CITP's Rule!

[UKDarkstar]

Originally Posted by jsnorth

I hope to do the new one soon. It will be a challenge, having reviewed the requirements but my experience should be ok. I'm just aware that it is time and money (I have to pay for it).

I'm concerned that my employer's HR teams will not understand the CITP effort and not reward someone for it.

So I'd be doing it for a sense of achievement + pride. Yes, I know that these days, getting a qualification does not mean pay rise but it will require some effort on my part that I would like to be rewarded.

I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing here

You do understand that CITP is Chartered IT Professional. It is an award given based on experience and an interview with a competancy test. There is no study course or anything for it.

[wagnerk]

Originally Posted by jsnorth

...I'm concerned that my employer's HR teams will not understand the CITP effort and not reward someone for it...

To achieve the CITP, you will already be working at a certain level, having certain responsibilities, etc... The CITP is one of the ways the BCS is aligning the IT industry with other professions like doctors, lawyers, accountants, surveyors, etc. The CITP also shows/demonstrates this to others.

Not sure why HR would reward you for doing your own job already, unless it is specifically implied or you took on more responsibilities. I mean I wasn't rewarded for gaining the CITP, as I was already doing the job.

Unless I'm missing something?

-Ken

[jsnorth]

I agree with what you've said, and the description of the CITP. I think my thoughts are not leaving my head properly.

If your employer has a list of your skills and regular reviews document your achievements, what would be gained by spending time doing the paperwork, sitting the exam and the interview for the CITP? Who do you need to demonstrate your skills to?

If "others" is a customer and your employer uses your CITP to demonstrate competance to the customer then I think you deserve something for your effort?

Through my work with the BCS locally, we are seeing a lack of IT qualifications after degree level. Employers simply do not need to recognise skills formally. Their own internal systems record and rate skills and competance. This leads to employees not pursuing further qualifications.

Maybe I'm just dealing with the wrong employers.

[wagnerk]

Originally Posted by jsnorth

....If your employer has a list of your skills and regular reviews document your achievements, what would be gained by spending time doing the paperwork, sitting the exam and the interview for the CITP?...

What you would gain? Well for starters a credential that implies that you work up to what a Masters degree would imply (but don't confuse academic with professional). Recognition of working at that level.

Originally Posted by jsnorth

....Who do you need to demonstrate your skills to?

If "others" is a customer and your employer uses your CITP to demonstrate competance to the customer then I think you deserve something for your effort?...

Well, your colleagues, customers/clients, your peers in other industries. Believe it or not alot of people do not see IT as a proper professional, but more of a necessary evil.

While it would be great to be awarded a bonus/prize/award every time a person achieved something, personally I don't think that it would be sustainable in the long run. Where would you start? Where would you end?

In an ideal world, we would all be awarded something for our efforts, however in the real world it doesn't always happen, especially in this climate - the recession. If you're lucky your organisation/company will assist you in your application and may even pay your BCS CITP fees/dues. However it really is down to the individual organisation.

Originally Posted by jsnorth

....Through my work with the BCS locally, we are seeing a lack of IT qualifications after degree level...

After degree level, I assume the BSc/BA, well there's the PGCert/PGDip/Master's and above on the academic side. On the vocational side there's the NVQ 5, the CITP, up until recently there was the GCGI & MCGI from C&G's. On the professional certification route, there's the CCIE from Cisco, the MCA from Microsoft, etc...

Originally Posted by jsnorth

....Employers simply do not need to recognise skills formally. Their own internal systems record and rate skills and competance. This leads to employees not pursuing further qualifications...

I have to say that's a general statement, I use to be a part-time lecturer at the local college delivering Microsoft courses up to MCSE level, just under half of the students in almost every module were sent by their company to gain the qualification, some were self-funded and some were there in order to get qualified to get into the IT industry (MCDST/70-270/70-290 level).

Plus also, in the past when I've applied for (or seen) higher level jobs, they have always specified:

1. Essential degree, desirable Master's or equivalent
2. MCSE/CCNP, etc (dependant on what the job entailed)
3. Membership into a professional body - desirable (however I have seen a couple stating CITP)

Originally Posted by jsnorth

....Maybe I'm just dealing with the wrong employers.

Maybe, there are alot of companies that do not invest in their staff, there are also some companies that do...

Like I've stated before, I'm pro the BCS and pro the CITP, and I do support the progression of the IT profession. But I don't want anyone to for the CITP and have an idea of what is going to happen if they gain the it, then once they gain it nothing happens. A person may just then say it isn't worth it and just dump it, which would have a negative effect on the CITP.

Hopefully, I've put this across in an understandable format

-Ken

[jsnorth]

Thanks for the discussion.

BTW: I did not mean that there were a lack of qualifications available - I meant that there was a lack of people with those qualifications because (from general feedback) they did not feel it important. The reason was that they felt employers did not value it.

So perhaps the problem is - should employers encourage it? should they even have to?

[wagnerk]

Originally Posted by jsnorth

Thanks for the discussion...

No worries

Originally Posted by jsnorth

...BTW: I did not mean that there were a lack of qualifications available - I meant that there was a lack of people with those qualifications because (from general feedback) they did not feel it important. The reason was that they felt employers did not value it.

So perhaps the problem is - should employers encourage it? should they even have to?

Should employers encourage it? Perhaps, maybe maybe not... The thing is that with most, if not all employers, they will want their staff (if they promote CPD) to go for things that will benefit the company and it will be cost related as well. Should they even have to? Again I don't know.

But then this brings us onto the lines of whether or not the IT industry/sector should be regulated like nurses, lawyers, doctors, engineers where you need to be registered or licenced in order to practice. Where you have to do X amount of CPD per year, among other things. This may be a good thing for the industry or it can be a bad thing.

Currently in IT you can join either the BCS and/or the IET, but it's a voluntary thing - not enforceable by law.

-Ken

[dmarsh]

Judging by the magazines I used to get from the BCS it probably means 'Cannot Integrate Technology Professionally'...

[wagnerk]

Originally Posted by dmarsh

Judging by the magazines I used to get from the BCS it probably means 'Cannot Integrate Technology Professionally'...

Oh, that hurts mate But then again, as the CITP is a voluntary thing to gain and until it gain the recognition that other Chartered statuses have (and I believe the BCS is heading in the right direction, they still have a long way to go though), it will mean different things to different people.

-Ken