I welcome not only the architecture certification, but also the more intense discussion in the industry on what architecture is, such as being done by the folks at Bredemeyer Consulting. Obviously Microsoft is the company that people love to hate (they are used to this) but there is a need by the buyers of professional services (such as architectural or database skills) that there is some mechanism to measure that they can walk the talk.
I consider myself an architect and today I interviewed someone who, according to his CV, currently holds the post of ‘Senior Developer and Architect’ – the poor guy crashed in the interview and on my team would barely make the grade of intermediate developer, never mind remotely being an architect.
Now when I step forward as an architect, I am being lumped together with developers who have no architectural skills, but choose the label because it looks good or their boss is trying to make them feel better by giving them a fancy title. Frankly it sucks, and it almost wants me not to (me too, me too) call myself an architect.
Microsoft’s and the Open Group’s efforts in this area has to be a good thing as people can be
properly better labelled. How many of the people who frequent this site would like to be called more than a ‘DBA’? Competing with people who last month upgraded their skills from Access to SQL server and are now suddenly DBA’s. Same title, same skills, same money – right?
Would you be happier if someone, be that Microsoft or even sqlservercentral.com, Kimberly Trip… anyone – took a step forward and developed a mechanism for sorting out the real SQL Gurus, such as Mike and Steve from the newly ‘minted admins’? Hey, if Kimberley Trip, who talks a lot to the buyers of my services, gave me a certificate that she had looked at my work and personally grilled me in an interview – and reckons I’m ok, I’d pay something for that acknowledgement – even if it is just to pay for her time.
Microsoft is simply stepping up to the plate – don’t hate the player, hate the game.