>Hi Rox...
>
>You have pinpointed for me some reasons why I don't believe that vendor-specific certifications translate into professional credentials.
>
>Here is a question to ask?
>
>From a civil liability standpoint, does the person who is "certified" have a greater duty of care to his clients than does the person who is "not certified"?
>
>I'll be happy to expand on this one if you like..< bg >..
>
>
>< JVP >

John,

Interesting question. I see a lot of folks misunderstanding the meaning of certification from the MS perspective. MS says cert says "Minimally Qualified Candidate" for a job using the product they are cert'd in. Minimally qualified is quite a distance from expert. Based on that I guess I would answer your question with No, they would not be held to a higher standard than a non-certified person. I would guess that they would be held to a standard respective of their representation of themselves prior to the engagement.