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..."

Comments

slashdot summary is just plain wrong

[yagu]

There is nothing in the article stating IT certifications are hurting careers. To summarize the real article:

• some certifications have lost value in the market (MCDST, CISA, NCDE, MCNE, CNA)
• some certifications have gained value (SCNP, CISM, MCT)
• companies are also beginning to pay closer attention to skills rather than certifications.
• 14 certifications have grown in value, showing an 11 percent or higher growth over the last year (directly contradicting the slashdot article thesis)

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.

Re:slashdot summary is just plain wrong

[zerocool^]

Not to mention, MCDST is brand new. It's the like easy-cheezy Microsoft cert. The consulting place I used to work wanted me to get a cert every year, but they didn't care which one, and they paid... so... whatever.

The Microsoft Certified Desktop Support Technician cert is exactly that. It's what you'd want the kid behind the counter at the local pee-cee store to have before he works on your next door neighbor's computer. Like, how Windows XP Home works; how email works; how Office works. That stuff.

The bonus to the MCDST is that if you're going for your MCSA (refresher: MCP -> MCSA -> MCSE, in order of knowledge and number of tests), you can substitute the Desktop Cert (which is 2 tests) for the "elective" test. The MCSA is Windows XP Pro, Windows 2003 Server, Windows 2003 Server Network Infrastructure, and an elective. The 2 Desktop tests are easier than the options you're given for electives (SUS Server, etc).

And yes, an MCSA / MCSE is still worth something. People say you can just glance at a book and pass it, but the thing takes 9 tests, some of which are so anal that you do actually have to study, and it helps to have seen it in practice. How many people do you actually know with an up to date MCSE? I know 1. I'm sure on slashdot a lot of people actually have one, or work with a lot of people that have one, but when someone says "Oh, MCSE is a breeze, 10 minutes of studying and I could take it", take them up on it, offer to pay the $100 if they can pass "Exam 70-294: Planning, Implementing, and Maintaining a Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Active Directory Infrastructure" or "Exam 70-285: Implementing and Managing Microsoft Exchange Server 2003". I bet you 95 out of 100 can't do it without studying.

On the other hand, I am glad I'm back to being a Linux admin, where things make sense.

~W

Re:slashdot summary is just plain wrong

[Ryan Amos]

Moral of the story: Experience matters more than certs. This has always been the case.

Someone tell this to HR.

[Quince alPillan]

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".

I sold my soul to Microsoft

[PIPBoy3000]

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.

A+ certification looks bad, imo..

[brxndxn]

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.'

Re:write on your resume

[Penguinisto]

"UNIX and all will be fine."

...at least up until the point where they put you at a bash prompt and ask you to perform some tasks :)

My current position as a *nix SysAdmin required that I take a long written (as in - paper and pencil) test on some rather complex questions involving Solaris, BSD, and Linux (e.g. - "write a script that will cancel all mail messages in a courier queue that is more than X days old and report/mail the results to all current admins"). Once I was hired, I discovered that most other people who wanted the job and wrote "UNIX" in their resumes would apparently come up against a brick wall rather hard if they didn't have the experience behind the ink.

But then, you can find out in five minutes at a shell prompt whether or not someone really knows *nix, as opposed to a GUI environment where a candidate can guess-and-click their way to success.

/P