Which would you hire?

Bokeh

You are the hiring manager. You have two new CCNA individuals. One who has only used a simulator to study and pass the exam, other who used a home lab and online racks. Yet neither has "real world" experience as of yet. Considering all other factors equal, which would you lean towards?

Reason I ask, is I have emailed back and forth with quite a few people who only plan to or are only using packet tracer, etc and seem to think this will account for enough hands on to get that first ccna job.

Opinions?

empc4000xl

it all depends on the person at this point. Most of the basic CCNA level stuff you can do in packet tracer, some things are flacky, but its more than enough to pass the CCNA exam. So I would weigh it in on the person. No 2 people are the same in IT.

remyforbes777

Create a basic ccna quiz and determine it that way.
Type the commands to configure eigrp with these networks.
How do you configure the switch with a dns server?
15 questions should be enough.

kryolla

with everything else being equal I would hire the person that has the home lab as he is more dedicated to learning in my opinion.

macdude

I would quiz them thoroughly. I would test them on there knowledge. Because some one does not have home lab does not mean he is not committed, maybe he couldn't afford one.

Glynixx

I would have to first determine how my environment can be managed and then hire accordingly. If a candidate only knew the SDM and I only had 1 device that ran SDM then I would probably have to go with the cli guy if both of their skill sets are equal.

empc4000xl

macdude wrote:

I would quiz them thoroughly. I would test them on there knowledge. Because some one does not have home lab does not mean he is not committed, maybe he couldn't afford one.

Thats what I'm thinking. You don't know peoples situation. If all he could do is packet tracer and he learned it from front to back. Then you have the guy who has a lab full of 2811's and 3560's. There is no way to prove who knows more. That's why you would have to look at the person.

cisco_trooper

Ask them about the other materials they use. If they like to use any of the well known brain **** then I would eliminate them immediately unless you have a VERY compelling reason not to.....

In addition to what someone else said, you may also ask questions that exceed the scope of the CCNA. If a candidate can answer these then they are going beyond the bare minimum and are actually seeking to understand things - this is what IIII like to see.

Daniel333

Actual interview done by my former employer for entry level network guys...Put two routers on your desk, a workstation and a bag full of wires. Give them a network diagram to follow and a hour. If they don't have it set up, you are better off without them.

Glynixx

Daniel333 wrote:

Actual interview done by my former employer for entry level network guys...Put two routers on your desk, a workstation and a bag full of wires. Give them a network diagram to follow and a hour. If they don't have it set up, you are better off without them.

Yep. After screening about 40+ candidates, we had 10 people come in and attempt to configure router on a stick and only 2 could do it. 1 of the 2 got the job.

Slowhand

Personally, I'd probably lean towards the candidate with hands-on experience. However, that wouldn't be the only deciding factor. Like any other hiring manager worth a damn, I'd have some sort of test to show that the candidate was truly at the CCNA-level. A couple of questions that a CCNA should be able to answer, possibly a scenario-based question on a whiteboard or a hands-on "fix this router/switch" type of thing.

There is also a major deciding factor, one which has worked in my favor in pretty much every interview I've ever had: personality and potential. As long as you have a fair idea of your technical knowledge, (that it's not blatantly obvious that you're a cheater or that you know nothing,) and you are able to engage the interviewers in a friendly, professional manner, that counts for a lot. If you have the personality and the willingness to learn, people are willing to hire you even if you're not 100% qualified for the position. This has worked in my favor several times, including at my last staff position, where I was chosen over candidates with several years more experience, lots more certs, and more technical knowledge, mainly because I spoke openly during my interviews and had a good connection with the interviewing managers on a professional and personal level.

Basically, even if the guy with hands-on experience may be a bit more confident and knowledgable about his Cisco skills, the guy with the hands-on labs isn't counted out altogether just because he doesn't have a whole mess of 2610s and 2948s in his garage. They're both CCNA certified, they're both equally qualified for the position in Cisco's eyes, and now they have to sit down and go head-to-head with me.

mamono

I agree with slowhand, I believe that personality and potential have considerable weight in the deciding factor. Qualifications get you in the door and into the interview. If you are qualified or near qualified, then there is a chance you'll get the interview. What happens afterwards in the interview depends on being personable and showing the potential to be much more. I think that is where the hiring manager should look most is whether this person will be a great addition to the team or not. Making sure that this person will be a team player plays heavily on the personable aspect. You will also want to consider that because team players share knowledge and experience with others so that everyone benefits.

Give them both the benefit of the doubt. They both passed the exam and have the cert. I agreed that Cisco sees them both as being qualified. Look for answers in other aspects as mentioned.

empc4000xl

Daniel333 wrote:

Actual interview done by my former employer for entry level network guys...Put two routers on your desk, a workstation and a bag full of wires. Give them a network diagram to follow and a hour. If they don't have it set up, you are better off without them.

I can't even go along with this. People learn at different levels and if they never had hands on, it might be a little different for them. I would rather have a person that is trainable and a good personality, than a person who may know a thing or to, but can't learn anything new. The original statement was all things being equal, but that's not really realistic when it comes to hiring a person. I was hired for my current job over people with prior voice experience and asked for a larger salary and got the job over them. You have to really decide if you are hiring the person or the skill. I know I just went all over the place with this, but you really have to dig out a person to find a good candidate.

frenchv

Slowhand wrote:

There is also a major deciding factor, one which has worked in my favor in pretty much every interview I've ever had: personality and potential. As long as you have a fair idea of your technical knowledge, (that it's not blatantly obvious that you're a cheater or that you know nothing,) and you are able to engage the interviewers in a friendly, professional manner, that counts for a lot. If you have the personality and the willingness to learn, people are willing to hire you even if you're not 100% qualified for the position. This has worked in my favor several times, including at my last staff position, where I was chosen over candidates with several years more experience, lots more certs, and more technical knowledge, mainly because I spoke openly during my interviews and had a good connection with the interviewing managers on a professional and personal level.
:

I really like what you said Slowhand! I'm a telecom guy working hard to get into the network world. I will keep this in mind on my next interview, thanks!

AlanJames

depends on the job.

If it was for a networking position i wouldnt hire either of them. they need experience.
If it was for a entry level position, it would depend on their personality

mikej412

We don't really care. Not everyone in the world has access to real equipment when they are learning (or could afford to buy their own).

We do a simple technical phone interview with the people who get their resumes pulled out of the resume pile (or resume database). That **** the dumpers and people who just learned enough to pass the exam (and promptly forgot what they learned). About 50-60% of the people fail this.

We do a hands-on test with real equipment based on the exam blueprint implement topics when the candidate comes into their first interview. If they can't pass we don't send them through the interview gauntlet -- that just wastes the interviewer's time. While we'll give them up to an hour for the hands-on test, most of the people that get hired finish it (and test their configurations) in under 15-20 minutes. We'll have interview days where more than 1/2 the people fail.

In the US it seems like most of the CCNAs we've hired (who didn't already have networking experience) used real equipment -- either at school, home lab, or access to a work lab at their old job -- so I'd say it probably gives them an advantage over someone who just uses a simulator.

I think an A+ tech who gets hired to rack 'n stack might be evaluated on their ability to learn... but I'm not sure why we'd want to hire someone with a CCNA who can't demonstrate CCNA knowledge and skills. I guess at the CCNA level and above we rate someone's ability to learn based on their ability to demonstrate the knowledge and skills their resumes imply they already have.