I think OSCP was the most legitimately useful in tech https://www.offensive-security.com/pwk-oscp/
PMP has been useful to take on Project Manager roles, but really PrM roles aren't all that exciting to begin with. Still helps when you want to run your own projects.
I'm currently studying to be a certified parliamentarian from the National Association of Parliamentarians. I'm interested in corporate governance and learning Roberts Rules of Order definitely helps.
I'm also a certified farmer (yeah its a thing), I have 5 sailing certs, 3 scuba certs, Wilderness Emergency Medical Responder cert, working on my pilots license, getting my real estate sales license, ham radio operator general class, almost done with my CDL, there's lots more I'd have to check my notes on.
I do want to get a Kubernetes cert done this year. Long term I want to knock out my CPA/CFA exams, but those are a huge commitment so we will see if it pans out.
Most of this response hasn't answered your question at all, because certs really are mostly useless. Still fun to collect.
I'd imagine financial certs would be the most useful (CFA in particular).
If anyone knows any other fun certs let me know.
Congrats on your OSCP - I run a cybersec biz and some of my colleagues have that cert and I’m always impressed when I hear someone has it. I’m a CISSP but I think an OSCP is more practical.
Ham radio extra which is elec eng focused rather than just rules of the airwaves is a good one. (I’m callsign WT1J)
In our biz I really appreciate it when folks have a Network+ or Security+ or a Linux admin cert because you can’t argue with the value of knowing networking fundamentals and the Linux command line. In fact knowledge of Linux command line is my leading indicator of competency for a QA role we have open. I look at answers to this question first every time. Next thing I look at is SQL knowledge- because I think both of these are strong predictors of deeper technical capability.
Certs are underrated IMHO because most of them provide practical knowledge that is immediately applicable in a work setting or other pastime. They give you real skills.
Lastly AWS certs are also super practical and very valuable IMO.
Great question OP!
And then they roll out new services almost weekly.
Quite a moving target.
Fyi, you are then a "professional driver" even in a normal car driving to the grocery. If you get a ticket, many states will instantly double the fine because as a pro, "you know better". Plus there's the medical aspect and other bullshit.
Unless you're going to actually use it, dont get it. Learn to drive an 18 speed with air brakes etc, sure. Just dont get the actual cdl.
Note: the EPA 608 has multiple levels. For mini splits under about 2 tons, you might be able to get by with just your EPA 608 core and Type 1 (small appliances, <5lb of refrigerant) Type 1 + core can be done online, open-book, and costs $25. Nobody should install a mini split without it!
CFA requires that you have work experience making investment decisions and can get references to that effect, but in all it would be easier than CPA.
I'll knock that out then take the charter exam, if I pass then I'll consider doing part time work as an accountant for two years to get the hours.
[0] https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/092815/how-b...
One thing I am wondering is how much these certificates cost. For example, quickly glancing through your OSCP link says the minimum is $1499, it is not cheap!
Thank you for mentioning NAP, I didn't know this was a thing (I suspect most people don't)
Fun certs - I did this last year https://www.pearsonpte.com/ and thoroughly enjoyed it. Unlike many tech certs, to pass language exams one has to really know the language. This exam is 100% computerized, so we don't have to deal with biases of examiners, which is what happened to me with IELTS.
The rats dig it.
Also, those are some pretty serious things to do as a hobby.
There is a separate certification for anything involving open flames. Including things like Dave Chapelle using a lighter to light a cigarette.
Storage, transport and manufacturing certs are independent of these and and all involve the ATF in the US (starting with Form 54). It’s actually pretty complex trying to figure out alone, I had to get plugged into the local pyrotechnics guild for them to lay it out for me.
I had started learning level 1, but realized I'm kind of wasting my time allocating much brain juice to it before growing my income/net worth.
I'm not OP, but I also have quite a bouquet of certifications. Why? Mostly because I love to learn and I also love to work towards goals. Also most certifications[1] are not that hard once you've figured out how to deal with scenario based multiple choice questions. It's a low effort way to focus my learning.
When it comes to hiring - and as someone who sat at both sides of the table - any certificate outside of what is expected in your industry does more harm than good.
[1] OSCP is the exception to the rule
I can see this being the case just for the fact that certs are usually paired a structured curriculum for learning a new skill. This takes a huge mental burden off and decreases time wasted in deadend exploration.
I need something to "show" for my efforts. Project-based learning can work for me as well, but it takes extra work to figure it out for a given skill. I'm learning photography and I have a goal of doing 1 portrait session per week for a few months. That kind of thing helps me feel like I'm making measurable progress.
My work requires me to take certifications and keep them renewed.
What I appreciate from certifications is actually taking a well-made test. (Instead of a carelessly made normal school or university test.)
For well made certification tests, the question writing process is interesting and a whole specialization by itself. Each question is beta tested. And metrics are collected as to how a question is correlated or predicts that someone will pass the test. Tests should avoid mixing question pairs that hint the answer of another question. And writing multiple choice answers in which the answer is not possible to guess. Also writing questions so they are well written and easily understood. So that the question measures knowing or not knowing the topic, rather than affecting the test taker due to unclear wording.
I’m similar to you - have a ton of certifications and I’m an insanely good test taker.
Several years ago I signed up for the Level 1 CFA exam in late August to take it on December 5th. So I had a little over 3 months to study for it.
My first inclination that I made a horrible mistake was when one of my portfolio manager coworkers said to me, “I got my bachelor’s in finance, got my master’s in economics, studied for that test for 6 months, failed it and gave up. It’s just too hard.”
350 hours of studying later, I was the only one from my company that passed Level 1 that year. 33% pass rate.
I’m in software engineering. It has provided no discernible career benefit even though I work at an investment bank.
I’m happy that I proved I could do it but the CFA program is not a certification to collect on a whim. It’s literally a 3+ year commitment and you will come close to killing yourself studying.
Also once or twice a year you can attend a conference and rack up all your CPEs.
In some states, carrying lockpicks is presumptive guilt unless you're a locksmith, but I never figured out whether that's a certification or just a business license or what.
Is the specific parliament you want to work in?
I've tried, really hard. I did 4 years of french, 2 years of spanish, 4 semesters of Arabic, 2 semesters of german, 1 Berlitz tutor session for 3 months in Russian and 3 months of tutoring in Farsi. Most of my grades were AWFUL and I barely qualified for anything. I really tried, but I just don't have the medium/long term memory for language. It also doesn't help that I live in the US.
Pentesting really requires "full stack" systems knowledge, from networking, to OS, to API analysis, malware analysis, binary reverse engineering. OSCP is an applied cert, so it really forces you to be able to leverage knowledge in a practical way.
However my favorite benefit of offsec is really being able to see things from an attacker's perspective. This has been super valuable in many situations and I've found I'm many times the only person in the room with an awareness of an adversarial mindset.
Maybe someday.
Now the easiest white collar profession (8 courses that are easy) require we work for a broker for years. Usually a broker who got their licence without becoming a salesperson first.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed the bill because he wanted competition.
Gov. Brown eventually signed it.
MSHA part 48, or others, is useful to be allowed to be unattended on a mine site. The scope and size of some mines, and the operations and equipment, are something to experience. Of course, the mine owner must want you to be there.
FAA explicitly allows after 48hr observation, see https://www.faa.gov/coronavirus/guidance_resources#useOfVacc...
Not only could you be bypassing people passionate enough to work their way into the field through pretty adverse circumstances, you could be inadvertently reducing the diversity of your workforce in doing so. I know it’s tough to have to whittle down a list of candidates on paper, but the closer you are to judging a person’s path rather than their capability, the more likely you’ll be to favor people who mirror your cultural identity and experiences. So if someone looks like they’ve got the requisite skills. It certainly doesn’t mean everybody with a pile of certs is worth considering, but it’s probably not a good immediate disqualifier.
Of course it's never a binary decision and the complete picture of the resume matters. For example, if someone got a bunch of certs 20 years ago when they started their career that doesn't have any negative impact. But more often, people try to use certs and MOOCs to pad their resume and hope use them to hide the fact that they lack real work experience.
Not necccesarily. Depending on the cert and field it may make sense to.
The goal of getting the cert should be to learn skills. If you've done that, the piece of paper doesn't matter.
> Not only could you be bypassing people passionate enough to work their way into the field through pretty adverse circumstances, you could be inadvertently reducing the diversity of your workforce in doing so
The people with all the certs still got interviewed where i worked last, it was just a consistent pattern that they bombed the interview, usually very badly on very basic questions.
E.g. if I'm hiring for a junior dev and get some self-taught person having done a couple of relevant online courses and so far managed to get a tech support role looking to become a programmer I'm often interested in talking to them.
On the other hand, I have seen cv's from senior enterprise/government engineers, 10 pages long, plastered all over with certs, titles, abbreviations, version numbers, iso standards, etc. and I have absolutely no idea what they actually did or achieved in their prior jobs even when googling a dozen terms. They might be great in the context they are working in, but they are from experience not a great fit for the context I'm hiring for.
Recruiters and hiring managers go through so many resumes, the last thing you want is to have someone looking for a programmer to read about your basket weaving skills.
My strategy has always been to tailor the bulk of the resume to the job I'm applying for. Bring everything else up during the interview if there's natural time to do so, because that's where they want to see who you are.
This is an old anti-pattern: tests that sound like they're about competence, but they're actually about "culture fit."
Example: Speaking at conferences. This sounds like social proof you know something about the industry, and have communication skills to boot. In many cases it actually means you are good at networking, have leisure time available to attend conferences, and get invited back to speak at more conferences because you're likeable and contribute to the conference's social scene.
In my own case, I have spoken and even keynoted multiple conferences. But I don't think speaking at conferences means much when hiring, unless I'm hiring an evangelist or community manager. If I'm hiring a programmer, I want to know whether they can program, nit whether they can talk about programming.
Anyways, I support your thesis that some (or even many) single-metric gatekeeping strategies that don't measure the actual skill required by the job are bad, and I suggest that many of them test for culture, not competence.
For sure include them if they are relevant to the role or show real commitment to a topic. If you see a string of disperate certs though it's easy to assume the applicant doesn't know what they want to do.
Not saying I would discount someone on this alone but it would raise questions for the interview if they were otherwise qualified.
It at least gave me something to talk about more directly because I can have some expectation on tech they've worked with.
I personally don't chase certs for myself because I don't see the point, but I find them as fairly okay talking points on a CV. And it's hard to argue any interview unfairness since the cert should imply certain levels of familiarity with a technology.
Edit: I do need to add that the cert concern was a real thing in our company but after some analysis, we sadly found some biases from the interviewers as they only considered certs for certain candidates to be a negative signal. I put a stop to that fast reminding people of candidates from more western countries with gobs of certs, and they legit didn't know their ass from their head, much less how to do anything besides press the button the manual said to press.
It's part of the reason I try to make "cover paragraphs" (not necessarily full cover letters) an important part of every application - it's important to give people the opportunity to let their passion shine through at the earliest parts of a process.
Just FYI that at some companies, collecting certificates is indeed real world stuff. Some companies use it for marketing (“we have the most certifications in the industry”) and some need to to satisfy vendor partner requirements (“AWS Premier Partners are required to have X number of certificates”). It doesn’t seem fair to penalize a candidate just because they did what their company asked for.
My rule is always to only put something on my resume if I could talk for 2-3 minutes about it in a way that makes me look good/useful. Most of my certs, the only real thing I could say is "I spent 10-30 hours watching videos and then took a test well." I wouldn't really want to work for a company that valued those skills vs. me explaining how I applied the things I learned from the cert.
I assume part of the reason is that certs are expensive and not well respected, so the only reason you would get them is if you had no other options.
I should also clarify, I only put certs that matter (why put an Azure cert on a resume submission to an AWS shop) and certs that are recent (I have 20 years on my resume, why would i put my CCNA on there). I think a large number of irrelevant certs would be a negative signal. I think a large number of relevant certs AND job history to back them up would be a super strong signal.
With the popular exams, it is mind-numbingly fast. Think days to weeks. Crowdsourcing / MTurking the question banks is depressingly effective if you sweated over nearly a thousand question bank items for a few months with a few other expensive experts.
Labs in the exams are a way to blunt this, but I think the exam dump industry has probably come up with a way to defeat labs as well by now, because the labs run a fixed set of scenarios with variations in parameters but not the general gist. It's better, but still hackable.
What I've come up with requires discipline by a team documenting the issues they've fixed in the past, but it is so far 100% foolproof. Pick a random relatively self-contained issue your team fixed in the past; this is the most critical step governing the quality of this technique's results. Reproduce the issue in a scratch environment.
Sit down the candidate in front of a workstation set up to their preferences you gathered in advance, with all the tooling they prefer, simplifying your superfluous environment specifics where possible (like logging them into various accounts ahead of time). Set their expectations ahead of time that they will be team / pair troubleshooting for half an hour, that you aren't evaluating whether they find the root cause or not, you're evaluating how well they work with others troubleshooting an issue in some system/language/etc. they claim they are a domain expert in. Dive in.
Without fail, the ones who exam dumped their way to a certification will thrash about. Hard. Most common is they will not know where to even start, deer-in-the-headlights. Even telling the candidate straight out where to start, by using your 20/20 hindsight and artificially picking a starting point 1-2 steps away from the root cause still does not unlock them; jumping to a known good starting point is useful for the experienced candidates who freeze under interview pressure, as they usually unfreeze when given such a big head start from your IRL issue that you ran into for the first time.
You can often get a good gauge of how much and how deeply the candidate worked with the stack they claim competency in by how they navigate around, ask questions, probe for error messages, etc.
How does the quality and value of, say, CompTIA, Cisco, AWS, OSCP, K8s, Linux+ and other certs compare with each other?
Interesting, since the majority of tech interviews (from what I’ve gathered) rely on artificial tests that require memorization.
I’m not disagreeing, I also think real world experience is infinitely more valuable. But it seems like certs could actually be an indicator that a candidate would perform quite well in LC style interviews.
Certs on the other hand are often just pure memorization. There's not really any way to "infer" which AWS service name matches to which service function. You either know the name of the API call or you don't. It doesn't provide much signal that you actually know how to apply that information to anything practical.
Even at their worst, most crappy whiteboard code interviews are still literally testing if you can literally write functional code, which is closer to what you do on the job than memorizing the Cisco books.
This seems like a shaky assumption. Keep in mind that many companies, like mine, sponsor or even mandate the certification process. Meaning the justification, time, and costs didn't come from the candidate you're dismissing.
It's almost 100% that they fail the interview because they don't know how to put the learning into real world solutions.
My past company had a huge pile of credits for certs because they valued them and I figured “I’ve been working with AWS; why not?” I didn’t study or prepare at all and went in using only the hands-on knowledge I picked up over my career.
I came out with all the associate certs, the AWS solutions architect pro, and their network specialty.
As a hiring manager I find certs to be a neutral indicator: you at least have to know the material to get them, but plenty of people learn the material hands-on, not from books.
I suppose if there was a reasonably trusted organization that could give the same cert for "front-end javascript", that would be good too, since there would be great value in surveying at least the major features of the current js landscape. (Probably not practical given the breadth and depth and dynamism of the space, plus the ambiguity of selection. And also, not sure what org would or could do this!)
the candidate should not be penalised for trying to tick boxes that other people have set up.
I got rejected from positions because I had a masters in computer science instead of an ECDL certificate. So I swallowed my pride and went and got one. Now, I'd agree with you that as an actual computer scientist, mentioning ECDL on my resume is embarrasing. But there you go, some HR departments have weird automated checklists, so I leave it in. I'd hate to then apply to someone like you who'd reject me because I had the nerve to list my ECDL certificate on my resume. It's a lose lose situation for everyone involved.
As far as side-projects and open source contributions, this is a two way street. When I look at side projects, I look for how well you are utilizing best practices in your code. If it's a sloppy, poorly documented mess it doesn't look favorably for you. If you use your side projects as a marketing tool they should be well-polished.
Or it signals that the candidate would rather learn hands-on than take useless multiple choice tests.
We work on side projects because we __like__ it. Seeing side projects through the lense of "value" is naive in my opinion. Yes, obviously if the side project has actual users than that's a plus. But companies like seeing side projects because it __does__ show that the candidate really likes what they do for a living. Now whether the company is purposefully using that to expect people to work 60 hours a week is a different discussion. And while I'll probably ruffle some feathers by saying this, I'll say it; software is a sport. Very much like a sport, if you stop doing it then you'll get fat and lose your touch. People that work on side projects are constantly honing their craft and because of that they tend to be the best athletes.
If I owned a baseball team, I sure as hell want the best. And in my humble opinion, the best are usually __always__ working on getting better at the game. AKA working on side projects ;)
EDIT:Just want to clarify; it is WRONG of a company to expect people to work 60 hours a week. Just so we are in the same page. I am NOT condoning that.
In the late 90s, 98 I think, I worked for an internet startup that didn’t end up being huge. We were on Novell and a bit if solaris and had just launched a product that used windows nt and server side activex.
I was a college dropout web dev/web master making $50k. They had a hard time hiring devs who knew nt and could design and automate server farms. I learned on the job and did an ok job running it. But they wouldn’t promote me because I was really young and didn’t have a degree.
I went to a Microsoft conference and would buy a study book each day and take the test there. I did 3 exams during the conference and took the other three when I got home and with all 6 certs got my Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer (with a stamp of bill gates’ signature).
They gave me a raise to $60k (and the college grads went from 50-55). I then got $70k six months later and $80k six months after that as I was the “certified person.”
I always thought it was funny that I did the same job before and after the certs. The Networking cert was really useful and I still remember how to do subnets and dns and dhcp and stuff.
It’s often more advantageous for the company to have people with certs (it was with MCSE and such in the 90s anyway) - more MCSE etc on staff meant it was possible for the company to attain higher partnership levels with Microsoft which often meant more lucrative contracts and so on.
So while you may have been doing the same job as before, just by having the getting the certs you added more value to the business.
I later worked for consulting companies where these certs came in handy for the reason you describe.
Another one that will catch my eye is any Kubernetes certification.
Both are great additions to experience, the certification itself has much less value standalone, but it might be the edge that will help someone get that entry level job.
(These are common for DevOps engineers, but a SWE with the above will have an edge in my book)
I.e. A SWE with a SWE cert says nothing, because you'd expect them to know it. But a SWE with a DevOps cert says something, versus just claiming knowledge.
Back story: when I started working for my self my first client was a pilot, he encouraged me to get my PPL or at least do a demo flight. I did an intro flight and was instantly hooked. 3 years later I had a PPL, Instrument Rating, High Performance and Complex checkouts. One of the best experiences I have ever had, I was fresh out of college, had a few bucks in my pocket and not many obligations. Anyway heres why its been great:
- I have found there are basically three types of people that bum around private airports where general aviation ops occur. 1) people successful enough to afford to fly private jets or charters when they need 2) people successful enough to OWN their own plane. 3) People who are liable to become types 1 and 2. In general pilots are a nice bunch and a talkative bunch. Ive met some really great people (read business connections) just by lurking around the airport. That first client I had, had lots of similar buddies who were pilots that I got to meet etc. etc. By far the most productive business networking I have EVER done occurred near an aircraft.
- Flying keeps you sharp in all aspects and it WILL change the way you look at things. It keeps you sharp on doing paperwork, sharp on staying current on a topic, sharp on thinking ahead of things, sharp on staying in at least some sort of decent physical shape. I have built a lot of productive habits in my life to ensure I can fly.
- It hones your decision making skills, a lot....
- It re-shapes how you view getting around and enabling your business/work. Both pre and post pandemic life. Meeting with client within 500 miles, Im not dealing with trains or regional jets, im coming and going as I need. This has enabled same day travel, taking meetings i normally wouldn't have and being able to generally buy time back.
- Putting my PPL on my resume has been the best talking point, stand out item, liner note I have ever had.
- Its just good fun.
I list it on my resume as "Holder of FCC-issued radio operator license under Part 97, Extra class". For muggles, it's the beginning that sounds impressive. For other hams, it's the end.
And every. single. interviewer. has brought it up and asked about it. In technical roles, often one of the interviewers is also a ham or at least fairly aware of it. That's a natural branch to talk about side projects and hands-on competencies, which can otherwise be hard to introduce.
It requires some study, nothing to the level of a PPL, but most folks can't walk in off the street and get anything higher than a Tech license. General-class usually takes concerted study, and Extra is basically a thimble-full of college physics and a whole whack of practical electronics and RF safety.
Radio is mysterious to a lot of people. Heck, a lot of people don't even think of wifi and GPS and walkie-talkies and WDET as being the same thing. Being both competent with the tech itself, and facile with explaining it, makes one instantly valuable in a great many settings.
The privileges granted with a license are insane. I sometimes use the analogy that: Imagine everyone walks everywhere, or you can buy a little e-scooter that's speed limited to 2 miles per hour. All the fasteners are welded and it's illegal to modify your scooter. That's FRS, wifi, etc. Pay a fee and you can get licensed for GMRS, which is a 10mph scooter, but it's still welded shut because there's no technical competency required for that license. Or, demonstrate technical competency on the ham exam, and you get a license that allows you to drive a supercar at 1500mph, and you're allowed and encouraged to modify anything you like or build it from scratch if that's your thing, and they when you self-certify its roadworthiness, they just take your word for it because you hold that license and you probably know how to tune it and not hurt people and stuff. It's utterly bonkers.
Sadly the community around amateur radio is nowhere near as elite as you make out general aviation to be; there's substantial overlap with the wannabe-cop cosplayers, and I find the most interesting hams tend to not spend a lot of time at ham gatherings. There are some magnificent technical fora, to be sure, but they are the exception.
Lack of experience and achievements also make certs stand out more, because you've got not much else to show for yourself.
Sometimes certs can be a red flag.. depending on the cert. For example, someone with a whole bunch of Windows certs applying for a job dealing only with Linux? That's a bit of a red flag. Doesn't mean they won't get the job, though.. it's just one factor in the hiring decision.
Sometimes for really laid back companies, any kind of formal signaling like this could be a turn-off. It's like coming in to a company wearing a suit when everyone else is wearing shorts.
This is the key point.
Certs aren't good/bad, or helpful/harmful in of themselves. They matter/or not depending on what type of employment(if any) you are trying for for.
For instance, I never want to work in bureaucracies or places levels/layers/management complexity that they must fall back on certifications, skill checklists, and the like. So, I never pursued any form of certification. Not even a university diploma.
Also: The more your role is "external consultant", the more certifications matter.
Maybe it sounds obvious, but if you don't have a license, you are crippling yourself.
Even if you don't have a car, not having a license means you don't even have the option of renting one. Also, is is so "obvious" that if an employer notices that you don't have it, he will wonder why. Are you too stupid to drive? Crippled in some way? Economic problems? Have some criminal history? Alcoholic? You may have a legitimate reason, but it is still a red flag and you may need to clear yourself.
Second and just as obvious is a degree. Not so important if you have experience (though some large companies care), but a degree may be the key to a good first job that may launch the rest of your career.
I have never felt the need for any technical certification, not personally, the few I needed were paid by my employer for a specific mission, and done during work hours. Didn't get much use after that. Since I am not an English speaker, I probably could want something like a decent TOEIC score if I wanted to work in a large company in an English speaking country, but I am net even sure.
College degrees can definitely matter, unfortunately, but they're not strictly required. I've seen teams and managers who were pretty snobbish about which university somebody went to—to the point where not having a degree would have been better than going to an unknown or poorly regarded school. It's an absurd idea and, thankfully, seems to be getting less common in tech, but I saw some of it first-hand. (From what I've heard, it's still a real problem in law where a bunch of firms in the US are virtually T14 or bust.)
Also, WRT TOEIC, while you might need something like that for visa/immigration purposes, i've never heard of a company looking at a piece of paper rather than just conducting the interview in English.
I recently got my driver’s license, first one, at an age far far above the norm for America, even if you factor in New York.
In a long and so far pretty successful career in tech, this has come up exactly once in a professional context, and it was my fault because I was asking about the lack of public transit options during an interview. CEO asked “why don’t you just get a license?”
My colleagues usually find out sooner or later that I don’t (didn’t) drive, because I’m very social. Most people are fascinated by the possibility. At the very least it’s a conversation starter.
I regret not getting the license sooner, but the kind of ignorant and malicious questions listed above have never, ever featured in my unusually long pre-DL experience.
And the same for degrees, this seems to be very US centric IME. Not having a degree hasn't stopped me getting jobs in top salary brackets based purely on my experience, hell I even have a very odd work history and didn't move into tech till my 30's.
Same for certs, requirements for certs in job ads definitely seem to be a US thing. And for me if I'm reviewing CVs I see certs as a mild redflag as I've come across far, far to many people who have certs but couldn't work their way out of a soggy paper bag.
Thank you for your application. We have decided to pursue other candidates due to our recruiter getting "low key cripple vibes" from you. Don't take it personally though, and good luck in the future.
I assume you're from the US :-D Sorry, but this is one of the dumbest things I've read on the internet lately
One of the perks was that you could lease a vehicle at a high discount, which I never did of course.
It's like going to college. You don't need it, but its a nice bump above others in the resume stack at some orgs
Yep, thats the DoD for sure. They require a lot of useless certs.
Note that "experience" means "everything I've done with the license since getting the license". Don't fall into the "achievement" trap: reading a book so you can pass a multiple choice test teaches you precisely nothing, unless you go out and start to apply the rote memorization.
Assuming you have the experience and a reasonable level of knowledge, CISA and CISM are pretty easy to maintain. CISSP is arguably worth it too but I let mine lapse due to annoying renewal requirements and some politics in the org.
Having one or more of these can be really handy -- sometimes you have a client who requires it (perhaps because they've copied someone else's requirements), sometimes there is a project you're tangentially aware of with an audit requirement, etc.
Technically they're nothing special. The Offensive Security stuff is probably the best for technical knowledge in their domain.
(I also do a bunch of med, shooting, driving, armorer, etc. classes; it's especially interesting seeing how adult education/instructional design/etc. work in those areas, independent of the actual subject areas taught. "Training" vs. "education" in a lot of cases, etc.)
An MIT degree seems like it would actually be helpful in one's career. They seem to be pretty good in terms of engineering courses, faculty and student body. Did you skip directly to a graduate program?
Although I would agree with most opinions here that that does not make me into a data scientist by any meanse, I do really like that I have a good "helicopter view" of ML. This is still super benificial in my role today, as I know which kind of statistical models apply to certain kind of problems. This enables me to find the right people for the right solution with much more ease.
Genuinely though certs don’t really add value just get you through people who don’t know anything about it and are doing recruitment.
6 months later I found a job and moved to Boston. After working at that company for a few months me and my boss went out for drinks and I asked him why he decided to hire me. He said that my certification was basically a deal-maker. He thought it was a sign that I was at the top of my profession. I thought it was funny, but, hey, it worked.
Super fast forward - a few years later I Fat FIREd at the age of 33 and I'm absolutely sure that the initial certification set a certain chain of reaction that led to it. So even though I think in most cases the certifications are absolutely useless, I'm absolutely sure that when you have to stand out from the crowd, especially at the junior level - they are super useful.
She was a tech consultant. After I looked up “CYT” I think that made me not think positively of her. I mean it’s good that someone is proud of their accomplishment, but such a weird thing to announce to the world.
It would be useful to focus on the question as intended otherwise we are just going to see the same "certificates meh" noise that most of us already know.
This led to more responsibility and more pay but it took a lot of my own time. As I’m senior in my career now I sometimes wonder if it was worth it as a trade off for all of the certifications I earned.
For a "normal" business that is more of a customer to vendors, nah not really. Your experience is worth far more than your certifications. The only place it might get you somewhere is Government, although expectations are low there so you can get away with associate-level certifications and seem amazing.
https://www.accessibilityassociation.org/s/certified-profess...
I see these days lots of certifications on LinkedIn. For the people that I know well, it is a mystery how they get it because it is usually the weakest in the team that gets certified, while the best people never do it.
https://www.credly.com/users/balamurali-pandranki/badges https://www.credential.net/cdcfc3a1-b8c6-4b79-8efb-120b61927...
CEH is missing in there.
It was fun but none gives a F as long as you get things done.
I find that these people feel lost when you tell them they'd be better off just being curious and learning by doing the thing itself. They tend to find comfort in systems like the belt system in martial arts. So, if you feel this way- it might be worthwhile to pick up a few certifications just for yourself.
In tech the more prominently someone posts these certifications, the bigger the red flag. Someone just got a CISSP for some reason, perhaps as part of a job, and it’s at the bottom of the CV? Sure ok. Someone puts “PMP” in their signature line next to their name? Flashing red flag.
Even with money, let me pay $10-20,000 , take a test, prove my experience, and bam I now have a degree...
Do the same for masters, make it 8-10 years experience
Such as what? An industry research position in computer science? Sounds very unlikely, but I suppose possible.
Middle-of-the-road software development experience is not the equivalent of a degree in computer science, or software engineering, or anything else.
(Interestingly, the University of Cambridge may award you a PhD if you're a Cambridge graduate who has made a PhD-level research contribution to an academic field. [0])
If you have work experience, put it on your resumé.
> let me pay $10-20,000 , take a test
What test? The full suite of coursework assignments and written exams for every module in a 3 or 4 year taught degree course?
> Do the same for masters, make it 8-10 years experience
10 years experience of what? For a degree in what?
You could have a long and successful web-dev career with almost zero knowledge of computer science.
[0] https://www.cambridgestudents.cam.ac.uk/your-course/examinat...
Many schools will give credit for life experience, some through testing, some through interviews and reviews of one's professional work. IIRC, Western Governors University is one of the leaders in this practice.
The system you're proposing sounds ripe for abuse; wouldn't universities get the most money by lowering standards? You can get an honorary or extra muros doctorate if you make a significant contribution to the field, but explicitly tying it to a fee doesn't seem like a great plan.
Security aside, CCNA has to be the most valuable IT certification. They are cisco specific but the sheer amount of knowledge you need to understand for it and the foot-in-the-door opportunity is extremely valuable.
OSCP as well as others have noted.
No cert is a substitute for real practical experience. If you are trying to get a job and you don't have experience, then I can see how a cert might be nice to put on a resume. As a hiring manager, it doesn't make you more attractive to me to hire. The four years of experience doing a thing does. For tech stuff, I'd rather you have a home network with the thing and valuable time using it then the cert for the thing. The time spent pulling your hair out getting the thing running at home is a better use of the time then studying for the cert test.
However, I do put value in a liberal arts education. I don't even really care what that education is in. I feel people that come out of a four year program tend to think differently/more critically, on average.
Short answer, then: Get a liberal arts education. Get hands on experience. Skip the certs.
Back in the early 2000s when I was fresh out of university I did the Sun Certified Java Developer course. It made me stand out of the vast number of other graduates looking to get into the industry. I landed an awesome job straight away.
My advice would be to get 1 or 2 meaningful ones if you really want them. Avoid littering your resume with a bunch of certificates, since that adds a negative bias I find.
I've personally gotten a couple and thought they provided good structure to the learning and so I also advise them to engineers we hire if they want to learn k8s and don't know where to start.
Generally, there are two ways I look at certs.
Skills Development: Having a test to pass is a great extrinsic motivator to go out and learn and have some assessment and external validation that you did learn XYZ. It also removes decision paralysis around what to learn and forces you to focus on a specific topic.
Career benefit: This is 100% dependent on the companies and roles you are applying for. Within the "enterprise" space and large companies certs are generally more valued but it's best to work backwards from the type of companies and roles you want to apply for and see what they are looking for.
My profile is generally BSD/UNIX/Linux sysadmin with some addons needed in between like storage/virtualization or high availability clusters.
If I got asked why I get to the trainings but did not get certifications I reply that I went for these trainings for learning and knowledge (and eventually things I needed to ask a teacher directly about them) and that was my main interest in them - I do not need a 'proof' that I 'got it and understood it' at the classroom.
Maybe certification is more needed in other areas ...
Regards.
Software development and certificates seems like it's not a perfect fit.
If it were for an industry that is heavily regulated, certificates make a lot of sense.
They're like small exams in highly domain-specific knowledge.
Having ISO/IEC 27001, for example, for legal/compliance reasons.
I was curious to discover recently that to try and bridge the gap between what we should arguably be doing to tackle Climate Change and what we are doing, a group has come up with the term Inner Development Goals to describe a set of abilities that might help with this transition. https://www.innerdevelopmentgoals.org/
Curious if anyone else has come across this, expecially as I've done courses on Sensemaking, Counselling/Coaching, Critical/Systems Thinking and the Shadow (Jung) as mostly just life skills, but interesting to see them grouped together as potentially helpful generally, even if most of them would have to be studied in some depth to turn them into jobs.
The Why (from the homepage):
In 2015, the Sustainable Development Goals gave us a comprehensive plan for a sustainable world by 2030. The 17 goals cover a wide range of issues that involve people with different needs, values, and convictions. There is a vision of what needs to happen, but progress along this vision has so far been disappointing. We lack the inner capacity to deal with our increasingly complex environment and challenges. Fortunately, modern research shows that the inner abilities we now all need can be developed. This was the starting point for the 'Inner Development Goals' initiative.
If you have long-term experience and a base 'proof' of knowing how to work together, you have a solid foundation and everything else is just time and putting in the work (unless you want to get into some old boys network which isn't based on skills but on some form of heritage, be it family or a specific institute to attend).
If you get some fundaments for compsci at any college and then work for 5 years going from application administration to system administration to cloud native development you'll have the same solid impression as starting at the helpdesk, getting an AWS cert and working your way up from junior AWS engineer to medior AWS engineer.
Keep in mind that none of this gets you FAANG level work because they get a large enough pool of applicants where they can just filter anyone who doesn't have a combination of high grades and university or lots of experience in a highly specialised field.
Besides that, like others wrote: "advertising" what certs you have collected is like advertising what Pokemon you collected.
I would definitely list online classes and certifications on your resume, right below where you list your public git repos.
I was into programming and computers when I was a kid and in high school but for whatever reason I decided I didn't want to study computer science. Ended up in an arts program, which I graduated from and reached the top of my career path nearly immediately by getting a minimum wage job at a bookstore. I went back to school for accounting and became an auditor at a public accounting firm. I made it to manager, burnt out, and decided that I'd explore other options. I ended up with a consulting side gig at a startup using both my tech and accounting knowledge, and now my primary job is in finance process transformation/automation.
Looking back, it looks like my career path was tailor-made for the position I'm in now. I use all my education - arts has made me a good communicator, researcher, accounting has given me good technical and management skills. This is just the narrative fallacy at work though, I had no idea what I was doing along the way (and still don't!).
Public accounting and CPA has been fantastic at teaching me how businesses work inside and out, and is very valuable for what I do now. I don't know if I'd recommend it for everyone, but studying accounting itself is probably a good idea for anyone working in management or finance.
If you want something that will tangibly raise your prospects - look into clearances instead of certifications. These will open you up to a segment of the market that has less competition. I have a few colleagues that got two levels of clearance during university and they were immediately hired upon graduation.
Where they are useful is as a structured learning syllabus for entry level knowledge of a topic. If you know nothing about a topic but want to get into it, starting with a cert is a way to get the vocabulary and build a base to actually learn it from.
There is a category of company/role that really just needs some basic proof point that you know what your doing.
My first job was auditing user permissions, and refactoring Perl/bash scripts. There was a department of 9 people who provisioned a server once every 1-3 months using a mix of proprietary and open source software, they were also responsible for the operations of the legacy financial service the company offered.
I got the job, because it was boring, contract to hire, and probably a career dead end, had a brutal on all schedule, a penchant for firing people over mistakes, low paid, and made you wear a suit to work. It didn’t hurt that I memorized the answers to 100 Linux admin questions.
I left after a year and a half for a much better tech job at a startup, and transitioned to a standard engineer position within the year.
I find product / vendor based certification helps me round out my knowledge of a product better than just execution of a given task I need done at the time. This has helped me understand more of the capabilities of the what I wanted to learn
IMO this is more were the value of certs come in.
So for example I would not get a AWS Cert to get a Job in Cloud Administration, I would start training learning the cert to understand AWS, the cert is then just the final step of the learning process, the reward if you will.
Do I need to cert to learn it, no and sometimes I do not actually sit for the test.
I think people that just brain dump to pass the exam do themselves a disservice, that said the short answer to your question, I can not think of any cert that by virtue of just having it has advanced my career, I can say the process of getting certs which resulted in my expanded knowledge and experience has
Since I went on my own for the last 22 years I do not recall ever being asked for any certs anyways. I specialize in developing products from scratch with some hit an run jobs in between and clients just read references and rather long list of products I've developed. This severs me way better than any cert ever will.
Of course the situation would be totally different if I've worked in some other field.
Directly IT related - Novell used to offer what they described as "practicum" exams for their SLES (Linux) offerings. These were web based and you literally did sysadmin stuff on VMs - configure users, set up a web server, SAMBA, DNS etc and then the system would mark you. Beats the crap out of memory tests like the old MCSEs and the VMWARE VCP bollocks. I recall quicky getting Apache to serve /usr/share/documentation to help me out.
Nowadays I employ people and I am not predisposed to any form of excitement about memory test type exams and qualis on CVs (Resumes). I may sit you down in front of something bloody expensive and complicated and ask you do do something with it ...
CS degree every time right?
Now imagine both candidates had the exact same career trajectory. Say 6 YOE, couple years at a FAANG recently, but the non-CS candidate was promoted there etc. which do you prefer now?
Probably the non-CS degree holder. They have proven they can do the work and advance by their self-starter mindset, skill and hustle alone without “appeals to authority”/certification.
Once people have proven they can do the job for real, certification matters less. While some industries make it a box you have to check, tech mostly doesn’t.
Dont wast your time unless you can’t get a foot in the door without a cert.
The person with experience versus a new graduate degree holder is the actual head to head where the non degree holder has a much better chance.
Yeah, I know most of the people reading this can't go back and get one because you can only do it if you're a kid. And yeah, it's not really a certification, but I thought I'd put it in as something tangential.
Still, some of the best men I've worked with seem to have it more than not [0]. And when they see it on a resume, it's an instant 'eyes-light-up' effect. The people that are then hired are really good all in all. Just one okay-ish person that was an Eagle Scout out of about 15-ish that I can remember.
[0] It's been exclusively male for my career, but now women can get it too. So be on the look out for both sexes.
I've been thinking of getting one of them to get taken more seriously as a software architect, but I'm concerned that it will be all about creating complexity for the sake of complexity.
The certifications from training classes while in tech were not useful for my career but did come in handy when a few customers required {n} percentage of people to be "certified in ..." but those were very specific and obscure use cases.
All certs are bootcamped. Pay money...get all answers...pass the test (maybe).
I got a lot of value out of studying for them though.
I'm very clear when I say senior management because not everything has to have +TLS. But when your management get the speak from the "security certified" guy they stop listening to you and delegate.
With that in mind SANS. And I feel sorry for saying most of it. When your a seasoned Unix admin you shouldn't need a Windows wireshark certification about diamond team picking up your internal site traffic containing open secrets, but management thinks so...
Some people go for that. I've never been that type of a guy (my grades were also low as I spent my time working on real world problems). I think it's not worth the time, given that you use that time for actually having some hands on experience in real world.
If you can prove yourself in the field virtually no one would care about certs unless they are legally required to do so (e.g. You'd need a piloting license to fly an airplane (legally) even if you can perfectly fly)
Learning to teach, forced me to learn how people learn and that was invaluable.
I have a certificate on how to teach sailing but never got a real job doing so, but the experience has applied to every job since.
The following three certs helped to show I know my field really well and these separated me from others that just say they know it. Cisco CCNA/CCNP, Linux institute LPI and Agile Alliance certified Scrum master.
Later on I used certifications to quickly pivot into a niche, sometimes when already practicing the role. Architecture (togaf) and product management.
How can they tell if the IT consultants are qualified for the work? Certification is one way to ensure they at least meet the minimum requirement but this is not to say the certification implies the IT consultants have the skill sets or knowledge to do the job.
I also scored really high in the Sun Certified System Administrator exam for Solaris 10 - i can categorically say that didn't help. Thanks Oracle & RIP Slowlaris (i jest, 10 wasn't slow, 10 was the ultimate OS, lightyears ahead of its time).
It’s impossible for me to know if they ever worked in that regard, but I imagine they probably did at a few different times (subconsciously at least) in terms of getting my resume onto the shortlist, which was the goal.
When I see certifications on a resume, I see it as a negative.
It tells that applicant is capable of at least understanding some high level concepts in terms of logic. However, Software Engineering and Computer Science are quite different than each other.
It is normal that experience overweights a CS education for Software Engineering field.
He said, the AWS ones were pretty good. They weren't too easy, you have to train a few weeks to get them and you would actually learn something of practical use in everyday work. Also, they're actually in demand.
From VMware to Cisco to all the other 25+ certs, wasn’t worth it, but learned a lot so maybe worth it?
Some Microsoft certs are worth having. The rest of my certs are relics - CNE, SCSA etc…
I say, if you know the underlying concepts, go and take the certifications. Doubly so if your company will pay for them. It's just free resume fodder.
TL;DR: DO IT.
Certainly from Google was valued quite high by clients.
Helped me get my first Systems Admin job
PS: I don't have a degree
You can't and thus don't do certifications for anything that leading edge and high margin because there is no time. It takes time to normalize and formalize a technology enough to even make certification possible.
So you need to decide:
1. What your skill levels are actually are,
2. What you comfort with actual leading edge tech is
3. Which of the two is best for you