Bonafide

I recently posted a comment on slashdot where I explain, in a big-picture kinda way, how I ended up with my job at the credit union. And it's true, that's not what I mean. This post, however, is about certifications.

Do I think certs are bad? Nope. I think they're cool. I think they're awesome to have, to show, and to show off even. I'm not above giving a man (or woman) props for sticking to a program all the way to the end. That type of dedication is to be commended, and whomever has shown it earns the right to boast about it.

Just don't rub it in, of course, or use graphics on your resume. (Full disclosure: I once recommended to a friend that he use graphics on his resume for his certs, to spice it up. Yeah, I've changed my mind, thanks)

So do I think certs are something required? This is a definite no. I think that most jobs list them as prerequesites because they don't want every Joe Computer who can wiz through Windows 98 SE, and play a mean game of Tekken, to be applying for their job. And that's understandable. Honestly, I've seen more job ads with the clause "or equivalent experience" than I've seen with a simple "you need these certs or this degree to apply."

Of course degrees are something else. They show an entire mountain of dedication where certs can sometimes only show a small village. These people took not only classes in their selected field, they broadened their horizons with knowledge from all kinds of sources.

Again, these peeps deserve their commendations, and I give them sufficient praise whenever applicable. (That's right JRob, I'm talkin to you!)

But on the flipside, on my side? They're really great to have, but after you self-teach yourself something for so long, you begin to wonder what the fuss is about certs anyway.

I found two points from this comment very insightful. He's speaking of those without certifications, ie, 'self-taught' people:

first, there were gaps in their knowledge that came from being able to do things without understanding exactly what they're doing or the underlying technology.

This is very true. A lot of times I'll get a new piece of hardware or software and I'll just dive right in. You don't need to know the exact technology because all things have a pattern. All things have syntax. When you understand command structures, config layouts, and setup defaults, you quickly learn that with Google all things are possible. As long as I keep my stuff in a controlled environment, I am very happy with how I learn my skills.

The second thing that I noticed was that self taught people could not see their lack of knowledge.

I don't see this one as ringing that true, but I know many where this is the case (of course, here I am, self-taught, saying that I can't see my lack of knowledge. The irony is palpable).

I think the point is this: When you're so used to diving in and getting your feet wet, you don't look at technology as a series of limitations, but a progression of challenges, each furthering the one before it until you've mastered whatever hoops need to be jumped through, and whatever is necessary to make Product X work like it should.

Those with certifications are used to finding limitations and structures of Product X and working inside them. This is the proverbial box that people love for your to think out of. Take this how you like, but this is what rings true to me.

In the end, as long as you know what you're doing, or can help me with what I'm working on, or getting out of my way so I can work on it, I have no qualms.

Qualm-free, that's me.