Em Qua, 2006-12-06 às 09:30 +0100, Karl Schock escreveu: > As far as I know (from the spare figures the LPI has published) only > one of ten "normal" candidates who has reached L1 later go on for L2. > If that is true then it is "normal" to reach L1 and stop. > And IMHO it is ok to reach L1 and stop. Not everyone can/must reach > for gold (so don't push all of us with changes in your certification > policy).
I think I may add some arguments which help to understand why running for gold doesn't make sense in terms of Economics, theoretically. I apologize if this puts more fire in the discussion; that's not my goal. If we consider that the folks who are willing to take the exams are guided by a cost/benefit rule of decision, we would model the exam-taker as a person who rationally evaluate the costs (time/effort/money/brain "damage") versus the estimated future revenue (new opportunities/higher salaries/etc.). By "estimated future revenue" I mean the person's view at that time, regardless of being right or wrong. To that person, it is offered a menu of education options. The person's budget (time/effort/money/brain) is limited. So, he/she will make a decision trying to maximize the value he/she can earn in return for spending this budget. So, conclusion #1: we would have to consider "normal" not to take LPIC-2 certification after LPIC-1, because this investment may not be the best choice in that menu. For instance, maybe he/she would prefer starting Cisco's program if he/she evaluate that doing so he/she can earn more value than having LPIC-2. conclusion #2: even doing nothing may be better than to engage in continued education, e.g., if one feel that the benefit would be small enough to offset the costs, and there are no other good options conclusion #3: folks may decide not to try LPIC-1 certification rather than others if they think that they can have more value in doing so conclusion #4: that's not because LPI is fine, great, shiny, or the best, that people will choose LPI, necessarily. This contradicts some statements that folks will choose LPI because it's the technically the best conclusion #5: reducing the benefit of the certification may induce people who are in doubt to take other certifications. A remark: the fact of being "communitary" or "because it helps to fight monopolies" (or other arguments such as these) doesn't seem to be of real value for most professionals, but may be considered a real benefit for not few people who are engaged in Linux/FOSS arena. This certainly is taken into account when these people evaluate their options, even if this arguments are plain rhetoric. My humble opinion, only. Luiz _______________________________________________ lpi-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-discuss
