For those of you who work in IT. Or particularly any of you who may hire people in the IT field, what certifications do you feel are the most helpful for better pay/better jobs out there? I realize this is going to be very dependent on the individual job but I would imagine there are some certs which are pretty highly sought after/generally required. Right now I just have a Security+ cert which is pretty generic and low level. I'm thinking of adding a CCNA->CCNP and a CAPM->PMP to stuff the resume.

The ability to use google..

*adds LCN to farm list*

I think it's better to be able to provide some examples of good programs you've written/worked on rather than certs, unless you're aiming for consulting.

Definitely Sifos, I generally agree that work experience seems to trump everything else from certs to education. However (and I realize this is anecdotal) most places use education/certs to filter out resumes before they even get to the point of evaluating anything else on your resume. Kind of like how Ivy League schools auto-ding transcripts below a certain GPA :P

Ya, can't say I have much experience on what they want, after all I'm still searching for my first qualified work :P

May change from one region to another as well.

IMHO A good portfolio of skills is better than certificates. Unless you are applying something specific. And you can build a good portfolio as an hobby.

You have a point Orking, when I have been helping the company I work for hire new Software Engineers we have first sorted out any who didnt meet the required University criteria, then we sorted out those with inappropriate skill sets. Whatever was left we read carefully and selected from.

But IT is a pretty big field of work, can you specify a bit what kind of job you are after?

Specifically, I'd like to go be a network engineer or sys admin at McMurdo Station in Antarctica. It's a bucket list thing but I'd like to go for it out of the way before I have kids and all that crap to worry about ;) I think they use Cisco products down there which is why I said CCNA->CCNP.

if you like linux RHEL certificates rock. They cost a bit but is totally worth it(if you can convince your work to pay :P).
Basic one:
http://www.redhat.com/...ing/certifications/rhcsa/

Interesting @ those certs. $400 per exam isn't that bad.

TOM, what field with in IT? I can only really speak to IT Security.

Well I'd love to hear Security as well. They regularly advertise positions for Network Engineers, System Admins, and IT Security(They also advertise PC Tech and Help Desk positions but I've done that before and I'd rather not do that again :P)

I'd rather seek employer who is willing to invest worker sponsoring him to complete certifications as he works. Tho lately I've been so tired of IT work I might think changing career to showeling fluff.

Get your CCIE and they'll come to you.

As most have said and I will say again it's almost completely based on what field in IT you are going for.

In general though those Cisco certs are pretty widely useful and still carry a good reputation. I guess the A+, Server+, blahblah+
ones are also some good general ones too. From what I remember those were cheap and didn't have much in the way of rigorous update requirements.

If you are going to be in server administration, and it's for a large company you probably better look at vmware certs. They are completely useless for any other field though and useless in non-vmware shops. Also useless in pre-ESXi5 shops from what I hear.

If you are going into a Windows based shop obviously Microsoft certs are useful... but I don't know if they still hold water these days.

It runs into a point though where experience means much more than these certs. Especially being these certs are somewhat specific and the further down a cert path you go the more specific to a task they become.

Pick up a bunch of cheap ones and easy to maintain ones keep your cert folder fat and slap it down on the interviewers desk. The last job I got they didn't even open my book containing certs.

"CCIE Lab and CCDE Practical exams are $1,500 USD per attempt, not including travel and lodging expenses."

Wow now THAT is expensive lol

Certifications are nice and all, but mean jack fluff if you have no experience. They are really just used by HR retards to pick and chose when they don't want to actually read a resume. However, my recommendations are that you know UNIX like the back of your hand. Whether or not you get any certifications by doing it is up to you.


Want to be great at UNIX? Get a version of UNIX (Linux, BSD, whatever), build a server from scratch and start building and writing C code. Get Rich Stevens books on system level programming and learn to program at the system level. Write your own server and client code, debug the code, work on interprocess communications, debug memory leaks, build shared libs, build static libs, fix corrupt file systems, etc.

Certification is not good for personal knowledge. It is useful when you are just starting to get your foot in the door of a company who requires certification, but you can bet your paycheck that the experts do not have these 'waste of time' pieces of paper.

Heh, the few people I know in IT related stuff normally just punch whatever issue they're dealing with into google to find the workarounds for it. 99.99% of the time, it's an issue that someone's already experienced and are likely to have posted about it on teh intarwebs.

I can defiantly attest to what Wharfed said. I don't know anyone working that keeps their certs up. They are pretty much only useful for getting the job. I would also say that someone having a cert doesn't mean they know anything about it.

Even then rampant creation of test dump sites and other such shortcuts to passing certs have ruined many of them for counting for anything.

In the IT field Certs are really for the customers and HRs benefit.

I agree and I do have IT experience (I'm a telecom specialist currently) However those HR retards tend to be the ones screening the resumes before they get sent to the people who actually understand the field etc... and they want to see a certain amount of paper padding on said resume :P On the programming bit I am a computer science student at the moment as well, I'm just going part time so it'll be 1-2 years before I finish, but we do all of our core work on Linux/Solaris and in C++

Also, what Trife said is true. However, having the knowledge to do it without doing that means you actually have experience and can actually do things in a timely manner. Seriously, being able to identify the problem and fix it within 1-4 hours is key. If you have to constantly google something to find and answer, it's going to take you a lot longer.

Knowing what certain code does and what things it effects and how things may go wrong and then knowing what to change or modify or do is what makes a good sys admin. Only experience will make you good at that.

If you already know that then just fill it up with useless papers.

In my experience HR sees a cert and just eyes light up and they say "ooooh shiny!" and put it down. Most don't know a thing about the actual cert or what it is for, other than it means you passed a test and paid money to do it.

my personal take on this, being recently (within the past year) looking for, and finding a job...
i'm pretty sure that i lost several job opportunities because i don't have any certs. just a college degree and 10 years of experience :P
regardless, once i got a job, it was with people that spent their time learning the technology, not learning a test.
i'm not a big fan of certs, although i understand they have their place. mostly for marketing.

^This has been my experience also at least browsing around. With the job market the way it is employers want education, experience AND certs :P

i went the education route (because i work in higher ed and it was free) and got a masters in IT. if you're interested in being a generalist or managing IT resources, it's not a bad idea to go the university route.

TOM if you are interested in security, specifically penetration testing, look into offensive security. These are affordable certifications and training that are all hands on.

If you want to get through filters and don't care about contact CISSP is the defact standard for that. Although most people I interview that have that don't know crap.

even basic computer stuff over here, they will not even LOOK at you unless you can provide paper qualifications regardless of what you know...
Unless you're going into business for yourself :/

bah, they should still check the paper work for the self-employed. doesn't really take all that much to start a business. i've had to submit my resume for various work.

yeah I meant employers. regardless how talented someone might be, if they haven't been to some kind of course, then they're not even remotely considered :/

if you get the piece of paper, it kinda shows that you're dedicated. i guess. beats me.

You should spend the next 10 years studying ADA. Then and only then, will you have mastered your field.

why does he want to spend 10 years studying dentists?

There is nothing worse than an IT Anti-Dentite.

dibs, i've got the piece of paper that says i succeeded for 4 (well really 5, but who's counting) years at a top-tier university :P why should i need another piece of paper that says "oh yeah and i passed a course at a local tech school too"?
it's silly, and somewhat insulting to me. maybe because i'm too egotistical.

might depend on when you got your degree. what good is a 10-20 year old degree in today's world? does it demonstrate that you've been keeping up to date with all the advances in that field? or does it just demonstrate that you mastered the basic skills required?

Azz Kikr: I think the logic comes down to degree (vendor neutral) vs certificate (vendor specific)

2005 :P it's fairly recent. also, every resume i've seen with "CCNA" or "MCSE" doesn't state the date of the test. and the same questions apply that you asked.
at least with a college degree, the interviewer is (generally) allowed to infer that you're capable of higher-level learning. after all, isn't that the point of college? :D

yah. i probably have too many questions and not enough answers. i'm also thinking about switching to a fluff showeling career. kinda think that eventually the computers will be doing the job anyway.

Yeah I do have a college degree already. But it's in Political Science :P Which is why I'm working my way through a second BS in Computer Science

Oh also, Dibs. The part of the resume that points out that i keep up to date would be the work history part ;)

no problem. whatever works.

TOM hit one point, 4 years doesn't mean you know anything about anything. You know the ground work and possibly the basics about a field. However 4 years, 6 years, 8 years... Doesn't mean you know a single command in IOS, hell it doesn't mean if you are asked about it in an interview that you won't pull out your iPhone. This is part of what Dibs is talking about and also TOM, you can legitimately be called the computer doctor and not know fluff where it counts.

The other half of that is that the interviewer may accept you having an iPhone as knowing IOS. So rather than try and teach the HR person anything, it's better to slap some specific certification requirements on there. This is what TOM is talking about Vendor Specific.

This in no way validates that you know anything or that certs have any use outside of making customers feel warm and fuzzy and giving HR something they can understand to judge your knowledge.

For the record I had to deal with someone today who has CISSP certification. This is allegedly the gold standard of security certs and you have to have five years of experience in infosec just to take the exam. He couldnt figure out that he was broadcasting a new IP address and that that's why the firewall wouldn't let him out....

meh. i had a long post written but i can be more concise.

1) if you want to get certified, go for it. woo.
2) as an idealist with a college degree, i think the college degree *should* be more valuable for job hunting purposes, but HR drones are so damned whiny about paying people what they're worth and people having independent thought that they won't hire folks that claim such things.
3) "4 years doesn't mean you know anything about anything", but a semester certification program does? pfft.
4) if you come out of a degree program somewhere and you only know the basics of a field, you need to go back and finish your junior and senior years.
5) first round interviewers frequently know fluffall about what they're interviewing people for. they're there to filter out undesired personalities.
6) vendor neutral vs vendor specific. do you really *want* to broadcast to everybody that you're applying jobs to that you've self-selected to a single vendor and that's all you can do?

yes. i call that concise :P

that might work for other fields, but IT is a bit dynamic because new stuff is being developed constantly. junk tends to get put in place before anybody even thought about writing a book about it. sometimes the APIs aren't even properly documented when people start using them. course, then how can people get certified on it... hmmm, dang logic.

i think you and I are seeing different sides of "IT". my definition tends toward operations and support, and yours seems to be more software development.
having said that, the languages and APIs may change on a frequent basis, but the underlying theory does not change that much over the same time period.
also, to extend your existing logic. when java was released initially, and .NET as well as i recall, people were immediately looking for people with 5+ years of experience. on a platform that was under a year old. i still hold that the most valuable thing for getting hired for *any* tech job, support, operations, development, whatever, is knowing exactly what that hiring agent is looking for and putting it on your resume. hope that doesn't require lying on your resume ;) anything under the CxO level will get fired for that fluff

LOL, i don't see any reason to lie on a resume. if i get that desperate for cash, might as well go bonk people on the head for a living.

Ya know, I was just looking at my walls -o- text and realized that I should probably be more liberal with my proper capitalization and double-spaced paragraphs. Apologies. That fluff is hard to read.

Also, I'm not suggesting that lying on a resume is a good thing. Just that if you could read the hiring agent's mind, you could easily tailor the resume to say what you need for an interview. Bad idea all around, but it would probably work.

-"1) if you want to get certified, go for it. woo."
I think it is pointless unless you are looking for a specific job title, because you have to decide what to cert(and maintain the fluffers) based on what that company is interested in. Like I have posted I think the more generalized the better because they are easier and cheaper, and generally HR has no clue wtf they are anyways.

-"2) as an idealist with a college degree, i think the college degree *should* be more valuable for job hunting purposes, but HR drones are so damned whiny about paying people what they're worth and people having independent thought that they won't hire folks that claim such things."
It should, but smart people don't make these decisions. If IT people are hiring to fill for IT jobs, then yes usually certs don't matter near as much. You know you have found a good company when the interviewer quizzes you, never opens up or looks at your certs, and hires you on the spot.

-"3) "4 years doesn't mean you know anything about anything", but a semester certification program does? pfft."
No it doesn't... In fact it means you know how to take tests, that's it. However, this is the standard. Your normal HR person doesn't know their ass from fibre channel fabric. The retards would probably try and sew a shirt from them.

-"4) if you come out of a degree program somewhere and you only know the basics of a field, you need to go back and finish your junior and senior years."
Just last month as part of my duties as a partner in a company that consults and manages it departments, I had to sit in on second interviews.. I am also trying to start my own business and after seeing the fresh BAs, I don't think I want my own business. Maybe it's just here but these little bastards act so entitled but I prepared a list of pretty basic questions for what a general internal helpdesk person should know, not a single right answer in 12 candidates. I have no faith in what schools or anything but self learning is teaching.

-"5) first round interviewers frequently know fluffall about what they're interviewing people for. they're there to filter out undesired personalities."
Everything I have ever seen, it doesn't matter the interview number, it is completely obvious that the department has little to no input in the decision. If it's done right an IT person is at least creating a set of question and answers that must be answered correctly. The scary thing is that even IT directors are chosen by HR with nothing to base those decisions on but work experiences, certs, and schooling. None of which means they know anything. Especially these crusty old dudes who never bothered to keep current.

-"6) vendor neutral vs vendor specific. do you really *want* to broadcast to everybody that you're applying jobs to that you've self-selected to a single vendor and that's all you can do?"
Um... You learn their vendors and tailor yourself to that. Especially there being so many out of work, you damn well better look like the perfect fit. I will say this I wouldn't hire someone that knew only windows or only linux or only unix or only osx. I wouldn't even hire someone that only knew cisco or only knew juniper. I don't expect anyone that hasn't been in the field 10 years with at least 3 different companies to know everything about every platform but they damn sure better not pull out an iPhone when I ask them about iOS, or I will jam that thing in their ass and kick them out the nearest window.

I don't make those decisions though even in companies where those decisions directly effect me. It's the same anywhere. HR decides who works for a company, and the cost of firing someone is usually pretty damn high and requires agreement from HR.

So what I guess I am saying is that you cert in a way that will entertain the HR person that you are dealing with. If they are brain dead, it doesn't matter what certs. Certs by design are vendor specific though, and as such it probably is a good idea not to tout your vmware cert at a shop that only does hyper-v, just as you wouldn't want to go to a Solaris shop with your microsoft server cert expecting to become a server admin.

Mind you though MCSE if it even still holds water is a pretty smart cert to get. No company I have ever had dealings with didn't run windows as a client machine. When I actually had to apply for jobs, I think the MCSE was probably the most well known Cert to HR departments. When I got out of school it was right after the big dotcom bust I know picking up my MCSE and CCNA is the reason I got a job and my classmates didn't even if I self learned everything they taught in school before going to school.

What you know means nothing to HR, what you can prove that you know means everything. The only way for them to know what you specifically know is through certs. So sure Certs mean nothing to people who know their fluff, but to people who don't they are impressive. From starting my own business I can tell you that Customers also find them impressive.