Recently I noticed some discussion on freelance LabView or NI programming. I also noticed some older discussion on certification. I have been a LabView programmer for about 15+ years. I have been completely freelance for 6 years. Before that I worked at jobs involving labview or teststand. I don't really want to go back to "employee" status but would under right circumstances.

One thing that bothers me about being a one man shop is NI certification. I don't see the merits for the most part. NI has always been a supporter of the do-er and not the talker. I remember the early 1990's when something like certification would have been laughed at because one could hardly find anyone interested in LabView; much less certification.

Many of the bigger NI Alliance groups follow the certification theme lots. NI has even removed from the alliance page anyone not certified so I lost my main advertisement - the NI webpage. So do all the freelance'rs out there get certified? I have programmed LabView for 15 years and never once took any LabView course. I would probably fail the certification test because I have not taken the coursework. I am sure there are merits for me getting certified but then it kind of makes me look like a talker not a do-er, and that has never been how I made my money.

I find the path NI took with certification contrary to the original NI. It also is a negative to many alliance members and freelancers. What do others think?

These days, when I'm looking for a LabVIEW or TestStand developer/architect, I need both - they need to be able to be a great wirer and a constructive thinker. Before certification came around, all the prospective staff I'd interview would come to me with a great resume, telling me that they were the most fantastic LabVIEW programmer ever invented. I would then get them to do a short supervised practical exam that would, in most cases, prove them otherwise. This is a process that I still use today, and seeing that someone is NI certified tells me two things: they are somewhat committed to the area that they were certified in, and they see value in a third party grading of their skills. I'm not saying that NI certification is the only reason that I'd hire someone, but it sure adds some weight. No disrespect intended, but unless you've gone through the levels of NI certification, you don't really know of it's value. As for learning, the NI specialised courses hold more weight with me, and I'm not sure what you're getting at saying that you've never done any NI courses - I've done several of them, and whilst some were more helpful to me that others, there were a couple in there that really helped me out (eg: the NI Advanced Application Development Course - written by V I Engineering - is an awesome course for developers wanting to make the move to architects).

The problem is that it's often impossible to distinguish the talker from the doer - I've seen some amazing websites that promise the world in system integration, until I find that it's for a back-yard operator with no knowledge of proceedure, architecture or quality assurance in their projects. Sure, they might be good at programming (although often they are not), but it takes more that programming to be a truly great programmer. Certification is a method of helping me know who's comitted and those who are just blowing smoke. I know it's not the best method, and it's certainly not the only way, but it helps.

Possible Perceived Conflict of Interest Notice: I'm a NI Certified LabVIEW Architect, and I now work for V I Engineering.

Well you are entitled to your opinion, but.... I just don't see it. I saw the same thing with network engineers I knew, and it is somewhat analogous. That is: people who came into network engineering just from years on the job, only to find some guy who passed a test and never did a thing would get a better job. That is just not how it works. NI certification says nothing about commitment. I am committed because I stay with NI material from job to job, company to company, then my own company. Commitment is not a test. I don't see your point really but it is one the larger NI alliance members are taking. I respect some of it, but don't really agree.

I also feel that the NI certification path says there is only one way to program. I saw all kinds of labview programming over the years; some bad, some good. But most of the best was not from guys taking tests.

I am also a CLA who works for an NI Alliance Partner.

[Rant = On]

I persoanlly do not like certifications (or anything that is acquired through the grading of an exam).

Unfortunately they (like university degrees) are a fact of the world in which we live.

When the people that have to make decisions where they have to choose between two options (people, companies, etc) regarding something in which they are not an expert, they will often use certifications as a way of distinguishing bewteen the two. In my opinion this is a "cop-out" and used used for justifying a descision that can not be justified otherwise.

Here is a self-deprecating example to make my point.

The last time I checked, one of the worlds top LabVIEW developers who's initials are RK is not a CLA.

If my boss came to me with his resume and someone with a resume identicle to mine, I would advise him to interview RK.

[Rant = Off]

So untill the world does away with the obsurd notion that people can be evaluated using tests, certifications are an evil we will have to "confront or die".

So I agree with what I think you are saying but urge to get the certification just for sake of employment.

Attempting pragmatism,

Ben

.
Courses are designed to impart knowledge, certifications are designed demonstrate knowledge.
.


Is that really because you're intrinsically committed to the growth of LabVIEW, or that the earlier companies forced you to use it, or is it because you like using it?
I'm with Ben: NI certifications only mean anything to people who understand what they truly represent, and as an employer, I'm looking for someone committed to LabVIEW, whereas I'd suggest that most of our clients don't care what development environment we use: they're more solution focussed.

Although I agree that certifications aren't the best way to go (see my previous post), they are one method of evaluating someone's appropriateness and ability to do the job before seeing them in action. Again - I agree that certifications can mean little to those that want to hire a company to complete a solution, but when my desk is flooded with resumes from hopeful candidates, they form one part of the complete picture. It's certainly not a perfect system, but I can't afford (cost and time) to employ every candidate who drops me a resume just in case they might work out - I need to cut the list. I understand the NI certification process intimately, both its' strengths and weaknesses, so it's a very useful resource for me. If you're a one-man-shop on the other hand, I can see where it might be pretty-much useless unless your clients are also needing to decide between almost identical bidders, where only one of them is certified - then you need to wiegh up the benefits. If you never deal with clients like this then I wouldn't bother certifying, but I'd sure look into some NI courses though. Why? Reread my first sentance in this post...


I'm with Ben (again!) - having never assessed one of his/her projects, I don't know that "RK" is a top developer - I know that he/she is certainly active in the wider LabVIEW community and certinaly committed to LabVIEW, so that would add weight to him/her being interviewed. Not having a certification won't disclude you from the interview process, as long as the interviewer knows what they're talking about

I hear you Ben. On the other hand I am a one man shop, it is one thing to work in a company paying for it all but if I take a month off to read a bunch of books and travel to test locations I think my bottom line would just about die. I may have to go that route, unfortunately.

Actually I taught a course in LabView in about '94 or '95 or something at a large government facility. I was a bigger NI promotor than most who are out there writing these tests. I remember telling my class not to get caught up in models but each person should find their own kind of model while looking to what is out there for code assistance (ok steal code from people). I guess I'll have to tell myself that some guys book really does have all the answers.

Actually it isn't academics that we are talking either. Academics are something I enjoyed at one point and at this point are almost a hinderance if I applied at some jobs. Try explaining research to an employer and the eyes start to look tired and strained....

But I hear the pragmatic advice....

Thanks for the thoughts.



I always did LabView because a) I enjoyed it, and b) it got work done that almost no-one else could do.

I don't think you are agreeing with Ben!

Again you are suggesting commitment is your motto. How does this test infer commitment?

See your way of talking LabView and mine really differ. I always impart to companies that they could not get the job done because they WERE using the wrong platform (like C++ or whatever), that is always my angle on LabView. If I read you correctly you don;t care what platform they use it is all just a job. No way. I save companies a bundle by using LabView I know it.

NI Certification is an important milestone on the path to LabVIEW enlightenment (which is more of a journey than a destination). If someone thinks she's good at LabVIEW and she hasn't taken any courses or obtained NI certification, then chances are she's not as good as she think's she is and she probably doesn't have the experience that our organization is looking for. (I'm also responsible for hiring LabVIEW developers.) A certification requirement for hiring certainly makes for a good filtering criterion (and you can't have too many). At our organization, we require that every LabVIEW developer be on a professional path to become a Certified LabVIEW Architect.

Bottom line, certification is an absolute must for anyone serious about calling himself a LabVIEW expert -- if only to understand the process and expose him to a variety of concepts. Certainly, I gained a lot by obtaining my certification (I am a CLA, and have previously held my instructor certification) -- I learned about areas of LabVIEW that I was weak in, and I subsequently strengthened those areas.

Cheers,

PS - please don't compare LabVIEW to IT (I can say this without getting in trouble because our company doesn't have an IT dept.)

Wow, I had a boss like that once. I am glad I don't work for him!

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that he's probably glad too

If you were your own employer instead of an employee I think you would be saying the same thing as me. It is one thing to play along with the office talk but entirely another to run ones own business.

But I hear the voice of the practical too....

Not at all - I used to own my own business as a system integrator, and I'm not changing my tune. When I worked for myself, my certifications (once I got them) were a great point-of-difference when bidding on competitive projects. Again, unless you've been through the certification process then I don't think you can speak with much authority on their worth. I also strongly agree with Jim's point that they are a valuable part to one's LabVIEW enlightenment - sure they're not the only path, but they're important nonetheless. Another component it work very closely with experienced and learned LabVIEW developers/architects - when I was in business for myself as a sole trader, I missed out on a whole lot of intellectual stimulation and learning - there just wasn't anyone else to push me to think outside the box. If you are working on your own, not doing any formal learning and/or not looking for certification amongst your peers, then you might not be pushing yourself enough - there's so much out there to learn, and if you rely solely on what you know yourself and don't try to expand then I can't see how you'd truly grow as a LabVIEW aficionado - you're just treading water...