Author Bio

Steve Jones Editor at SQLServerCentral.com You can follow Steve on Twitter as way0utwest (www.twitter.com/way0utwest)

Rangers to Masters

By Steve Jones in SQL Musings | 12-01-2008 3:04 PM | Categories: Filed under: Career

Rating: (not yet rated) |

Discuss | 1,020 Reads | 94 Reads in Last 30 Days |4 comment(s)

The new Certified Master program sounds suspiciously like the Microsoft Certified Architect program, which appears to have been revamped to be a step above this one as it's now a requirement. When that was announced a year or so ago it required weeks of time and $25,000.

Tim Mitchell had some interesting comments on this, and for the most part I agree with him. This isn't a certification for most people. It's like something that's a PhD-equivalent, something that I'm not sure many of us would invest in, especially given the pace of change to the products.

In fact, with new versions being scheduled about 30 months apart, and now a major refresh scheduled for the first half of 2010 for SQL Server 2008 (18 months after RTM), it's almost silly to spent US$20k becoming an expert on a product when that certification will be dated by the time you get it. Imagine that you need 6 months post-RTM to be sure you know the product well, then you go for the 6 weeks and pass. That means that you've got to pay back (likely) your $40k investment (don't forget 6 weeks off of work) inside of 5 years or so before your certification would be out of date. And you've have another version to learn in the meantime.

This certification serves a purpose, perhaps something that some high end trainers and consultants (Microsoft Consulting Services people perhaps), especially PSS Support people, should go through. I have a few friends at Microsoft go through Ranger training, which appears to be the precursor to this program. It's a good program and you come out of there knowing a lot about SQL Server, but is it worth it for most people?

No.

We need some type of certification that conveys value, that demonstrates you know how to use a version of the product. I'd love for this to be some type of certification you can point to, similar to an MD, that you must continue to work on as versions change, but shows that you've done some investment in your skills, in those core skills (SQL, database design, etc.) and then continued to work on it through various versions. Sort of like MDs do with continuing education.

There were rumors that IEEE was working on something, but I haven't seen much lately.

Comments

brento said:

I'd disagree that a certification will be dated by the time you get it. I've got customers that are just now doing SQL Server 2005 projects for the first time because they're migrating off SQL Server 2000 - and those SQL Server 2000 boxes are still around.

You're totally right that it's not worth it for most people - but that's the point, just like the PhD degree isn't worth it for most people. The MCSE was "worth it for most people" - and look how that turned out...

December 2, 2008 6:22 AM

Steve Jones said:

Perhaps, things definitely stick around a lot, but if you're trading on that certification, you're somewhat on a treadmill. You don't want to get a 2005 cert and not upgrade it to 2008, which means you're looking for 2008 work to get those skills sharp.

I do agree that most people don't want/need a PhD. It's a limited cert, and in that sense there is some value. However a PhD is usually in a field that has some longevity to it, not 5-10 years.

We need a cert that's more of a BA level, something beyond a MCSE, which is like taking the SATs.

December 2, 2008 8:47 AM

SQL Server Blog by Jason Massie said:

December 3, 2008 8:33 PM

SQL Server Blog by Jason Massie said:

Pingback from SQL Server Blog by Jason Massie

June 7, 2009 1:08 PM

SQL Musings

Rangers to Masters

brento said:

Steve Jones said:

SQL Server Blog by Jason Massie said:

SQL Server Blog by Jason Massie said:

Blog Roll

Rockstart Blogger