A couple of weeks ago, I wrote a blog post about MCSM for BI certification. This raised an interesting discussion about the reasons why such a certification does not exists, whether it was really necessary, what it should include, and so on. There was no signs at the moment of the decision Microsoft communicated on Friday evening to existing and candidate MCM/MCSM/MCA community. The email transcript has been reported by Neil Johnson, a Microsoft employee certified as MCSM:Messaging.
You can imagine the community reaction, and I will not repeat the many concepts expressed in many posts and comments I will list below. I disagree with this decision, but I understand the need for Microsoft to shut down the program for economical reasons. I don’t like that, and I think it’s not a smart move for Microsoft, too – but I would not add other points to those already expressed by many people. My point is about communication and timing.
A few days after the news, I still cannot understand:
- Why this mail has been sent to MCM/MCSM/MCA on a Friday night, before a long week-end in US
- Why such a short notice (exams will be retired on October 1, 2013, in just one month)
- Why there is no communication about future plans
- Why the MCA, MCSM web pages are still active without any update
- Why this decision after other changes were already applied to the MCSM program effective on July 1, 2013
- Why Microsoft didn’t put an official statement on that (but this is a consequence of sending an email on a Friday night before an extended week-end)
I really would like an answer to these open questions, because I cannot even think that the consequences of such a communication plan weren’t discussed in advance. But, again, this time I cannot understand why. The obvious alternative was having a soft-landing of the MCM/MCSM/MCA program, for example no new admissions and 6 months for completing certification by open submissions; publishing a roadmap towards new certifications and how existing ones will be automatically remapped on the new ones; public statement and instant update of the web pages for a coordinated communication that would have hurt someone, but would have not destroyed confidence and trust in a much bigger community than the one impacted by this decision. Why this was not possible? I would like to know the answer.
From a PR point of view, I cannot imagine a worst way to communicate the bad news. Sending an email on a Friday night, leaving to bloggers, journalists, analysts, influencers and community in general 4 entire days to discuss, blame and writing bad feelings, without any official answer by Microsoft, will be hard to recover. When on Tuesday morning MS people in Redmond will start reading the thunderstorm of the past three days, they will realize that in many areas of the world outside US the days elapsed were 4, 2 in a regular week-end and 2 whole working days. However, they are lucky that the Microsoft-Nokia deal will get the attention of anyone, so the MCM news is not going to spread too much, but the damage made to community trust will remain.
This is a list of links you can read until now:
- Petition on Microsoft Connect (more than 400 votes at the moment of writing)
- In the comments in this connect item you can read the Tim Sneath answer, the only response I’ve read from Microsoft until now)
- Nicholas Cain – SirSQL
- Robert L Davis – SQL Soldier
- Steve Goodman (he’s from Exchange, but I agree with his post, it is not Exchange specific)
- Chris Givens
- Marc Anderson
- Jason Brimhall (containing many links to other posts and a longer story)
- (plus tons of other blog posts similar to these above)
As I said, in this moment I’m not concerned about the future of Microsoft certifications, I will judge it when there will be a roadmap and some new announcements. I am concerned about the destruction of trust and loyalty in a large community and ecosystem that helps Microsoft selling its architecture. My perception is that the damages this communication is producing is way beyond the boundary of MCM/MCSM/MCA community. Maybe I have a misperception about this entire topic and I am just worried for a self-referential issue that does not affect the real word.
I really hope I am wrong this time.