This is an article from Computer Users. This is the link: http://www.computeruser.com/article...,1,1001,00.html
What is that NT certificate worth?
Plenty, as long as some work experience comes with it.
By Jim Aspinwall
In August, Lanop Corp., a network-certification training company based in Jeffersonville, N.Y., issued a press release entitled, "Bill Gates Isn't Going to Like This…" The opening line read: "Certified MCSEs and corporate IT managers alike were ready to revolt when Microsoft announced that they were going to discontinue the certification program for NT technicians within the year."
The announcement is partially true. It's true that the MCSE program will no longer test for NT 4 and earlier versions come January. Whether the IT department will come storming through the server room with torches, mallets, and ropes, ready to revolt, is debatable. If they do, it will probably not be because Microsoft is shifting the focus of its MCSE certification program from NT to 2000.
Microsoft perhaps used an unfortunate term when it said it would discontinue NT certifications. This implies that scads of NT-certified administrators out there would be left behind. You may be led to believe that this means Microsoft is dumping the MCSE program, or that the NT MCSE will become obsolete or meaningless. This is completely untrue.
The reality is that NT is no longer a current Microsoft product. It and the attendant course materials and tests have been displaced by Windows 2000. Win2K certification materials have been available since before Windows 2000 was released to prepare IT and other staff for 2000's release. Microsoft's continuation of training and testing through this year is acknowledgment that migration to 2000 will not be accomplished overnight. If Microsoft wanted to force the market into 2000, it could have cut NT from the program before 2000's February release.
Administrators will need to take a few courses and tests to recertify for 2000 if they want to work for companies that have Win2K networks. This is not necessarily a bad thing; keeping your skills fresh is a requirement in IT. There is nothing wrong with getting trained and certified on 2000 in the Microsoft program, since more than half of the 2000-related material should apply to NT.
However, Lanop believes that NT skills will still be important to the IT community for quite some time. And they may well be. To that end, Lanop is inventing its own independent NT certification, mimicking the course material and tests that Microsoft currently uses.
What Microsoft's people say
If Lanop's press release did not get a reaction out of Bill Gates himself, it did catch the attention of Microsoft, which, of course, prepared a response. Microsoft, having established a leading-edge technology presence, says it expects 2000 to be running on more systems than NT in the next few years. Indeed, this may be true for many companies. The shift in the MCSE certification track was announced well in advance of 2000's release--September 1999 to be exact--which makes Lanop's reaction and announcement seem all the more reactionary.
Microsoft claims that it will carry NT in the training materials for some undefined time in order to support its customers, and current NT certifications in the MCSE track will not be retired until 2002. This means that your current MCSE is not worthless; merely upgrade with a course or two in 2000 to keep your skills current. Microsoft realizes that NT will remain important to current users and businesses, and acknowledges that independent industry training and certifications may indeed be the correct solution for this situation. Whether or not going with a non-Microsoft certification would cause any repercussions in current product licensing or reseller arrangements remains to be seen.
What Lanop's people say
I had hoped to get a substantive list of leaders in corporate IT and industry groups to lend credibility to Lanop's claim that its NT Certified Professional (NTCIP) program will be recognized as more than just another knee-jerk reaction to big, bad Microsoft's way of doing business. Alas, supporters of NTCIP are reluctant to be named publicly at this point, perhaps fearing eventual repercussions from Microsoft. Based on a few e-mail and forum postings on Lanop's Web site, there does seem to be some grass-roots momentum in favor of keeping NT training and certification alive no matter who provides it.
Pushing 2000 upgrades by leveraging certification and training programs does not seem to be good business in principle. John Goodfriend, chairman of Lanop, believes Microsoft should continue NT certifications just as Novell continues the Certified Netware Engineer program for Netware 3.11 and 3.12, even though 4 has been around for years and 5 is the current product version. Goodfriend advised us to keep watch on the Lanop Web site for regular updates about NTCIP. Whether Microsoft will yield to market pressures and continue NT certification beyond 2001 remains to be seen. The company may adjust its aggressive training timetable as a result of a slower-than-expected adoption of 2000.
What IT people say
The question of whether or not certification is important to employers or employees raises quite a stir in IT cubicles and in online discussion groups. The answer, of course, depends on whom you talk to, what certification means to them in one situation or another, and where they are in their careers.
Ask enough people and you will probably find that many of the most professional, experienced, and helpful systems people have never taken a computer-training class, much less a certification course. You will also find a lot of managers and their employees who swear by certifications as an essential benchmark of a candidate's employability.
In areas where IT candidates are plentiful and jobs are scarce, certification programs such as MCSE, Novell's CNE and the A+ PC technician programs are at least a first-pass screening tool for job applicants. With a lot of available personnel to choose from, hiring managers can get away with being choosy, and certification is a convenient requirement to impose.
Certification does not guarantee skill level or experience any more than a lack of it indicates incompetence. It only means that the certificate holder either has memorized or has been coached on enough material to pass six expensive tests. This alone does not translate to technical aptitude to install, configure, maintain, or troubleshoot a complex network infrastructure. At best it validates an existing work-experience level with the systems and software involved.
Certification is not like bonding an employee under a liability-insurance policy covering labor or materials damages when it comes to establishing requirements and ensuring that your network is in the best hands 24/7. Even the most competent systems engineer--certified or not--can make a mistake in a router configuration, IP netmask computation, login script, or data circuit hook-up. It happens; we are only human, tests or no tests.
No substitute for experience
Providing training and benchmarks for success are worthwhile and necessary endeavors no matter what the job title. These resources and their qualifiers provide goals, motivation, and validation for millions of people, as well as guidelines for selecting and employing the right people for a particular job.
Network and server engineering and administration are as much skill-crafts as managing and designing for business needs. Neither of these soft skills is part of the certification processes, nor should they be. Certification was not necessary when the Internet was created. Many of the Net's founders had electrical engineering or math degrees, but rest assured the curriculum at the time did not include UNIX or C++, much less NetBIOS, Windows NT domains, or Cisco routers. Yet the technology and standards they introduced are still solidly pumping away as the heart of the biggest, most reliable network in the world.
As in any hiring situation, I would advise challenging anyone with certification and little or no work or practical experience to be sure they know not just the test material but how it applies to real-life situations. Requiring certification may be a way to gauge people coming in your door, but it cannot tell you how or if they will do the work. I would also challenge job seekers who have years of experience without any certificates to fully appreciate how much return on investment that piece of paper can bring.
Report this post to a moderator
|
10-10-00 12:20 AM
