Is it possible to have too many certifications?

I was wondering what the members opinions are on this topic.

First of all should your certification reflect your experience / skill sets or does that not mean that much? Example Help desk employee with a MCSE or a Operations Tech with a CCNP.

Do you think that listing to many can look ackward or even strange?

Should your certs paint a picture AKA show a certain path. Rather than have some random cert pattern? (Just wondering I really don't have an opinion at this point).

I ask because at first I had a plan and that was to get several process certifications because that was my interest and that's where I wanted to go. But now I feel I should validate some of my technical ability so I am taking on Net + which I just passed today and security +.

Find more posts tagged with

Free for TechExams community: Cybersecurity salary guide

Compare cert salaries and plan your next career move

Button

Comments

varelg

Sabalo wrote: »

A certification is a final exam, of sorts. There's nothing wrong with saying "I want to know that stuff", learning that "stuff," and certifying on that stuff.

+1 here. If you feel the curiosity and interest in that subject, there's nothing wrong with studying it, labbing it and eventually take an exam on it. However, there should be some line of focus evident on the list of certifications that one provides, say an ad for *nix admin and a candidate with a list of *nix certs like LPIC, Red Hat, Sun...

Psoasman

I don't think you can have too many certs. I do think you can have too many certs in a short period of time, though.
It took me about 15 months to get my MCSE and that includes A+, N+, S+. If I did that in 4 months, most people would naturally be suspicious.
If I was interviewing someone who had a lot of certs, but they were spaced out in a "reasonable" time period, I would think they were dedicated to learning and keeping up with technology.

SteveO86

N2IT wrote: »

Lot's of interesting comments!

Indeed, of course everyone's comments are just that.

We each have our own way of looking things, no one is right or right. Of course it might be hard for some of us to justify the reasoning by others, but that's life.

I only get certs that pertain to my job role. When something new comes along (like Hyper-V, I will learn about Hyper-V but I probably won't get certified in it till I really get my hands dirty with it). I've come to realize the longer I work with the technology and the longer I hold off on the certification test the easy it is.

That's just me.

(Keep in mind I am already in the field, when I first started off in IT I did get certs just get a position, so everyone's position is different.)

And just because you have a cert doesn't mean your an expert. I've worked with enough individuals that either didn't have any certs or had alphabet soup after their name and have had both good and bad experiences. It's one thing to have cert, and it's one thing to be knowledgeable.

My 2 cents.

networker050184

Sabalo wrote: »

Along the same lines, why even look into college if you don't already know the bulk of what will be on the final exams? Answer: Because you are interested in the material leading up to that final exam. A certification is a final exam, of sorts. There's nothing wrong with saying "I want to know that stuff", learning that "stuff," and certifying on that stuff.

In my eyes a college degree and a professional certification are completely different. The point of college is to learn through courses. The point of a certification is prove that you have already mastered a subject. Just my opinion.

cisco_certs

N2IT wrote: »

I was wondering what the members opinions are on this topic.

First of all should your certification reflect your experience / skill sets or does that not mean that much? Example Help desk employee with a MCSE or a Operations Tech with a CCNP.

Do you think that listing to many can look ackward or even strange?

Should your certs paint a picture AKA show a certain path. Rather than have some random cert pattern? (Just wondering I really don't have an opinion at this point).

I ask because at first I had a plan and that was to get several process certifications because that was my interest and that's where I wanted to go. But now I feel I should validate some of my technical ability so I am taking on Net + which I just passed today and security +.

Not really.
No
No

I believe that too much certifications is not a bad thing. IMO certification is a paper that shows you that you are eager to learn and you know at least the basics of that subject.

The company that I'm with will only give you the job like system admin if you have a certification like MCSE, MCSA or CCNA. Does the company expect them to know everything? No, in my company, certification is a way to show that you know the basics and that's enough to get promoted.

Is it too much? No, company has projects and the managers will usually asked if a person in IT will help in the IT projects like for example creating a WLAN. If you have a CWNA, CWSP, CCNA wireless, you have the idea how to help, participate and shine in your department. This will help your manager sees that you are helpful and important to the company.

I think listing too much certification doesn't matter. My company will even pay for any IT certification as long as you passed it. They would even pay for your boot camp as long as you passed. My company doesn't even care which certification (MS certs, Cisco certs, Security certs, VOIP, & wireless certs) it is as long as in IT. What does that say? It says that they would want you to learn more and grow in the company.

Sabalo

networker050184 wrote: »

In my eyes a college degree and a professional certification are completely different. The point of college is to learn through courses. The point of a certification is prove that you have already mastered a subject. Just my opinion.

The point of college is to learn. The point of earning a college degree is to prove a certain level of competence in the subject matter... yes?

Similarly, the point of studying for a certification is to learn. The point of obtaining that certification is to prove a certain level of competence in the subject matter.

If I know my material, I skip the college class, study for a bit, and take the CLEP / Challenge test.... or I skip the books, study the cert for a few, and take the cert test.

Just my opinion on how they relate.

eansdad

Psoasman wrote: »

I don't think you can have too many certs. I do think you can have too many certs in a short period of time, though.
It took me about 15 months to get my MCSE and that includes A+, N+, S+. If I did that in 4 months, most people would naturally be suspicious.
If I was interviewing someone who had a lot of certs, but they were spaced out in a "reasonable" time period, I would think they were dedicated to learning and keeping up with technology.

So what would you think of someone like me? Over the next year I'll be going from 0 certs to 9+ certs including A+, Sec+, MCDT: Win7, CCNA and most of the rest of the WGU Cert list. I should also be able to find time for MCITP:SA, CCNA:Security, Net+ and Linux+. I've got 13 years in IT just never had a need for a cert of degree. I am also paranoid about failing. No matter how much I study or how much I know I always walk in feeling unprepared.

I don't think you can have too many or get them to fast. If you know it you know it and some people can absorb the knowledge faster than others. Also most certs do stack like the M$ and Cisco ones (you don't state on your resume that you have 5 MCDTs and MCITP:SA if you have the MCITP:EA unless you’re trying to pad it). I'd also be more suspicious of the person with a dozen certs who ask simple questions (ie someone with Linux+ asking what C is or A+/Net+/CCNA asking the difference between a router, switch and hub).

LTParis

Bl8ckr0uter wrote: »

^ No^

I am sorry if I am reading this wrong but from what I am reading, you are saying that it is not possible to have too many certs. Is that correct? IMO the previous posters mentality is one of the 3 problems with the current certification process/system (number 2 being the sheer amount of certs and number 3 is braindumps). IMO every cert you get widens your attack surface (areas that an employer will expect you to be an expert in). If you constantly study all of that knowledge, thats great (I am not going to get into the specialist vs generalist thing). If you don't you would could really get yourself into a world of trouble. IMO keep your certs in areas you work with or want to work with and go from there.

Actually I am going to say that not everyone is a generalist. Some people (i would say a lot of people) are specialized. In small companies it is more likely to have 1-2 people doing everything but with large shops that just isn't scalable.

That is why I framed it in a generalized/specalized viewpoint. I am a generalist, working my way from help desk, to web design and development, to networking, to architect. In my case having a wide scope of certs would not have harmed me because my career is not focused in one specific realm of IT.

Now if you are looking to be specialized or are specialized, then getting certs not related in your expertise could make your employer question your career motives.

But again it depends on what you want to do.

Turgon

networker050184 wrote: »

This is the way I go about certifications and believe you can't go wrong with it.

1. Acquire experience with technology
2. Master technology
3. Get certified on technology

I'm not a big believer in the "get certified to learn something" approach. The way I see it you should already know the stuff if you are even thinking about getting certified with it. Of course at times there will be some details or an objective or two you aren't familiar with and will need to learn to get certified. But if you don't already know the bulk of the material why even look into a certification?

Entry level certifications don't really apply though. If a certification is aimed at someone with no experience level then I think its fine to learn as you go.

I agree with a lot of this. Picking up a certification to break into something new is sometimes a useful way to get into it, particularly if you already have strong experience in related areas.

UnixGuy

KZhao wrote: »

I can't agree with you more. But if you want to do your job well enough in IT filed and want to get higher and higher position, you'd better try to get some important and advanced certifications, such as CCIE. What do you think about that?

absolutely, if you are already in the networking field and you deal with Cisco gear, then getting a CCIE will significantly boost your career, specially that it's a lab-based cert. CCNA--> CCNP --> CCIE is a wise approach IMHO.

welcome to TE forums

Psoasman

eansdad wrote: »

So what would you think of someone like me? Over the next year I'll be going from 0 certs to 9+ certs including A+, Sec+, MCDT: Win7, CCNA and most of the rest of the WGU Cert list. I should also be able to find time for MCITP:SA, CCNA:Security, Net+ and Linux+. I've got 13 years in IT just never had a need for a cert of degree. I am also paranoid about failing. No matter how much I study or how much I know I always walk in feeling unprepared.

I don't think you can have too many or get them to fast. If you know it you know it and some people can absorb the knowledge faster than others. Also most certs do stack like the M$ and Cisco ones (you don't state on your resume that you have 5 MCDTs and MCITP:SA if you have the MCITP:EA unless you’re trying to pad it). I'd also be more suspicious of the person with a dozen certs who ask simple questions (ie someone with Linux+ asking what C is or A+/Net+/CCNA asking the difference between a router, switch and hub).

I think you'd be more of an exception. If you have 13 years of experience, I'd think you would already know the material and be able to pass the exams.

ibcritn

I was also very interested in this question.

So the general consensus is you can't have too many certs (if spaced correctly, and you can speak/perform with what you are certified on)

I was worried as I plan to accomplish CISSP, CISA, ECSA/LPT, and possibly another certification in 2011...and I didn't want to over certify.

I can certainly say that if you list certification be able to answer probing questions about it in an interview.

SteveO86

I really wouldn't worry about the time line either many things can factor in that. (Training, Real life experience, how quickly you pick up on stuff, etc)

As long as you know the technology (which is what really matters) go ahead and get a piece a paper that says you know it.

Hypntick

Yeah I think as long as you can back them up then it's no big deal. More than likely in an interview spot you will be quizzed to some degree, which you should be.

ibcritn

Hypntick wrote: »

Yeah I think as long as you can back them up then it's no big deal. More than likely in an interview spot you will be quizzed to some degree, which you should be.

I agree! The certifications can help you get the interview, but they don't answer the questions for you in them