Do employers care?

Sabalo

L0gicB0mb508 wrote: »

I'm going to fall in to the crowd that says most don't care as long as you can do the job they hire you to do. I don't really agree with dumping at all (unless you are buying my product, please see sig), but if you can do the job, I honestly don't care about your piece of paper.

Your product failed me. It told me that a Pumpking was a character from the Wizard of Oz instead of a delicious seasonal brew from Southern Tier. Beer+ failure. >_<

L0gicB0mb508

Sabalo wrote: »

Your product failed me. It told me that a Pumpking was a character from the Wizard of Oz instead of a delicious seasonal brew from Southern Tier. Beer+ failure. >_<

Sorry I was actually doing labs for my Beer+ when I wrote the testbank. I'll be sure to update.

Matt27[lt]

citinerd wrote: »

So I think **** give an unfair advantage

This got me thinking about dumping for two days - couldn't get it of my mind. Advantage - it is always "unfair" for someone, who doesn't have it. I'm taking exams, because I want to get certified and to gain advantage over someone. Accordingly someone, will try to take advantage of ****, to get over my advantage. Should I do **** to get my advantage back?...
On discovery channel saw about USAF pilots which took prescribed drugs (amphetamines i think), year was about 2000. The pilots were ok with this - "as long as it give us an advance over the enemy".
For some reason I am starting to think like them - if only it gives me advantage, it must be good for me. It's like crossing to the dark side
Get back to original question - do employers care? They should and even must. Unless they are simply hiring people to become certified partner or something. In this case you take quantity over quality. Otherwise I see no point why employers should choose a dumper which wouldn't be able to perform at his job.

Excellent1

Bl8ckr0uter wrote: »

What I would like to know is do employers actually care about whether or not someone braindumped a cert or not? I know the struggle I had going from Network+ level to CCNA/CCNA:Sec level of networking knowledge. I know how many times I took apart and labeled a pc for A+. Most of you know about Security+ (which we won't talk about ) but what I am wondering is would an employer care?

I know this is going to come across as naive and maybe even somewhat pretentious, but in the end, to me, what an employer might think isn't anywhere as near as important to me as what I think. All the employment opportunities in the world aren't worth coming home at the end of the day and knowing you're a fake and that you don't deserve to be where you are at. The confidence, satisfaction, and peace of mind that comes from knowing you obtained your goal (whatever it might be) legitimately far outweighs the instant gratification of a falsified certification.

I would guess that most of us reading this grew up in the era of instant gratification in a lot of video games (U,U,D,D,L,R,L,R,B,A,Start--you know who you are ), but most of us also remember that there was a great deal more satisfaction that came from winning legitimately.

Again, kind of a preachy post, I know, but it's just my take on it. The older I get, I find myself thinking less about how to get away with things and more about how to do the right thing because it's the right thing to do. I sleep better at night for it, and trust me, I need my beauty sleep.

As a final comment, all employers that are objective will care about whether your certification is legitimate or not. Regardless of whether you can do the work, if you've shown a willingness to **** to achieve a goal, you are absolutely a liability to a company in terms of potentially compromising company policy and procedure. Companies these days not only have the burden of remaining profitable in a business sense, but they also have to manage litigation risks, and shortcut-takers are one of the biggest sources of these kinds of risks. Just my experience, ymmv.

Turgon

Bl8ckr0uter wrote: »

So while in the cisco forum, some douche comes up and boast about how easy the cisco certs are if you use brain **** and such. I saw this in a post:



Now some of the people here are in hiring positions and are probably not an accurate representation of the populous at large. What I would like to know is do employers actually care about whether or not someone braindumped a cert or not? I know the struggle I had going from Network+ level to CCNA/CCNA:Sec level of networking knowledge. I know how many times I took apart and labeled a pc for A+. Most of you know about Security+ (which we won't talk about ) but what I am wondering is would an employer care?

I would imagine that the answer to your question will be somewhat skewed on TE as the membership here signs up to an ethos of anti-dumping. Putting all that to one side though I think certification has taken such a clattering the last 10 years that honestly a lot of employers are really easy going on all that. We still have a lot of people in hiring positions who either have no certifications or took the easy way out to get them. There is still a lot of rat racing going on to get them within Partners and the underhand practices of obtaining them is not frowned upon. The training community as a whole still has a problem with instructors liberally spreading the good news to get the pass stats up. There is also a lot of emphasis coming from companies to get qualified to keep the auditor or client happy and everything they tap into to accomplish that is under pressure to win the business and keep the business by guaranteeing results.

There there is the footprint itself which hasn't exactly covered itself with glory the last 10 years. A legion of people who are qualified in something who pass themselves off as experts in areas they have marginal production experience with. An ill informed recruiting base who assume that a qualification is a panacea. Both of these situations lead to bad expectations, botched work, delays and spiraling costs in the field. A case in point is design. A support professional, an instructor, a designer are all different things. Getting yourself qualified to the hilt in say design qualifications is certainly beneficial, but you have a long way to go before you should be leading a global architecture refresh for a fortune 100. Some people pass themselves off as being experienced at that, but premium qualifications and a few hours superstar consultancy doesn't cut it. First of all because such projects can run for 12 - 24 months and are a serious fulltime commitment for any technical leader. Secondly, the body of knowledge you should be leveraging goes way beyond what is embraced by a qualification blueprint, and that includes the CCIE or CCDE tracks.

All of these things taken together have left hirers less concerned and impressed about qualifications and generally more interested in what you have delivered in the field that is truly impressive the last 5 years. I continue to hear that CCNP holders do not cut the mustard in interviews nevermind in the field.

So why bother with them? Well if you study dilligently you can learn a great deal, and the structured approach certainly helps you cope with subjects that are new. Secondly it helps in the hiring process as people do like to work alongside qualified people. Other than that it's really down to what you actually *know* that is truly useful and what you can actually *do* really well. Just don't get out of your depth.

chrisone

Wow I made the head lines! Lol it's simple and common sense regarding this subject, it's been debated about here monthly lol

Devilsbane

Matt27[lt] wrote: »

On discovery channel saw about USAF pilots which took prescribed drugs (amphetamines i think), year was about 2000. The pilots were ok with this - "as long as it give us an advance over the enemy".

It is different. Having that bonus might actually give you an advantage over the enemy. With certifications, there is no bonus to having a certification posted on the wall that you know nothing about. Yes, your resume looks nicer, but it doesn't make you any better at the job.

tanix

I would hope they care, especially after all the effort I have put into my certs.

I really dislike brain dumping. As some have said, it simply results (providing they fool their way through an interview) with someone being on the job who has absolutely no idea what they are doing.

While having the cert without experience does not guarantee someone will be ready right out of the gate, I would hope it means enough that the person has the basic understanding of concepts to work through the issues and that with a bit of experience, can slide into a fully functional role without too much direction.

If they view brain dumping as acceptable, then... this completely throws out the credibility of the cert, leaving those who actually did put in the effort to learn the material and become fairly functional in it standing with a piece of paper to which will grant them little if any consideration due to their lack of experience when it comes to even interview selections. This would be unfortunate as I am sure there are aspiring learners to which lack of experience would be a small obstacle in the path of them achieving success in that role.

shodown

xmalachi wrote: »

I wonder how popular cert dumping is in the world of Microsoft Partners and Cisco Partners. Most of their partner status is dependent on what certs individuals have correct?

Very High. The real smart quys where the ones that were pushed to get certs in 2-3 weeks. The company was pretty smart about it though. They would have the guys who's brain operated at High RPM's **** test, but they were so smart nobody would even question it. These were usually for the specialist certifications renewal season was underway.

SephStorm

I know several parts of a company that I have seen places where it is known and accepted that employees brain ****. Its allowed because they have to meet federal cert requirements. The line of thinking (excuses) varies, but all the same, I consider most of them worthless.

citinerd

Excellent1 wrote: »

I would guess that most of us reading this grew up in the era of instant gratification in a lot of video games (U,U,D,D,L,R,L,R,B,A,Start--you know who you are ), but most of us also remember that there was a great deal more satisfaction that came from winning legitimately.

Is it wrong that I read your entire post but just had issues with the fact that you got the code wrong. it is (U,U,D,D,L,R,L,R,B,A,SELECT,Start) and I think the game that made it popular was Contra. Give me my 30 lives..... Just Kidding!

MentholMoose

Actually you use select only if you are playing a two player game.

Devilsbane

Excellent1 wrote: »

(U,U,D,D,L,R,L,R,B,A,Start

It is also what you type into your palm pre to turn developer mode on. I love when programmers use clever things in their programs.

citinerd

MentholMoose wrote: »

Actually you use select only if you are playing a two player game.

That just means I have friends....

Chris:/*

As for the Government comment about supporting cheating I would have to disagree. A manager in an organization that pushes their employees to get certified no matter the cost is wrong not the entire organization. In addition most trainers or training coordinators do not know what is considered cheating in the industry which is a big problem. If you violate an NDA for an exam provider and a government organization learns of this you can be held accountable for it by your employer.

I would agree though a number of managers in the Government want results and will suggest products that get results quicker which is wrong. Due to this we are hemorrhaging with people who can tell the difference between a Linux CLI and a Cisco CLI but may be in positions to work on both. That being said we do have some outstanding people who would put many to shame but they are the exception.

Part of the problem is the in the government is the bill of goods sign off we have. They higher people who do not have to directly prove their knowledge just their certifications and degrees. Only high tier very technical jobs in the Government really require you to prove your knowledge all others take what they get especially if it requires a clearance.

Poor policy for hiring and firing and lack of validation of technical knowledge has created more of the bureaucratic problems we have in the government than anything else.

spiderjericho

I work in the government. And with the 8570.10 mandate, there is a lot of emphasis on certifications (certifications equals quality workforce).

Someone, somewhere decided that attaining the certification, ensures the IT workforce is capable, competent and knowledgeable. Problem is the manner in which they're meeting the mandate. It's about numbers. How many servicemembers and GSAs can I certify to say I'm compliant with the mandate.

Net+ bootcamps. Sec+ bootcamps. CCNA bootcamps. CISSP bootcamps. Recommending the use of test simulators or whatever.

One of my coworkers was teaching an active directory/DNS class. He created a poorly made lab, which didn't completely consider DNS zones/replications and the active directory architecture. But I won't hate on the guy, as the situation he's in, he's not an MCSE, MCSA, etc. But one of his students is an MCSE and MCTIP (who brags about it) and he wasn't able to solve the lab issues, which I consider laughable. Or in the same class, someone was teaching a suite of equipment. One of the instructors, who is a CCNA (used test **** to attain it) and is actively studying for CCVP (again using test ****) was blown up by my teaching partner (who is a student in the class). My friend questioned him on using a static route on an ethernet interface without using the next-hop IP. The "CCNA" argued with him, and his defense was, a CCIE told him this was the recommended practice. My friend came over to my class and asked my supervisor and I. And we agreed with him but didn't bother to get in the argument. My partner then proceeds to open up a CCNA book and shows the "CCNA" the errors of his way.

A lot of my peers believe the more the certs, the better, as it will guarantee you a job in the civilian sector or gain you some modicum of respect.

But test **** is just one issue. We could probably get into a heated discussion about the validity of certifications. Not to say the knowledge that is gained isn't valuable, as it is.

twodogs62

I know several people who got msce. They both used brain ****. One said they couldn't have done it without it. It was so open them talking about the material they used. Brain **** with actual test questions. Yes, I think less of them. Seems dishonest. Could they be trusted. Business ethics questionable. I think they were saying, why not everyone is doing it.

cabrillo24

With some of my previous employers I've seen brain **** passed around for certifications, and always thought to myself "what's the point?" Ok, you have the certification, but once you talk to them with regards to it, they assume you're speaking in Chinese.

As for your question. Do employers care? Depends on the industry. Some companies are required to be compliant with certain certifications, especially on the defense side. Failure to obtain certifications could result in termination of contracts or loss in revenue.

keenon

I have had technical interviews phone and in person. If you don't know what your doing someone asking the correct questions will know.

Admittedly there are somethings people will forget as not using them frequently can happen but the fundamental stuff is mandatory.

joshmadakor

Devilsbane wrote: »

I wouldn't, $1,250 for a test is pretty steep.

qft

bertieb

Claymoore wrote: »

If you're going to piss yourself at the prospect of aswering 50 multiple-choice questions, how can I expect you to be of any use when production systems are down at 4 AM and we're scrambling to meet our SLAs?

Sorry, I know I'm a bit late on this thread, but thats a quality statement that made me laugh out loud and nod in agreement at the same time.

Pash

It the grand scheme of things it always becomes crystal clear who has worked hard for something.

My goals in the past has always been about trying to better myself by gaining certifications to cement my knowledge. Now I am much more content learning stuff for the sake of actually using it day to day. Which I know sounds ironic considering I spend my time reading a tech exam forum

alphaomegait

xmalachi wrote: »

I wonder how popular cert dumping is in the world of Microsoft Partners and Cisco Partners. Most of their partner status is dependent on what certs individuals have correct?

I would say quite a bit from some of the guys we have hired from that side back into the data center. The reseller needs their guys to cert up to sell products. Does not mean the tech is a bad person or a bad tech, they do what they have to do to keep a job at the company until they can find their way buck to a hands on tech job.

aprillove20

"Originally Posted by chrisone
Employers should ask for the dates of certificates. . If i was in charge of hiring I would not even let this guy have an interview , especially if he had no job experience."

yes, employers care about certificate, because it add more credential on your application.