NUMBERS DON’T LIE, BUT…

Many of you wrote to take issue with my recent discussion of vendor numbers: Cisco topped 1 million certifications granted since the beginning of its program, Microsoft is over 2 million, etc.

While I wholeheartedly agree that the numbers aren’t mutually exclusive — one individual may hold more than one Microsoft certification, or may hold a certification from Microsoft and Cisco, and so on — the key issue is that these are numbers the vendors are actually proud of, as witnessed by Cisco’s press release when it hit the 1 million mark.

Should vendors be pleased with those numbers, or should they report ONLY the number of certifications that are currently valid? From a marketing standpoint, it sounds good to say X-number of administrators are certified by your program — never mind if those administrators certified 15 years ago on a platform that has since lost support. From an administrator’s standpoint, however, it’s better to compete against those who have the same exact certifications as you and to stand out from those who have antiquated certifications.

Arguably, creating new titles is one solution (we’re moving from “engineer” to “architect,” and I’m guessing “draftsman” isn’t too far down the road). By creating a new title, you immediately start with zero certification holders, and then only those with current skills will hold the title. One drawback to this approach, though, is generating enough market education — particularly among hiring managers — of the new certification.

I would think that a better solution is to simply strike from the record all old certifications. A Microsoft Certified Trainer (MCT) can’t be an MCT if their skills aren’t kept up-to-date, so why shouldn’t the same be true of all other certifications? This would require an expiration date to be affixed to ALL certifications, not just the ones which currently implement it.

Press our buttons!
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
  • Furl
  • Live
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
Related posts: