Certified Tester

Certification in Testing is an individual goal rather than organizational goal

A Testing Certification is an individual tester’s asset rather than the organization’s asset as it increases the employment chances of the individual without apprehensively adding any substantial value to the tester’s job requirement. Definitely, the tester’s skills are enhanced (a bit) with this certification, but there is more increase in his expectations from the organization. Why a tester who is doing well at his job would go for a certification thereby compromising with his performance at job as he will be required to pay attention to studies and learning to acquire this certification. The certificate that is attracting him is for his own sake. Ofcourse, when it is an organization’s requirement to train their testers or display on board some certified testers, the initiative and drive for certification to the individual testers will start from the organization itself.

Certification is not bad. It is an exposure to a new learning. But the testers who get attracted to acquire a certificate have a different goal than a new learning or for the sake of organization. But if the intention is merely to acquire a relevant certificate for a tester, it can be examined by the organization by offering him a course relevant to his job with no certificate at the end of it. This step will display the real interest of a tester, whether he is individual oriented at this juncture or organization oriented.

Certified Tester or Experienced uncertified Tester? Whom to appoint?

At the time of recruitment of a tester, the biggest question in front of Quality Manager is to decide on certain factors related to the qualifications, certifications and experience of the candidate. The balance of all three is important. But if there is a demand to sacrifice one (or two) amongst three of these requirements, which can that/those be? Let us take them one by one in the perspective of Quality Head.

Qualification do matter, so the candidate must be having the basic IT degree (or if degree in some other stream, then that degree has to be relevant to IT, and the prospective candidate should be holding an advance IT diploma). When we are talking here of qualifications, we are talking about IT qualifications and not specific Quality/Testing related qualifications, which we would be considering in Certifications.

So, qualifications being the basic criteria, now there is a battle between the certifications or experience. Let us assume here we have three sets of resumes of the candidates. All sets have similar qualifications, and are differing on the basis of Certifications and Experience parameters. First Set of resumes is having Certified testers with no experience, so they are fresher certified testers candidates. Second set is certified testers with good experience in testing (say 2 plus years of experience). And the Third set is group of experienced testers with no certifications. Experience with this group of testers may vary from 2 to 5 years. Definitely the first set expectations in terms of salary would be lower as compared to second and third set of people, whose expectations would be almost at par.

In my view, appointing a tester with basic qualifications and some experience will be better than taking a tester with basic qualifications and certifications but less experience. Certifications, if any required, can be acquired by the tester during the job at a later stage.