Comments on: Agile Certifications

By: Anthony Cairns

Anthony Cairns — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 18:12:39 +0000

The entire discussion around Test (and indeed other) certification is quite interesting really. As a Test Management Consultant with over 11 years experience I have found that by having some kind of certification is something to help you get your foot in the door for companies who swear by them. The structured testing methodologies are basically great to enable testing personnel to be able to draw out a “pencil” outline of what is to be achieved, and then it is down to professional themselves to use their understanding and knowledge as to how well they “colour” the plan in with real content and scope.

By: Scott Seltzer

Scott Seltzer — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 08:29:16 +0000

From my experience, many people I’ve interviewed that took software testing courses (not necessarily for certification) didn’t seem to have any practical skills at all. Sure, they spouted off some terminologies including acronyms I’ve never heard of (I’m QA manager for 15 years and I read a lot on our subject), but I felt like they never even turned on a computer; many couldn’t even do the most basic computer skills.

In defense of Danny’s comment, I’d say that a tester with experience plus training might be better than someone with the same years of experience and no training/certifcation.

On the other hand, I’m wondering about the relationship between testing certifications and university degrees. I personally have very little value for my diploma, though I’m certainly not going to keep mention of my degree off of my resume. But when I hire, I’m not a stickler for degrees and my current test lead is successful without his having one. Obviously James Bach, the Buccaneer-Scholar (http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/), is a great example of an expert in our field without any formal training.

After writing the above, I looked for articles online that compare having a certification to having a degree and this one is the most relevant I could find: http://www.prototest.com/protoblog/2008/10/7/are-testing-certifications-bogus.html. Why have most of us accepted the value of degrees but get so defensive about certifications? Why differentiate between skill-based and knowledge-based in software testing but not in university degrees?

-Scott

By: M P

M P — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 21:07:03 +0000

I just grill the candidates (with certifications) a bit more than a candidate without the certifications It becomes very interesting when you start talking about the imprecision in the testing glossary and the set-in-stone answers that you get from “certified” candidates.

I have seen that certification is almost a pre-requisite in the European market compared to the US market. I don’t know what drives the psychology of the decision makers there.

My experience has been that once you end up with a manager who is metrics driven, they buy into the snazzy marketing literature from ISTQB and such and even companies marketing testing software so well, that they turn into kool-aid fueled management hacks that insist that its the certified-way or the highway.

In my book, a PMP is a pretty mediocre person and CSM is Certified **** Master.

Good candid post Elizabeth and sorry for the rant.

By: Hillary Johnson

Hillary Johnson — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 18:48:44 +0000

Thinking about certification in general, why does your barber need to be certified, whereas chefs and fry cooks do not? The emergence of certification regimes is pretty arbitrary.

Certifications in any field are almost a form of unionization, meant to provide centralized control and oversight over who gets in. It’s always meant to protect the members of a profession by creating barriers to entry that are designed to keep demand higher than supply which in turn keeps salaries high. However, the inevitable result is that anyone with a touch of innovation in their soul is turned off from jumping through those hoops, and you end up with a legion of plodders.

Agile being based on a small, salient set of values and practices, it can only be made certifiable by crufting it up with extraneous nonsense, which certainly isn’t very agile. In my native field of publishing and journalism, there are no certifications, because it’s acknowledged that talent and convictioon count so much more than any BOK that the skillset is unquantifiable. Imagine looking at a book you pick up for a “certified Novelist” label–well, I submit that certifying Agile practitioners is no less ridiculous.

By: Paul Denize

Paul Denize — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 19:59:43 +0000

http://www.agilecertificationnow.com
This website just cracked me up. I think we need some printable posters for the workplace to spread the message. I’d love to have just one customer embarrased to ask for certification because they are scared of looking stupid/ignorant which I’m sure they are not. They are just sold the hupe about certification, the sales pitch from tarining establishments that make money for certicication and courses – and in contrast a lack of alternative view being shoved at them.

By: Jeff Anderson

Jeff Anderson — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 19:15:03 +0000

as always great post.

I hold absolutely no certifications in any methodology, software discipline, project management approach and yet I’m clearly regarded as the firm expert on SDLC.

I agree with you, technical certifications are good, because they at least test whether you have basic working knowledge with some specific product.

Certificates the tester knowledge on a best practice are pretty meaningless, the devil is in the details, and nothing can replace real experience.

Regards

By: Arjun Rathore

Arjun Rathore — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 22:15:22 +0000

I have been a performance engineer for almost a decade now and I find this certification business little troubling. This is being driven by the industry. It does have some value but should not be the main criteria for employment. I believe there is no short cut for experience. When I interview people I can tell within 15 minutes the capabilty of a person, just by asking broad questions and not even getting too technical. Also what if I get a certified guy and suddenly the technology changes. How well this guy will adapt? I normally look for people with potential and it is ok if the person does not have full knowledge of the current environment. If that person is quick on the feet and pick up things quickly I am fine. I personally do not give much weightage to certifications.

By: Michael Hunter

Michael Hunter — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 21:57:28 +0000

Elisabeth, Anyone who chooses not to take one of your courses simply because it does not lead to a * Tester certification is certifiable!

By: Nikki Sedgwick

Nikki Sedgwick — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 12:13:32 +0000

The only thing going for ISTQB qualifications and the like is that it’s the only way I’ve found of proving (in a commercial/corporate/non-specialist market) that I have the skills I’ve always had.

By: Joao Rodrigues

Joao Rodrigues — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 16:42:39 +0000

Regarding Danny’s reply, “testers with a certification are likely to be better at testing on average than the general population of testers”, there can be a number of reasons to think the opposite. We could find a correlation between professionals that are certified on /certain/ courses and unability to do the job (generically speaking):
-If an employee has atended a certification programme, probably the enterprise paid for it because no one there knew anything about the topic, including the newcomer. Someone that learned through experience and communication with experienced professionals would probably be much better doing the job.
-A paid certification is somehow a substitute for competence. An alternative to being good at something, is holding a marketing competence label, and showing it around, we all have seen this…

So these are just 2 reasons why there could be negative correlation as well.