Are the best IT certifications the ones recognized by HR?

N2IT

I know this topic has been touched on a few times in several different post. But wouldn't it make sense to do a search on the job boards and see what certs get the most hits? Factor that in with the job you want to do and how much pay you want and come up with a determination of certifications you should study an sit for.

Example: I am going to keep this generic so I don't hurt anyone feelings or tick anyone off so these will be fictional certifications.

Microsoft Nuclear Engineer: This is a wonderful certification and requires 10 intense exams and is leading toward new technology. Yet when you are on Dice, Indeed, Monster ETC you get 0 hits on this technology. Is this really a wise certification to get?

Again you do a search on Printer + and you see 500 hits in just one city. I know this certification example would indicate and low to mid level paying job, but my point is wouldn't this be a better certification to get from a ROI standpoint? Obviously cost per certification or certifications and how much time it required to study for factors in.

Thoughts?

I know my examples are kind of weak but I didn't want to say one cert was better than another or get into a **** match that non vendor are better than vendor etc.

Thanks

jamesleecoleman

I think I understand what you mean. I think it goes by the city that you would find the most common certs. So if there was alot of companies that wanted a certification for CCNP in Grand Rapids, I might look into getting it. While Detroit might have the need for alot of people with the CCNA cert. But it mostly depends on what you want to do and what you would like to learn. You could get a low level certification, apply for a job then get it, and then get higher certifications so you can move up in the company.

erpadmin

I'm gonna answer this like this: the best certification you can go for is one that you're comfortable with in both learning and working in.

If it were about the money, I'd have done all I could do become a CCIE. (And I'm not afraid of stating that cert, because there's no way I'd diss that cert OR those who have achieved it...lol). CCIEs have always been equated to very nice, high six-figure salaries. HR and IT pros know what it is, and a CCIE, for the most part, has a better shot of getting a job than most as well as writing his own ticket. So you'd think that, hey, since they make all this money, and HR will get me in the interview, I should just go for it, right?

I value my free time too much.....there are other paths that I can take to get to where I need to go. I am getting there and I don't need an HR department or anyone else to dictate to me how I spend my career in IT. I make career moves based on what I want to do, not based on "what's hot!" So far, it's working out fine. If there is something I need to get (e.g. a degree) because it's what required to go to the next level, then that's what I get. But it'll be because I wanted to do it.

[Deleted User]

What you are saying makes perfect sense but the hits you get on a certification is going to heavily rely on the area that you are in. I'm not testing this but how many hits do you get on a GSEC? I bet it is a whole lot less than the Sec+. The fact is that the person with the GSEC is probably far more qualified than the person with the Sec+. How do you measure the worth of a cert based on what kind of job hits you get? I don't think it's really feasible. When it comes down to it in the end its what you learn from the cert paired with your experience that gets you the job.

N2IT

erpadmin wrote: »

I'm gonna answer this like this: the best certification you can go for is one that you're comfortable with in both learning and working in.

If it were about the money, I'd have done all I could do become a CCIE. (And I'm not afraid of stating that cert, because there's no way I'd diss that cert OR those who have achieved it...lol). CCIEs have always been equated to very nice, high six-figure salaries. HR and IT pros know what it is, and a CCIE, for the most part, has a better shot of getting a job than most as well as writing his own ticket. So you'd think that, hey, since they make all this money, and HR will get me in the interview, I should just go for it, right?

I value my free time too much.....there are other paths that I can take to get to where I need to go. I am getting there and I don't need an HR department or anyone else to dictate to me how I spend my career in IT. I make career moves based on what I want to do, not based on "what's hot!" So far, it's working out fine. If there is something I need to get (e.g. a degree) because it's what required to go to the next level, then that's what I get. But it'll be because I wanted to do it.

Hiliarous I love!

N2IT

xmalachi wrote: »

What you are saying makes perfect sense but the hits you get on a certification is going to heavily rely on the area that you are in. I'm not testing this but how many hits do you get on a GSEC? I bet it is a whole lot less than the Sec+. The fact is that the person with the GSEC is probably far more qualified than the person with the Sec+. How do you measure the worth of a cert based on what kind of job hits you get? I don't think it's really feasible. When it comes down to it in the end its what you learn from the cert paired with your experience that gets you the job.

Thanks for the answer, great post!

eMeS

N2IT wrote: »

But wouldn't it make sense to do a search on the job boards and see what certs get the most hits?

We see this often here as a proposed measure of the value of a cert.

Correct me if I am wrong, but the logic goes something like this: "Cert x returns y hits on site z, therefore there is (or is not) demand for cert x."

IMO this is logically weak reasoning, with the critical assumption that the job boards in some way represent the broader job market. It hasn't been 1998 for at least 12 years! Lower-level, and more common certs are always going to appear in greater numbers, but that is not necessarily an indicator of demand.

No doubt about it, I'm a bit jaded and have a low opinion of job boards. The job boards are at best a small sample of the broader employment market, and are often populated with scam postings and recruiter fishing trips. You're leaving out a much larger segment of the job market by only considering this source of information.

To answer your ROI question, I don't think you're considering enough sources of information to calculate an ROI. Plus+ (pun intended), if using your example Printer+ costs $250, but only gets you a $15k per year job, ROI is irrelevant, simply because you can't like on $15k per year.

IMO when looking for a job you really can't rely on the job boards. In any sales activity (and job hunting is plain an simple selling yourself to an employer) you have to cut out as many middlemen as possible, and all the job boards seem to do is insert more middlemen in the process. Work on your direct connection as well as making direct applications to organizations, and you'll likely have greater success.

MS

MentholMoose

The certs to get, and the ROI, depend on your goals. Do you want one of those 500 jobs requiring Printer+? Then by all means get the cert. If not, skip it! For the other cert, zero job listings is obviously bad, but maybe you're exaggerating and there are really five listings, or maybe there are zero today but five will open up sometime over the next few months. If you really want one of those five jobs then get the cert so that when a job requiring does opens up, you are ready to go for it.

N2IT

eMeS wrote: »

We see this often here as a proposed measure of the value of a cert.

Correct me if I am wrong, but the logic goes something like this: "Cert x returns y hits on site z, therefore there is (or is not) demand for cert x."

IMO this is logically weak reasoning, with the critical assumption that the job boards in some way represent the broader job market. It hasn't been 1998 for at least 12 years! Lower-level, and more common certs are always going to appear in greater numbers, but that is not necessarily an indicator of demand.

No doubt about it, I'm a bit jaded and have a low opinion of job boards. The job boards are at best a small sample of the broader employment market, and are often populated with scam postings and recruiter fishing trips. You're leaving out a much larger segment of the job market by only considering this source of information.

To answer your ROI question, I don't think you're considering enough sources of information to calculate an ROI. Plus+ (pun intended), if using your example Printer+ costs $250, but only gets you a $15k per year job, ROI is irrelevant, simply because you can't like on $15k per year.

IMO when looking for a job you really can't rely on the job boards. In any sales activity (and job hunting is plain an simple selling yourself to an employer) you have to cut out as many middlemen as possible, and all the job boards seem to do is insert more middlemen in the process. Work on your direct connection as well as making direct applications to organizations, and you'll likely have greater success.

MS

I love your, "logically weak reasoning"! MS you crack my arse up!

I knew I would get beat up on this post, but I just wanted to throw it out there for some fun. In the age of data mining monster data sets this one struck my interest.

Besides I learned a new way of thinking today

[Deleted User]

eMeS wrote: »

We see this often here as a proposed measure of the value of a cert.

Correct me if I am wrong, but the logic goes something like this: "Cert x returns y hits on site z, therefore there is (or is not) demand for cert x."

IMO this is logically weak reasoning, with the critical assumption that the job boards in some way represent the broader job market. It hasn't been 1998 for at least 12 years! Lower-level, and more common certs are always going to appear in greater numbers, but that is not necessarily an indicator of demand.

This! +1 I was trying to convey this message but I couldn't figure out how to do so.

eMeS

xmalachi wrote: »

This! +1 I was trying to convey this message but I couldn't figure out how to do so.

List of fallacies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pretty much take your pick.....

MS

N2IT

eMeS wrote: »

List of fallacies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pretty much take your pick.....

MS

For a Six Sigma guy you sure seem to side with qualitative analysis over quantitative analysis.

At least that is what it seems like.

MS this isn't derived from just this post, but others. I would think you would be on the other side of the spectrum. I do remember you making note that most upper management don't understand quantitative analysis.

Basically I am wondering what side you lean towards?

eMeS

N2IT wrote: »

For a Six Sigma guy you sure seem to side with qualitative analysis over quantitative analysis.

At least that is what it seems like.

Adding more sh*t to a pile of sh*t does not improve the quality of the original sh*t.

MS

networker050184

eMeS wrote: »

We see this often here as a proposed measure of the value of a cert.

Correct me if I am wrong, but the logic goes something like this: "Cert x returns y hits on site z, therefore there is (or is not) demand for cert x."

IMO this is logically weak reasoning, with the critical assumption that the job boards in some way represent the broader job market. It hasn't been 1998 for at least 12 years! Lower-level, and more common certs are always going to appear in greater numbers, but that is not necessarily an indicator of demand.

No doubt about it, I'm a bit jaded and have a low opinion of job boards. The job boards are at best a small sample of the broader employment market, and are often populated with scam postings and recruiter fishing trips. You're leaving out a much larger segment of the job market by only considering this source of information.

To answer your ROI question, I don't think you're considering enough sources of information to calculate an ROI. Plus+ (pun intended), if using your example Printer+ costs $250, but only gets you a $15k per year job, ROI is irrelevant, simply because you can't like on $15k per year.

IMO when looking for a job you really can't rely on the job boards. In any sales activity (and job hunting is plain an simple selling yourself to an employer) you have to cut out as many middlemen as possible, and all the job boards seem to do is insert more middlemen in the process. Work on your direct connection as well as making direct applications to organizations, and you'll likely have greater success.

MS

I agree with what you are saying, but can you suggest another way to get a ball park estimate on the demand of a certification? I know the job boards are only a small sampling of the positions available, but I really don't know another way to gather useful info.

eMeS

N2IT wrote: »

MS this isn't derived from just this post, but others. I would think you would be on the other side of the spectrum. I do remember you making note that most upper management don't understand quantitative analysis.

Basically I am wondering what side you lean towards?

I would argue neither. The situation dictates the tool. Flexibility is key. Reality trumps everything.

If I were to always take one approach over another, wouldn't that be the equivalent of considering every problem a nail that I gladly hit with my one tool, the hammer?

This extends to vendors for me as well. I don't believe that any one vendor has the answer to everything. Those that do are typically trying to shoe horn solutions into whatever their favorite vendor offers.

The situation you've presented here is in no way quantitative, looking at it from a purely quantitative standpoint is missing about 95% of the picture.

MS

Turgon

N2IT wrote: »

I know this topic has been touched on a few times in several different post. But wouldn't it make sense to do a search on the job boards and see what certs get the most hits? Factor that in with the job you want to do and how much pay you want and come up with a determination of certifications you should study an sit for.

Example: I am going to keep this generic so I don't hurt anyone feelings or tick anyone off so these will be fictional certifications.

Microsoft Nuclear Engineer: This is a wonderful certification and requires 10 intense exams and is leading toward new technology. Yet when you are on Dice, Indeed, Monster ETC you get 0 hits on this technology. Is this really a wise certification to get?

Again you do a search on Printer + and you see 500 hits in just one city. I know this certification example would indicate and low to mid level paying job, but my point is wouldn't this be a better certification to get from a ROI standpoint? Obviously cost per certification or certifications and how much time it required to study for factors in.

Thoughts?

I know my examples are kind of weak but I didn't want to say one cert was better than another or get into a **** match that non vendor are better than vendor etc.

Thanks

ROI on a cert often goes way beyond just having it. Demographics, experience, your location, the rates you are willing to work for, the kind of work you will consider, your expectations all come into play there regardless of if you have the *valued* certification.

I know someone who got the CCIE back in 2008 who bemoaned the ROI after taking 6 - 7 months off work straight to get it. He used to do 10 -12 hour study sessions broken up by his wife knocking on his door and leaving him food on a tray. Thing is he was already making a really good screw as a contractor doing specialised comms stuff outside the Cisco space, so in fact the CCIE was just another string to his bow instead of a bump up. He had never worked on Frame Relay but knew a lot about Radar and military comms. Security clearance type work I imagine.

That said it can still pay to have a look and see what people are asking for and the rates. The chances are though that where there are many hits the rates are lower and there are far more qualified people out there. You could have something relatively obscure in the pantheon of certifications but it may be gold, not in and of itself but because you can tie that in to a job that needs not just the cert but the right holder of the cert. Those sorts of niches usually require demonstrable experience.

eMeS

networker050184 wrote: »

I agree with what you are saying, but can you suggest another way to get a ball park estimate on the demand of a certification? I know the job boards are only a small sampling of the positions available, but I really don't know another way to gather useful info.

I'm not really sure. I question all of the surveys that we see because they usually seem to have some agenda behind them.

It would be really nice to see someone come up with a non-sales oriented/affected way of measuring something like this.

For me I would say this is very qualitative. I look at many things and then throw a bunch of chicken bones in a pot and try to infer some kind of answer from how the chicken bones pan out.

I'm joking, but I am also making a serious point. Just as my chicken bone method produces data, so does the method of looking at postings on job boards. However, I suspect that both produce bad data. Is bad data better than no data?

I've been both correct and completely wrong with certs. All of the Microsoft stuff I ever did was pretty much pointless, whereas all of the ITIL stuff I've done has had a huge payoff. The Six Sigma stuff has never really paid off for me, but all of the IBM stuff I ever did has had a huge payoff. I guess the real trick is having more correct guesses than incorrect ones....

The other thing that I sense is that at some point the market will become disillusioned with certs. I have nothing hard to prove this, however, I just feel like what's not missing is more certs, yet there seems to be many organizations and vendors producing exactly that...

MS

jahsoul

eMeS wrote: »

The other thing that I sense is that at some point the market will become disillusioned with certs. I have nothing hard to prove this, however, I just feel like what's not missing is more certs, yet there seems to be many organizations and vendors producing exactly that...

MS

You said a mouthful right there sir. I've noticed a lot of jobs that spews out certs that don't relate to the advertised position and I feel like a lot of people pay the money to obtain the certs that won't even be on their resume in a year. Seeing that is what really made me look at the certifications that I want to pursue and if they are worth my time and would be beneficial to my end goal, but that's why I feel like it's good to have an end goal before getting into the field, but that's just me. *shrugs*

eMeS

jahsoul wrote: »

You said a mouthful right there sir. I've noticed a lot of jobs that spews out certs that don't relate to the advertised position and I feel like a lot of people pay the money to obtain the certs that won't even be on their resume in a year. Seeing that is what really made me look at the certifications that I want to pursue and if they are worth my time and would be beneficial to my end goal, but that's why I feel like it's good to have an end goal before getting into the field, but that's just me. *shrugs*

The other thing to consider is that sometimes requirements listed on a job posting are used to disqualify, rather than qualify, applicants.

MS

jahsoul

eMeS wrote: »

The other thing to consider is that sometimes requirements listed on a job posting are used to disqualify, rather than qualify, applicants.

MS

*disclaimer*
I have nothing against the certs listed in the following post. They just weren't for me.
*/disclaimer*

I always figured that but that's what push folks to go get the certs. When I first decided I was going to get into IT, I was about to get A+, N+, Sec+, MCDST, and looking at an MCSA for a desktop support job that I KNOW paid $9 an hour. Then I really sat back and decided what I wanted to do. My cert list is short, selective, and related to my end goal. (well, other than my school certs..lol). But everybody mileage varies. I don't know how far my list will get me but at least it's what I want to do.

Repo Man

Good argument. Looking at the job sites I have never seen MCITP listed. Even with environments that specifically state Win7/Server 2008 I still see MCSE listed in the requirements. I suppose this is a valid reason to go MCSE then upgrade to MCITP.

NetworkingStudent

Turgon wrote: »

I know someone who got the CCIE back in 2008 who bemoaned the ROI after taking 6 - 7 months off work straight to get it. He used to do 10 -12 hour study sessions broken up by his wife knocking on his door and leaving him food on a tray. Thing is he was already making a really good screw as a contractor doing specialised comms stuff outside the Cisco space, so in fact the CCIE was just another string to his bow instead of a bump up. He had never worked on Frame Relay but knew a lot about Radar and military comms. Security clearance type work I imagine.

I’m sorry , but that is just sad….. He really had his wife bring him food on a tray, while he was studying for 10-12 hours a day? I like my free time and I like studying to, but I need to have balance.

N2IT

eMeS wrote: »

The other thing to consider is that sometimes requirements listed on a job posting are used to disqualify, rather than qualify, applicants.

MS

How often does this occur? Intuitively I would say less than 1%, without data to back this up who really knows.

N2IT

eMeS wrote: »

Adding more sh*t to a pile of sh*t does not improve the quality of the original sh*t.

MS

Hey you have your PMP. Isn't the technical term for this called "crashing" the project?

Just kidding.

Mike-Mike

N2IT wrote: »

How often does this occur? Intuitively I would say less than 1%, without data to back this up who really knows.

i have no facts to back me up, but i would disagree with you... i think many jobs list degree or cert requirements to scare off applicants, but they would certianly look past it if need be

N2IT

eMeS wrote: »

I would argue neither. The situation dictates the tool. Flexibility is key. Reality trumps everything.

If I were to always take one approach over another, wouldn't that be the equivalent of considering every problem a nail that I gladly hit with my one tool, the hammer?

This extends to vendors for me as well. I don't believe that any one vendor has the answer to everything. Those that do are typically trying to shoe horn solutions into whatever their favorite vendor offers.

The situation you've presented here is in no way quantitative, looking at it from a purely quantitative standpoint is missing about 95% of the picture.

MS

I would also argue that you have to have a lean one way or another. Nobody and I mean nobody is completely neutral, it's just not human nature. I don't discredit that you remain as neutral as possible, but that still doesn't answer the question. Everybody has tendancies and beliefs. Even if you were to sway 1% one way or the other that one way would be your lean.

Mike-Mike wrote: »

i have no facts to back me up, but i would disagree with you... i think many jobs list degree or cert requirements to scare off applicants, but they would certianly look past it if need be

I was under the opinion he was stating that jobs list certification requirements to disqualify applicants because they obtained the certification, not because they didn't.

eMeS

N2IT wrote: »

How often does this occur? Intuitively I would say less than 1%, without data to back this up who really knows.

Every job posting that I ever wrote did this, as did those written by my colleagues.

MS

N2IT

eMeS wrote: »

Every job posting that I ever wrote did this, as did those written by my colleagues.

MS

Maybe I am not understanding the premise. Are you saying that you over list qualifications to weed out people or are you saying that you purposely list certification so that if an individual says he/she has them you automatically know he/she is not a good fit?

I am just trying to get clarification. I don't want to mistake what you are stating.

eMeS

N2IT wrote: »

I would also argue that you have to have a lean one way or another. Nobody and I mean nobody is completely neutral, it's just not human nature. I don't discredit that you remain as neutral as possible, but that still doesn't answer the question. Everybody has tendancies and beliefs. Even if you were to sway 1% one way or the other that one way would be your lean.

You might be amazed exactly how neutral and uncaring I can be.

It's like this:

Craftsman

Do you know why they sell tool sets with this many pieces? Because not one tool fits every problem. Personally I'm going to go for whatever I understand that gets me the result I want as quickly and as accurately as possible.

I'm not going to screw around (pun intended) with a standard screwdriver when what I really need is a Torx screwdriver.

It's very difficult to make a subjective problem into an objective one, which is what it seems is what people are trying to do when they review the number of postings that include some keyword. It's a logical leap of faith to assume that this number is an accurate measure of the demand for a credential.

MS

N2IT wrote: »

Maybe I am not understanding the premise. Are you saying that you over list qualifications to weed out people or are you saying that you purposely list certification so that if an individual says he/she has them you automatically know he/she is not a good fit?

I am just trying to get clarification. I don't want to mistake what you are stating.

This is going to sound really bad, but I've said it here before, and it is the reality in many large corporations, and I suspect small ones as well.

Here goes: It's a whole lot easier to not hire some one because they are missing some small technical requirement, such as a college degree, than if you don't like something about them such as their status as a protected class member, or simply don't like them.

Here's an example. I know first hand of a company in Dallas that is run by hard core fundamentalists Christians. They describe their jobs in such a way that they have many ways of disqualify candidates, when much of what they are actually doing is not hiring people that they feel are not a fit for their culture, meaning hard core fundamentalist Christian.

Here's another way to say this: You're free to not hire anyone you want, as long as your decision wasn't based on their membership in a protected class.

BTW, we're pretty much all members of one protected class or another....

MS

N2IT wrote: »

I was under the opinion he was stating that jobs list certification requirements to disqualify applicants because they obtained the certification, not because they didn't.

No, that's not what I'm saying.

MS

N2IT

eMeS wrote: »

You might be amazed exactly how neutral and uncaring I can be.

It's like this:

Craftsman

Do you know why they sell tool sets with this many pieces? Because not one tool fits every problem. Personally I'm going to go for whatever I understand that gets me the result I want as quickly and as accurately as possible.

I'm not going to screw around (pun intended) with a standard screwdriver when what I really need is a Torx screwdriver.

It's very difficult to make a subjective problem into an objective one, which is what it seems is what people are trying to do when they review the number of postings that include some keyword. It's a logical leap of faith to assume that this number is an accurate measure of the demand for a credential.

MS

"It's a logical leap of faith to assume that this number is an accurate measure of the demand for a credential".

This I agree with, but it was one I was willing to make, right or wrong. I am just saying IF the boards are any indication of what employers are looking for it might be a good idea to run a query on different types of certifications to see exactly how many jobs come up with those certs. Obviously this isn't an indicator of the quality of jobs, but IMO it does give you a ball park figure of the quantity of jobs that are requiring or at least asking for that certification.

You made good examples about some of your certifications earlier so I don't doubt what you are saying, because you are using real world examples of ROI on those certs.

eMeS wrote: »

This is going to sound really bad, but I've said it here before, and it is the reality in many large corporations, and I suspect small ones as well.

Here goes: It's a whole lot easier to not hire some one because they are missing some small technical requirement, such as a college degree, than if you don't like something about them such as their status as a protected class member, or simply don't like them.

MS

That makes sense and not being a hiring manager or upholding a HR position I am not aware of these tactics. I am not playing naive nor stupid, I just wasn't aware that these tactics were used.

Don't get me wrong I know they exist, just not in this form. Example: Age discrimination. All you have to do is request their high school transcripts or ask when they graduated.

eMeS

N2IT wrote: »

"It's a logical leap of faith to assume that this number is an accurate measure of the demand for a credential".

This I agree with, but it was one I was willing to make, right or wrong. I am just saying IF the boards are any indication of what employers are looking for it might be a good idea to run a query on different types of certifications to see exactly how many jobs come up with those certs. Obviously this isn't an indicator of the quality of jobs, but IMO it does give you a ball park figure of the quantity of jobs that are requiring or at least asking for that certification.

You made good examples about some of your certifications earlier so I don't doubt what you are saying, because you are using really world examples of ROI on those certs.

I'm generally very skeptical of the motives of people that I don't know, and always skeptical of the motives of recruiters. Job boards are heavily driven by recruiters, many external to companies and some internal. In my experience, the internal ones are just as slimy as the external ones.

Among many issues, one problem with this measurement is that you don't know whether or not the jobs that the recruiters have posted on the job boards are simply the ones that they will make the most commission for filling?

You also don't know if they are trolling for resumes for other, unrelated jobs.

That said, I think it's fine to do this, as long as you're aware of the weaknesses of the measure. Not targeting you specifically, but I've seen postings here over the years that take the results of such searches as the gospel.

N2IT wrote: »

That makes sense and not being a hiring manager or upholding a HR position I am not aware of these tactics. I am not playing naive nor stupid, I just wasn't aware that these tactics were used.

Don't get me wrong I know they exist, just not in this form. Example: Age discrimination. All you have to do is request their high school transcripts or ask when they graduated.

Yeah, it happens all the time. There's many ways to get the information that you want without directly asking.

Although many will claim otherwise, people generally act in their own self-interest.

MS