Whatever the merits of certification, it has always been a big hit among those who get to do the certifying.
Though the rationale for certification is always societal good, the real objective is different: siezure of power. Certification is not something we implement for the benefit of the society but for the benefit of the certifiers.
But the real issue here is not certification; the real issue is de-certification. Certain people are going to be kicked out of the fold, not because they are not useful to the needs of the market, but because they don't jump through the certifiers' hoops.
Tom DeMarco, LETTER TO THE EDITOR On Certification
And? (Score:1)
The links to the last flamefest we had on this :) (Score:3, Insightful)
Some links to head off the rest of the discussion:
My 2004 OnLAMP post about Perl certifications [oreillynet.com]
I've softened in my old age on this. I don't need to worry about it because I know people are all talk and no action. Four years later we see that nobody did anything but talk. It's my favorite life rule for the last couple of years: ignore things you don't like and they mostly go away on their own.
Reply to This
Re:The links to the last flamefest we had on this (Score:1)
Re:The links to the last flamefest we had on this (Score:2)
Honestly Brian, how hard is it to do a bit of link checking? You had no way of verifying it?
Ahem. I'm totally kidding
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for the correction.
Old, but good (Score:1)
Gosh! I agree with chromatic :-) (Score:1)
Certification - waste of space. See my delicious links on certification [del.icio.us] for a collection of similar views.
I especially enjoy the Agile Allience position on certification [agilealliance.org].
Re: (Score:1)
I didn't express any opinion in the original post, except that I think that Tom DeMarco wrote that letter.
For what it's worth, I could support a certification that identified actual skill, limited its promises to what it could reasonably support, and did not exclude people of the appropriate and corresponding skills.