You know the deal Scott, you don't need a brain surgeon to swap out a bandaid(and few want to pay for one to do so!!!).
In my experience having worked in global NOCs where you deal with FEs quite often, they typically require very little knowledge outside of chassis familiarity, interface knowledge, etc. In this role they don't need to know anything about OSPF, STP, etc....you don't want to pay CCNA salary. You want to find someone who is content with going onsite and swapping out memory and re-loading an IOS via TFTP, or perhaps swapping out a bad interface card.
Now, that does not sound glorious, but I've been on too many calls to count where the FE gets on-site and asks me what a router looks like. When this person is about to tear into your ISR and swap out multiple components - that simply is not a welcome feeling!!!!
With that said, I'll be interested to see if this actually takes hold and fills the niche it seems to be intended for, and what kind of impact it has on CCENT and CCNA numbers.
Oh yeah, I know that group well... However, I never dreamed of having them certified! This is why you have someone in charge on the project who is capable of writing very explicit instructions that any 4th grader could follow!
Won't we need to pay them more if we give them certifications now?
The recert for it is CCENT or above, so there's apparently a planned progression. That's the part I was wondering about.
So, the CCENT supercedes this? Looked like a good cert until I looked at the certification requirements. I learned most, if not all, while studying for the CCENT/CCNA. Very entry level. I'm not sure if it will stick, though. Once you get hooked on Cisco, you don't stay with the lowest certification!
I suppose that it could well fill a niche - the employers have the security of knowing that their potential employee has a certain basic level of knowledge, without having to shell out too much in wages. The technician has the gratification of becoming offically Cisco certified and at the same time Cisco expands the opportunity of getting people "hooked" into the certification path. So all in all it ould be a winner for all concerned.
To Scott - would the people automatically get more money for the cert? Good question. I doubt it - it might just possibly seperate the wheat from the chaff though when it comes to job opportunites at that level.
Hey guys, I manage the team at Cisco that provided much of the SME's for this Cert, so I can fill in a little bit more info on why we launched this. CCT was designed and built around the support technician job role - as Travis pointed out, those folks out in the field, replacing HW, assisting TAC or NOC engineers with hands-on equipment. Yes, this is an entry level Cisco exam, and is definitely a good entry point for Cisco exams.This differs from CCENT/CCNA in that these exams are more product/HW focused, and less technology/theory focused.
There are also a significant number of career technicians out there who have been doing this for 15 or 20 years or more. CCT provides a way for them to validate their industry knowledge, and drives consistency across all the different Cisco service partners out there providing this service. The different technology tracks allow these folks to expand their knowlege breadth, if they aren't intent on moving up the cert food chain.
CCT is really is about providing value for the individual field engineer and their company, and driving a higher level of on-site support in the field.
So, with it being so different (hardware vs. theory/technology), how would it fit with someone already CCNA certified? Although the CCNA didn't really cover too much on the hardware side, it was definitely a huge part of studying and preparing for the exam (home lab, learning the basics, etc.).
Sounds like a fun exam, though! I might go for the R&S and the DC one just for the fun of it.
Good question. If you're already CCNA certified, then you theoretically wouldn't need CCTRS, unless your employer requires it, or you want to get it just to have (CCNA will recertify CCTRS). But the CCT TelePresence and CCT DataCenter have product specific info that's not covered in a CCNA track. If you are servicing those products, or just want to verify you have some knowledge of the HW and service procedures, they will be valuable even for someone who is CCNA certified.
I am with Scott on this. I have all the respect in the world for field techs. Heck, I was one at one point in time and still perform that function at times. The role of the field tech varies from company to company. I know of one organization where the field tech mounts the gear, gets everything plugged in, turns on the device and then calls the NOC to verify everything.
Others may rack the device, plug everything in and then use a console cable, watch the boot up process and then verify routing by doing a show ip route. Not really a lot to it there. Other field techs may be dealing with RMA issues and just swapping out hardware after the new device is configured by their NOC.
But certifying? I must say, I was suprised to see that.
I do agree it is very entry level. Perhaps the CCENT should be re-designed to contain CCT and parts of the current CCENT to have a single Entry level certification. The CCT is definately the hardware side of the CCENT.
You know the thing that doesn't make sense to me is there are a couple of types of individuals. You have the type of person who is perfectly happy swapping hardware and being on the phone while someone walks them through things. Then you have the type of person who has aspiration to move up through the ranks. For the second type of person, I think the CCENT, CCNA, CCNP, CCIE is appropriate. If the CCT is meant to certify that someone can visually locate a CSU, follow detailed instructions and work with someone on a phone, I guess it is what it is. I guess prior to this thread I just never envisioned a certification on the lower end of the pyramid.
It was good meeting you at the show last month!
From what I understood in talking with Cisco a few days back, I think CCT's content was designed based on a primary goal, but with lots of secondary benefits. The primary goal was to create a way to certify the skills of TAC dispatched 3rd party installers. So, while CCT may have secondary uses - it may be useful to techs working for Cisco customers, or Cisco channel partners who aren't part of the TAC dispatched service group, etc - Cisco made it so that they could assess skills for the folks they dispatch. And while CCT sits at the bottom of the cert pyramid, finding a pre-CCENT kind of cert wasn't really the motivation, either - it's just a coinincidence.
Cisco's been sending 3rd party techs out onsite for a long time, and in the past, there was some form of training and informal (internal) assessment of how those third parties were doing. Now Cisco has a formal and public certification process for those techs, which I'm sure is intended to help improve the results of that service, drive customer sat, etc etc.
My $.02 for the night!
Now that was a very insightful 2 cents! Thanks Wendell! In that scenerio, I can see why a certification would be wanted. Maybe a poll should be taken on how many Field Techs that would help assist to replace hardware are here on CLN and then get their take on this.
I know that many companies do that kind of thing and require a certification for it. Dell is a good example. I really didn't think of that situation because I do a bit of everything, including install and troubleshoot hardware.