[aklug] Re: What certifications should one have?

On Sun, 3 May 2009, Kurt Brendgard wrote:

> I agree with you. MS certs are pretty much worthless. My suggestion for get=
> ting them is not for the knowlege that goes with them, but for just that: t=
> he fact that it is many times required by the HR dept in order to gain an i=
> nterview. Once you have your foot in the door, it's up to you to differieni=
> ate yourself from the crowd as MS certs are widely known to be pretty much =
> worthless by any IT dept. They can serve the purpose of getting past the HR=
> dept screeners though.

True, and moreso when you're trying to get your first IT job. Once you're
in, though, work experience can often be substituted for educational
requirements. Thank goodness for me, personally. That said, if you're
working for a consulting or outsourcing group, certs may still be an
essential requirements if the company's client base contractually obligates
it. You won't see it a lot, but it does happen.

> Who? Lil ol me?? :> The lab attendent where I went and got what little trai=
> ning I have, called me the terminal hacker heheheheheheh

:-) Reminds me when I first worked at GCI. The training class I was in had
some exceptionally slow employees in it, so while I waited for them to
finish their work I opened up the Qbasic snake game that used to come with
every WinNT system. We had smoking fast 200MHz machines, then, and the
snake program ran too fast to be usable. So, I inserted a few for loops to
slow things down.

Apparrently, the instructor saw me do that and I was quietly taken aside by
HR later that day and interrogated about "hacking their network". My evil
plans for taking over GCI with the power of my Qbasic skills thwarted!
Curses, foiled again! ;-)

> Very true. I wasn't meaning it as something to rely on, just that it does s=
> how raw talent, something *some* hiring staff look for. If you're fortunate=
> enough to work for this kind of employer, dig a foxhole, moat. chain yours=
> elf to the desk, etc, unless God himself says not to. These can be very goo=
> d companies to work for.

:-) Well noted.

> But Arthur touched on a point that is very important. Certs are worthess af=
> ter the point where you get an interview. Not just MS certs either, all of =
> them. When you need to bring up a downed server, a cert only shows you were=
> able to pass a test, it doesn't help bring it back up. The knowlege that (=
> hopefully) still resides in your head is what employers will want to see, a=
> nd that coming out through your hands by means of working on that server, g=
> etting it back up. Certs might be instramental in getting your foot in the =
> door, or in getting raises or promotions afterwards, but not much more. Don=
> 't depend on them.=0A=0A=0A

Let me clarify my position a bit: in theory certifications are supposed to
prove that the testee possesses a minimum level of knowledge sufficient to
pass a challenging test. When the system is designed towards this end they
can actually work and have value. It's only the companies that cared less
about evaluating knowledge than they do about selling a "service" (in the
form of certification) that that breaks down. So, some certs do give the
tech guys a little bit of a comfort zone when dealing with prospects. Just
not all of them, and certainly not Microsoft's.

         --Arthur Corliss
           Live Free or Die
---------
To unsubscribe, send email to <aklug-request@aklug.org>
with 'unsubscribe' in the message body.
Received on Sun May 3 10:14:40 2009