Earlier this week, we published our three-part interview with Michael Bolton. This was the latest installment in our monthly Testing The Limits series, in which we sit down with luminaries from the worlds of testing, development, crowdsourcing or startup life. As part of this discussion, we asked Michael for his take on the issue of testing certifications (as we’ve done with Matt Heusser and James Bach in previous months).
In response to what she felt was “cert-bashing,” Charity Stoner of ProtoTest has written a post defending test certifications. Since we always encourage civil discourse and open-minded debate — and since the purpose of the Testing The Limits series is to offer up different perspectives from around the world of software — I wanted to shine a light on this post.
What do you think about test certifications? Do they provide testers with a toolkit that complements their experience and adds real value? Are they a marketing mechanism that limits what it means to be a professional software tester? Or is it somewhere in the middle? I’d love to hear your thoughts.