By Ed Tittel

Program Recertification Requirements

The objective that drove this story was to discover the recertification requirements, certification maintenance requirements and other ways that vendors and organizations try to identify or ensure certification currency. For this story, I conducted a systematic online survey of the IT certification landscape, including every vendor’s or organization’s certification program I could find on certification sites and related resources and by using a variety of search engines. Along the way, I uncovered a broad range of possibilities and an equal variety of approaches that vendors and organizations use to label certifications for freshness or to ensure that certified individuals stay current in their areas of expertise.

To begin with, Table 1 recounts some of the data that the survey produced. It’s interesting enough to be worth some analysis and discussion.

Table 1: Survey Overview
Item	Count	Explanation
Survey Population
Vendors/Organizations	95	Total number of players on the field
Programs	280	Number of distinct certification programs surveyed
Certifications	674	Number of individual, named certifications covered
Recertification Data
No recertification	57	Number of certifications that never need to be renewed
Explicit expiration	175	Number of certifications with fixed expiration dates or periods
Version-based	318	Number of certifications tied to specific product or technology versions
On demand	80	Number of certifications that must be renewed upon notification that renewal is required
Other	42	Number of certifications that don’t address renewal or recertification or that don’t fit other categories used
This overview relates to the full version of the recertification table found here.

The numbers in the “Survey Population” section describe the population from which the survey was drawn. There were a total of 95 different vendors or organizations covered that offered a combined total of 280 separate certification programs, which included a total of 674 distinct IT certifications altogether. To qualify, a vendor or organization had to describe some form of professional credential that mentioned “certified,” “certification” or “certificate.” The vast majority of such certifications require taking and passing one or more exams. Most also include submitting an application form and subscribing to a code of ethics or conduct, and the majority include some recognition that recertification or continuing education is necessary to maintain current credentials—and presumably, a current knowledge base upon which such credentials rest.

Before I tackle the kinds of recertification and related policies that vendors and organizations apply to their certifications, it’s important to explain why this topic is important enough to warrant detailed analysis and discussion. Because the majority of IT certifications–about 85 percent if you buy into a rationale I’ll present later and more than 60 percent if you prefer a more conservative approach–involve either outright expiration of aging credentials or provide a way to identify such credentials as potentially outdated, I assert that this represents explicit recognition that IT certification is time-sensitive.

This also means that serious professionals must make a commitment to ongoing learning, testing and involvement in their chosen fields of expertise to make sure that certifications remain meaningful and relevant. That’s why many programs require certifications to be renewed periodically and also why their renewal requirements sometimes involve regular, continuing professional education and/or periodic retesting to re-establish an individual’s knowledge, skills and abilities.

Next, it’s important to explain the entries that appear in the “Recertification Data” section of Table 1 because they establish the foundation upon which this story is built.

No recertification

The certifications in this category (and the programs that are their parents) either explicitly state that no recertification is ever required to maintain currency or that once earned, certifications never retire. To appear in this category, such certifications must also include no way of labeling credentials (other than test dates, when available) to establish currency or “freshness.” Less than 10 percent of the certifications surveyed fall into this category. Many of these certifications relate to methodologies, assessment techniques or other forms of knowledge that might arguably be considered less subject to obsolescence than technical details that adhere to specific products, technologies or implementation techniques. Thus, it’s not necessarily the case that no recertification is a strike against some particular credential, but this status should definitely be considered when choosing among multiple certifications of the same type.

Explicit Expiration

The certifications in this category come with explicit expiration dates or equally specific durations. In either case, the certifications come up for review at the end of some time period and are either renewed if specific criteria are met or revoked outright when the criteria are not met. Such criteria may relate to meeting or exceeding a certain number of hours spent on continuing education, retaking a certification exam, taking an update exam and so forth. Thus, only individuals with current credentials can claim to be certified. This is one of the most stringent ways to ensure that certifications maintain their value in the marketplace.

version-based

The certifications in this category are labeled with version information, version designations or other data that indicates the approximate vintage of the credentials involved. About half of such programs also impose requirements that certified individuals retest, pass update exams or otherwise meet currency requirements (occasionally, continuing education plays a role in such programs as well) within some period after a version retires or is supplanted by a more current version. The other half of these programs do not retire credentials, but leave updates or recertification efforts to the discretion of certified individuals, rather than enforcing such requirements outright. The difference between each half of this category explains the difference between 85 and 60 percent of the overall certification population mentioned previously. That is, counting this entire category produces the higher figure, while discounting it by 50 percent produces the lower figure. The higher number indicates the percentage of certifications that include freshness indicators, and the lower indicates the percentage that impose mandatory currency requirements on certification holders.

on demand

Certifications in this category also tend to use version labels or designations, but include the requirement that certification holders will retest, take update exams or otherwise meet currency requirements. This permits more flexibility in certification programs, without requiring specific expiration dates, freshness periods or regular renewals. Instead, individuals who hold older certifications must meet additional requirements whenever the software, the environments or the technologies on which their certifications are based change sufficiently to warrant further training and/or testing.

other

Certifications in this category either fail to address the issue of recertification (without claiming that they never expire) or use criteria other than those that apply to the categories covered here to address the matter of certification currency. While certifications in this category may indeed be subject to currency considerations, I was unable to learn about them through published sources or by requesting such information from the parent vendor or organization.

Now that you’ve had a chance to review some summary data and related analysis, I’d like to report on various items of significant interest that I observed while conducting the survey. These provide further details about specific recertification policies or certification labeling techniques. They also suggest some possible trends for which I lack prior historical data to assess looking backward, but which may serve as a point of comparison for such studies in the future.

As this story was underway, five of Microsoft’s six certification programs exited the “explicit expiration” category and entered the “version-based” category, pursuant to the company’s decision not to retire (or expire) Windows NT 4.0-based credentials. Instead, the company decided to switch to a “version designation” system for its various credentials. (The sole exception is the Microsoft Certified Trainer, or MCT, program, which retains annual renewal and specific update criteria.) Microsoft’s professed reasoning for this change was to take cognizance of customer and partner input, especially in light of feedback that shows that Windows NT 4.0 remains in heavy use in many organizations and that adoption of newer versions of Windows operating systems is not yet far enough advanced to warrant the retirement of Windows NT 4.0 credentials at the end of 2001.

Without trying to read too much further into Microsoft’s motives or agenda in this reversal of policy, this change does reveal a potential flaw with certifications that come with explicit expiration dates or freshness periods. That is, it’s possible that circumstances beyond the control of the vendor or organization that stands behind a certification may dictate different timing. Although unlikely, it’s possible that some certifications might expire more quickly than scheduled—perhaps in the face of some radical new innovation or technology. Likewise, as the Microsoft case illustrates, uptake of new products or technologies may not keep pace with forecasts and thus make trouble for the planned obsolescence of earlier versions or products.

To me, these unforeseeable circumstances help to explain why so many IT certifications fall into the “version-based” or “on-demand” categories. Simply put, version-based logic ties certifications to specific product or technology versions and lets those credentials coexist with the products or technologies to which they’re tied. On-demand-based logic gives a sponsoring vendor or organization the ability to state update, training and testing requirements when such requirements are well-enough understood to be published, explained and imposed on a population of certified professionals. Because these approaches take marketplace and technical realities into account and provide a certain degree of flexibility to their parent organizations, it’s entirely understandable that the certifications that fall into these categories represent the majority of certifications surveyed here.

Another phenomenon observable in this data should also make perfect sense, given the foregoing discussion—namely, that organizations with vendor-neutral certifications (and hence, with limited allegiance to specific products and versions) are far more likely to set hard and fast expiration dates on certifications. In general, when vendors set such limits, it’s in fast-changing, engineering-intensive technology niches such as wireless networking, telephony, routing and switching and so forth, where versions are probably changing even faster than the 18-to-36-month windows typical for the certifications that fall into this category. On the other hand, vendors are far more likely to belong to the version-based or on-demand categories, where product changes and updates are the most likely impetus for related certification changes as well.

My detailed investigation of IT certifications from this perspective, as compared to my less focused observation of the field in general in 1997, also tells me that IT certifications in general are more likely to involve expiration dates and continuing education requirements today than they were five years ago. The increasing pace of change and the increasing population of aging certifications makes it more necessary for vendors and organizations alike to address the issues of recertification, continued education and periodic retesting than in the past. In the kinds of companies and organizations represented in the “no recertification” and “other” categories, I see some evidence that when the subject matter is not less time-sensitive than other certifications, any of several factors may be at work:

• Relatively new, immature certification programs may not yet have sufficient longevity to tackle issues like recertification or continuing education.

• Willingness of certified populations to engage in retesting, continuing education and so forth may be in doubt. (This seems particularly true when certifications originate with training companies, instead of with vendors or industry associations and related vendor-neutral organizations.)

• Certain niche certifications may be so specialized as to be replaced by other certifications over time, rather than being renewed or updated.

These relatively limited circumstances notwithstanding, I see a pronounced tendency to build time limits, recertification or certification maintenance requirements and other mechanisms to maintain certification currency into certification programs from the outset. Because such mechanisms provide a reasonable expectation that certified professionals are in touch with current events and technologies, I see this trend as entirely positive, good both for the businesses and the industries they support and to help ensure that IT professionals remain employable.

In closing, let me refer you to Table 2, which summarizes some of the sizable body of raw data that served as the basis for my survey, providing the ultimate rationale for the analyses I’ve presented here. In the full table on the CertMag.com web site, you’ll find a wealth of data about and pointers to the largest collection of IT certifications I’ve ever seen assembled in one place.

Table 2: Recertification Requirements
Abbr	Program Name	Organization	Recertification Info
CCNA	Cisco Certified Network Associate	Cisco Systems	CCNA certifications are valid for three years.
ASE	Compaq Accredited Systems Engineer	Compaq	Meet Compaq-prescribed maintenance requirements.
CTE	Certified Telephony Engineer	Computer Telephony Institute	No recertification requirements at present; CTI estimates they will become necessary in 2002/2003.
A+	A+ PC Technician	CompTIA	No recertification requirements stated; exams have versions and dates.
	HP Certified IT Professional	Hewlett-Packard	Whenever exams retire, HP notifies certified professionals which new exams they must take to remain current.
	IBM Certified Advanced Technical Expert	IBM	No recertification requirements stated, but exams are tied to specific product versions.
CLP	Certified Lotus Professional	Lotus	Certified professionals must take update exams or retest within six months (4 separate credentials) of retirement of old exams.
MCSE	Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer	Microsoft	Tracks specific product versions starting with Windows NT 4.0; no recertification required, but currency inheres to version designations.
CNE	Certified Novell Engineer	Novell	Novell imposes continuing certification requirements (CCRs) on its programs, usually involving update exams and new electives.
OCP	Oracle Certified Professional	Oracle	Certs are tied to specific product versions, and OCPs must recertify on new programs to maintain currency.
CIW (7 separate certs)	Certified Internet Webmaster	ProsoftTraining	No recertification requirements stated, but certs are tied to program versions, so currency is manifest in official transcripts.
RHCE	Red Hat Certified Engineer	Red Hat	Certifications tied to specific Linux versions; “recertification is a matter of choice by professionals and employers.”
For a more extensive survey of recertification requirements for hundreds of programs, click here.

Ed Tittel is the president of LANWrights Inc., an Austin, Texas, company that specializes in IT certifications, network and system security and Web markup languages. He also has co-authored more than 100 computer books, developed the Exam Cram series of certification guides and is a contributing editor for Certification Magazine.