Nice writeup.

I listened to the podcast too. What I think the panelists failed to point out is that many clients have absolutely no clue as to what constitutes a good web designer.

The benefits of employing a professional web designer and not a frontpage jockey are so numerous that educating clients almost borders on consumer protection.

We have regulation and bodies for other industries - why not for the web?

Sadly I can’t see it happening. It would take even more diplomacy than the UN going into Lebanaon.

Just because people have certifications and/or degrees from an accredited body doesn’t mean they know what they’re doing or are good at what they do. At most, I would view a certification as a </em>good to know</em>, but certainly not as a strong deciding factor for hiring.

I’m interested in people who are passionate about the technology they’re utilizing and people who are good at using it. I could care less about whether they’re certified or not with a national/international organization. I see this as simply one more road block for a more talented person in a corporate environment—an environment that’s dependent on know nothing human resource personnel. Meaning, the dufus with the certification (but no talent) will get the job, instead of the most gifted and skilled.

In a weird bit of synchronicity, I have in the past hour uploaded a post on just this subject. I don’t put things as succinctly as you (that is, it’s a very long post...) but I talk about the same issues.

Interesting post, and I’m glad to know the issues continue to be discussed.

I think I’d prefer a more clubhouse ideal than a certification.  I’m certainly not some whiz-bang designer, I do this for fun, for me. That said, if you say you’re a web designer all you need do to prove it is show off your stuff. It doesn’t matter if you’re 13 or 30 and at no point does someone ask to see your Web+ certificate.

Web design is in that funky space between aesthetic art and scientific art. I don’t know how you accredit the aesthetic and I don’t see why you should the scientific.

But, the idea that if there were a group required some sort of proof of ability I find that more appealing than something for which I must take a test at the local Marriot. I think I’d appreciate that more as well. And the, give the member a nifty button that says, “we know for sure this guy only uses tables when appropriate” or something like that.

I’d just hate to see a world where one can’t get a job making a web site for some local business because they heard you need to have your Web+CSS 6.0 Whiz-bang accreditation.

I?d just hate to see a world where one can?t get a job making a web site for some local business because they heard you need to have your Web+CSS 6.0 Whiz-bang accreditation.

I agree...and yet, on the other hand, I’d love to see a world where one can’t get a job making a web site for some local business because they picked up Frontpage or similar off the shelf of their local Office Depot, made a personal web page, and decided they were good enough at this to start selling their services.

There’s a fine line here. I’m not sure how to solve this problem, but it will never get solved without some kind of a professional body governing these things. I’m for it—but I agree with Mark that the focus will have to be narrower than some other similar professional bodies.

...they picked up Frontpage or similar…

And agreed. Welcome to the mutual agreement society.

I think ultimately I’d prefer something of a peer group. It might sound elitist but shouldn’t it be elite? Oh, and to be sure, I’m not even sure I could get in to such a group.

I think it all comes down to your portfolio and if you’re a good fit for the company trying to hire you. I still see any type of certification as an obstacle for a talented designer who is trying to get a job in the corporate world.

But maybe that’s a good thing for smaller companies like mine. We’ve passed up plenty of applicants that went on to work for large corporations, while hiring guys who couldn’t get past corporate HR, but ended up being some of the most talented people we’ve ever worked with.

Maybe the less talented will get this new certification and breeze through HR, and leave us with a better talent pool to choose from. Hmmm, I’m starting to like this certification idea. Seriously though, a professional membership is much, much more desirable for myself and any applicant that would come through my door than a certification any day. It’s professionalism via association, and coupled with a good portfolio and personality, means a job.

I absolutely agree that certification won’t work. By the time the certification process is in place for each new technology it will already be out of date.  Alternatively if the certification process is developed and released with each new technology development and improvement will be hindered.

As for the peer review idea I think it’s a good idea but it will have to be done very carefully. One of the great things about web design is the low entry barrier, (I’d been doing it as a hobby for a while and when I found myself in need of a job I was able to start up easily).  If it gets to a point where so many designers are members of the peer-review country club that to get any worthwhile work someone starting out has to shell out $250 and wait 6 weeks that won’t be any good at all. I also think the Frontpage jockeys do serve a purpose even if that purpose is to make clients truly appreciate the standards crowd.

I am a member of another professional, (or labour), organization that will remain nameless and has nothing to do whatsoever with web design and really all it does is charge me dues and tell me not to work. However, now that I’m in I can’t really withdraw because if I do want to work in that field, (more than on the fringes), I will have to be a member.  We have to be careful that a web design organization doesn’t come to this.

I also think the Frontpage jockeys do serve a purpose even if that purpose is to make clients truly appreciate the standards crowd.

If that’s their purpose, I assert their not doing a very good job of it.

I wonder how Refresh, which is largely a grassroots effort, could tie into this idea, which is a decidedly more grasstops idea.  Seeing how active Refresh has become in these last few months in so many cities, it would be great if both ideas could be mutually leveraged to create a body that has an instant support base and, with that support base, credibility.

The problem with tech certifications during the boom was, in my eye, it was so corporation-centric that it was tough not to be skeptical of its value outside of that narrow framework.  With something a bit broader, and with a grassroots support base, perhaps that skepticism could be assuaged.

I think we need communities and not certification boards. Most certifications are made to make some organization money. They make money through testing and renewing the certification.

Refreshing Cities is an excellent example of community based growth for standards and accessibility, but I would have never started Refresh Nashville if I had ever imagined that we were going to make it exclusive, instead of inclusive.

The web development community should be just that, and shouldn’t be soiled by any type of subjective certification process. I for one will completely ignore it. Growth through community and peers is the only way to go in my opinion.

Provide the tools and resources needed, and participate in local and global communities. I don’t think there’s a need for anything else.

As someone old enough to have graduated when Netscape 1 was still in beta, I have a degree in Chemical Engineering. Before discovering my true calling, I went on to become a Chartered Chemical Engineer, and with that a Member of the Institution of Chemical Engineers, meaning I could have CEng MIChemE after my name - as many engineers do on their business cards. Regarding becoming chartered, the IChemE says this:

Becoming a Chartered Chemical Engineer is about having a good academic education coupled with initial professional experience at the right level of responsibility.

Therefore to become a chartered engineer, one must have the training and, most importantly, the experience. This is something clients of engineering firms recognise, appreciate, and expect of a professional engineer.

How are these qualities measured? The education bit is easy - it is almost always a relevent engineering degree. The experience is more tricky - one requires five years in the industry spread across different fields such as design, production, research, safety. The relevancy of such experience, and overall suitability for chartered status is determined in an interview with another Member. And this is where I think our industry can learn something.

If an accreditation system is to be created, then a minimum period of experience should be required (3 years?), preferably in more than one speciality (visual design, back-end dev, front-end code, IA, SEO,...). As with the IChemE, competancy and relevancy of experience should be determined in an interview with an already qualified member - not unlike a job interview. Entry requirements should be demanding but flexible.

Perhaps one function of a professional body is to help collate, review and disseminate examples of best practice. I have in mind an academic model where there is some kind of publishing channel (like a journal) where peer reviewed work is published.

A List Apart fulfils this function very well, but perhaps more formal research structures might be useful to create a legacy of solid knowledge.

Or perhaps that whole process would be too slow and cumbersome

Because of the global nature of the Web standards community, much of the discussion about professional bodies has assumed that such an organization for the Web will have a similarly international flavour. In practice, professional bodies tend to have a national focus, with links to similar bodies elsewhere. An international organization would be almost impossible to run effectively. The recent emergence of WIPA might provide a model.

If you’re looking to design an accessible website there are already bodies out there who will audit your site and approve it for accessibility eg the RNIB See it Right

If you’re looking for your peers to nominate a good design then there are already sites out there who do this
Macromedia site of the day
Favourite Website Awards
Styleboost
FCUKSTAR
Misspato

The question is what consitutes a good website design? What criteria are you suggesting? Aesthetically, functionally or accessible to all?

You also have the UK Web Design Association which anyone can join

I think the nature of this debate reflects the nature of being a web designer. It helps to be a jack of all trades, and this is because the power of content creation and delivery is in the hands of the individual, so therefore a lot of factors. We have to keep learning and pushing on with the latest buzzwords and what thanks do we get?

Whether you are creating pages with Frontpage, Flash, Wordpress, MySpace, Dreamweaver, whatever, the point is that anyone can do this for themselves. Like it or not, web design is a huge moving target of skillsets, and I just don’t think there is any possible way to have a widely recognised accreditation scheme as there is just too much to consider.

I do think a paid up ‘elite’ club would be a good idea though, membership by peer review and then you get a badge for your website/certificate/magazine/complimentary bottle of wine on approval. Keep it simple, and excelling at 7 of 10 criteria for example is enough to get you in. The criteria are reviewed every 12 months. Anyone who disagrees with the criteria is wrong. I’d apply.

Two more points:
EDUCATION:
Lecturers and teachers who are on the ball will be enthusing about aesthetics, standards, CSS etc regardless of what is in the curriculum. The students who ‘get it’ this will have their light-bulb moments anyway. The rest are on MySpace already.

THE FRONTPAGE CROWD AND THE CMS-OF-THE-SHELF-FOR-?20 CROWD (Who are more scary):
Designers have big egos and are show-offs in various forms. If you’re good enough then you’re not going to be intimidated by some geek pirating site designs for a day job. I don’t want to imagine what they do at home.

Everyone’s a critic.

Now this IS nice
http://designcharts.com

Whether you are creating pages with Frontpage, Flash, Wordpress, MySpace, Dreamweaver, whatever, the point is that anyone can do this for themselves. Like it or not, web design is a huge moving target of skillsets, and I just don?t think there is any possible way to have a widely recognised accreditation scheme as there is just too much to consider.

I find it really interesting (and baffling) that when you talk about we design, you talk about tools. Tools are not skills, in my opinion. Knowing how to use Dreamweaver is not a “skill” or a “talent.” Knowing how to use Flash is not a skill. A skill is “writing valid (X)HTML” or “creating vector animations and user interfaces for the web.” Knowibng Photoshop is not a skill. Skills are things like “color correction” and “image compositing.” Illustrator is not a skill. Skills are “creating vector illustrations” and “brand/identity system design.”

What I can not get over is how technology-focused our industry seems to be to the outside world. When i say ‘I’m a web designer,” the response I get is “Oh cool, maybe you can help me with my computer!” Everyone hears “web” and ignores the “designer” part. Why do people insist on boiling our skills down to what languages we code in and what software we use, rather than things like “typography” and “page layout and design?”

Until potential clients understand that what we do is design, they’ll always be willing to pay less to the hacks. Until they believe that our skills are more than “knows how to use Dreamweaver,” there will always be cheap hacks taking out business. Why? Because they can learn Dreamweaver themselves. They can learn HTML. They can learn CSS. They can learn PHP. Hell, may of them probably already know the basics of these things. But what they can’t do—at least not without a lot of education, experience, and practice—is become a designer.

I lost a client once because I got huffy on the phone with them when they mentioned that their nephew, a high school student “made web pages.” My response? “Yeah, well my 9 year old daughter makes bracelets out of beads, but I don’t think you’d buy one for your wife on your anniversary, would you?”

Having a nice camera does not making me a photographer. Having a stethoscope does not make me a doctor. Having a hammer does not make me a carpenter. Having a trumpet does not make me a musician.

So why, dammit, why, is it that people believe that if they have Dreamweaver, they can be a web designer?

No professional bodies, please!

In the world of project management, there is a certification body. Many, if not most, of the PMs I’ve met who have been certified are actually pretty much useless at project management, lacking any kind of ability to be creative about new situations and the ability to understand people management, skills that a certification body cannot measure. Many certified PMs are excellent, of course, but the certification is not an accurate indicator of that.

Many technology managers will attest to the same thing—a Java or .NET certification is often meaningless when a programmer needs to be skilled at solving new and unforeseen technology problems.

Design certification would be even more unreliable. Let this idea go, please. The solution is right in front of us: make your decisions based on portfolios and recommendations from people you trust. That’s all we have that we can count on, and that’s all we need.

While I’m no professional yet, it’s something I’m working on, and I can vouch that institutions are teaching greatly outdated technologies. Try finding a course on python or ruby. Instead you have to take C, C++, Java, Perl, PHP, etc. and rely on your own ability to teach yourself other languages. Granted, that’s not as hard as it may seem for some, but for me, it’s all about making time for myself to learn of these newer things instead of relying on my own self to make time.
I don’t know if an organization would help or not, but it sure would be nice for clients to see one is worth more than what they see on a web page.

Why do people insist on boiling our skills down to what languages we code in and what software we use, rather than things like ?typography? and ?page layout and design??

Jeff, maybe a title change is in order. Let the “tools” keep calling themselves web designers while the “skills” come up with a name which more closely explains what we do.

I’ve been a frontpage gal in years past, but had tremendous respect for people who did what I do today and would never have dared call myself a web designer. I told people I did cheap sites and if they couldn’t afford a real web designer, I could throw something together until they could (or until I became one). It’s how I learned, so I definitely don’t think people in that boat should be drowned, but I do agree that there should be a professional separation of some kind, just not sure what’s best.

So why, dammit, why, is it that people believe that if they have Dreamweaver, they can be a web designer?

Those exact words have come out of my mouth! Actually, I was told in an interview earlier this year that I had to design in Dreamweaver or they couldn’t hire me. Needless to say I didn’t get the job. I’ve found this to be pretty common in the area I live. Other places I interviewed said basically the same thing. The agencies want the factory-produced websites that can be whipped up in a few hours because it makes more money for them. Me, I’m not JUST in it for the money, which seems to be the case among many people here, but if I’m not using “the tools” I’m out. And the clients don’t know the difference, honestly. I get samples sites sent to me all the time from prospects who want their site to look like some other site. These sites are cookiecutter sites probably slapped together and they honestly can’t tell the difference between those sites and the ones in my portfolio, which until I get past their ignorance, is pretty insulting.

One point in regard to certification, I do think there’s a difference between a developer and a designer. I see a lot of developers who go by designer when they rarely if ever work with graphics. I think that brings down designers a lot - in the same way it would bring down the level of developer if I were to tell people I was a developer. I can tweak some code and okay, writea little with a gun to my head, but I’m no developer. I do graphics/css mostly, so it would be hurtful to my beautiful developer peers to cay I’m a developer when I occasionally develop. I like to see the same respect from developers. If you only occasionally design, you’re probably not a designer (though I’ll bet you’re a fabulous developer). :)

I agree with a good deal of the above. The mention of creating graphics brings up on problem with the definition. Not all web designers have graphics backgrounds, or are graphics designers (though most could manage an icon or two) yet I see in many discussions that if you can’t do this you aren’t a designer but a developer.

A developer to my mind is one who does the behavioural aspect of a web site. Scripting, applications and database programming, creating hooks, etc. The designer is one who creates the site concept, does layout, presentation and stylistic coding (though I hate calling (x)html/css/xml/etc coding). They may do the graphics design if they are able, or use the services of a graphics designer.

Now they may, especially in the case of a small independent shop all be done by one person, but they can also be more of a contractor where a staff provides the various components of an integrated whole.

This is why I think any universal certification program is doomed to failure. As I indicated in a discussion elsewhere on this topic there are any of a number of organizations that purport to do this sort of thing now. Most people have never heard of them and lend them little credence if they have.

Most ?web designers? of my acquaintance are mostly self-taught rather than academically educated in the field and , as has been stated by a previous poster, are of necessity jacks-of-all trades in scripting, layout, coding and occasionally graphics.

Any certification would need endorsements in various fields leading to the morass that plagues Microsoft certifications. Such programs are costly to run and are reflected in the price of the certifications. This has the potential to be onerous for and/or shut out many smaller designer/developers who, while they may be perfectly competent, are not so afluent as to be able to play the ?certification game?.

I know it is easy to criticise without offering alternatives but I?m not sure what the alternatives would be. The fact that it is easy to find problems to criticise means that the concept needs further development.

Perhaps something more along the lines of the Society of Graphic Designers of Canada or American Institute of Graphic Arts would be better than the Engineering model.

Very nice post. As a farely new “web” designer (who is also in college) I see real world examples of all of the issues you mentioned. Most notably our education system is simply not setup to teach the industry at the current rate it is growing and changing.

I also liked your comment about the following:

Jon pointed out within the discussion that I am a member of the iSTD and as such (in the context of the discussion), it sets me, and members of similar organisations, apart from the ?Front Page designers?. True. But, sets me apart to whom? My peers or my clients?

I previously worked at an attorney marketing firm and attorneys seem to continue to suffer this same mindset of accreditation. Marketing a professional service, like web design is very different from marketing a physical product. The client is NOT qualified to judge the quality of your work (the drafting of a trust, or the coding of a site), so accreditations are fairly useless to the uninitiated.