Certifications have always been a very polarizing topic in the IT business. Some people (and the vendors behind the certifications) push them as verifiable proof that you have a certain set of skills or knowledge that qualify you for specific jobs within the industry. Others believe that, without the real world experience to back them up, certifications aren’t worth more than the paper they’re printed on. Though people on both sides tend to get really heated about the topic, my opinion is that they both have good points and neither side is really “right” per se.

The people who work endless hours and spend hundreds of dollars on books and lab equipment to earn certifications want something to show for it, and rightfully so. After all, if certifications didn’t qualify you for a better job than the one you have now (or have become a requirement of keeping the job you already have), why would anyone bother? On the other hand, people who question the value of certifications typically already have experience in the field the certifications are supposed to qualify people for, and to them, being able to sit there answering multiple choice questions and doing simple lab work doesn’t mean that you can actually do the day-to-day work in real life.

Whichever side of the debate you fall on, you ought to be interested by this slideshow from Computerworld.com, which lists their picks for the 18 Hot IT Certifications For 2014. I’ve been reading pieces like this for years, but the ones I’ve seen more recently all seem to have one very interesting thing in common: they’re mostly made up of vendor-neutral certifications instead of being dominated by Microsoft and Cisco certs like you would expect (and like they have been for years).

I find this interesting because, for as long as certifications have existed, the part about gaining useful knowledge was really secondary in a lot of peoples’ minds to “Get your CCNA and you’re guaranteed a $90,000 job” or “Once you have an MCSE, you can write your own ticket.” Though the MCA and MCSM are both on the list (albeit with notes that both are being retired in the near future), Cisco was nowhere to be found, and instead this list was full of certifications from CWNP, Open Group, and GIAC, indicating a pretty drastic shift in philosophy from a few years ago when a CCNA was seen as far superior to a Network+ even though I can tell you, as someone who holds both certifications, that the curriculum is basically identical except that the CCNA includes stuff specific to Cisco equipment, licensing, and IOS configuration.

So why the shift now? One theory I have is that, as we’re all aware, the IT job market is pretty soft right now, and a lot of people are, for example, applying for network admin jobs with a CCNA or CCNP, and being told something along the lines of, “That’s great, but we run Extreme/Juniper/whatever equipment here, so a CCNA is no good to us.” Does the hiring manager really believe that the CCNA curriculum just teaches you commands to configure a Cisco router and nothing about routing protocols, VLANs, TCP/IP, or NAT? Possibly, but whether they are or not doesn’t really matter because vendor-specific certifications have actually become somewhat limiting in a job market where it sometimes feels like hiring managers look for any excuse to reject applicants.

Another reason I think vendor-neutral certs are becoming more popular is because vendor-specific certs tend to double as promotional material for the vendor’s products. Again, that’s not a knock on the curriculum, but people who have taken enough certification exams know that a lot of questions have “the right answer” and “the answer the vendor is looking for”, and they’re not always the same answer. Vendor-neutral exams are (usually) free of these ulterior motives, and are about understanding the technology without an overwhelming emphasis on configuration.

Now, are you also at risk of making yourself look unqualified if you show up to an interview with a bunch of vendor-neutral certs and nothing with a name brand? That depends on the hiring manager, but in general, I’d say you want a mix of both to cover yourself in either situation. Plus, to go back to the Network+/CCNA comparison, once you learn the material for the Network+, you’re really 75% of the way to the CCNA, and all you really need to do now is learn the configuration commands, Cisco specific terminology for stuff you’ve already learned, and “Cisco’s answer” to certain questions.

However you decide to go about it, the certs are only half the battle because you do still need to demonstrate some aptitude for the job you’re applying for. If you show up to interview for a network admin job and you have two CCNPs, an MCSE, and your work history consists of five years at the zoo, you’re going to lose to somebody who doesn’t have all the letters after their email signature, but does have ten years of experience in a networking environment. Good luck, and choose your weapons wisely!