Beyond Certification

Certifying Generalists vs Specialists

Seth Godin's recent blog post has interesting implications for certification.

Says Seth: "If the world is really bigger, if you can find the best in the world to do what you want, no matter what it is you want, does that change things?

If I need an animator, I can find the world's best animator. If I need a bond to insure my movie, I can find the best broker at selling completion bonds. If I need SEO help, get me the world's best SEO person. If I need braces, I can find the best orthodontist in my area. Not the second-best or someone who will try really hard or someone who is pretty good at that and also good at other things. Sure, there are occasional tasks where a diagnostician with wide-ranging experience is important (but I'd argue that that's a specialty in and of itself).

When choice is limited, I want a generalist. When selection is difficult, a jack of all trades is just fine.  But whenever possible, please bring me a brilliant specialist.

If you're shaking your head in agreement with this obvious point, then the question is: tell me again why you're a generalist?"

And, why is it that almost all certification programs certify and recertify generalists?  That is, if recertification is by examination, that exam is a generalist exam (usually the same exam given to initial applicants).  If recertification is by continuing education, diversity of content is acceptable...and sometimes mandated. 

I don't mean to oversimplify the issue, which is a complex one.  There's the expense factor, of course, of having multiple assessments.  Then, there's the issue that if you're issuing one credential, shouldn't it have the same requirements and mean the same for everyone (which it wouldn't if you have specialist examinations or other pathways).   But I think it's something to think about.

Look at the PE (professional engineer) - here's an example of a credential that is diverse from the beginning. PEs, regardless of their specialty in civil, electrical, etc., all take specialty exams, but they all use the same credential (for licensure, btw).  I think it's an intriguing model for certifying agencies to consider.

Certification Pricing

Read something today that suggested that as a general rule, the cost of certification should not exceed one percent of the target's gross annual salary.  Anyone using that rule of thumb?   For an average gross annual salary of $25,000, a fee of $250, for $50,000 a fee of $500, and $100,000 a fee of $1000.  At face value, it seems reasonable.  Sounds like a good place to start...but of course you need to consider your costs and make sure the fee covers those. 

I had a thought of how to turn this around for promoting.  Isn't certification worth investing just 1% of your annual salary?  Seems that''s hard to argue against that, assuming  your certification offers something to be valued.

Microsoft moving to Performance Based Testing

Here's an article describing how Microsoft is moving into more performance based testing for its certification programs.  The article does a nice job, I think, of explaining the benefits of performance based testing in terms everyone can understand.