I guess its time for my paltry $.02 . I've been and am on both ends of the coin. I've interviewed folks with certs and told 'em to pound pavement over more experienced and uncertified talent. When it comes to hiring people who are going to have your back, which would you want? An uncertified worker that can do the job or some certified schleprock with an alphabet after his/her name that can't manage perform $task? On that side, I always take the person that fits the job, regardless of having a cert or not.
Sure, sure, having a cert gets you looked at and I think its time that employers step up and start testing on their own. The tests should be commensurate with what the job entails and should be a final stage in interviewing. I've been a party to way to many people that have certs that can't do simple things required by the job. Finally, since I'm merely thrashing about in the corpse of an already dead equine, some employers don't permit employees to obtain sought-after certifications. My prior employer did just that. Sure, I could go to training but certification, paid for by $employer or not was out of the question. The certification rush of the late 90's/early 2k's scared them. Bottom line, this revolves a lot around where HR within organizations has gone in the last 10 years. They're more concerned now with hiring someone that looks good (knowing that a replacement is just another online posting away and can probably be gotten cheaper) than with whether or not the same person can do the job at hand. Organizational managers are being bombarded with kiss-asses and certified fools. Managers do just that, manage. When hiring is solely up to them and list of templatized HR requirements, you get what we have today. On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 11:12:50AM -0600, Daniel Kuecker wrote: > well, i guess i can tell you what my expirence has shown me. in the > past, it seemed to me and others i associated with, that the only > interviewers who wanted to know about the certs, or even "required" them > usually were ignorant to the technology field. the cert showed them this > guy/gal really knows their stuff. we gotta hire them. as Ted stated, i > am not putting anyone down, i like to see certs too, but i really do > believe they put way too much emphasis on them. most people i worked > with that took the MS certs, just downloaded the exams and crammed and > took it, and guess what, they passed! and of course a week later, they > forgot 80% of what they were just tested on. but they didnt care, > because they had the cert, and these ignorant businesses will hire them > becasue of it, only later to regret that. > of course this isnt 100% true, there are people who have certs that > really know their stuff. that impresses me, but most do not. i have some > certs.. Certified NetWare Engineer, MCP, and A+. i only took the A+ to > have the cert, of course I didnt study for it becasue i already knew it. > the MCP i also knew, but stop pursuing the MSCE because I was disgusted > with everybody and their dog cramming and examming. the CNE, i took a > class for and successfully passed the cert. > I agree with the statement about getting the A+ if you are an entry > level job seeker. it will help, however on a higher end job, it is > almost a waste of time to put on a resume with all the other certs and > expirence that need that same space. > I am sorry, but I am desparately looking for a job. i am unemployed and > it is no treat. so forgive me for ranting about certs and employers who > only hire certified people becasue they are the only ones who know what > they are doing. i call BS. once again, sorry. > I do agree as far as interviewing, certs help. i wish i had more. > Daniel >
