[James' Reply: Hi Alex. Can I read your testing books and articles, please? Can I take your classes? I'm sure I could learn a lot about testing from you, if only you would give me the benefit of your wisdom on this subject.

You haven't offered any counter-arguments or anything, but the way you're talking, there must be a lot of them, and I'm sure they are very good.]

Back to certificates: Regarding the recently created semantic difference between ‘Verification’ and ‘Validation’, I notice Wikipedia provides exactly the same definitions that score a multiple-choice point in an ISEB exam, but no dictionary printed before that scheme was created used those distinctions. To get the point, you have to ignore real knowledge of the English language and regurgitate the required answer. That’s a bad thing.

[James' Reply: I don't often say this but: LOL.]

Good to see this subject still provoking discussion nearly 6 years later. It’s something that needs pushing more than ever.

I have just joined a new company, and in the process went through several interviews. At one point I was asked why it said “working towards ISTQB”.

Now firstly, this isn’t to discuss the merits of my CV (though hindsight has showed me that I needn’t have added it, and should have stuck to my guns), but obviously this meant I had not yet passed it, and was merely reading the book.

I was then quizzed on my future plans regarding the ‘qualification’, to which I said I was not going to take the exam since I don’t agree with how it goes about it’s business, and that it doesn’t take a bit of paper to make you a good tester.

I was greeted with warm words and lots of nodding. At this point I realised it was a company I wanted to work for.

Keep it up James, in the future I’ll stick to my guns, and then I’ll feel I can stand beside you.

[James' Reply: Good to hear, Chris.]

I don’t see how you can say “manipulating ignorant managers”. If entry to mid level testers are the ones that have to sit through these crappy exams and waste our hard earned money just to get a certification to get in the door of a company then WE are the ones being manipulated… not the “ignorant” managers. Also, its not your industry… you happen to be a part of the industry.

[James' Reply: Perhaps you haven't spoken to hundreds of testers about this, as I have. What's driving this is not demand from testers. What's driving this is companies that are ignorantly accepting certifications as evidence of ability to test, interest in testing, etc. Most people who get tester certifications do it because they are afraid they will be frozen out of the job market (although this has not been much of a problem in the USA). So, really, it's the managers in companies that think certs matter who are being manipulated. Testers are being bullied. Bullying is different from manipulation.]

But, overall, I do respect the path you’ve taken to mastery… and to me that seems to be a major theme I pick up from your sites: Pick a subject and master it. I would not argue with the path to mastery or expert as being the way to go… if more people chose their interest or passion and became masters then the country would be much better off.

There is one thought though, that is still on my mind: It’s my impression that during the 90′s and before, the IT industry was not as structured in the sense that employers didn’t require as many degrees and/or certificates to enter the field. Therefore, most people entering IT didn’t have a certification or degree. But, it is more structured now… like most other corporate jobs such as accounting and marketing they look for degrees and or certifications from the new people they bring in.

[James' Reply: When I joined Apple in the 80's there was exactly the same emphasis on degrees as there is now (in other words, a lot... my step-father, at IBM, warned me in 1982 that I would not be able to work in this field without a degree... but I got a job as a video game programmer right after I dropped out of school). I don't think that has changed at all. The industry is not structured in any respect, here. It's an issue that varies from company to company based on the size of the company and their perceptions of themselves. Anyone can get around "degreeism", however. Just be good and you will be rewarded with work.]

Sure, if you have a track record of great success in accounting or marketing then I am sure they will be happy to forgo the standard sheets of papers to give interviews… but the question many people are faced with is: How do I get the interview and experience without the degree or certification in this environment? I am not attempting to answer if the testing certifications are good or not… I am not far enough along on my mastery path to be able to formulate a thorough response to that question… but, I get closer as time passes to answering that question.

[James' Reply: The people trying to answer that question are often not aware of how resumes are sorted. My brother and I just went through a stack of resumes and pulled out about a third of them. The main thing we were looking for? Signs of life. And there was very little there. Just a lot of buzzwords, mostly. The phone screen is where I'll start to get an idea. We'll do this first third, and then we'll do the other two thirds, too. Basically, I have learned, after many years, not to exclude more than about a fifth of people based on a resume. It takes a lot to make me flip the bit at that stage. I'll sort the resumes based on the quality of writing and breadth of experience and a few other factors, however.]

Anyway, I still have much ground to cover to reach master level but I am trying to enjoy the process. Your site looks like it has much knowledge to share and I thank you for that!!

1. I think only a newbie to the professional work world would think that all that must be done for success is to take and pass a certification and then they can put their feet up and relax because the world will now be their oyster and they can get ready for fast track to becoming CIO of their company. No one is attempting to claim certifications have anywhere near that kind of power. But, with that said, that can help people get jobs which, in turn, help people put food on their tables… plain and simple. That is and of itself… a good enough reason for someone to acquire certification.

[James' Reply: No, it isn't. That's a terrible reason. You're saying that manipulating ignorant managers is a good way to get work. How sickening! Please get out of my industry.]

That is… if they do not put their self into debt in the process of acquiring the certification. And as we all know, ISTQB syllabus is given for free and is only 78 pages long. Not like applying for master’s program at top school to shell out thousands of dollars to take tests. Frankly, I have never liked certifications either and I would rather develop skill than remember terms any day… but who says a person can’t do both?

[James' Reply: Lots of things on the net are free. You don't need this syllabus. Certification, however, is not free. It's a blatantly commercial enterprise.

You don't need both. But you DO need courage and integrity, though.]

2. James seems to be arguing for the idea of developing a passion for a subject and becoming a master at the subject through years of experience, study, and practice.

[James' Reply: I made several arguments. Do you see them there? THEY ARE LABELED IN BOLD FACE for crying out loud.]

There is no doubt that the mastery track is, was, and will always be a better way than simply gaining a paper after taking a test or certification one day on a subject. To compare mastery with certification is like comparing Bruce Lee to a guy that went to a one week martial art boot camp… there is no comparison. The only issue would be if certifications claim to offer more than master.

[James' Reply: No, there are several issues, and I have laid them out for you in this article. You seem to have ignored them. Perhaps you are practicing your speed reading?

One of the issues I raised is that ISTQB-style certification is wrong and bad. It doesn't just over-promise.]

I think most employers want experience most and if there is a certification to go along… then fine. Certifications are not a destination but a small piece of a journey.

[James' Reply: Certifications should not be a piece of the journey. That's my point. It's a dumb idea. Wake up, man.]

I’m comming from safety critical community and I have learned how to specify and verify systems with tools like PVS, Alloy, SPIN, etc. In this field one must reason about the behavior of the system and not just test certain cases. It’s really cool stuff. To make a long story short: I know what we are talking about.

[James' Reply: Okay, let's say that you know what you are talking about. Personally, I've been the test architect on a class III medical device for this last year, and I've done in my career what I propose is the most rigorous form of testing known to man: testing for a court case. That means I have the experience of spending $250,000 of LABOR (not materials) to prepare and execute a 10 minute test. We won that court case, BTW. So, I too am familiar with rigorous testing.

I've spoken to several ISTQB trainers who admitted to me that they got their certification NOT by telling the truth on the test, but by filling in the answers that they believe the examiners were expecting. In other words, it's all just a game to them. A game of winks and lies. Some of these trainers agree with me about the poor quality of the whole system, but feel weak and helpless in the face of it. I don't understand this. Even when I was a new tester, I never felt weak and helpless. I felt that I could think for myself and form my own opinions about testing. I didn't need permission or certification to be a tester. I just needed to study and become so good that I would be sought after.]

I checked out your course slides and read one of your books, before I sent my previous post… and I think most of their content is okay. I’m quite sure that you are taking serious what you are doing. I’m also quite sure that you missed the smile at the end of my post. Please, don’t take the last part that serious.
The serious part of the message is that some of your argument are valid, some of them are invalid e.g.: “No accountability” argument; In IT sector people are not accountable for what they are doing generally.

[James' Reply: Actually, it's all valid. But if you think some of it is invalid, and you expect me to take you seriously (instead of dismiss you as a crackpot) then you really should consider making a counterargument that has some kind of substance to it. I don't see any substance here. I'm sorry, but you won't dismiss my ideas with a single sentence. I didn't get my reputation by being a lightweight, so hey, don't you be one, either.

Now, what's your counterargument...? That we don't expect accountability from IT people? Really? So, you're saying that there is no profession. Well, I agree with you. But that's a non sequitor. It doesn't MATTER that we have no profession in IT. What matters is that the ISTQB is CLAIMING that their system essentially creates a profession. I'm saying, no, it doesn't. You're telling me my argument is invalid, and yet you haven't yet even addressed my argument.]

I think it is quite hard to create a good certification program. You are kidding with the driving license, aren’t you?

[James' Reply: No, I'm not.]

I’m pretty sure that too many people have driving license who should never be allowed to drive a car!

[James' Reply: I'm not sure of that. I don't have any such information and I bet you don't either. A driver's license certifies reasonable driving skill-- not reasonable driving judgment or drug-free lifestyle. It doesn't certify that someone can drive well while texting or right after having a fight with his girlfriend. Adn of course, a certification system can be imperfect and yet still be quite reasonable.

I'm not arguing that the ISTQB is imperfect. I'm arguing that it's a scam; a danger to our craft.]

It would be much more professional to maintain a pros/cons list than just critize something. On the other side it is your blog and you are free to recruit disapointed people and sell them your services… clever

[James' Reply: It's my blog and I'm free to tell the unfortunate truth, even if it's hard for you to read. The unfortunate truth is that there are bad people doing bad things, and we don't need pros and cons when there are no pros and only cons. A criminal in the dock can't expect to be taken seriously if he complains that the prosecutor is ignoring the "pros" of his crime.

I remain hopeful that you will eventually decide to take your craft seriously and stand with me for high, reasonable standards of professionalism.]

You want anything better? Go read “Lessons Learned in Software Testing” by Cem Kaner, James Bach, and Bret Pettichord.

That’s the only book on software testing that I use in educating my team since 2004 (well, apart from technical stuff like “Software Testing with Visual Studio 20xx”, etc). That was the first book which tries to look at testing as it is in reality, and in fact it teaches you something you can directly apply in practice, no matter whether you are a junior guy with no experience, or a seasoned test manager. Most of the other books just replicate / build on Myers concepts from as back as 1979, which do not work for nowadays testing industry.

I find your post quite intersting, but I feel your argumentation strange. It seems that you collected the arguments against ISTQB (some of them are valid), ignored the arguments for and you concluded that ISTQB is evil.

I am part of a community that takes testing very seriously. We take our skills seriously. We work on them nearly constantly. The ISTQB make a mockery of testing skill. Just this morning I made an analysis of what makes an assumption critical. What did YOU do to study testing this morning?]

My opinion is that ISTQB is far from perfect, but it is not that bad.

[James' Reply: And what is your opinion based on? Have you studied software testing yourself? Should I accept your opinion without argument or evidence? I have made my arguments. Are you capable of responding to them?]

From your intro it seems that you have strong feelings against any form of formal education or standards, except your own BCRIT. As you have written: “They are bad. They are doing and have done great damage. They should be abolished.” Hmmm… actually I could say: You are bad! You know how to do it better (or at least think you know) and you didn’t presented and organised anything! You do a great damege, because you try to abolish some positivie initative without presenting anything better!

[James' Reply: As I have repeatedly written, there are good certification programs out there, such as the programs that taught me how to fly or dive or drive a car. The ISTQB and bullshit like that does nothing of the kind. I know of no commercial tester certification standard that is honest and worthwhile.

Raise your standards, man.]

[James' Reply: Ah, well since you're not a tester you might have trouble seeing that the certification you received has harmed, rather than helped, your knowledge as a tester.]

Some of the core concepts that I learned are quite useful to keep in mind when designing software, but you shouldn’t blindly follow the rules that were taught in the syllabus. Just like with religion, there are times where breaking/ignoring the rules is quite alright, and even recommended, ex: the “Thou shalt not kill” commandment is ignored by even the most fervently religious people when a war erupts.

[James' Reply: The core concepts you think certification gave were either wrong, or if they were helpful, they were available to you without certification. As a certified tester, all I can say about you is that you have been indoctrinated in some way. Some of it stuck, and some of it didn't. If you come to me for training, the first thing I have to do is strip that crap off of you. Then we'll restart your education.]

Certifications, just like university degrees, are not official documents that say that you are a good [insert title here] but rather that you’ve followed a certain curriculum and learned a few key points on certain subjects. Real world practice is the only valid experience, and the only way of knowing if someone is truly good at something is by looking at past work and then deciding if that fits your definition of “good”.

[James' Reply: You are almost saying that certifications are unnecessary. Just take one more step and say that. By that way, I'm not certified by the ISTQB. I'm not even certifiable by them. I also don't have a university degree. Or high school. None of those things are required to be an excellent and successful tester.]

Thanks in advance for taking the time to share your thoughts on this matter.

[James' Reply: They might think that it shows that, but a much better way to show that is to not pursue fake training and fake certification. Instead, actually study and learn your craft. Your public portfolio will show that you are serious.]

First of all, I love your way of teaching any testing concept. Its a talent. Keep it up. ^:)^

Now, about certifications. Its true that, merely attaining some scores in certification courses will not prove intelligence/analytical skills of the tester. But its also true that you wont suffer “clearing” the exam unless, you fail and lose your money.

I am good at work, testing softwares. My sucess records speak good of me in my company. Also, I am able to clear these certifications “adding” more value to myself and my career. So far, this mechanism works !! Atleast, it comes handy for shortlisting .

Your concerns are genuine and I appreciate that you have put forward these in public.

All I would say is, you are welcome if you have “better” method of certifying testers.

[James' Reply: You can also forge a university degree. You can lie to your employer, or exaggerate the presence of any skill that you don't really possess. The certifications that I am criticizing are-- in my opinion as a 28-year student of professional programming and testing-- FRAUDULENT. The mechanism that you say works is equivalent to dressing up like a police officer and fooling citizens into following your commands. Sure it works, in a manner of speaking. When lots of people do that, it makes people doubt the existence of real policemen, and that destroys the credibility of the entire profession.

My brother was just hired as a director of testing at eBay. He has no certification. He was on a very short list, recruited from outside Silicon Valley specifically for this new job. He is not certified. He's not a programmer. His university degree is in Journalism. But he's a kick ass leader of testers, and eBay saw that.]

When I first noticed this trend, I considered getting the ISTQB Test Manager certification. But when I went through the syllabus, I started to feel that I’d be much more comfortable proving during a job interview that ISTQB is rubbish, than spending a week to memorize their whole glossary or to learn what exactly they claim is right in certain rather ambiguous situations.

I think the popularity of certifications comes from the fact that a significant part of people engaged in software engineering still do not understand clearly what software testing is. I have observed several cases where senior management thinks testing is as simple as point-and-click practice and appoints incompetent test managers (because it sounds weird for them when a competent test manager asks for a salary close to, equal or even more than what they pay to their development manager). Then the incompetent manager conducts incompetent hiring and the company ends up with underachieving test team, so they park to hiring certified people going forward. Basically, popularity of certifications among employers is there because certifications are the last refuge of incompetent hiring managers.

A year ago I was being interviewed for Test Manager position. The interview as such would be barely enough for me to hire a junior tester. Yet I got the offer. Predicting what it could be like working for a company that hires test manager based on the interview I had, I rejected the offer. And I should admit that I didn’t refuse myself the pleasure to inform them the exact reason of my rejection. )

I have personally interviewed MANY, really many testers with various certifications. I have never hired one. Many of them didn’t have the right mentality to be able to work effectively in the team. The other part of them were just useless. On the other hand, I once hired a junior tester after 10 (!) minutes of interview just because he could explain to me what HTTP is (EXPLAIN, not just quote Wikipedia) and describe HTTP request and response structures. He came for a two months contract and got a permanent contract right after.

James, I do see the problem here and I know it’s a “dangerous” one. I to want to stand up against it, but I don’t know how and I don’t know whether it’s at all feasible. Boycotting certifications won’t work as those who think that nowadays certifications are useless, are vastly outnumbered by those who “exploit”, and those who blindly get “exploited” (both employers and certificate holders).

Do you see any clear paths to improve the situation? Do you have any forecast on how things will change in the near future?

[James' Reply: I take my inspiration from Voltaire. He almost singlehandedly sparked a revolution of thought that ultimately destroyed the power of the corrupt French priesthood. His principal tool was ridicule. When enough of us laugh at these fake certification organizations, their advertising will fool fewer new testers and test managers.

The long term solution is to develop popular academies for skilled testers. This is already being done. The academies (all of them informal gatherings of like minded testers) are out there. One example is my circle of testers, called the Context-Driven School. Come to the CAST 2011 conference and join us. We just need build on that.]

[James' Reply: The situation is a little worse. Thinking testers of the world should stand, with me, against bad certification.]