Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [XP] Re: Certification on eXtreme Programming

Expand Messages
  • Larry Brunelle
    ... Several approaches already in use . . . 1. You already know the person from having worked with him/her. 2. Someone whose judgment has your implicit
    Message 1 of 94 , May 3 12:25 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Ron Jeffries wrote:
      > Hello, Phlip. On Sunday, May 3, 2009, at 10:21:40 AM, you wrote:
      >> A certification would reward those who are good at gaming certifications,
      >> and punish those who are better at their aspect of Agile, and who should be
      >> hired instead.
      >> (Certification is also a huge marketing gimmick for big corporations, like
      >> Oracle/Sun, MS, or RedHat...)
      >> All the problems with certification can be summed up in one question: If you
      >> find yourself _de_certified, for whatever reason, to whom do you appeal?
      >> Certification creates three social castes - the untouchable uncertified, the
      >> ranks of the certified, and the privileged elite who have the power to
      >> de-certify anyone who questions their authority.
      > Hmm, perhaps. I wonder whether all those things are inherent. It
      > seems to me that the interview is certainly the way to know the most
      > about people. Still, it would be good to know in some concrete way
      > whether someone has this or that skill.
      > What kind of social or other process could there be that would
      > address the legitimate need to know whether someone was fair, good,
      > or excellent at something. Or whether we ourselves were?

      Several approaches already in use . . .
      1. You already know the person from having worked
      with him/her.
      2. Someone whose judgment has your implicit confidence
      has worked with him/her and shares that knowledge.
      3. (Caveat: Depending on circumstances, this one can be
      ethically questionable - but it's done.) You review
      the person's resume for previous employment, and ask
      around among present staff for former coworkers who
      may be able to provide an opinion.
      4. The "audition".
      5. The "extended audition", AKA contract-to-maybe-hire.
      6. You are good enough at interviewing to discern who
      has what you need, who has everything BUT what you
      need, and who is simply very, very good at

      It might be relevant to discuss what is the "something".
      Is it a skill? Or is it the ability to acquire the
      necessary skill? Is the most relevant skill, say, a
      programming language? Or is it the skill to recognize
      unnecessary complexity and to know what to do about it?
      Or maybe even the skill to share skills with others
    • Adrian Howard
      ... Not sure that it is mind - I m often wrong :) Adrian
      Message 94 of 94 , May 8 7:55 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        On 6 May 2009, at 04:08, Ron Jeffries wrote:

        > Hello, Adrian. On Tuesday, May 5, 2009, at 11:37:58 AM, you wrote:
        >> That said, my perception is that the odds of getting a bad candidate
        >> at interview increase if they have certifications listed on their
        >> resume.
        >> My post hoc rationalisation for this experiences is not so much
        >> related to the certification programme itself (although many of them
        >> have severe problems), but to the sort of folk they can attract.
        >> The less creative, by-the-book, list-following developer seems to see
        >> certification programmes as a way to prove their competence. The more
        >> creative, problem-oriented, passionate developers seem to spend their
        >> free chunk of career development time building something cool, or
        >> learning erlang, or contributing to open source projects or...
        > Interesting model. I can see how it might be.

        Not sure that it is mind - I'm often wrong :)

      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.