I first have to say that I agree with you in that I find very few CCIE's
actually performing gritty hands-on work. So then you are probably
wondering what is the whole point of working on your configuration and
troubleshooting skills to become a CCIE, only to then become shunted into a
position where those skills are rarely used? I have also thought long and
hard about this phenomena.
OK, I'm going to open a can of worms here, and go off on a bit of a tangent,
but just bear with me. I believe that criticisms of the utility of industry
certifications could also be said about the college degree. Sure, CCIE's
are routinely put into high-level positions that involve little of the
hands-on configuring and troubleshooting that is the very heart of the CCIE.
But as we all know, many companies have positions that require job
candidates to have a degree, but few of those positions actually require
the knowledge of the exact subjects people learn in college. Would-be
flamers, hear me out.
Consider the average bachelor's degree. If it is in the humanities, you
spent quite a bit of time studying various authors or artists, writing
papers on literary and artistic criticism (the who, the what and the why of
the artist/author and his work) and being exposed to various cultural
schools of thought. If it was in a social science, then you most likely
studied a lot of socio/political/economic theory and their application. If
you studied a science or engineering, then high-level calculus was the
order of the day, in terms of expressing events in mathematical terms. If
it was computer science, then a whole lot of abstract programming theory.
But regardless of what you studied, I think it is universally true that
college graduates with whatever degree then plunge into their careers and
rarely use the actual skills that they picked up in college. Barring those
who have entered academia, how many times does the typical grad with an
English degree get the opportunity to do an literary analysis of Elizabeth
vs. Victorian poetry? How many real-world graduates of economics, in their
day-to-day working life, actually have to whip out supply/demand curves and
calculate marginal utility? Even the engineering graduates (historically
one of the most applied of all the college subjects), how many times do they
really have to derive out a 40-line thermodynamics multivariable calculus
formula using just pencil and paper, and within 15 minutes?
Ah but, college administrators and the pundits of education will stress,
what make the college experience so valuable is not the subject matter per
se, but rather the base level disciplining and training of the mind that is
the ultimate goal. It is not the memorization of the political theories of
Plato that is important, rather it is the improved cultural exposure, the
openness to different philosophies, and the ability to conceive of and
defend a particular thought. It is not the ability to quickly derive and
calculate the eigenvectors of a linear algebra matrix that is important,
rather it is the improved grasp and understanding of abstract concepts that
is the real prize. In short, you college grads are hired not for the
precise subject matter that they studied, but because they have demonstrated
enhanced thought processes and the ability to quickly learn whatever skills
they need for their career.
Having said that, I believe that the CCIE is evolving into a similar role.
CCIE's are prized by employers not because they can type a config for and
troubleshoot a OSPF NBMA frame-relay network without using subinterfaces and
while still electing a DR/BDR in less than an hour, typing at 150
words-per-minute. Rather they are prized because in the course of their
study, they have substantially improved their knowledge of networking
fundamentals and have developed a systematic and logical method of fixing
problems.
Now, some readers out there might take exception to the above paragraph and
point out that there are some CCIE's who have developed more than a
superficial knowledge of networking, and obtained their 4-digit-number just
by memorizing a whole bunch of CCO configs. Of course I'm sure that has
happened.
Yet the same thing also happens with the college degree, but you hardly ever
hear anybody complain about that. I think everybody college graduate has a
story about somebody they knew who was admitted just because he could play
a sport, or because Daddy donated a lot of money, or something like that.
Then that person deliberately searched for and enrolled in the easiest
possible subjects and undertook the easiest possible coursework (have you
ever noticed how Division 1 college football and basketball players always
seem to major in things like mass communications or hotel management?). But
they graduate just like everybody else.
And, on another tangent, I have noticed lots of people complain incessantly
about the paper certificate - the paper MCSE, the paper CCNA, the paper
ABCDEFG. Yet, it seems to me that there is also such a thing as a paper
college degree, but nobody ever seems to complain about that.
""NY50TT"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Well here's a thread certain to start a fire, but I thought I'd see what
> would happen.
>
> Does the community feel that Cisco Certifications are still in demand in
the
> market place? Do they still get you through the door in anything?
>
> I have been in the IT field for the better part of 8 years. This year, I
> will be pulling in about 5K short of 100K, and I have a very short list of
> certifications which I rarely use in the network security and development
> position I'm in. I work for a very large, if not the largest IT shop in
the
> world, and I am a little disoriented by what is seen as really important
> inside this organization. I have some level of respect for this
> organization because of it's sheer size and some of the industry giants
and
> experts I work on teams with. However it doesn't seem that certification
> matters. All of the top tier architects, the "Gods" of the "Gods" are
all
> undoubtedly very good at what they do, and rumor has it they are paid
> handsomely(much more than me), but a quick direct survey of these rather
> humble people, and I find that they have just been around for forever and
> seem to know near everything, especially about the business aspect of
> things, but don't carry any certifications that some deem so important to
> get(though I have no doubt they would pass if they were forced to take the
> tests). Yet they are crucial to the organization, and would probably be
> considered "lifers", meaning they would never leave the organization.
>
> So, as you may understand, seeing this every day, you might imagine why I
am
> so disillusioned and pose this question. If I don't see certifications
> meaning anything inside the organization I'm part of right now, what do
> others see certifications worth in their world, their work, their area?
Is
> the playing field different "on the outside"? Does organization size make
> the difference? Do certifications matter more in an organization of 50 ,
or
> in one with 50 thousand people?
>
> I guess the other confusing aspect is that I use my skills diffrently now
> than I did before. It used to matter that I could sit down on a bunch of
> routers or switches and configure (provision them when they are not
ciscos)
> and make them do anything under the sun. Now that's considered a less
> valuable "production" type work, and the design,testing, project
management,
> policy writting, and architecture work I do is for some reason considered
> more important than all that "lesser", and once crucial "production" work?
> Now I spend my days testing and designing new infrastructres, and once my
> documentation and design is done and approved, people, they call them
"I.T.
> Specialists and "Junior Network Architects" sometimes getting paid a
whole
> lot less (almost half less) go out there and actually implement it
> worldwide. Yes, I'm still called upon to analyize things when they go
> wrong, and help out with the roll-outs, but somehow I pictured that I
would
> be touching more routers, not authoring documents of policy, design, and
> architecture. (ok so maybe I'm having trouble adjusting, but I spent many
> long nights study this sh** to be an expert at it, all the time
envisioning
> that I would be building and deploying networks, actually using this sh**,
> to make a living, but what ended up happening is that I use maybe 20% of
> that knowledge, and the rest of the stuff I actually get paid for has
almost
> nothing to do with any certification or education path)
>
> All the CCIE cisco certifications seem to be geared torwards doing this
type
> of "production" work, do CCIE's really use those skills in production once
> they receive their CCIE? Do they even touch a router anymore?
>
> Here's why I ask this, the one CCIE I personally know, he's the CIO at the
> site for the organization that I work for. He approves security policy
for
> the entire organization world wide, but it's probably been a long time
since
> he has even had to touch a router, switch, or firewall. (that's the job
of
> people like me, we go out, test the latest and greatest, create proposals,
> and them submit them to him to get approved) (though I should probably
ask
> him on monday in passing, when the last time he sat at a console actually
> was) I kid not, he is simply amazing, and he know's everything, and has
this
> scary guru type knowledge on networking and security, but I still hold
that
> I seriously doubt he uses any of the "production" type knowledge that the
> cisco ccie lab tests for on a day-to-day basis.
>
> That all makes it seem, that the concepts and years of expereince mean
more
> than the actuall cert, in this organization, but I wonder it it's the same
> everywhere else. Now, I'm sure that this CCIE has spent his years doing
the
> "production" work, but is the natural progression of things such that once
> you get the high tier certifications, that you move on to upper
management,
> and the type of work you end up doing is less and less hands on techincal
> and more and more business related?
>
> Another CCIE I've heard of, works in denver as a sales engineer for
juniper
> networks. In fact, juniper is one of the companies we are testing for
> replacing some devices that aren't handling the load requierments of our
> latest infrastructure(And I guess I'll probably end up working with this
guy
> when we get permission to actually talk to juniper). Here's this CCIE,
> who's job is to tag along with salesmen of juniper equipment, and be there
> to just dole out knowledge and insight on a perpective customer's needs,
and
> how juniper equipment can fit it, in a mostly cisco world. But the point
> is, he too probably (and I guess) seldomly touches a router anymore.
> Probably spends alot of time writting proposals, making drawings, and
> looking at architectures and design than anything else.
>
> CCIE's are expensive to hire, I guess it makes sense to use them for the
> most critical work, and leave the "grunt" work for other, less expensive
> workers, but I guess my point is that the "grunt" work used to be fun
> sometimes. When you get a CCIE or such, do you still get to play?
>
> Somehow I figured things would be different.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=10604&t=10599
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
