I have to agree with You in essence that none certification could ever replace experience on any field. In the other hand, You have to understand that none certification, even University diploma, never ever was intended to replace exp. In such, certification is only reference point to knowledge required by particular program, ie.: ISTQB and should be treated only this way.

[James' Reply: I think you missed my point. I'm not complaining about the limitations of the ISTQB, but about the stupidity and injustice of it. How would you like it if I hit you in the face, and then when you complained I were to say "I never claimed that hitting you in the face was a perfect solution to my problem, nor did I claim that it would be pleasant for you. The difficulty is in you, because you don't like being hit in the face with my fist."]

Difficulty is in people. They are week beings that has to believe in something. Some believes in God others in money and anothers in politicians. So the real thorn is not in certification programs, ok they could be better, but in the way like people treated them. We can ban certifications at all but do we realy have enough strong to change milions of people?

[James' Reply: Let's begin by banning bad certification programs and worry about changing people, later.]

I want to answer on Harinder Seera question: “How would you test something that you can not test?”

Answer is very simple - You have to place object in some well defined environment and observe this env. I do not know the English equivalent but in Polish we say “Metody Po?rednie”.

I am totally against these certifications.Because many of them are just concepts which can be memorized and written,you don’t need to have questioning or analytical skills to answer them.These certification no way helps to solve the problem we face in our projects.
And my next company is also giving credit to Certified people by sending a appreciation mails and encouraging them.And guess what? Cat and Mouse race is on…

[James' Reply: Well, stand up and speak out, man.]

well - nearly 3 years after my first post / comment to your “against Certification” post have passed.

During this time I’ve come to participate in numerous projects as well as set up a department from scratch (which consisted of mainly “newcomers”: to the Testing and Programming Field ), and Interviewed dozens on the way…

ITCB / and It’s certifications is indeed becoming a stronger force to reckon with these days - as more and more companies and solutions providers offer “certified” testers ( some have the ISTQB Certificate - while some went through 450 “academic” hours with projects etc. ) - and recently Certifications for the “Advanced” level ( Test Managers etc. ) has surfaced. – It is important to differentiate the ones that invest their precious time in gaining a profession while getting a certificate of some sort on the way from those who gain it for the certification alone…

I must confess that I’ve listed myself to an upcoming advanced level Test + Purchased Rex’ Book on the subject as well…
but my reasoning is now different than in the past…

I’m taking the “why not” approach with a grain of salt - having the Certificate - today - does not ( and will not ) adversely affect my experience / credibility etc. - and at worst - I’ve “invested” ( or spent ) - Roughly 200$ on the process.
at best - my Company would be able to market myself and my team’s services better ( alongside the traditional Pre-Sale Presentation ). - During the past years - I came to understanding that while experience is Key - Referring to different schools of the profession greatly assist!,
While embracing several books of so called “old school” testing - I’ve also embraced your techniques - and thoroughly watched your presentations / videos ( you are indeed a funny guy ). and other ( dare I say ) World renowned ( and definitely active and open spoken ) professionals.

Gaining “terminology and semantics from these schools – I gained common language with nearly every single Testing and or QA Manager I had to interact with – which greatly assisted reaching a common goal. ( I admit though that we have always pushed our own methodology and belief into the process – but mainly via the language acquired by the different sources )

So - I’m taking the do everything - be aware of everything - diversify approach based on them all - with my team and in general.

The certification in question - ( Foundation / Advanced and other ) - is indeed more of a memory Quiz than Logic - and I’ve argued greatly with my “tutor” after my Foundation exam - as I indeed marked answers which do not conform with my view, or worst yet - my actual experience… – but “showing off this piece of paper – actually opened doors for some business ( mostly in heavy players… )

On the other hand - People - who truly want to enter this Diverse and Intriguing world of Software/Hardware Testing ( and/or Quality Assurance - to a certain degree ) - find themselves with a far worse choices tree than your common Programmer…
doing the Certification for the paper alone - is just like getting an ISO 9001:2008 Certificate while not actually adhering to its guidelines ( which is easily doable - and misses the whole point ), - but doing it with intent to learn, gain experience and actually make a difference and set a milestone in a way to a career - is a whole other story - and indeed ITCB have taken the wrong choice here…

Bottom line,

James – it seems that you have developed deep antagonism to the “traditional” and the “documented”… - I believe it is not healthy.

[James' Reply: You mistake me. I have no antipathy for documentation-- just for wasteful and useless documentation. I have no antipathy for tradition-- unless it's oppressive and silly tradition. Surely you have noticed that I make specific arguments about this, rather than just attacking the idea of tradition and documentation in general?]

– on the other hand you are indeed right in referring to Certification methods and “objective” tests as misuse and abuse…
But I don’t see you actively going against it… - lecturing and blogging is nice – and I assume you find yourself in a convention or two each year… ( ? ),
Not to mention maintaining/managing “Satisfice”– and pushing the Context Driven methodology is indeed appreciated.. – but somehow along the way – ITCB and their work is overshadowing these efforts ?…

[James' Reply: What do you think constitutes actively going against it? I speak, write, teach, and consult. What's left to do? Lobby the congress?

Stupidity, however upsetting, is not illegal.]

God speed

My apologies for the lengthy entry!

Eyal

I am very glad to read this. I see that there are people in this blog who hold the same views as mine. I’ve often interviewed such ‘certified’ testers who cant even spell out very basic test scenarios, some freshers easily do it. I am amazed that there are companies that entertain such crap ‘certified’ professionals for employment. I have a friend who got a copy of such a certificate from his friend who has the same name!! And can you believe it actually worked for him !!

I have vowed that I would never get “certified” if it is this sleazy.

Regards,
Mihir

It does a disservice to testers everywhere, and I’m surprised that they’ve managed to gain a foothold in this industry. It proves the power of marketing. Style over substance. Saying that “any standard or certification is better than none” is no excuse — it’s creating a generation of poor testers. Anyone who practices what ISEB teaches will probably harm an organization rather than help it.

The software industry needs to know! I think there should be a formal opposition front to challenge this certification, to make the industry understand that ISEB is *not* and “Industry Standard.” Stop them before they do any more damage. I’ve read many blog posts (like the one above) speaking out against it, but is there a unified organization of people against it? Can we create one?

[James' Reply: I'm glad someone besides me is angry over this. The Association for Software Testing is opposed to these certifications. But maybe someone out there is more politically active and will start the Testers Against Stupid Certification organization.]

[James' Reply: It's not just a personal choice, it's a system that intimidates testers and test managers. It preys upon the fear and doubt of the public. It's morally wrong. It cheapens the craft. Fighting bullies, for me, is the "fun of making so much noise."]

These topics seem to be a good base. Why do you think the topics suggeted by ISTQB, is a load of rubbish?
Ofcourse, I gree this is just a starting point and not an inication of high competence.

BTW I am not a tester, so not a testing expert.

[James' Reply: It sounds like you want me to explain my reasoning, but since you are not a tester, I don't know how to explain it so that you would understand. Suffice it to say that I think you would be better off without the certification nonsense. Even completely ignorant, you would be better off-- less to unlearn.]

[James' Reply: How do you know it has increased your knowledge and not harmed your knowledge? Which parts of it make sense and which parts don't? What if you simply taught yourself testing from first principles?

I think the syllabus is an insult to out intelligence. It was written by people who apparently know very little about the history of the craft of testing, nor about the practical issues surrounding testing.]

I think it is a mistake for people or the community to take “certification” as a mark of competence. A certification should only be taken as a semi-complete guide to the field. Yes Companies should look beyond certifications.
Otherwise how does one even start learning about testing?

BTW I was a co-trainer for a Java course where particiapnts took the Java Sun certification to complete it. I came to know of the type of questions asked in the exam, while preparing to teach, and honestly lost quite a lot of respect for Sun cerfication. Also if I sat down to give the exam I would probably end up passing, but only just.

[James' Reply: I can't pass the ISTQB test, because my sense of integrity and pride no longer allows me to answer falsely on a test. The only ways to pass the ISTQB test is to pretend you believe something that isn't true, or to ignorantly believe things are true that aren't, or I suppose you could also answer randomly and hope for the best.]

I am European and before the European Union, I could not cross a border before showing my passport.

Certification is now a passport for many companies. You are not allowed to enter unless you show from which “country” your are. So have passport from “countries” like Microsoft, Cisco, Project Management and also Testing.

Of course with a good resume you can also enter a company. But that takes time to read and it is easier “customs” to look for a visa in the form of certification.

So certification in itself is useless, but it makes travelling between companies easier.

Kind regards,

Brian

[James' Reply: If it is like a passport, that's only because of the misleading way that certifications have been advertised. These certification have force only among the ignorant. We can change that. When enough of us ridicule bad certification, the ignorant people will catch on too, and bad certification will pass away.] 

I totally agree with your argument. I took the foundation ISTQB exam and all I did was select an answer from multiple answers. Yes I passed the exam but it didn’t give me an satisfaction since it didn’t challenge my brain at all. I would like the people who have give a software testing exam to answer me this question: How would you test something that you can not test?. This I believe is something of a challenge to your brain rather than a question like:
What is a software testing?
a: finding bugs in a software
b: checking the software quality
c: to prove that software does what it is meant to do
d: all of the above

I know that nowadays companies ask for software testing certification and I hate it because I don’t believe that it truly reflects how good you are as a tester.

Your arguments are certainly very valid and current. While living in the US I have never met a professional in the industry who even cared to ask about a certification. I have been testing for over 10 years now, and I have had over 100 interviews, everything from programming, to analytical, to test techniques, to plain dumb questions, but no manager, even the non-technical ones, ever asked me about a tester certification. Things may have changed, I have been out of the country for 3 years now. In Europe though, certification is a big thing. Recently our company required everyone in the test department to get certified with ISTQB. Not only did we have to go through the foundation level certification, but also the advanced level functional tester. The classes we took were not really that bad, comparable to other seminars I’ve had in the US. The instructors were really trying their best. But when it came down to real life issues, their best answer was to learn for the test, and to ignore experience, critical thinking, solid test techniques, and other skills/information we have aquired so far. The tests, as you have stated above, only certify your ability to carefuly choose among multiple choice answers. I once had a possible answer that listed “A,B, C, D is false and D, E, F is true” (what is that supposed to prove anyway, that you have read the answer??). The “material” can be memorized by anyone, middle school level and above. There is no need to understand the software development process or know anything about computers for that matter. All you have to do is memorize it all, just like they teach you, then you can pass the test in the highest percentile. Actually, having real life test experience and knowledge will often work against you, as you may pick the “wrong” answer.

I don’t have a solution for what is happening to the test community. What I see is that some “businesses” saw money making in this certification process, so they went for it. The way it works, in Europe at least, is that you take a very expensive 3-5 day course, then you take the test. There is not very much interest in feedback and there is a strong certification lobby who is set out to convince every software making company that your ISO certification (which is also a big deal in Europe) is in jeopardy unless you get yourself a certified test department. I don’t see any real value added by this certification, not to the certified tester, who has not learned anything valuable in the process or demonstrated his/her skill through the certification, not to the employer, who is only getting a worthless piece of paper, with no guarantee of skills to go with it. My manager does not believe in the certification, neither do those above him, but it makes us more sellable to the client.

I understand HR managers dilemma of getting good, skilled testers. But, at this point, I don’t see a way around a structured interview process, designed to weed out potential failures. I really liked an article from Sticky Minds that I read recently http://www.stickyminds.com/sitewide.asp?Function=WEEKLYCOLUMN&ObjectId=12122&ObjectType=ARTCOL&btntopic=artcol, by Fiona Charles. The idea is to get creative when interviewing testers, find out if they are real pros or just wannabes. I usually like to confront candidates with a real problem we are having (or one from the past) in the test department and observe how they go about finding a solution. This tells me almost all I need to know about a tester. I am a professional in this field, I still have a lot to learn, I don’t have all the answers, but I have designed/implemented/performed test processes in all test techniques. And yet I managed to fail one of the certification tests, because I was choosing my answers according to common sense tester logic. It’s no big deal if you fail the test, you can take it again, thus getting the certification you so desire. My point is, HR managers should inform themselves about these tests and certifications, that are just as easily obtained as college degrees from obscure institutions, before they make test certification an important criteria in their recruiting process.

I do agree with what you have to say about certifications on a personal front.

However, I was wondering…how organizations around the world ever be able to benchmark or assess if they have the right person. Not every person standing in line is skilled enough to test just because he thinks or claims he is!
If you had a financial product to test which required 50+ ’skilled testers’, as an organization would you recruit 50 guys claiming to be ’skilled testers’ or 50 who have a certification in testing.

Personally, I don’t believe that a certification actually speaks for an individuals skills as a tester but was wondering how it works from an managment perspective …

-p-

[James' Reply: Hiring managers do job interviews. Progressive ones use behavioral interviewing and skill demonstrations. What I do, these days, is hire people for one week contracts to see how they work.] 

When I went into the test, I was expecting something that would test my general
knowledge of the Java language and object oriented programming. The test that I took
did not do that.

There were a large number of questions on special purpose API’s that I have never
used. There were some questions on development tools that I have never used. And
there were a large number of “brain teaser” questions on code snippets which I could
have answered, if I would have had more time.

As a result, my test score was very low (2.60).

That score shows that I’m not good at guessing at API’s and tools that I’ve never used.
And it shows that I’m not good at brain teasers with a three-minute time limit. However,
it shows ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about my Java and object oriented programming skills.

In 2002, I studied a book on Java, and then I took a college course on it. I got an A in
the course. According to my Brainbench score, I should not have been an “A” student.

For over a year, I was the sole designer and developer of web software that my employer
believes is marketable. That software involves thousands of lines of Java code, a large
number of API’s, and advanced object oriented constructs. According to my Brainbench
score, I should not be able to accomplish what I have just accomplished.

When I was in college, I took secondary education courses. Later, while I was working
for a former employer, I designed two computer courses which I taught for several
years. As a trained and experienced trainer and tester, it is my opinion that the
Brainbench Java 2 test has a number of very serious flaws.

It appears that there have been no sound scientific studies regarding the Brainbench
claim that their tests predict employee success. And it appears that there are a large
number of companies that are blindly accepting these unsubstantiated claims.

It seems to me that a sound scientific study for the Java 2 test would include the
following elements: have thousands of working and successful Java programmers take
various Java 2 tests; have thousands of inexperienced people with Java knowledge take
the same tests; for individual test takers, have tests with a large number of questions
on API’s and tools that they have never used; for individual test takers, have tests with
large number of questions on API’s and tools that they have used; for the latter, follow
their careers as Java programmers for at least five years.

It appears to me that the creators of the Brainbench Java 2 test do not know what a
typical Java programmer does, and they have no understanding of the art of testing.

I wonder how many careers have been derailed as a result of flawed Brainbench tests. I
would like to see a scientific survey on that.

[James' Reply: Thanks for providing details of this pathetic Brainbench situation.

I once took a computer-administered test of Microsoft Word skills. I took the test because the recruiting agency told me that each candidate to be sent for my review as a hiring manager would first be certified on a battery of such tests. I wanted to be sure that any test taken by a candidate was reasonable.

I failed the test, of course, despite having a lot of experience with Word. The reason I failed is that that stupid testing software only understood one way to perform actions in Word, and if the subject solves the problem using a different feature of Word, or uses the feature in a different way, they are instantly graded down on that task. There was no backing up and getting another try.

So, like you, I wonder how many good people had been denied jobs because this software had flunked them. Someone should file a lawsuit over that.]

I completely agree to what you’ve mentioned - “honest approach to certification must be community-based and must recognize the debate”

Other than your Approach, Rex’ and other are all valid.

The question in our day and age is the question of “relevance” and it is completely context related.
Related to the Company, the Project, the Product, The Budget, etc. etc.

In my line of work - i.e. handling multiple projects ranging from simple pilots and demos to full blown Client/Server/Network/Security Solutions - i need to decide, at times on daily basis, the approach i’ll use, and the approach my team should be using.

Ever lasting ongoing documentation of every bit and byte is a thing of the past, but completely off the wall exploratory approach, ( even the most well educated reason/logic/error based one ) is something to be aware of and use only in certain circumstances,
at some projects i have - that is all i can afford, and at other it is complementary.

Disregarding it completely would be foolish of course as it is one of the best ways to make actual progress and build proper evaluation of SUT/AUT/DUTs when required.

Certification wise - AT some universities you’ll learn for 3 to 4 years filled with concepts/methods/opinions of one side - only to witness something completely else when you are using it in practice, however - such a diploma ( e.g. BA etc. ) is still a mandatory requirement in a wide range of organizations and companies.

But as long as no one will centralize all approaches under one leading board / certification system - the bashing between the different approaches will rage on - and the so called “ignorance” will rise - on both ends.

And no, i do not accept all of the methods / terms / work flows / types / levels I’m learning these days, - but it is good to be aware and acknowledge some of these terms only to realize that others do - and a common language must be created. - if it is by learning all the terms independently - or via certifications of all sorts - is a subjective mater - but is indeed needed.

In any way - would be interesting to hear a lecture from you some day in Israel - any chance?
perhaps even endorsed by SiGIST itself ( Pro Rex Black - but pro/endorses other approaches as well - in fact - open minded to all Test/QA Related approaches and methods ).

Thanks for the blog

Eyal