From: Lampron, George (glampron@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Jan 02 2001 - 13:10:20 GMT-3
Dave,
I am a board member of the local Cisco Users Group and our last meeting
covered the certification process.
Currently in the entire world there are about 5500 CCIE's of which about 70
are fully certified and half of those are employed by Cisco
This means that there are about 1900 CCIE's in the general population in the
entire world. About half of those are US based and the
other 950 are based around the rest of the world.
The current pass rate for the written exam is about 40% and the pass rate
for the Lab is about 14%.
I think Cisco has done a great job making sure that the value of the CCIE
improves and that the individuals who pass the exam
are well respected for their ability and accomplishment.
Please, If you are reading this and are a CCNP who thinks the CCIE is a
small step from CCNP then please do yourself a favor and invest a little
time in researching what the CCIE is all about.
As far as the backlog. I have been told by people in the Cisco Orginization
that they are planning to build more test facilities in Key locations to
decrease the backlog.
George Lampron
Manager
KPMG Consulting Inc.
Rocky Mountain Broadband Solutions Center.
Denver, Colorado
-----Original Message-----
From: David Ankers [mailto:d.ankers@chello.nl]
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2001 9:56 AM
To: Lampron, George
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: Backlog for CCIE Lab (RTP at least)
Totally agree, if anything make the written for the CCIE harder. CCNP - and
I
don't want to upset anyone on the list, I have one as well - is a memory
test. There is no way it should qualify for the CCIE lab. I guess the CCIE
written falls in to the same catagory though? For me the written was a case
of either, "Eh? that's not a CCIE level question is it?" or "What? Is that
English?".
I really think the CCIE written should be harder, some of the question I had
were fairly similar to CCNP level. It would also be a lot fairer to make the
written harder so as nobody has false ideas about the lab :-)
$0.02
Dave.
On Tuesday 02 January 2001 15:30, you wrote:
> Not in a million years.
>
> I know tooo many CCNP's who don't have the hands on experience to handle
> half of the CCIE topics.
> How do you get to pass the CCIE? Practice, Practice, Practice.
>
> George Lampron
> Manager
> KPMG Consulting Inc.
> Rocky Mountain Broadband Solutions Center.
> Denver, Colorado
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Don Rogers [mailto:drogers@icscorp.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2001 7:43 AM
> To: 'tv'; Jonathan Hays
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: Backlog for CCIE Lab (RTP at least)
>
>
> How about only allowing CCNPs to take the CCIE Lab Exam? Eliminate the
> CCIE written exam. Require a CCNP instead. Would this reduce the
backlog?
> Would this increase the number passing the lab exam?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tv [mailto:tvarriale@telocity.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 1:28 PM
> To: Jonathan Hays
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: Backlog for CCIE Lab (RTP at least)
>
> >I have been told by several Cisco SEs (and I assume they were just
>
> repeating the party
>
> > line) that Cisco needs CCIEs (and other certified Cisco professionals)
to
>
> design and
>
> > service Cisco equipment pure and simple.
>
> Yes, they do. But, from my experience, they need those people to service
> the accounts they don't want to. Cisco wants the 4 BPX CLEC
> account....they don't want the 10 router frame network.......that's where
> the partners come in.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jonathan Hays" <jhays@acropolis.com>
> Cc: <cisco@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 12:04 PM
> Subject: Re: Backlog for CCIE Lab (RTP at least)
>
> > Chuck, I think your numbers are way off. Even if we forget the overhead
>
> for lab
>
> > equipment, electricity, etc. I believe that the staff and hours to
> > support
>
> the CCIE exam
>
> > is substantial (there's more than just a lab proctor or two behind the
>
> scenes - what
>
> > about people who do training, write exams, etc.). Cisco SEs spend many
>
> hours each week
>
> > presenting free CCIE prep seminars to Cisco resellers. And so on.
> >
> > On a cost accounting basis, I wouldn't be surprised if Cisco is actually
>
> losing money. I
>
> > have been told by several Cisco SEs (and I assume they were just
> > repeating
>
> the party
>
> > line) that Cisco needs CCIEs (and other certified Cisco professionals)
to
>
> design and
>
> > service Cisco equipment pure and simple. They don't have near enough
>
> employees to handle
>
> > the huge demand. One even told me that Cisco would love to have
thousands
>
> and thousands
>
> > of CCIEs out there but it simply is not possible to lower the standards.
> >
> > -Jonathan
> >
> > Chuck Larrieu wrote:
> > > >> I was told Cisco was trying to reduce the problem, but not how they
>
> were
>
> > > going to achieve their goal. (I wish them luck)<<
> > >
> > > some cruel and unusual thoughts come to mind.
> > >
> > > 1) Set some arbitrary standard such that people who fail day one by
> > > more than so many points have a 90 day wait for retest, rather than 30
> > > days.
>
> Or
>
> > > you have to at least made it into day 2 to be able to retest within 30
>
> days.
>
> > > Some such thing
> > >
> > > 2) Limit the number of times one may attempt the lab in any 12 month
>
> period.
>
> > > 3) Increase the price charged for each lab attempt. E.g. 1K for first
> > > attempt, 2K for 2nd, 5K for third
> > >
> > > I say this half jokingly, but half seriously. I talk to a lot of
people
>
> who
>
> > > take the lab, both those who have passed and those who have not.
> > > The old rule of economics holds true - people act according to their
> > > perceived best interest. If someone else is footing the bill, and
there
>
> is
>
> > > no disincentive for failure, then people will act accordingly. They
> > > will book themselves and make attempts even when they know they have
no
> > > hope
>
> of
>
> > > passing. They will schedule attempt after attempt because there is no
>
> reason
>
> > > not to, especially if someone else pays, and especially if there is no
> > > penalty for failure.
> > >
> > > To be frank, I don't see any incentive for Cisco to do anything to
>
> change
>
> > > things on the demand side. They might add more racks, or more lab
>
> locations.
>
> > > But do the numbers some time. Cisco is booking something like 25 - 30
>
> people
>
> > > a week in San Jose alone. That's 25-30 K per week in revenue, or at
>
> least
>
> > > 1.3 million a year. So they pay a couple of lab proctors 150K each.
The
>
> rest
>
> > > is pure profit. ( yes, I know from an accounting standpoint there are
> > > several other cost factors ) So the incentive from Cisco's standpoint
> > > is
>
> do
>
> > > figure out ways to add revenue, rather than limit testing attempts.
> > >
> > > I look for Cisco to announce a bit more capacity, either in terms of
>
> adding
>
> > > another location or adding more racks at existing locations. Or both.
>
> There
>
> > > is a ton of money to be made in the certification game, and as the
>
> entity
>
> > > that controls the rules and the market, Cisco certainly enjoys the
>
> lion's
>
> > > share of that revenue.
> > >
> > > Chuck
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
>
> Of
>
> > > CiscoCCStuff@aol.com
> > > Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2000 9:04 AM
> > > To: cisco@groupstudy.com
> > > Subject: Backlog for CCIE Lab (RTP at least)
> > >
> > > I am a little behind on my mail, so please forgive me if this has been
> > > answered.
> > >
> > > I called to schedule my lab on Dec 21. The next date available was
> > > June 11-12 at RTP. SIX MONTH BACKLOG...WOW!!!
> > >
> > > I did not ask about other test centers, but would imagine similar
>
> bookings.
>
> > > I was told Cisco was trying to reduce the problem, but not how they
> > > were going to achieve their goal. (I wish them luck)
> > >
> > > Jon Burns
> > > CCNP, CCDP, Lab Candidate
> > > Now, I just need to get a job! ;-)
> > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:27:20 GMT-3