O O Ø O O O O
Certifiable
Over the past couple of weeks I've been boning up for a certification exam this coming Saturday. I won't bore you with what it is, but the more I read reference materials and study guides, the more I'm trying to figure out what exactly my certification will prove to me. I know all the material in the study guides; I'm just re-learning the ways to describe it using someone else's terms. This bugs me. A lot. I know what I know, and given the opportunity to speak with people, have never had to worry about not having certifications. It got me wondering, “Why am I doing this?” and, more importantly, “Why do the hiring/contracting companies require this?”
“Why am I doing this?” and, more importantly, “Why do the hiring/contracting companies require this?”
It's easy to see why the companies and organizations offer certification programs: revenue. Look at how many companies, acting as educational institutions, promise instant success because they'll teach you how to pass an MCSE exam set in as little a week (for a lot of money up front) to a couple of years (with even more money spread out over time). The organizations administering the certification program get a good chunk of revenue for each exam administered, and they get to point at the legions of “certified” people out there as testament to their presence and sustainability through availability of support.
It's harder for me to see the practical value of the certification to the company hiring or contracting people based on these certifications. Before you argue, I said "practical value" meaning what does it really mean about the holder of the certification. I've looked at the tests, and talked to some holders of the MCSE fresh from certification. They know which control panel applet you need to double-click on to start IIS, but can know nothing about optimizing, securing, or configuring it for the real world. Heck, ask them to set up a workgroup server for twenty people with organizational grouping, print services, secured user directories, and to lock down any other services that are not needed, and the odds of getting a blank stare are good. The defaults must be good enough, because the company that makes the software set it up that way, right?
It's upsetting, because all you really need to do to pass the exam is spend some money, memorize the guides, and you'll probably get by without having any strong practical knowledge. I don't have a problem with high-end designations or professional accreditations which require strong practical AND theoretical knowledge to attain. I have a huge problem with the certification process that companies like Microsoft and Cisco use for evaluating people without any kind of practical exam. Actually, I have the same problem with most things classroom-oriented, as my stellar University career shows. It's all about learning to regurgitate crap in the format someone expects me to because a group of learned individuals has decided that's the way it should be. I don't agree with some of the things I am learning, but that doesn't matter, because what I have learned the hard way has no bearing on what the academic version says it should be. As a good friend of mine drilled into my head very early on: theory != practice.
It's all about learning to regurgitate crap in the format someone expects me to because a group of learned individuals has decided that's the way it should be.
While I'm not a big fan of school, I am a big fan of the way the first few years of science labs worked. Sixty percent of the mark came from lectures and tests on those lectures, and forty percent came from a practical examination. I was one of the people who actually enjoyed calculating molarity of a solution by titration because it showed a practical application of what we learned in the lectures. The odds of passing the class without passing the practical part were pretty slim. Why can't part of the exam for certifications be to sit someone down in front of a box and say: “This is what it's supposed to do. It's not doing that. Fix it.” or “Configure this fresh install to do this.” and grade them on the results. That would show an understanding and practical application of the information studied instead of just being memorized for regurgitation.
Sadly, it won't happen. It would cost too much money to train people this way. It's possible to do it, but it would cut into profit margins and I imagine the number of people failing would go up dramatically for the time it takes for the masses to adjust to the new testing standards. Instead, people go merrily through DeVry courses, buying up books from the ExamCram series, and generally scraping by to get their piece of paper. This piece of paper is useful to the recruiter because it's a screening criteria set by the hiring company, and can be pointed to if things go wrong (“They had an MSCE, which made them qualified in our eyes, and saved us a lot of work finding out what the individual can actually do while giving us something to blame if they don't work out”). It doesn't tell them how well I can do the job, only I may have some knowledge set that allowed me to pass a test, so I must know something about the subject matter.
That's why I'm writing the certification exam. It's not to make me feel better about myself, the five new letters and a logo I can put on a business card (when I get a job), or to give me a warm, fuzzy feeling knowing I'm in an elite group of peers. It's to help me get by the 21-year-old contracted clerk who knows only to look for a University Degree and some letters. They're not going to spend the effort calling people to find out what they can do, because they are getting hundreds of applications for each open position, and wouldn't know how to rate a good applicant from a bad one (I know, I'm being generalist again, but I'm bitter). The certifications and designations and degrees give them some screening criteria to cull the resumes down. I want in, so I'll have to play the game to get to talk to someone who might care about what I can actually bring to his or her company, and that takes letters beside my name which “prove” I can do the job.
That's why I'm writing the certification exam ... to help me get by the 21-year-old contracted clerk who knows only to look for a University Degree and some letters.
To the folks who work hard for their degrees and certifications, I mean no disrespect. I know how difficult it can be, especially for some of the advanced certifications, degrees, and professional designations. You also do have to know something to pass any exam, so I'me not being as fair as I could be. I've busted my can for the last fourteen years and know my stuff cold. I don't have my certifications because I was too busy getting things going and doing my best to make my company successful, when I really should have been looking out for me as well. Lesson painfully learned, but it's still hard to accept with what I know I can do.
It all boils down to me knowing what I say I know, actually having done what I say I've done, and being able to prove that to prospective employers. I'm saddened that the last decade of truth-stretching and outright lies in the tech market have made everyone suspicious, but I don't blame anyone for feeling that way. I just wish there was a better way to rate peoples abilities (specifically, one that will give me the opportunity to talk to folks on the inside), because in my experience, certifications usually have very little to do with ability.
I'm spending $500USD on the hopes those letters added beside my name will make me more palatable to an employer. That's the long and the short of it, and it's pretty pathetic. I don't like the rules, but I'm playing by them, and I feel dirty.
Tuesday, October 8, 2002
PD DLXVIII