Cisco's announcement in July of the new Cisco Certified Design Expert (CCDE) and Master Architect certifications was a sign of the times. For years, people have been designing complex networks or, at a higher level, setting architectural strategies and goals. However, during this time, the key to the design engineer washroom was a CCIE.
Cisco is looking to change this now. There are skills that a network engineer or architect requires that cannot be capture in a CCIE test. The CCIE makes you good - very good - at configuration and troubleshooting, along with some attention to detail and time-management skills. However, it misses other important skills that network design requires.
On a technical side, the CCIE does not test the "why" of network technology. Jeff Doyle captured this well in his "My Favorite Interview Question" blog. The CCIE teaches you every part of "how" OSPF works, but not necessarily "why". Yes, you will need to understand why OSPF works for the CCIE lab, but not to an in-depth level. Certainly not enough to accurately design it for global networks or make a strong case with a customer whose business relies on a stable network. These technical skills come with experience and learning over several years. This is where people with experience start to separate themselves from the certification kiddies. But, in the industry, there was no way to independently identify yourself as a design expert. Your only avenue was your resume and performance in an interview (the interview you got because you have a CCIE).
Furthermore, there are soft skills that are absolutely critical for design engineers:
- planning skills
- documentation skills
- interpersonal skills and team work
- oral and written presentation skills
- quality control
None of these skills are not taught by the CCIE. The CCIE is going to teach you how to configure a router to push packets, not make you an engineer.
Cisco is now trying to fix this problem with the CCDE program. I think this is part of the reason why a CCIE is not a prerequisite for the CCDE. While it's prudent to be knowledgeable in both areas, the skills are different. Getting a CCIE does not make you a design engineer. Conversely, doing good network designs does not mean you know Cisco's IOS inside and out. The skills are complementary and, in some ways, synergistic, but still different. Now Cisco has a chance to identify those people that have the skills needed to design quality networks, even if they don't know which command creates a serial interface on a Cisco 2821 with a VWIC card. And honestly, in the end, this is where most of us aim to be. Ask yourself; are you more proud that you can accurately describe why BGP can scale to thousands of routes or that you know which command adjusts BGP timers? Most people aspire to be good engineers, not great configuration experts.
The question to Cisco, and to you out there, is how? How do you capture the technical skills and soft skills needed for expert-level network design in a test? What is the balance between technical and soft skills that makes a good engineer?
Michael Morris is a communications engineering manager at a $3 billion high-tech company. His background is in enterprise WANs working with telcos, and developing large-scale routing designs. He has worked on networks at government and corporate organizations, including networks at two Fortune 10 companies. In his current role, he leads large-scale IT networking projects and develops and maintains architectural standards for data networks, storage area networks, IP Telephony, and security. Michael is a CCIE and has 11 years experience in networking and communications, including four years as a paratrooper in the U.S. Army. He has a bachelor's degree in MIS from the University at Buffalo. Recently, he was awarded the Network Professional Association® (NPA) Professional Excellence and Innovation Award for his work on network architecture, templates and enterprise MPLS design.
The opinions expressed in this Weblog are those of the writer and may not represent the opinions of Network World.
|
|
Great points
This article (and Cisco's new DE track) exemplify everything that we are hearing about companies moving away from hiring technical people, instead hiring people who can manage, design, and communicate the business value of technology. CCIE's can be outsourced at an efficient rate. Those who understand a company's needs are the individuals who are most valuable and worth the big salary bucks. This includes understanding how to effectively design a network from a high-level, not just configure it.
RE: "CCIE's can be outsourced at an efficient rate"
"Those who understand a company's needs are the individuals who are most valuable and worth the big salary bucks. This includes understanding how to effectively design a network from a high-level, not just configure it."
Unfortunately many of the people whom can perform the aforementioned tasks are also CCIEs, so lets not be too quick to assume that a CCIE couldn't possibly also work in network design. (Just a hint of cynicism...) ;-)
What you will now see is many CCIEs scrambling to obtain their CCDE, and just like any certification out there through focused study and determination anyone with half a brain will be able to obtain this certification as well. Experience will definitely be of help, but at the end of the day it is just another test. Without a thorough interview process (such as the one prescribed for the Architecture credential) this is just another piece of paper. If someone truly understands the materials covered within the testing process then they will have walked away with a marketable skill set, but this still doesn’t replace experience. Certs can be good on a resume (This seems to vary in this day and age), and they are a necessity for Cisco partners. This makes me wonder if Cisco will in future require CCDEs of their Gold/Silver partners………
RE: Great Points
"This article (and Cisco's new DE track) exemplify everything that we are hearing about companies moving away from hiring technical people"
How can someone design a network and not be technical?
Moral of the story is that technical skills alone are no longer enough, and that to be successful you must also be bussiness savvy. ;-)
After taking the CCDE beta I can say the level of technical knowledge required is much higher than any of the 3 CCIE written exams I have sat.
Missing my point
Those who quoted my post are missing my point. My point was not to say that there is no value in technical abilities/experience/certification and the like. My point was backing up Jeff Doyle's comment that simply knowing how to configure OSPF is not enough for most companies. Simply knowing "how" to configure it does not create a stable and converged for a company. But, knowing why it works and being able to apply it to a business need is extremely critical.
As was stated in this blog post, both are absolutely critical. But, simply being able to do it is not enough anymore. It's being able to cogitate the value of the solution that is being critical.
The only way to truly do
The only way to truly do this is to require the candidate to sit for an interview in which they ask a theoretical customer questions related to their RFP and then present and defend their design. So basically you have to obtain the CCDE which may contain a very small portion of this in the practical portion of the examination, and then go for the Master Architect Cert. I think Cisco has the right idea, but time will tell if there approach will be successful. Better get some translaters queued up..........
CCDE Subjectivity and Secrecy in Grading
Michael,
Long time reader, first time poster - I enjoy your blog...
IMHO, I think one of the biggest issues with CCDE relates to the subjectivity involved in network design and how much the CCDE program replicates the CCIE program's secrecy in regards to how the exam is graded. (The secrecy in grading comment isn't meant as a judgement on the CCIE program - just an observation.) Both CCIE lab exams and the new CCDE practical "interview" have some subjective components, but I think it'll be more difficult to remove the subjectivity from the process for CCDE, as compared with CCIE lab exams. I can imagine ways to do it, but it'll be hard work.
About the secrecy-in-grading issue: many well-prepared and highly-skilled CCIE lab candidates leave the CCIE lab scratching their heads as to what was truly expected to be configured, versus what they actually configured. For many good reasons, Cisco can't simply list what you missed on a CCIE lab exam - however, even if someone might argue that they really got the answer right, but Cisco graded it as "wrong", the "right" answer boils down to a combination of config commands, which is pretty objective. The main subjectivity relates to the wording of the lab requirements. However, from a CCDE candidate's perspective, knowing that a set of known requirements can lead to multiple reasonable design choices makes the overall process more subjective from the start. That perception, combined with an equally secretive grading process (compared to CCIE labs), will leave people somewhat frustrated.
One solution to this combined issue is to make the grading too easy, which devalues the cert. However, just an idea - maybe if the CCDE folks tell us the details of how they're going to grade the interview, maybe even a video of mock interview with a description of what's being looked for in grading - the process in particular -that might convince me that they've made the grading more objective. I can't imagine that feedback on individual lab/interviews on what you got "wrong" would ever fly. But opening up the grading process, compared to CCIE, might be part of the solution.