Looking for Advice on Certifications and Degree

[bjmach]

Curious. I currently am 8 yrs away from a 20yr military retirement. Taking A+ Certification class next week via New Horizons. What certs should I pursue next?? Network+, Security+?? CCNA? Microsoft??
Also I have been chipping away at my bachelors degree through Park university. Bachelors in Management/Computer Information Systems. Should I put ahold on the degree and focus on Certs? Just trying to be in the best position when I retire in 8yrs. I also have a TS Clearance which I am told would help me when I retire from the military. Any advice? Suggestions?

 

[Lilliabeth]

Certifications anymore just tell people you can memorize a book (or a Test King test) and pass a test

I don't know about other certifications, but that has not been true of MS certifications for a long time. The questions are situational and are pulled from a humungous deck of questions, and are therefore, really not memorizable. The days of a "paper MCSE" are over.

What a degree says about you varies quite a bit from school to school.

Lilliabeth
-Why use a big word when a diminutive one will do?-

 

[Lilliabeth]

Certifications are mostly a waste.

We must live on different planets. It's the norm where I live for the HR Dept of a large organization to automatically refuse anyone without a relevant certification.

Lilliabeth
-Why use a big word when a diminutive one will do?-

 

[SQLSister]

Interesting Lilliabeth, we never care about certifications nor have we at any other job because we have found most of the candidates with certifications don't really have the technical skills unless they have other relevant experience which will qualify them for the interview without the certification. I would never consider turning down a person with relevant experience and no cert over someone with a cert and no relevant experience. Someone with a cert and relevant experience would not be higher than someone with similar relevant experience and no cert because the certs are mostly meaningless in terms of actually performing the work. You lose most of the better candidates with a silly policy like that.

"NOTHING is more important in a database than integrity." ESquared

 

[Stella740pl]

Where I work, what is mostly looked at is a relevant education and/or relevant experience, or a combination of both, depending on the position/level. Certification is a nice addition to the other qualifications - sometimes; but isn't really a deal maker or deal breaker in most cases.

 

[SANEngInCO]

I agree with you SQLSister. I get an MCSA back in '04 with no experience at all in managing Microsoft from a practical perspective. But I thought I needed it to get a job. I actually got a job because of my degree and not my certs. I have a couple others now, but my experience far outways my certifications in terms of meaningfulness. I would not say certs are meaningless, but I would definitely say a degree and experience are far more important in industry.

I am very surprised that a company (large or otherwise) would disqualify candidates because of a lack of certs. That's probably the craziest thing I've heard yet. As for "paper MCSE" (or any other cert for that matter), I can point you to the actual exams to memorize if you want. I know they're there because I know people who have used them and recently. I don't like it, but that's reality. I've worked with many engineers who had "paper credentials" who had no clue how to do things their certs said they could. Is that "the norm?" I don't think so. But there are enough of those types of people out there that any responsible company would take experience into consideration before certs.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
Albert Einstein

 

[beltmanjr]

I believe it is a combination of your skills and assets that make you the right candidate for a job. If part of your assets are a certification that is nice but usually not enough. If you however have the skill, but nothing to proof this you wont get there either.

Thus experience + cert + degree all account for the total you bring to a company and is what in one way or another you will be judged on.

 

[Stella740pl]

experience + cert + degree

I don't think this formula describes your value to a company correctly. :-D
I think it should be

[i]a*relevant_experience + b*relevant_degree + c*relevant_cert + d*miscellanious_factors[/i]

but I won't say anything on the value of a,b,c and d, since the issue is somewhat debatable. Let's say that they are variables depending on many different things.

Got to add, though, that some companies use different formulas - or wrong values of a,b,c and d - when hiring people; and this process is not always based on the true value of candidates.

 

[beltmanjr]

a*relevant_experience + b*relevant_degree + c*relevant_cert + d*miscellanious_factors

You nailed it!

 

[kmcferrin]

I have to disagree about memorizing tests, it is absolutely possible with MCSE exams and I know people who have done it (getting perfect scores on 5 of 7 exams, no less!). There are even boot camps where they give you the actual pool of exam questions to study rather than teaching you the material. And that's before you even get around to the hired guns who you could pay to take the exams for you in your place! I assure you, the age of the paper cert (including the MCSE) is alive and well.

My rating scale when I interview candidates goes like this:

Cert only - worthless
Relevant experience only - good
Relevant expereience + relevant cert - better

Not that the cert makes you any better at your job, but if you have the experience and take the time to get the certification, it does say something about your character and work ethic. Plus, I think that the certs and experience help validate each other.

Regarding companies not hiring due to a lack of certification, I do believe that happens. In those cases you'll usually have a job description posted by HR or a PHB who can only quantify the skills needed in terms of certifications, so they list it as a job requirement. Then in the first wave of screening they discard any resumes that don't have the certs listed. If you don't have the listed certs then you don't get an interview. If they find the candidate that they want during that first round, you never had a chance at getting the job. If they don't find the right fit, then they often times go back through the discard pile to find people with closely matching experience. Then if you do get the job offer, you have to negotiate for more salary while the HR person considers you a B-list candidate, which could have an effect as well.

Just keep in mind that I'm talking about larger organizations here where HR handles most of the pre-screening. At smaller companies where you actually deal with managers directly for most of the hiring process, I doubt that a manager with technical knowledge would pass you over for lack of certification. But it does happen.

________________________________________
CompTIA A+, Network+, Server+, Security+
MCSE:Security 2003
MCITP:Enterprise Administrator

 

[shoalcreek]

Many of our customers have dozens of open reqs for technical resources, many of them listed as contract to hire.

You might get more people if you made them real full-time jobs, instead of this contract-to-hire garbage. When one employer treats people like dirt and another employer treats people like humans, the employer who treats people like humans will always win out.

 

[kmcferrin]

You might get more people if you made them real full-time jobs, instead of this contract-to-hire garbage. When one employer treats people like dirt and another employer treats people like humans, the employer who treats people like humans will always win out.

You very clearly did not understand the post. Firstly, these are not my positions to offer. They are my customers' positions, and they're free to offer them however they like.

Secondly, contract-to-hire isn't garbage, nor is it treating people like dirt. It's a customer (many of which are Fortune 500 companies) who needs skilled IT resources. Rather than spend a great deal of time weeding through candidates to find a few decent ones, then hire them and hope it works out, they prefer to go through contracting, staffing, or consulting firms. They get a 6 month no-risk trial of a pre-screened potential employee, the employee gets a no-risk trial of the company, and the employee can either choose to go to work for our customer or stay with us when the contract is up. It's usually a win-win-win. How is that treating people like dirt?



________________________________________
CompTIA A+, Network+, Server+, Security+
MCSE:Security 2003
MCITP:Enterprise Administrator

 

[acewarlock]

kmcferrin: I must agree with you on this.




This is a Signature and not part of the answer, it appears on every reply.

This is an Analogy so don't take it personally as some have.

Why change the engine if all you need is to change the spark plugs.

 

[Lilliabeth]

Whenever I mention that certifications have value, I always make the assumption that everyone knows that certifications complement experience and do not replace it. That's because (and I know you disagree, kcmcferrin) I feel it is extremely unusual for someone to be able to attain a high-level cert without experience. Anyone who has no experience and gets a perfect score on 5 exams is obviously, without a doubt, no question about it, inarguably, cheating and I feel that is also pretty rare (at least in the US) as testing centers do try to maintain security.

The bootcamps that have attained a pool of answers... why haven't you turned them into Microsoft?

Lilliabeth
-Why use a big word when a diminutive one will do?-

 

[shoalcreek]

It's a customer (many of which are Fortune 500 companies) who needs skilled IT resources. Rather than spend a great deal of time weeding through candidates to find a few decent ones, then hire them and hope it works out, they prefer to go through contracting, staffing, or consulting firms. They get a 6 month no-risk trial of a pre-screened potential employee, the employee gets a no-risk trial of the company, and the employee can either choose to go to work for our customer or stay with us when the contract is up. It's usually a win-win-win. How is that treating people like dirt?

As a technical professional, I can tell you that most technical talent does not consider this situation a win-win. My guess is that you probably also don't care what they really do think. Most technical professionals I know equate this type of arrangement with prostitution. Not surprisingly, the most talented people have no interest in doing this and often don't have to do it. When talented people go to "contracting", "staffing", and "consulting" firms, it is a last resort.

What I have also noticed is that companies that truly are good places to work don't do this. I know that the corporate office of Whole Foods does not operate this way. And, even though the pay is generally consider "low," most people I know love working there. It's also interesting when you have an attitude toward commitment you actually get commitment. As a result, turnover at places like Whole Foods is quite low.

Every employer, company, and manager has the turnover that they deserve.

 

[tfg13]

Lilliabeth, I've found that the bootcamps that do pass out the pool of answers are sometimes an "accredited" Microsoft trainer. They could very well be turned in, but the red tape to get something done is usually pretty long. Also, I highly doubt anyone who "passes" these courses is going to say anything.

I am also going to agree with you big time. I'm a pretty good advocate of certifications. I don't have a degree, but I have a few certifications. One of the certifications I am scheduled to take later this year is the CISSP. One of the requirements is 4 years experience to attain the cert, and continuing education is a must to maintain the cert. How about CCIE? Toughest certification out there. OSCP? Another 24 hour certification that is very challenging. Anything from SANS. Like to see a "paper" cert on these.

I have met quite a few graduates, that couldn't use a copy machine. How does that make them better than someone with certs? OK, someone goes to college, another jumps right into the work force. Who is more motivated to succeed? The person at college, who is looking for at least 4 years of college life, or the person who hits the bricks right away?

I have made this statement earlier in this thread, and I still firmly believe it.

But isn't a degree nothing more than sitting a bunch of exams to get a paper?

And those exams to get a paper degree sometimes include "basketweaving 101". How is that going to help the person succeed in IT? Oh, never mind. They can make baskets made from mouse wires and sell them.

I'm am not bashing anyone with a degree, because I have met some very well rounded graduates, that impressed me with their knowledge. As in life, you meet some dumb "smart" people, and smart "dumb" people.

 

[kmcferrin]

That's because (and I know you disagree, kcmcferrin) I feel it is extremely unusual for someone to be able to attain a high-level cert without experience.

We don't disagree there at all. I'm not encouraging paper MCSEs, I'm just pointing out that they're still alive and well, and probably always will be.

As a technical professional, I can tell you that most technical talent does not consider this situation a win-win. My guess is that you probably also don't care what they really do think. Most technical professionals I know equate this type of arrangement with prostitution. Not surprisingly, the most talented people have no interest in doing this and often don't have to do it. When talented people go to "contracting", "staffing", and "consulting" firms, it is a last resort.

I like how you can tell me what I think, or what's on the mind of most technical professionals. That's a neat skill to have.

Seriously, what's wrong with consulting firms? I can tell you as a technical professional that it's not for everybody, but it's by no means treating people like dirt either. In many cases the most talented people ARE consultants. Why? Because consulting pays better than being a full-time regular employee, and if you have the technical chops to command the higher salary then why wouldn't you? I've been working for consulting firms off and on since 1999, and worked for literally dozens of customers. At every one of them I've picked up some new piece of knowledge or skill set that has increased my value. It is definitely a winning situation for the technical professional.

It's true that some people end up leaving to go full-time as an employee, but that's just part of the business. Usually it's people who either don't want to deal with meeting new people and adjusting to new environments on a regular basis, or it's people who are risk-averse and think that somehow working for a consulting company is "less secure" than working for our customers. That's fine, consulting isn't for everyone, and if they're willing to take the pay cut then more power to them. In those cases they're benefitting from the no-strings attached trial that I mentioned earlier.

The consulting company that I work for is regularly listed in the top 10 places to work in our geographic area. Not the top 10 consulting companies or the top 10 IT firms, but the top 10 companies. That pretty much says everything that you need to know.

________________________________________
CompTIA A+, Network+, Server+, Security+
MCSE:Security 2003
MCITP:Enterprise Administrator

 

[shoalcreek]

I've been working for consulting firms off and on since 1999

The key phrase here is "off and on." If these consulting firms are such fine employers, then what is the reason for ever going off? I would think that if it is so great, one would go on and stay on. It seems that you have also worked for many different ones as well.

I know IT people who have been with the same employer for ten years or more. They are happy with their lives and actually like their jobs and the people they work with.

I work for a company that is probably the smartest group of people I've worked with. It is easy to have an intelligent conversation with these people on almost any topic.

How did they get such good people? They hired them. There is no "try-before-you-buy" garbage. Both employer and employee are committed to building a successful win-win situation from day one. It's amazing how easy it is and how well it works.

Employers really do reap what they sew.

 

[Stella740pl]

The key phrase here is "off and on." If these consulting firms are such fine employers, then what is the reason for ever going off? I would think that if it is so great, one would go on and stay on.

Have you ever done any consulting? "Off and on" - that's because consulting firms send you to their clients on assignments. If there jobs that require your particular set of skills and you are interested in those jobs, you are "on", is there are none at the moment, you are "off", and might go to another consulting firm that has an assignment for you.

Some of the assignment are short (a few months) - that's why they don't need a permanent person. Some are longer, and for those some consulting companies sometimes would employ you full time with benefits if you wish - but those jobs also end. Because if the client needed a permanent person, they would ask for a permanent person, not a consultant. If the job is for a few months only, do they really need to commit to a permanent employee? For that kind of job they can always find a skilled person who is also not eager to commit, but would like to get (and can command) a good pay for their work.

The clients get the job done, consultants get some short-term good money and new skills. Also a win-win situation - just for different needs on both sides.

I've done some consulting earlier in my career. They gave me some new skills, very good names (client companies) on my resume, and some pay jump which helped me to get better salary on my permanent job. Say, one job lasted 2 years, during which I've been a consulting company's full time employee with salary and benefits; another one was paid hourly (very well paid) and lasted 6 months, then a few days several months later.

Why did I stop consulting? Because I have a family with kids, I need stability, predictability, medical insurance, sick days and long paid vacations more than higher hourly rates. Because my husband doesn't have medical insurance. My requirements changed with time, so is the type of my job.

 

[shoalcreek]

I need stability, predictability, medical insurance, sick days and long paid vacations

I already knew that consulting doesn't give you any of those things. That's reason enough to stay enough from it. Thank you for helping prove my point.

 

[Stella740pl]

You are welcome, but really, you didn't actually prove anything to anyone - except yourself. You believe that consulting is not for you - and you proved that successfully. I helped you to confirm that you should stay away from it. You didn't prove that consulting is evil and perm is superior to those people that prefer changes, meeting new people and learning new skills to predictability (yes, they do exist). Some people do equate that to monotony. And getting higher rates you can buy medical insurance and other benefits. Not stability and predictability, though.

I already knew that consulting doesn't give you any of those things. [sub](Underlining mine)[/sub]

As matter of fact, I didn't actually say this. It may give you some of them - I did mention that I had a full-time position for one of my consulting jobs - it included not only health insurance, but also other benefits: vacation, sick days, etc. It lasted two years - longer then some seemingly permanent jobs do (you cannot be always 100% sure you can - or would want to - keep yours for life).

So, it may give you some of those things - not just all of them at once. But hey, not everyone needs/wants them all at once. Say, if your spouse has a good health insurance, you don't need another one in the family, you may take a higher-paid job without one. And, as I already said, not all people like predictability. So, to everyone their own.