Voice of the DBA

Tag: Microsoft

  • What does certification achieve?

    This is part 2 of a 3 part series of thoughts on certification and Microsoft technologies.

    The idea of certifying someone as having a skill is almost as old as the idea of teaching someone a skill. I’m sure as soon as a person had the idea of teaching someone for compensation, others wanted some assurance that the person had learned the skill. That was probably the first time that a test was developed, graded, and scores passed out.

    We all know that a certificate or a test score doesn’t imply any level of competence at a skill. If I had to weld two pieces of metal together as a test, successfully completeing this wouldn’t imply that I could weld any two other pieces of the same metal together (size, scale, etc. matter). It wouldn’t even imply that I’d do as good a job welding the 99th and 100th pieces together in a week as I’d done during the test. The same would hold true in almost any endeavor, but we still have tests, grades, certifications, diplomas, and awards in many different fields.

    Is IT that different? In one sense it is. The technology field seems to change so often, and the bars for entry (and thus hiring) are so low that it’s difficult to set up standardized tests, often because it’s not cost effective. Medicine and law change constantly, but their tests slowly evolve, and they certainly don’t change at the rate of SQL Server versions and tests. It’s also more cost effective to create new revisions of tests in these other fields when the candidates have made a large investment in their education and regulatory agencies require licenses to practice in these other fields.

    However I might argue that technology doesn’t change that much. The idea of backing up a SQL Server database, rebuilding a clustered index, adding a login, querying for duplicates, and more haven’t changed much in the two decades I’ve worked with the product. The actual syntax might be different, but are we hiring people that remember syntax or accomplish tasks?

    I think that’s the point of certification. It should be a method that gives others confidence that an individual can accomplish a task, or has some basic skill. I’d argue the current set of tests, questions, and even structure of the MCSE/MCITPro/MCSA whatever doesn’t remotely do that. It doesn’t test skills, tests knowledge at the base level of memorization, and fails to provide a basic bar that we can be sure everyone has met.

    Perhaps those aren’t Microsoft’s goals. Perhaps they value their profits higher than the certification that individuals hold skills, perhaps they view these designations as a part of their marketing effort to sell software. Perhaps they have other goals. All I know is that as long as employers ask for these certifications in job postings, as long as employers pay for tests and candidates take them, why should Microsoft change?

    If we all believe the emperor has clothes, does it matter if he really wears any?

    Steve Jones

    Video and Audio versions

    Today’s podcast features music by Everyday Jones. No relation, but I stumbled on to them and really like the music. Support this great duo at www.everydayjones.com.

    Follow Steve Jones on Twitter to find links and database related items and announcements.
    Steve Jones Windows Media Video ( 22.8MB) feed

    MP4 iPod Video ( 26.2MB) feed

    MP3 Audio ( 5.3MB) feed

    Feeds are available at iTunes and Mevio

    To submit an article, rant or editorial,
    log in to the Contribution Center

  • No More MCM

    This is part 1 of a 3 part series of thoughts on certification and Microsoft technologies.

    I’ve heard that Friday afternoon is the best time to fire someone. People are leaving early, the office is quiet, and you can let people go quickly and get yourself away. It also gives the remaining employees some time to grieve, and hopefully, come back to work Monday without some of the shock they initially experienced. At least, that’s what they say. Personally I think there’s no good day, and productivity always suffers somewhat whenever there’s surprising, upsetting news.

    Recently, just before the US Labor Day holiday, late on a Friday, I saw a number of announcements on Twitter that the MCM program had been discontinued. Since I was on holiday, I thought I’d missed something, but apparently not. It was late on a Friday that the an email was sent to all MCMs and MCAs notifying them of the change. It was a brief email, noted here, and didn’t include some of the reasons of that were given as a comment in a Connect item filed to save the program (the comment was from Tim Sneath at 1:32pm). There’s been a variety of coverage and blogs around the Internet as well.

    We aren’t being told the whole truth, nor do I expect to be told the whole truth. This is Microsoft’s program, and as such, we follow along and adjust, or choose to ignore it. In this case, I can’t believe that this was anything other than a cost based issue, designed to reduce expenses and raise profits. In all likelihood, someone(s) bonus depended on internal Microsoft Learning metrics being met (probably revenue or profit numbers), which the MCM/MCA program were reducing. In an effort to look better, the program was chopped, without a lot of input, communication, or discussion with the people actually working to better the program. I expect Tim Sneath and others were caught off guard with the decision and told to deal with it. They did so poorly, extremely poorly. In hindsight, I’m sure someone wishes they’d composed a better message and delayed sending it for a couple days.

    I attempted the first part of the MCM early on, with a voucher. I didn’t pass, but I learned how hard the exam was, realized it was within my capabilities, but that it would require some serious study. I didn’t proceed further because of other commitments, but I’ve watched more and more people work through the MCM process, usually over months or years as they learn, struggle, research, and drive themselves forward.

    Ultimately the achievement isn’t the certification, but the journey. The efforts candidates go through, the knowledge they acquire from study and hard work, and perhaps more importantly, the skills they build to teach themselves new techniques. I wouldn’t hire an MCM because I was sure they necessarily knew everything about my environment. I’d hire them because I would be 100% confident they could find the problem and fix it, no matter whether they used old knowledge or acquired new proficiency on the spot.

    That was the real value of someone who completed, or even seriously worked towards, an MCM.

    Steve Jones

    Video and Audio versions

    Today’s podcast features music by Everyday Jones. No relation, but I stumbled on to them and really like the music. Support this great duo at www.everydayjones.com.

    Follow Steve Jones on Twitter to find links and database related items and announcements.
    Steve Jones Windows Media Video ( 26.3MB) feed

    MP4 iPod Video ( 30.3MB) feed

    MP3 Audio ( 6.1MB) feed

    Feeds are available at iTunes and Mevio

    To submit an article, rant or editorial,
    log in to the Contribution Center

  • Opinions and Votes

    When you work with a vendor, you may report bugs, issues, or strange behaviors in software. These area facts, and are valuable pieces of information that vendors do care about. When you exclaim that a particular bug or missing feature is critical, you’re stating an opinion. The importance or priority you place on an item is not necessarily the same priority the vendor places on the item.

    We see this every day in our work, as clients and customers send us issues with our applications and systems. We triage the items and may or may not fix them in the order the customer would like them fixed. Our management may set priorities that we don’t agree with. It’s a complex interaction that involves many factors, all of which are weighed differently by different people.

    However the end user (client, customer, etc.) often doesn’t understand why the priorities are different and why can’t we just see how badly an item needs to be fixed? I see this all the time, though from the end user perspective. I use lots of software, and I find lots of issues and failings, especially in SQL Server. My priorities aren’t Microsoft’s priorities, and I accept that. I provide them with an opinion of what I think, not a vote. If they don’t agree with my opinion, or choose to work on other priorities, I don’t think they aren’t listening to me. I think they disagree with my opinion.

    Like it or not, politics is important here. The art of influence is important, and while an individual opinion doesn’t matter, lots of opinions can have influence. Again, however, these are opinions and influences, not votes. We can convince Microsoft to change direction at times, or work on certain issues, but it takes participation and rational, reasonable debate, not childish exaggerated complaints and insults. We want to influence and convince, not upset and anger.

    Steve Jones

    Video and Audio versions

    Today’s podcast features music by Everyday Jones. No relation, but I stumbled on to them and really like the music. Support this great duo at www.everydayjones.com.

    Follow Steve Jones on Twitter to find links and database related items and announcements.
    Steve Jones

    Windows Media Video ( 16.9MB) feed

    MP4 iPod Video ( 20.8MB) feed

    MP3 Audio ( 4.1MB) feed

    Feeds are available at iTunes and Mevio

    To submit an article, rant or editorial,
    log in to the Contribution Center

  • The Reorg

    I haven’t been thrilled with how Microsoft has been run over the last decade. As a stockholder, I’ve been disappointed. As a technologist, I’ve shaken my head all too often at the various ways in which I think the company has failed to grow and reinvent itself. I’ve been concerned over the lack of coordination and focus that many groups have had, changing priorities and abandoning technologies instead of building products that impressed people with their fit, finish, and constant enhancement.

    Don’t get me wrong. I think SQL Server has grown, changed, and amazed me at times with the enhancements. At the same time I’m disappointed with the lack of improvement in tooling for things like replication and Service Broker. There seems to be a lack of coordination at times between the various languages used by pieces of the platform, almost like the fractured standards that plauged parts of the Office Suite in the past. I moan the lack of resources devoted to improving features like encryption. At times it appears that whole sections of the platform are ignored during development cycles.
    I don’t know if this large scale reorganization will improve the way Microsoft functions. I have concerns about the bundling of Windows into one group, and the potential issues with trying to force the product to work the same way on tablets, phones, and desktops. Devices and services sounds good, but ultimately I think that Microsoft needs to ensure that the software works well, with a high degree of fit and finish that meets the particular platform on which Windows runs.
    I like how Windows Phone looks, but I bemoan the lack of applications. As important as marketing can be, I truly think that Microsoft needs to get back to the “developers, developers, developers” mantra and not only entice developers, but reward them for helping catapult Windows Phone onto equal footing with iOS and Android.
    Most of all I wish Microsoft would go back to being a technology company, with a focus on cool, exciting technology, with a leader that appreciates, uses, and understands how exciting technology can be.
    Steve Jones