Quote from the article:
"In return, Cisco will share its best practices and tools with its partners
and drop the CCIE requirements from one per $10 million sales to one per $40
million in sales.
That will push CCIEs into a project management role, and put more
responsibility on the shoulders of associate, professional and expert
certified Cisco partners."
Where does the project management thing come from? Very possibly, the second
part of the statement may be true, that with a lower percentage of CCIE's
the NA, DA, NP, DP's will take on the workload that the CCIE's previously
shouldered.
The CCIE may take on a more general consultancy role supporting the lower
qual's, but Project Management?
Surely the CCIE could be even busier doing what 4 CCIE's were doing before.
Is this going to increase the value/requirement for the other
qualifications?
Is this going to make the CCIE more of a rarity? (All of ours were company
sponsored through CCIE)
And more importantly are my company going to change their mind about
sponsoring me through it?
Are the details of this available anywhere, if it's official at all? (No
offence ZDNet)
Gareth
""EA Louie"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
009a01c0aa7f$c8deff80$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:009a01c0aa7f$c8deff80$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> It's kinda funny how this whole certification process evolved. In the
> "olden days", the CCIE was a certification that was geared towards the
TAC,
> as a way of enhancing Cisco's already-renowned technical support. It was
> offered to the external world as a way for those packet jockeys to be
> acknowledged as experts in the internetworking field.
>
> The CCNA/NP/DA/DP certs were geared mostly toward the channel, to enhance
> and acknowledge their technical expertise. When they looked at the certs
> carefully though, Cisco decided to make CCIE certification a requirement
for
> their premier channel partners, and the number of CCIE's and amount of
sales
> determined their premier partner status.
>
> As far as CCIE's being "project managers", most of them balk at it because
> in truth, they're technical experts, not project experts. The quote from
> the article is the opinion of the authors, and not necessarily the
position
> that Cisco is taking for the CCIE.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Howard C. Berkowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2001 1:09 PM
> Subject: Re: off-topic: anyone alarmed?
>
>
> > Does it occur to anyone else that it's strange to put CCIE's in
> > "project management" when the CCIE program doesn't, in the slightest,
> > test for project management skills?
> >
> >
> > >just a correction, it wasn't a newspaper but an article on ZDNet:
> > >
> > >http://www.zdnet.com/sp/stories/news/0,4538,2693233-1,00.html
> > >
> > >which in part states:
> > >
> > >Quote
> > >
> > >Not to be left out, Cisco Systems is reworking its partner program so
> that
> > >all partners are required to specialize. The company also will require
> > >customer-satisfaction ratings for its partners, a step taken by
Microsoft
> > >earlier this year for its top-tier Gold partners.
> > >
> > >In return, Cisco will share its best practices and tools with its
> partners
> > >and drop the CCIE requirements from one per $10 million sales to one
per
> $40
> > >million in sales. That will push CCIEs into a project management role,
> and
> > >put more responsibility on the shoulders of associate, professional and
> > >expert certified Cisco partners.
> > >
> > >Unquote.
> > >
> > >Kevin Wigle
> >
> > _________________________________
> > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> _________________________________
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
