Guy's do we really need to discuss this more ?????? Can't we just take note that we all have different opinions and let's get back to all the nice technical issues not the BORING subjects like these:)
PLEASE!!!! -----Original Message----- From: Howard C. Berkowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 3:31 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MBA/CPA/JD vs CCIE Vs. BS or MS degree vs Heisman Trophy vs [7:60323] > > I think an agenda is emerging here, nrf. This thread seemed, at least >> to me, to deal with the merits of academia, certification, or >> combinations to move into technical jobs. > >I completely disagree with the insinuation that I have solely been moving >the discussion in any direction. If anything, I am only moving where others >are taking me. People want to invoke things like ethics and happiness >(which as far as I can tell had nothing to do with the initial argument) >into the argument, and I am only too happy to oblige. But I don't see you >jumping all over them - why not? I too thought we were just talking >about degrees vs. certs, but other people want to go to other places. Because, offhand, I have only seen you bringing up the issue of people bringing up general management and tying it to power and money. Tradeoffs in the technical area of the value of certifications vs. academic training, especially early in one's career, seemed to be the scope of the original discussion. To the best of my knowledge, this list has never emphasized how to use technical skills to springboard into general management. > >> >> In your last few posts, however, I'm only confused whether the thrust >> of your arguments is to maximize monetary return, or to reach the top >> ranks of general corporate management. Now, if you had a screen name >> of NFL, I'd suggest you have more monetary potential than most >> corporate executives. If you can give a creditable impression of >> Christina Aguilara, that also offers significant potential. The >> latter, however, might require an unacceptable level of surgery. Not >> that I have met you personally, but I know several people in the >> business that have much better genetics for that mission, including, >> indeed, at least one top executive that has been mentioned. > >What I am doing it attempting to counter the notion that certifications are >the only thing that matters - something that often times seems to be the >prevailing paradigm on this particular newsgroup. Certs have their use, >don't get me wrong. But it is a tremendously reckless strategy to dismiss >the value of the degree categorically. I don't disagree with that in the slightest, in the technical realm. But I question the relevance of even discussing whether it closes off general management opportuntities, which may not even be in networking. > >By electing not to get your degree, you are closing opportunities off to >yourself. Simple as that. That's my point. Now, everybody should make the >calculation that perhaps getting the degree is not worth its cost in terms >of time and money, and that's a perfectly valid calculation to make. Or you >might respond that those opportunities that you are closing are not, and >will never be, of interest to you, and that is yet another perfectly valid >observation to make. What is not valid is to delude oneself into thinking >that you are not closing off any opportunities. > > >> >> But to my mind, your utopia has relatively little to do with >> networking. Personally, I don't agonize about not making a >> seven-figure plus income when I can make six figures doing things I >> love. Now, yes. I want enough product management authority, >> including P&L justification, that I can see my best ideas come to >> fruition -- and those are not one-person projects. I still believe, >> for example, I have an architecture in mind that could give orders of >> magnitude improvement in certain aspects of router performance. >> Perhaps some day I will land a slot as technology VP of a startup, >> make that happen, cash out, and mix my interests in network research >> and medicine. > >Heh heh, so I see you want money too. I emphasize "perhaps". I mostly do things I like now. I don't feel driven to get an MBA -- but, believe me, I can do a financial presentation to a VC. That's something I've chosen to learn how to do on my own. > > There is no question, however, I could be making much more right now > > in the networking industry had I chosen to go into sales. And to go back to your earlier point, there is no question that I'd be making more money had I done so. That seems to counter your "heh heh." > > > >> I can't help but interpret the above as an appeal to get out of >> technology as soon as possible. > >Hardly so. A certain Mr. Gates never left technology and I'm sure he >doesn't have any complaints. > >But what I'm saying is that success in the technical realm is rarely >determined by technical skills alone. Business savvy matters. What matters >it not that you know this-and-that technology but that you know how that >technology translates into dollars. Not necessarily. I can think of a fair number of very highly sought-after design engineers who have extremely limited involvement in presenting business cases. They have typically teamed with compatible marketing folk, and rely on their track record of building salable products. True marketing, as opposed to sales, people can provide useful information on market requirements, and I freely admit architecture does include determining requirements and cost-benefit. That's a far cry from doing long-term ROI analysis and decisions, say, to go public. NOTICE - This message contains privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee named above. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, copying, disclosure or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by person or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by return email and delete this message. This message should not be copied or used for any purpose other than intended, nor should it be disclosed to any other person. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the view of Investec Group, its subsidiaries or associates. The Investec Group is not liable for the security of information sent by e-mail at your request, nor for the proper and complete transmission of the information contained in the communication nor for any delay in its receipt. Please note that the recipient must scan this e-mail and any attached files for viruses and the like. The Investec Group accepts no liability of whatever nature for any loss, liability, damage or expense resulting directly or indirectly from the access of any files which are attached to this message. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=60411&t=60411 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
