth of resources and reference information made available by the internet I think anyone with a basic understanding of a UNIX environment can get the job done on any OS/shell with the proper motivation; how can you be sure you're actually testing what you *think* you're testing? I think the problem with your approach is that it isn't designed to handle candidates who may be specialized in a particular distribution (AIX, Solars, HP-UX, AIX, RedHat, SuSE) or shell (csh, tsh, ksh, bash), especially considering that no one *I know* who "Knows UNIX" uses a default shell that someone would open for them at a interview. You're also probably filtering candidates who may be stronger in terms of problem-solving abilities rather than trivia (which may ultimately be more valuable to your company).
My guess is that you're simply skewing your results to decrease the number of "false positives" at the cost of increased "false negatives". While that may still allow you to reach your goal (you'll get a "positive" match or a hire) it might be at the cost of filtering out candidates who truly are more qualified.
Rishi Chopra
www.rishichopra.org
When I first decided to get certs, I was a college dropout. I had reached mid-junior level in a CompSci track, and taken a local developer job. I was working at a local company doing web application development. This was in the same small town (50k pop) in which I went to school, and was looking to be a well paid fish in a bigger pond. My route was the MCSD (Microsoft Certified Solution Developer) track. In 1999, that meant doing a track with 5 tests, two of which would be VB or C++ centric, a couple of electives, and the two hour "solutions architecture" test. Since I had done of ton of C++ in college but no MS C++, and had a lot of VB and ASP experience, I went the VB route. After passing all of the tests (self study), I soon found a well paying job out of state and took it. I was told that my certs got my foot in the door, and my interview and technical skills I demonstrated got me the job.
Now it is 2006, and I have almost 9 years of professional software development experience under my belt. I take pride in the fact that I have continued my self education sans BS CompSci. Recently, things got craptacular at work and I decided I needed to look for new employment. I pulled the old .doc resume files out, and seriously thought about removing all of the old MCSD crap. However, I left it in. And it worked really well for me. I found that recruiters still look for this stuff. I cannot believe how many interviews started with questions or comments on my certs. It got my foot in the door, again.
In the end, I am more than certain that it was my experience and my answers to some tough technical questions that got me my new job. However, I would recommend certs to anyone looking to prove their technical merit.
Great ideas often receive violent opposition from mediocre minds. - Albert Einstein
Beats rock, ROCK (99.9 KISW) beats scissors, and scissors beats PAPER!
How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
especially when you're an outside consultant that doesn't even have the certification.
Are there any other certifications besides the CCIE that have a lab requirement?
Anybody remember the old CCIE lab exam? It was TWO days long, and if you didn't pass the first day, you weren't allowed to continue the second day. Plus the proctors would 'break' you setup while you were at lunch.
I agree.
I've only seen ONE job where I live that doesn't require some stupid piece of paper.
When I went to get that piece of paper I was "taught" by "teachers" who were reading from a book, obviously I left to do something useful with my time!
But many people who screen applicants are complete imbeciles.
I have worked in IT over 25 years, and that is something I know for a fact.
I had nearly run out of excuses to put off my studies.
Think I'll have a couple of beers, and watch television tonight.
I'm a software visionary. I don't code.
http://testking.com/
You can download most any current Cisco exam, cram it, and become a 'professional'. I got my CCNP and CCDP the old fashion way - worked, studied, worked, studied, worked, worked, worked, recertified, completed three of four exams for the CCIP, worked some more. Now you can just download 'em. Cisco resellers are required to have people with certain levels of different things and most jobs I see wanting Cisco qualify the position based on the ticket you need to have to get it.
I've taken my first halting steps towards studying for the CCIE. Those words are in italics because I feel like I've just typed arranging a circle jerk every time I use them. There are so many guys six months into the process with no real skills and none of the talent needed who are circle jerking on their theoretical CCIE. Or worse, the guys who are six years into it, they've got their whole self esteem invested in getting those four letters after their names, and they just don't have what it takes. Its sad to see.
Whatever the case, CCIE still has value, and my job puts me in front of everything on the exam except multicast and I'm slutting about taking multicasting jobs at half of market rate just so I can tune up for that area.
I am very easy to get along with, but I don't have time to waste being nice to people who are being stupid. -Theo
I have BS in accounting, but after 6 years in that field, realized that I love computers. I've been building them since the mid 90's, but due to personal reasons switched my major in college from EE to accounting. It was the biggest mistake of my life.
So I'm starting over. But how do I get into the IT when I have the knowledge, but don't have the "resume-able" experience besides a college co-op at GE? While I know I could sell myself once I got an interview, I CAN'T get an interview because I don't have anyway to sell myself.
So I'm getting the easiest cert I can so I can get my foot in the door. The A+ . Is this a bad idea? I don't know, but I do know I'm miserable at my job, and I hope that getting this cert will be enough to help me get my career in the direction I want it too.
I'm taking the Test on Thursday... wish me luck
Easy enough..
There & Back Again....
... Looks good? I don't know whats wrong...
...
Thats how I became a Tech. See I worked for this piece of **** CO. That wouldn't teach me anything. Oh, they had a master tech, who really knew his stuff, but was allways gone. They expected me to just "magically absorb" how they wanted stuff set up. I often spent alot of time in a warehouse turning these long plastic pipes into deadly blowguns by putting a screw int a styrofoam packing cylynder (peanut?)and stuffing the thing into the pipe. I could shoot that blowgun 50 yards and screw it into a sign about 2 whole revolutions! But I digress...
I didn't learn a thing from there, and when I got word that NEC was hiring, I jumped on over thinking that I was a "Computer TECH." So, I went there, and they had me doing basic assembly for 2 weeks. I outperformed every other assembler, so when they promoted their tech, they asked me to replace him. My first day of trianing with him went something like this:
Me: (after hearing a noise or something, Turns head)
Pete: Rapidly dis assembles everything, but leaves it looking like it was together.
Me: (turns head back)
Pete: Why doesn't this unit work?
Me: ? The flux capacitor is down?
Pete: Uh... NO.
Me: ??
Pete: Look at the damn thing.
Me:
Pete: You were a tech where?
You get the picture..
With a little bit of coaching, from then on I started at the begining.
Is the machine working? Y/N?
N >> Is machine switched on Y/N?
If N then switch on and recheck.
Else then check power to wall.
Is there power?
If N fix, and recheck,
Else If Y then is powersupply connected in unit? Y/N?
If N then Reconect and recheck
if Y then
I learned a very valuable lesson that helps me from writing a small peice of code to explaining something to my boss, to teaching classes. Am I a great tech now? No, I am a sys admin because I was a great tech! I diagnosed a bad powersupply over the phone, fixed it, and soon had an interview with my current Boss!
How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
There is something odd about their inclusion of CISA--observing salary drops is one thing, but drawing conclusions about the certification's value is another. I can't really put my finger on what mistake they are making, but purely based on observational evidence, I can't imagine getting a "real" IT audit job without that certification.
As for IT security-type stuff, certifications like CISSP have become sort of an "oh yeah, I have one of those" (I let mine lapse after getting sick of paying them 80 bucks a year for nothing) despite ISC(2)'s attempts to turn it into something that actually represents real knowledge. That said, I actually found the study material for the certification pretty interesting (neat insight into IT security management terminology and thinking.)
Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
being a student and talking to many employers quite often to find out what they want they all seem to say the same thing. "Get as many certs under your belt as possible". maybe im crazy but that seems to go against tfa
Thank you Captain Obvious, but the problem is that you need a job to get experience, which isn't true with the other options.
A lot of companies pay for you to take your certifications, and often you are required to take one of two a year. This is how I ended up obtaining my Sun certification, though I don't even program in Java anymore. If you ever attend any free Microsoft event, you'll also find that in your goodies bag there is a free certificate voucher for any MS exam.
It would be silly to not take a certification if it's being paid for by your employer, or if it's free of charge for you to take. A certification may not necessarily help career-wise, but I've found it invaluable for obtaining a refresher on a particular subject applicable to my work. It also forces me into 'academic' mode, by forcing me to actually read books and study just as I would for a college exam. It also gives you a goal to work toward, whereas otherwise you might just come home and vegitate on the TV.
As to their effectiveness in getting a a job, I wouldn't really know. I've never ever been able to get any job thus far without doing some sort of personal networking. Monster.com et. al has never worked for me. From a hiring perspective, it seems like resume matters less, and a personal recommendation from someone in the company will get you in the door, regardless of the number of buzzwords in your applictaion.
Part of this is may be because I work in Engineering, and for whatever reason, it is much harder to apply a set of consistent buzzwords to the Engineering discipline.
Titus Barik
everywhere I ever worked, and I did lots of resume reviews and hiring interviews, we thru out any resumes that had any certifications on them. Period. After interviewing enough people that could only answer questions off the tests in the order they were asked on the tests, it became extremely apparent, anyone who spent the money to get "certified" was more stupid than we wanted working for us.
I've looked at Courier, and I don't use it specifically because it's a piece of crap. And I wouldn't use shell script to write something that was supposed to build and e-mail reports--I'd use a more sensible tool, like Ruby or Perl.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
How about, instead of spending all your time getting a cert, you spend your time actually making something you can show to prospective emplooyers - your own web site, your own contributions in open source software. In benchmarking, real-life results always win.
Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
Does an MD guarantee a great physician? Does a JD guarantee a great lawyer? Does an MBA guarantee a business man? Need I go on?
If somebody in high school (for whatever reason) wants to be a computer tech; 90% of the posters here on slashdot, would post that five years of experience is much more valuable than an A+ cert. Well duh, thanks for being so insightful, and all. But how is somebody supposed to get started?
Practically every real profession relies on degrees, certs, licenses, and the like. IT has always been a major exception.
Then the IT pros piss and moan about how their not treated like real professionals, and certainly not paid like other professionals. Imagine if a BSEE was optional for an electrical engineer.
You can't just hire somebody off the street to fix your toilet, or clean your swimming pool. Those jobs require licenses, certs, etc. But, hiring somebody to write life-and-death critic software, whose only credential is that he's the PHB's nephew . . . hell, that's done all the time.
Why were CompTIA certs ever taken seriously?
for $foo in a b c; do
:o)
$foo
done
that's how you do a b c in a shell.
I believe you. But, I happen to think the CISSP is the most over-rated of all IT certs. Don't get me wrong, having a CISSP doesn't prevent somebody from being great at computer security, but it certainly doesn't guarantee it. I've know CISSPs who couldn't install a home network.
Of course the CISSP is supposed to be managerial. But what's managerial about it? It does not go into nearly enough depth to prove somebody knows how to do a security audit, for example. IMO: the CISSP doesn't go into enough depth to prove anything.
A smart interviewer will know what skill level is required to pass what test. "MCSE" I have heard described as a "Minesweeper Consultant and Solitair Expert". Three people I know that have taken that test agree with that assessment.
Now try that stunt with CNE or Apple Technical Coordinator sometime. If you didn't study, you're not going to do better than random chance. If you studied, you might hit 55%. Better crack the books good if you want to pass those, and practical experience here can make the difference. Apple's tests are downright evil... "check all that apply" questions, mismark a single one of the five checks and you fail that question - you cannot BS or guess your way through that - final scores of 18% have been seen on that test.
Unless it's a Cxx hiring a CIO, you should expect your employer to know more than you do about I.T., and they should have the common knowledge to know what certs mean something and what certs are basically "pay us $100, take a simple test that any clown could pass, and here's your cert".
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Unlike most certs, the RHCE is a practical test. You can't just memorize a bunch of trivia.
From what I have seen, the RHCE is a well respected cert.
The number of people I've carried through courses is probably the reason degrees are such dubious predictors. If you do have practical skills, a degree is a valuable accompaniment though.
I got out of software development to go into admin a few years back because: 1) at the time, admin were in greater demand. 2) admin were up and around, not stuck in a cubicle. 3) More varity in the work.
But now it seems that admins are a dime, a dozen. I wonder if I could go back to development? I still vaugely remember C/C++. Do people still use that?
My degree is in math with a comp sci concentration.
The people who don't have the sheepskins are always the loudest to assert the "pieces of paper" don't mean anything. It's painfully obvious the attitude is just pure unadulterated sour grapes.
Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
Sure, an A+ will get you occasional $12 an hour grunt work with no benefits. But, I'm sure you want better than that.
Do you want to be an admin? A software developer? A manager?
Just to let you know, IT is ball-breaker for re-treds right now. Even experienced IT pros, who like the work, are getting out because jobs are so bad. When employers see the accounting degree, and experience, they will figure that you're not really dedicated to IT, and will be reluctant to hire you.
JMHO.
The years of radio commercials luring idiots into the certification mills with "$70,000 starting salary for an MCSE!" blather have flooded the market with people who know enough to pass the exams, but cannot necessarily apply that information in a real-world situation.
Those people won't make it past any competent interviewer, but the mere existence of "MCSE" on their resumes waters down the 'oomph' of it on yours (assuming you didn't just buy the brain dumps yourself).
All I have is a dumb CIS degree from a biz college (just so I could have the paper). I've worked as a sysadmin, network administrator, network security consultant and now general IT consultant. I make 77K a year.
I've never needed a cert...why do I need one now?
Good lord, don't I wish I could go back and get into a real career: law, engineering, medicine, whatever.
Why would anybody, with any sense, want the horrible uphill battle that is IT?
Employers are doing everything they possibly can to outsource the jobs, or bring in H1Bs. IT workers are often considered washed up at 35. There is zero security.
Even if you do a decent job, is it really what you want? Year after year in a cubical? Doing twice the work, for half the pay, as people who are not nearly as smart?
that's a good anology
People seem to think that because it's low it's bad. If I was an IT manager hiring a desktop break/ix technician I'd make it a requirement for them to achieve it in 6 months. Not because I think that it proves expertise - but because if they can't do it then I don't want them.
Its a minimal line in the sand that you're safe to be left alone in the same room as a pc, a screwdriver and a boot CD.
Anyone who says "this guy has the right piece of paper, he must be our man" is an idiot. But anyone who says "this guy has that piece of paper, so I'll ignore his resume" (and yes, I've heard it said in public) is an even bigger idiot. Certification is a service, and it holds a certain value. Opinions may differ as to what the value of a given cert is, but to make certification a primary factor in your decision is foolish... in this field, anyway.
There are two types of economic gain. The most obvious is getting more money in exchange for your investment in money and effort. The more subtle one is getting into the game at all.
:-)
BTW don't assume that "certification" equates to "no experience." I'm not alone in having extensive C experience but having problems finding a Java position since I didn't make a 100% switch years ago. My java certs show that 1) I can work in this environment and 2) it forced me to take a broader perspective than I would have otherwise. If somebody has doubts that the sun exams have gotten decent, I'll start asking them technical questions as well.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
There are ads on Slashdot?
Nope. That's a mix of perl and shell... "for $foo" is a perlism.
oops, shouldn't have had the $ on the first foo..
;o)
[root@localhost ~]# for foo in a b c; do $foo; done
-bash: a: command not found
-bash: b: command not found
-bash: c: command not found
had a, b, and c been commands, they would have executed
Ideally, what you want is for the basic pay of the lowest paid to be comparable to the cost of living at an acceptable standard. (By that, I mean you can get an apartment that shouldn't be condemned, you can afford to meet your nutritional requirements, you can meet reasonable medical expenses, that sort of thing.) At present, there are many below "minimum wage" workers in the US who probably earn half to a third of what I consider an acceptable minimum.
True, there will always be a bottom of the pyramid. That is why you want automation. Machines don't need much, so put them at the bottom and raise humans to a more human level. It's not a perfect solution. I don't have any perfect solutions. But as a temporary fix, whilst society figures out what a perfect solution would look like, it sounds a lot better than what we have now.
When it comes to degrees and certifications, I do understand why rarity affects value. Again, it is supply and demand. On the other hand, breadth and depth of knowledge defines understanding. Merely knowing a formula by rote is nothing more than alchemy or religious indoctrination. It doesn't tell you anything of substance and the moment you fall outside of the straight and narrow, your knowledge becomes worthless.
(This is true of ANY educational program. I am definitely much more in favour of "Classical" or "Renaissance" thinking there, where context and diversity of knowledge was of the utmost importance. "Modern" education does better on the depth, which is important too. Knowing everything about nothing is just as useless as knowing nothing about everything.)
I'd prefer a system that provided continuous education and rolling tests throughout a person's life, or at least provide sabbaticals to approximate that. That way, you can dispense with a lot of the redundancies in the degree program and you can link certifications to a significant quality and quantity of knowledge.
I believe Britain has something like 60% of the population go through the University system now. That's not a bad start, provided the diversity is great enough that the degree has no value. It seems to work OK, but there are still more areas that need work than don't.
(By comparison, there are States in America which barely manage to get 54% of their population to even graduate High School. And, no, that's not because American standards are higher, when something like a third of those can't even find America on a map!)
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
?A company selling a product (HW or SW), a company selling a service - can highly benefit if their employees hold a CERT for the product, be it software or hardware or support.
You would like to buy a firewall from a company, who has the product manager trained about the features, and the tech trained on how to set it up. Even if you have your own techs, a 5 minute local call "how do i fix it" is a lot better than try to call INTL and be on the phone on hold for hours to get a canned response.
I think with software it should be the same. Of course, I do not care if my programmer has MS whatever training for desktop support, but if my programmer is writing network code, a Cisco class or firewall Training cannot really hurt.
ANY training adds to the knowledge base of a person. Period.
I think jerks try to cut salaries, that is my real feeling.
The article does not mention much detail regarding the value of most certs and certainly does not define "non-certified" skills. Tier 1 phone support, junior operator, entry level coder, etc. could have tremendous growth in wages and still not mean anything. Note that some certifications are highly valued such as CPA, passing the bar, M.D. etc. In general, crap like MCP is useless. However, those certs that the vendor claims to correlate with job performance are a valuable indicator whether the individual has been exposed to the breadth of the product/technology. I am suspicious of the individual who claims they always know more than the vendor. What matters is whether the vendor is working to improve the certifications process to acheive higher correlation with job performance. As tests become more practial and scenario based, brute force memorization becomes worthless. Additionally, someone who spent 8 months acquiring a cert is much more likely to have mastered the skills than the person who spent $10,000 for a 3 week cram course. What matters most to me is whether somebody has mastered the learning process that is taught in school as opposed to the skill in regurgitating specific course material. I do not have a degree. This has not hurt me im my career as my prior bosses will always give a good recommendation. I have both MCSD and MCDBA not becuase of the "prestige" or "marketibility" of such, but because acquiring such required me to learn things that I had bypassed in my daily work or study. It is easy to put aside things that are not applicable today or in the current work environment that will be useful later. Properly used, certification is a disciplined way to understand and master the scope of knowledge required for a job skill set. That said, too many people fail to see the value of skills that are core to the job such as mastery of language and communication, people skills, statistics, accounting, personal presentation and only focus on the obvious job skills in their career devlepment. Unless your ambition is to be an entry level cubicle dwelling geek coder your entire life, you will need to be able to commmunicate with people effectively. Certs, degrees and experience are only a small part of your value to an employer. The ability to play nice, understand the business model, integrate your activities with others, accept requirements you don't like and do what is needed for the success of your organization (esp. boss) is what will determine your long-term success.
When I was young, I had to rub sticks together to compute.
Last time I bothered with a certification, I'd been out of work for a month or so and not having many decent hits on the job boards. So I snagged a copy of Solaris x86 and studied up on the new features of Solaris 8 and took the certification exams. And my resume hit percentage went up. But my experience has been that having those certifications is what gets you past the gatekeepers in HR, once you get to the actual hiring manager is when your experience will get vetted. And I've nuked someone after their resume listed "Solaris Certification" and they couldn't answer basic questions about disk slicing, turns out it wasn't a Sun certification, but something offered by a local community college... So, if *I* will see your resume, expect me to ask questions that pertain to what your certification is in...
Ahem,
Have you ever head of a fellow called Stephen Bourne? There's a thing called the "Bourne shell" named after him.
For the self-motivated, certs provide clear education milestones. The cert industries produce some fine documentation - often the Cert guides provide better references than product guides. I use the my Cisco Press CCNA Exam Guide regularly, and I can loan it to others. Its explanation of the OSI model is fantastic.
I would expect that people who obtain certs on their own without for-pay classes would be motivated, intelligent, and have a fairly comprehensive knowledge of computing.
As the economy rolls through its cycles, the criteria that employers use to select employees change. The certs on your resume are more important when there are more people competing for the jobs. For anyone interested in maintaining maximum employability through the different phases of the economy, I would recommend accruing any resume item that you may be able to rightfully claim while the funds for doing so are there.
"It seems to me that those certs "
In case it wasn't obvious, I was talking about the various cisco/novell sorts of applied networking certs here. My attention span wandered a little there, I think. heh.
-bw
It comes as no surprise to me that several of the security certifications are still more highly regarded and have actually increased in demand. I've been told by an IT that the CISSP (https://www.isc2.org) and others are somewhat difficult to obtain but very valuable knowledge to have. I think that this is especially true these days when risk assessment and prevention is crucial.
As a relatively new user of linux, I can say that while I have learned quickly how to set up various servers on a system, I know very little about properly configuring them to prevent vulnerabilities or attacks.
I still think experience reigns over most if not all certifications. That's just something that takes time and effort to build.
Maybe I'm going offtopic here, but my professors have always told me that internships are very important to nailing a good first job. They suggest doing at least 2 or 3 in the span of a 4 year degree and they've given names of people that have done just that (while maintaining a good GPA of course) and were offered good jobs right out of college. This leads me to believe that employers are looking for ambitious resumes, not necessarily a list of certs.
...is the illegal immigrants protest marches.
Interestingly enough, in Los Angeles, home to the second largest protest today,obviously due to demographics legal residents versus illegal, their high school drop out rate is between 20 and 50% depending on high school.
Now, these drop out kids are either going to A) somehow find a job that pays enough for them to actually live in the LA area, a pretty expensive place(unlikely) B) move someplace else (with what money and forcing down wages at the new place?) or C) become gang bangers and make a living that way
I would bet option C) hits the high note. Also based on reading the crime stats and demographics. The cost of no education is greatly magnified when you factor in crime costs to society.
And they are *protesting*. Protesting! Exactly what I am not sure, when they show that huge numbers of them can't be tasked with finishing even a bare minimum and pretty easy high school education, despite being here illegally and not bounced out on their rears and despite being offered the education for freebies, paid for by other people. I would dearly love to see what would happen if huge numbers of "anglos" were sneak across the border to go "protest march" through downtown mexico city and say they had "rights" to this or that free service from the mexican government. My guess is, said protest would result in a lot of machine guns and all dead protesters, unless they decided to just arrest them all and hold them for mordida,basically the bribe, pay a ransom to get your relative back, which is what they usually do down there to unlucky picked at random tourists.
I think the US could go a long ways to having a "living wage" and have "better" education and better/cheaper healthcare if we weren't trying to absorb several million new barely educated grunt workers per annum, *and* if we just stopped with the greed factor.
I am not against them, just "for" my own nation and the legal residents and the idea that the middle class is where all the real wealth gets created and what keeps societies stable. I see it as the other nations problems and duties, not ours,to deal with their surplus populations, and it is fairly obvious that massive numbers of illegals drive down wages. An extra dime per chicken at the grocery store would pay packing plant workers a real good wage. An extra nickle per pound on tomatoes would make that job harvesting perfectly acceptable. And etc. Wouldn't "need" illegals then. Apply it to all the other low end jobs. There's not a ton of difference between a person making 120 thou a year or 130, but there is a huge difference in the "lifestyle" of someone if they can crack the 10$/hr barrier from 7 or 8 in the US. Even that is extremely low ball, but it could get you out of poverty. And it does no good if you do that if all the wealthier people just "house flip" with each other and drive up housing costs so high even at ten you can't afford the cheapest place around.
The US has become too cheap and greedy for our own good, hell bent on destroying the middle class (although most of them aren't seeing it that way, it is really a form of self induced economic suicide based on short term greed) in exchange for a grossly burgeoning eXtreme lower class example, something we were trying to get rid of just a few decades ago.
All that work and effort for nothing it appears. The planet has billions of utterly poor people, I see no end to them all coming here, as many as will fit, which will make the US look just like wherever they came from. The illusion of a minimum or living wage is lost in the practice, LA, right here and now, an example par excellance in this grand experiment. We are a good model and example of what happens when you attempt it with no outside controlling factors. Capital accumulates into cartels and fewer hands, who insist on an aristocratic lifestyle (maids, servants, guards, drivers,gardeners, chefs, nannies, etc.) The bulk of the labor is reduced to near-serfdom and frantic competition
I have the Linux+ certifcation and it's on my resume. I've applied from Linux Help desk to Linux Admin jobs. At the moment, I make mattresses for a living.
So now, think about this for a minute. Would you hire someone with 1 certification or are you likely to hire someone with multiple certs? I think it's good now that most certs require practical parts too so you demonstrate you know what you're doing.
Idealy, the prime candidate is somone with both certs and experience. Certs aren't everything, but experience doesn't teach you all the proper ways either.
That which does not kill me only postpones the inevitable.
(I teach classes for IBM as a contractor, hence the AC posting. :)
I used to write courseware for IBM under contract (still do, once in awhile). IBM has a certification process for instructors: an instructor must take a class and then team-teach the class before they are considered "certified" (the person they team-teach with is supposed to evaluate their performance).
It's ironic that there are some courses that I'm not certified to teach. In a couple of cases, I wrote some of the chapters in those same courses, or was the subject matter expert responsible for reviewing the course content for accuracy and to ensure that included topics were pertinent for the course. :-/
I'm not certified to teach them, so IBM won't hire me for those courses (well, that and the fact that my daily rate is 30% more than they want to pay!). But every once in awhile, they get a customer with very specific needs and they come to me and ask me to customize the course for that customer and then teach it. I then remind them that I'm not certified for it, and they do the paperwork to get that cleared up (one way or another).
The end result? A bunch of (seemingly redundant) paper-pushing. Don't get me wrong: I agree with the goal (verification that instructors are qualified to teach particular topics), but their implementation leaves much to be desired.
Just my $0.02
I can't program, but I learned to use google. Use advanced search after the first "normal" search. Your first search is just to find the stuff you DON'T want. On your first look, see all the bogus off topic references. Now, negativize them. Do this on next search; -bogusreference A, -bogusreference B and etc, now mash search again. Add in a few industry names, like for instance Bosch to your router reference. You'll get *much* better results with a few google advantages. Hmm, lemme try...
k ing%2C+bosch%2C++-cisco%2C+-linksys%2C+-netgear&st art=0&start=0&ie=utf-8
http://www.google.com/search?q=routers%2C+woodwor
neato! Check that page out! Now just do it again, add in what you really want to find out about routers. If you have to search three times, so be it, just narrow down and "negativize" what you DON'T want.
First my background: 15+ years in IT, no certifications until I came to work for Novell. Well-paid as an IT technical lead at a Fortune 50 company prior to joining Novell. First job after joining Novell was teaching advanced technical training, hence the need for certifications (=marketing value as an instructor)
Now my current job: Global CNI Program Manager for Novell. Been at it since November of last year.
As long as I've been in IT, I've always held the fact that I held no certifications as a bit of a badge of pride; as a published author, it made for a very good benchmark to see what a potential employer was looking for - a cert, or "real experience". In fact, I did not go back to a company for a second discussion about potential employment there when the department manager expressed disappointment at my lack of certifications.
My observation over the years has been that certifications have value for those who hold them if and only if there is scarcity in the market for a certification. The article mentioned CNA (among others) as a devalued certification; I would tend to agree with this, because it is relatively easy to get.
Certifications that are difficult to achieve (CCIE & CISSP come immediately to mind) seem to be highly valued because they are difficult to get. Similarly, for those who hold Novell's CDE, they see it as very valuable because there are a very few in the world who have it (I happen to be one of those, so I'm not entirely unbiased in that belief).
One of the projects I'm involved in at the moment is certification roadmaps. I'm involved because - as the CNI Program Manager - I need to make sure we have qualified instructors teaching the courses, so testing and certification becomes important (as a student, I know I would want to know that I was being taught by someone who was qualified, and I know that any employer that is going to invest in sending their employees to a class is going to want to be able to see improvement in the employee's job performance).
One of the things that I'm looking at is how certifications reflect real-world knowledge. Some certifications do better than others; speaking from a Novell certifications perspective, the CDE, CLP, CLE, and CLE9 seem to do well in this regard because the tests are not "written" (form) tests, but practical tests that require you to complete certain tasks within a certain timeframe. Clearly the goal is not to turn out certified individuals with no real knowledge (and I've known some at jobs I've worked in the past who passed the test but didn't retain any knowledge - so-called "paper" certs).
So my questions: What do you find makes for a good certification vs. a bad certification? Is it in the testing method? Is it in the validity of the question pool? Is it that a good certification (or valued certification) has scarcity - so you are somewhat "elite" in your validated knowledge?
Or is the value of certification more oriented at a validation of a path of learning that you're (or an employee of yours, if you're an employer) on and knowing that you're doing well within a goal of achieving expertise in a particular technology? (ie, certification as a validation that you're where you should be in the track, rather than a goal unto itself, similar to when you were in college/university)
Serious answers are greatly appreciated - I realize there will be a few ACs who reply with some degree of snark, and that's OK, of course - it is Slashdot - but I do see a lot of good experience out here and having some feedback from the real world would be very beneficial as our team looks to increase the value of the certifications we offer.
Jim
Insanity is a gradual process; don't rush it.
Every year another self proclaimed "expert" somewhere must give us their opinion on certifications, and every year another Slashdot story appears to suggestively blow more holes in the certification concept.
Like it or not, IT certifications are here to stay. While its true no amount of college or certifications can substitute for certain kinds of experience, the reverse is also true: I personally know of a few gluttonous sysadmins who have become so complacent and derelict in their roles only to lose all interest in anything but their own short-sightedness, unwilling to consider anything outside the realm of their "experience". In that case, certifications serve as an engine of learning and change, bringing people with fresh ideas and new ways of thinking to the forefront of business. The very nature of the field demands change, so too much emphasis on past experience, especially in obsolete technologies, serves as a detriment to the field.
Even though I personally have over 10 years of experience, I find those with schooling and certifications to be much more open to new ideas and ways of doing things as opposed to those who just cling to their past personal or business experiences. Sure that experienced candidate might be able to outperform the learned one in a dozen or more procedures, but how long will that last? The learned candidate eventually becomes the experienced one, surpassing the prior in both areas.
I've been in project/program manager for years and am quite a good at it. I figured having a MS in CS and an MBA from a top 20 B-School were all the creds I would ever need. Then all of a sudden in the past few years everyone wanted their PMs to be PMI certified. At least 2/3 of all PM job postings say a PMP is required or a "plus". Many contracts now specify that the PM has to be certified so I shelled out an outrageous amount of money for a ridiculously easy exam (easy as long has you know the right PMI buzzwords and use a little common sence) and then have to keep shelling out more money every year just to be able to legally use the PMP after my name, then I have to take useless certification credits to stay active and then pay a recertification fee every three years. Has this made me any better of a project manager? Heck no, but it has brought in a nice steady cash flow to the folks at PMI. There's no correlation I ever seen between someone who's certified and their ability or inability to manage a project. But since the "PMP certified" label is what the "market" deems necessary then that's what you need if you want to go into project management.
People bash this cert due to the name - some people use it to pretend to be engineers on applications and it drags down the name of professional engineers. If it had a different name I wouldn't see Microsoft as a fake degree mill - and yes, we've all seen people with just high school and an MSCE who shouldn't have half the confidence if they had ten times the ability. Others have ability, but this is really a cert that has to be ignored unless it comes with other things. To put things in perspective many undergraduate subjects in Universities are difficult and require more effort than an MSCE - but yes I accept it is not a breeze.
Guess employers are getting hip to the idea that those who don't' have experience or can't "do", get certified..."
Those with experience who can do, get certified as well. If you're so fscking brilliant, then why the hell can't you get certified? The way some of you people talk, you ought to be able to do it in your sleep. Professionals get certified. That you are not certified tells me that you are either full of shit, or too lazy to be an admin. Watch me feed your resume into the shredder as you watch...
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
As someone a year away from entering the IT workforce, and planning on getting some certs this year, its a tough call on what you should do. I want to work small-medium business as system admin/it guy. Preferably a lone wolf.
I'm currently taking a 2 year network engineering program that is based partially around CCNA/CCNP (btw, stats from cisco academy were posted a couple weeks ago, while they have 455k enrolled in CCNA, it only reported 7700 and change enrolled in CCNP).
I've spoken with my coordinator who's done a fair bit of consulting with various businesses in town, as have a couple of my other instructors. They seem to be of two minds, which have been expressed here:
1 - Businesses want certs
2 - some certs are junk
3 - the businesses often want some of the junk certs
I figure if I were to get something like: CCNA, Server+, Security+ this year and after I graduate next year, get CCNP, Linux+ and maybe CWNA I should be in a reasonable position. However, I can't shake the feeling that I'm going to encounter someone who insists I have an A+, when at that point, its obviously beneath me.
I'm not a fan of MS, but I might get the MCSA as most of the material for it will be covered during our course.
At first I wasn't concerned about getting "over-certified", but my coordinator pointed out, some companies might take a negative view of that. I guess that comes down to almost a guessing game. I know I worked to get my certs, but does the company go, "This guy has 9 certifications and very limited experience, did he fake his way through?"
I don't think the problem is with the concept of being certified, its that a lot of the certifications can be gotten by Joe "What's a mouse?" Blow after paying a few bucks for a short intense course, or cramming on some key topcis to pass the exam.
I know we have an instructor from the 2nd year who went down to get his CCIE but failed the practical part. Not because he couldn't complete it, but because he didn't do it exactly how they wanted it. It would be nice to see most certifications modified in some way that you couldn't just memorize ABABABCDAEBBF and slap it on your resume.
One of my classmates went for his CCNA prior to the end of the semester and said he only had 2 very short, very easy questions on the router sim. The rest was all multiple choice. One of my other classmates, is just completely clueless, yet he's survived this far, through 4 semesters, and I have no idea how. The first 2 or 3 weeks of each semester he spends the entire time begging someone to explain concepts from the previous semester to him. Somehow he managed to make it through a practical final, written final and online net academy final without understanding basic concepts like subnetting, our how to set up basic ospf.
I would personally include a practical of some kind in any cert that could handle it, and make it a big part of the mark, something they couldn't just memorize their way through.
So I'm a little unsure on how to proceed with my certs, which ones I should take exactly, and which ones I should avoid entirely (other than network+ and a+) and whats going to make the difference for the kind of job I want to move into when I graduate.
Whenever I have seen someone listing "IT Certification" as one of their qualities, I have though "Aha, an amateur!". I'm glad others sees that as well. I mean, it could perhaps be better than nothing, but its just a short course. As a professional with degrees from universities and years of experience as a developer, I'm offended by people knowing almost nothing about IT claiming to be professionals just because they have an "IT Certification".
The RHCE has a different emphasis i.e. qualifying people who will bring a good reputation to the product in the field (this reflects in it's low cost) where as the M$ versions developed a reputation for being nothing more than another profit centre for microsoft i.e. get as many people as possible paying and passing.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
This is absolutely true in many cases, but it's often also important to have very specific experience... even if it seems pointless. Personally I had trouble even getting through the recruitment agents when I was looking for work early on. I'd come out of a postgraduate degree at 'varsity, but with only intermittent commercial experience and lots of academic work experience (part time jobs while studying, etc). Consequently, I had a pretty good certification record, but not a very good demonstration record for applying my skills outside of open source which had been most available to me.
The most frustrating thing, however, was that most recruitment agents (with the exception of perhaps 10% of them to be fair), didn't actually know how to assess tech people in the first place. What they would do was cross-reference commercial experience with particular buzz words, and screen people based on whether they had both. Most jobs that were available for me to apply for (relatively small town, unfortunately) were Microsoft-based technologies. Consequently, they were looking for buzz-words such as SQL Server, .Net, C#, etc etc.
The fact that the bulk of my experience (including commercial but also academic jobs) was with specific technologies like PostgreSQL, Apache, Linux, Python, C, Java, and so on, didn't help me, even with all the theory backing and with being able to demonstrate that I was very capable using these specific technologies. Going in to speak to the agents, it was pretty obvious that many of them didn't actually even understand what a lot of these systems were.
I thought it fair enough that the recruitment agents were looking for people who had skills rather than certifications. On the other hand, I also got the impression that they didn't really have a clue how to rate many of the skills. If an employer had stated they wanted someone who could drive a bright red truck, they'd rather put forward a candidate who can demonstrate being able to drive a bright red tricycle than someone who'd had lots of proven experience driving a bright blue truck.
That's behind me now, fortunately, and I was able to get a good job as a .Net developer in an organisation through having inside contacts... which I guess is the ultimate way to do it if you possibly can. Now I'm happily building up my experience with Microsoft technologies simply so I can say that I have it, because it's more valuable than I first thought it was. To top it off, when I see others in the organisation flipping through the lists of candidates provided by recruitment agents for other jobs, it's hardly surprising to hear them comment that none of them seem any good.
Real EUNUCHS typically don't include BALLS ;)
Let's talk about that "higher education system" and how its career-based charter ussurps children by its scheme adapted through coercion...
Has anyone tried their Will at an ol' 8th-grade graduation test?
Schooling begins for a young one, him either male or female; Is usually happy to attend, when curiousity is prevails a choice to learn with similar youth. Every aspect of study is about developing English(default language), Writing(good form), Arithmetic, and Bible (grace, law, etiquete, manners, respect, honor, charity, and good chastity). Up to the 6th-year of study, the young student is a qualified man(Bible says a man is "male and female").
Every manner of comprehension taught after the 6th-year has typically been for moving those three Pillars into Life for blessing and burden to neighbors; most students will have good mechanical knowledge for general work, while others could have chosen a study at a benefice among associates speculating on improvements beyond market demand. Keep in mind that none has become "career" until the coerced "education" begins after the 6th year. By the 8th year of study, there is speculation on a "High School" that is nothing more than a trade guild coerced upon children to develop a "cereer" to an opinion of a private market analysis indoctrinated by the State. The fun ends at 6th grade, where enters a blurry line of coerced education and school spit-shine for one's indoctrination to speak on one's own Will to wit.
Today, Career has become less than a specialty training and more to advance an initial trend and service to compete with the intended competancy of a student, to the suppression of a free mind to make decisions on need and charity. Career is excess, and you can take that to "telemarketers", "credit-card" offers, and related communisms.
without prejudice
My research into adoption of F/OSS into businesses looks, in part, at the part certifications play. Are people with commercial certs less likely to F/OSS friendly?
The beginning of my research is in the form of a survey. If you haven't taken it already, please do... URL in my .signature.
"Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest." (Diderot)
My motto for working with someone (yes, I actually work with people that ask me for work) is to have an introductory week of typical work to let them calibrate their application to the schedule and environment, pay them for what it was worth to the customer, then decide if they could stay or come back later when they don't want to be a poseur.
/shaking nife at Truman/ "Truman, you are really scaring me!" /This comment brought to you by AOL, connecting people on the second or third try(C)./
:-)
It seems whenever someone asks for a job from an alleged "respected" company, and they have experience (I don't mean that street-corner Hooker kind), they just get the hypnosis response in likeness of that Movie (Truman Show)...
"Everyone needs to be XXX-certified because it promotes complacency and equality in a diverse work environment, satisfaction, and builds a good career profile for someone to present to a respective employer on their known achievements."
Wife(TM): "Honey, would you like to try a cup of some fresh mountain-country Mocha Mix(?) -- It's made from the finest extracts from the mountains of Nicaragua and fortified with all the necessary vitamins and minerals naturally found in the region(?) -- Nicaragua mountain Mocha Mix is not like all the other brands, and I trust it more than any else."
Truman(R): "Who -- what are you talking to? There's no-one else here but me! Do you want to slice me, dice me, or peel me too? There are so many choices!"
Wife(TM):
Truman(R): "You are scaring me too!"
psykocrime, did you write your post all by yourself or did you learn to write it by the inspiration from a Certification? This is a litmus test for people that are Domestic or Non-Domestic -- USA vs US. I wonder if a baby will eventually take off his diaper to crap on the ground, because his growing mind discerns the comfort of uncrapped pants and not some dummy-education taught by a psychopathic anti-Society troll working for "Huggies".
I hope this post was funny, not sarcastic/flamebait.
without prejudice
A number of years ago I was placed on a MCSE boot camp, the company was thoughtful enough to negotiate a cut price with the training company as a result of not including the actual certification but just sticking me on the course. At the time I was the Systems Administrator, 6 months prior I had migrated the Netware data centre to Windows 2000 as a result of political pressure. I wasn't too keen on attending the courses as I had numerous other projects running at the time but thought that it would be an opportunity. On my arrival I was greeted by three members of middle (non-tech) management from my organisation and a large group of Helpdesk operatives from an outsourcing company. The course bored me to tears and fortunately or unfortunately I was removed after 3 days to oversee an impromptu acquisition back at the ranch.
Two weeks later the middle management returned, all having been certified. Upon questioning the certification I was told "It is not in the companies benefit to invest in your certification, you can do the job without the certification. Why should we invest in something you can already do?" The individuals who recieved the certification shot up the management chain and after a number of months left the organisation. I wouldn't have employed them to defrag a disk, yet their CV's were certainly much rosier than mine. From that point on I have always questioned certification, not one member of my current team is certified but they all have a proven track record and a degree...
In large corporations, HR doesn't give a crap about the facts; they want the documentation that protects the corporation from lawsuits. Legal protection is HR's sole contribution to the effort. Once that's satisfied, they'll let someone else (engineering department, IT department, etc.) worry about whether the person can actually do the job.
In smaller companies (what's the limit now?--less than 25 folks?), significantly less restrictive employment reuglations apply. There's usually not an "HR" department because it's not necessary. Folks making hiring decisions can use more practical criteria, if they choose.
If anyone beyond HR actually looks at the piece of paper, they'll be looking it as a promise. Whatever you present--degree, certification, license, etc. sets expectations.
If you don't fulfill the expectations that your piece of paper sets, there's going to be disappointment.
Once you're in, nobody cares if you satisfied the hiring requirements.
Once you're in, nobody cares that the job is not what was advertised.
In a technical field, once you show up, you just do the job. If you fail that, you can usually milk it for a year or two, by which time you'll have more experience to put on your resume (another piece of paper), and get hired by the next sucker.
And, yeah, I know lots of guys that play that game, too.
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, it doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick
Some companies hold these certifications on a very high pedestal. I once applied for a job as a computer tech, or whatever you want to call it... fixing PCs for people basically. I have a Bachelor's in IT from a good school. Because I did not have A+ certification they refused to interview me. I could understand if they didn't think I had enough experience, but to specifically require A+, over even a 4 year degree is silly. I bet there are plenty more companies out there like this.
nothing
I would go in for IT certification combined with experience.
Chris ,
Php Programmers.
I'm ashamed of you Taco. Those who can't do get business degrees.
Furthermore, the whole certification thing was entirely driven by businesses completely unwilling to train or take a chance on graduates a little lacking experience because they just graduated. That they're backing away from certifications altogether, to the point that it's hurting otherwise capable individuals, is simply another exercise in shortsightedness. You've either got alot of nerve or are exceptionally naive to suggest otherwise.
And no, I'm not certified or planning to change that. I decided to stick with the BSCS and pass up the opportunity to go into another $20,000 worth of debt for another stupid, meaningless line on the resume to maybe placate bean-counting, buzzword-regurgitating retard in between his/her placing those "25 yrs of Win2K exp mandatory!!!!11111" ads.
To use an analogy: I'm a medical student at the moment and I've got to wait six years until I am qualified and certified to diagnose a patient and solve their problems. However, I work as a nursing auxillary to pay my way through medical school and I'm allowed to diagnose minor problems like bed-sores, irritation from cannulation, poor oxygen saturation and treat them (apply dressings, remove and replace cannula, administer oxygen) despite not having any qualifications.
I think that summarises IT certification too: for important and critical systems like air traffic control, health databases, electrical distribution systems, chemical manufacturer systems etc, certification is required to show that you've not only proved you have the skills to prevent life-threatening problems but to solve them. It also provides a measure of legal protection, both for you and for your employer should something go wrong. However, for minor systems like B&M store systems and other "low-level" systems there's no need for certification if you've got the skills, howsoever obtained, to run and maintain them.
Where I wrote
my ($user, $id, $home) = @u[0,1,7];
I should have written
my ($user, $id, $home) = @u[0,2,7];
Sorry
https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
I think the point of the poster can be taken to mean that Certs gained 10 years ago are worth more today than they were at the time. Having a trail of Certs from NT4 to 2000 to 2003 sure drives home that you've been around during that whole time when your experience list on your Resume also shows that. It also brings home the fact that you're staying up to date with each new release.
So then you get tons of calls from recruiters and employers and eventually you meet one that goes interviews you on the skills you listed in your resume (some tend to jsut see the certs and get crazy ideas of what that means without looking at which electives or your experience. You have no idea how many times I have been exasperated and had to ask recruiters if they READ my resume)
Getting a bunch of up to date certs today may not help you out today, but it sure is nice down the road...
It's taken for granted now that most people entering the workforce will have a college degree nowadays. So you come out of school with a degree in CompSci/CompEng/Info Systems etc... but really, what do you actually *know* about how to program/network/run systems? Judging by most 4 year programs, you don't know much of anything practical. You've got a lot of good theory in your head but almost nothing in terms of job skills. You may have taught yourself a lot in part time jobs or in your spare time, but to the average employeer looking to hire a college grad, they don't want to usually hear about hobby work etc...
And now that the market is relatively flooded with entry level people in IT, companies don't want to waste their time doing too much on-the-job training. They know they can pick and choose from a large pool, looking for the handful of people who already know what they're doing. That leaves everyone else scrambling for work. They get caught in the catch-22 of "You need work experience to get work, which is the only way to get experience"
What choice do these people have, if they want to get started, other than to go for some training and certs? Look at a cert as the diploma for a specialized education program. Sure, a cert may not be so useful to someone late in their career, but for those just getting started, often it's the jumpstart in knowledge and experience they need to get a real job and start getting real experience.
By the arguments given on this thread, you could just as easily assert that a college degree is a sign that someone doesn't know their arse from a hole in the ground since such a certification means absolutely nothing in terms of ability or knowledge.
The trouble is, if they lied to get the job, what else will they lie about?
Do they keep company secrets, or only until the payoff/blackmail is big enough? (e.g. If you don't tell me I'll let your employer know that you lied on your resume.)
Do they work when they say they do?
Is all the work claimed by them actually done by them?
I know that one lie doesn't guarantee another, but if you don't think that one lie makes another then you're an easy mark.
Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
I bet the people on here that say "certs are meaningless and trivial to acquire" don't have any. Take MS' 70-291 without studying...let us know when you pass.
More predominantly, it is becoming so easy to get certified that the certificate doesn't have any value. So many BS certification programs have sprung up to offer meaningless pieces of paper that it is impossible to determine which programs actually have value.
for example (fictitious):
In reality some certificates are useful. Unfortunately, the endless supply of for profit weekend seminars and on-line programs have made these credentials non-creditable.
"Seven years of college down the drain. Might as well join the f-ing Peace Corps." - John 'Bluto' Blutarsky
I decided to take the plunge for 3 reasons: :)
1. There are people I know with more experience than me struggling to learn the material for some of these exams, so if nothing else they prove I am at least not one of them.
2. The easier certs are useful because you know the HR guy screening your resume will recognize them.
3. The next time I am at a party and someone tells Joe PC guy I work with computers I don't have to here him tell me how facking awesome he is because he is A+ hardware _AND_ software. Laughing in response is considered rude, holding ~15 certifications and laughing in response adds perspective
Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
I dunno; when I see ads like that I'm immediately put off.
How about a company that prizes its technical staff, focusing on them rather than HR people? The HR people may be a bit clueless as to how long particular technologies have been available, and they're the ones writing the opening announcements. And you'd miss out on an opportunity.
and it was a web development company whose homepage made the W3C validator throw 61 errors. I'll pass.
You have a skill that the company doesn't have. You already know that you can improve their work, and "you'll pass"? Maybe they're looking for someone just like you.
There are legitimate things to be picky about in a new employer, but these are not it.
"Experience tells me that most people who come out of school are mediocre coders at best"
Mathematics tells me that most people are mediocre at best. (Assuming the median to be mediocre.)
One thing that a college degree tells you that many other things don't, is that they started a large (multi-year, multi-discipline, working with/for multiple people) project, and saw it through to completion, while many others quit/failed.
(Note: I do not imply that all started projects must be completed, nor do I imply that a college degree is all-important, nor do I imply that school is always the best source for education.)
Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
It may sound hard, but that's about it: Choose your friends wisely. Find people who already have a foot in the door of some company. Then find out what they do for leisure. Hang out with them. Start private projects with them. Show them that you have The Clue. Have them rec you.
It's easier in the IT biz than anywhere else. It's not like you have to hang out in the "geek bars". There's no such thing. Hang out in the relevant chatrooms, IRC, sourceforge something with them, if everything fails, go secondlife and start scripting there.
I know for a fact that this worked well for me.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
This may not be the ideal choice, but you could always do what I did when I faced a similar situation. About four years ago, I had been kicked out of college for not keeping my grades up. I was working at a photography studio in the local mall, but what I really wanted to do was write code. I didn't have any experience or education at the time and the local market was thin on opportunities. Going back to school wasn't really an option as I had burned that bridge already. Looking at my situation at the time, I decided to join the Air Force to be a programmer.
Now, I am not trying to give anybody a recruiting speech-I did four years and broke free like a parolee. I didn't like the control the military exerted over my personal life, but I can't deny what the Air Force has done to my career. First of all, I got paid for doing what I wanted to do. I received training and an AS in Computer Science Tech with no cost to me. I turned my academic career around - I am working on my bachelor's and I am maintaining a 4.0. The biggest imapct, however, was that I earned 4 years of experience in a standards-compliant production environment. You see a lot of comments in this thread saying that experience and skills are what matter most these days, and that is what I received.
Now that I've given you the upside, you have to be prepared for a couple months of rigid structured military training, but after that its pretty much like any other job. You are "on call" 24/7 and they will hold your hand through every major/minor decision you may wish to make (buying a car/house, getting married, etc), and the penalties for making mistakes can affect your paycheck severely and possibly land you in jail.
To sum up, its not for everybody, but it will get your career going if you decide to do it.
How may I help you today?
Usually have never taken any. I have a 4 year degree and have been in the business for about 10 years. If someone told me I wouldn't have to spend every night after work and every weekend studying for the certs I have passed, I would have jumped at the chance. It may be mindless and easy for some, but for me, it was extra work, that took dedication and commitment to pass. crack_vial
For $100 actualtests has the EXACT word for word questions of virtually every test and every answers. There are resellers that sell the tests answers for $3.50 on EBAY. These are WORD FOR WORD. What I think happened is that companies offer 'practice tests'. The practices are real tests and actualtests just buys several of them and makes its product from that. Certification is a scam and a waste of money. I have a few and I will never certify again.
One of my ancestors landed at Plymouth in 1638 (about 18 years after the original landings). I'd be very interested in hearing another side of that story, as I love history. Can you cite any sources that a curious Yank might read?
I do know, for example, that England at that time was on the brink of civil war. As I understand it, one of the secondary causes of that war was the question of freedom of religion. Again, as I understand it, some Englishmen of the time suspected Charles I of wanting to re-instate the Catholic church as the state church based upon his choosing a Catholic wife over the objections of Parliament. Passions were running high on all sides of that particular debate. I can see how some minor, uncondoned acts by individuals of a small church might be construed as 'acts of terrorism' (in quotes because I don't think that was really a legal concept at the time) by some who were looking to keep a lid on things by quietly getting rid of some troublemakers. The fact that the Pilgrims were allowed to emigrate instead of being imprisoned, hung, beheaded, and/or drawn and quartered in job lots would tend to substantiate that. (Our common ancestors did have some very imaginative ways of performing executions, don't you think?)
So how well does a Yank understand his English history?
For example, another branch of my ancestry is Serbian. The defining moment in history for a lot of Serbs was the defeat of the Serbian nobility by the Turks at the Battle of Kosovo in 1389 or 1390. Serbian poets, artists, and writers still spend more time on that battle and its aftermath than they do just about anything else. Knowing that helps explain Milosevic's almost obsessive desire to reconquer it.
What people think of as their history is what their ancestors chose to document. Determining the truth still requires cross checking every source. At best you'll have to accept the fact that we will never know exactly what people were thinking, only what they chose to write.
For $100 actualtests.com has all the questions and answers to most certification tests and its WORD FOR WORD. For $3.50 you can buy individual tests off ebay from resellers. Certification is a scam for companies to make money.
I think they get the answers by buying several 'practice' tests and pulling them out of there. The practice tests are probably the real thing.
The best thing we can do for the industry is to tell newbies to save their money and not fall for the con-artists trying to get them to throw away money on certification tests. People outside the industry fall for this garbage and get taken advantage of.
I have a few certifications. I will not do anymore. I keep them at the bottom of the resume because some employers want them.
That was probably true five years ago, but not anymore. They have cracked down.
Today, it works like this: you study 600 Q&As for an 80 question test. Of those 600 questions, maybe 15 will be on the test. Those 15 *questions* may be very accurate, but the answers are not similar, and are often wrong. And you don't know which 15 of the 600 practise will be on the exam. So you have to really know the answer to 600 practis questions, to get just 15 questions correct.
So, yeah, those braindumps (or whatever they call them) can be helpful. But they are certainly not giving away the test.
If you don't mind me asking... Do you run all your bash-scripts as root? :)
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
I'd much rather an excellent programmer with no formal education
You're not the only one. FreeBSD kernel guru Jordan K Hubbard has only high school education. He has self learnt basically everything and he's one of the best in the world.
Here's interview.
It is? Could've fooled me.
Yagu wrote, I personally think certification is bullhockey, but I don't necessarily hold that someone has a certification against them. Doing so (subtracting value for certification) would be akin to disrespecting someone for having a college degree, and that doesn't make sense.
I would agree with this, but add something: In today's world, if you aren't qualified on paper, you aren't qualified. When it comes to promotions, etc., it's really hard to justify promoting someone with no official qualifications over someone who has them. While certification does not equal competence, when you have to justify a hiring decision, certification will win most of the time.
Why did Netmare need each disk 2 or 3 times?.
The first thing I did on a netmare 2.x system was copy the floppy images onto the network so I would'nt have to spend the hours swapping floppys for each subseqent server config and link. The only disk you had to feed it was the serial#.
But my boss at the time was cheap. We never bothered getting certs, just worked the grey market. I could consistantly get copies of netmare for less then the legit outlets cost (not price, cost).
I personally know of a couple of companies that use certs on resumes as filter criteria. Not as good filters. You'r MC??, to the bitbucket with your resume.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
actually, I didn't run it as root, or on a machine called localhost. But I altered the info to not give attack targets. At least every system is guaranteed to have a root. (well, almost every system)
Well, I don't know about others, but I only use root for compiling and running exploits from bugtraq and full-disclosure
thanks !
I'm positive, don't belive me look at my karma
... the quality of the school. Lets face it many cert places are completley unregulated, no accountability and course quality varies wildly. Then there are those products sold solely focused on helping you pass the tests without really checking your understanding.
Speaking as a "Cert"-ified guy, it's not that certs are useless, it's that theirs no accountability to places that teach courses/issue certification curriculum.
The biggest problem is that there ARE good certficication schools out there that will teach you what you need to know and there are those fly-by-night-schools that will not.
I did the whole certification thing, but that didn't help me get the job I have today. At best I learned a whole bunch of stuff I didn't know that I've now forgotten and at worst they're pretty useless...but I don't think it's hurting me particularly. If anything, my fiances mother (who has a BA in Computer Science) has hurt herself because she feels that she shouldn't have to take an entry level job because she has the degree (but no experience). It's all about knowing your limitations and doing what it takes to overcome or improve them and not being hung up on a certificate or degree.
One of the biggies was, correlation isn't causation.
A good one. One I'd like to use on the cellphone-driving-ban pushers.
OOC, what are the other two?
Terrorists can attack freedom, but only Congress can destroy it.
I use lots of different opsystems all the time, so I'm probably jaded. Anything with a superuser and a 3-class file security model looks like a bad joke to me.
My company called Malaysia and Mexico to make sure I had done what I was claiming on my CV.
Play the lying game at your own peril, bad reputation spreads like wild fire, and in some places the IT world is really small...
IANAL but write like a drunk one.