In the United States there is a unified opposition against the establishment of a legal registration for Engineering Technologist. This opposition is supported by the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) public declaration that it objects in the formation of a registration for this group. The NSPE has formed a certification for Technologist through the establishment of NICET. The certification is a hollow atonement that attempts to appease those who wish to see the acknowledgement of Engineering Technologist as a career professional. Is it a conflict of interest for an organization to establish a registration process for a group that they wish to oppress?
Short answer: Yes. If PEs do not consider ETs professionals there will be conflict and suppression of any advancement of the movement to gain professional status. In Canada, you cannot refer to yourself, even in a position title, as 'engineer' as in "John Doe, Network Engineer, ABC Company" unless you have an engineering undergraduate degree and have passed the Professional Engineering (P.Eng.) examination(s). This is the reason people with a Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer certification cannot say "engineer" on their resume and there was a dust-up with the Professional Engineering society over the use of that word in the certification. Not sure whether it was ever resolved. Not too long ago doctors (MDs) were opposed to recognizing nurses as anything but chamber maids so to speak.
This is true. Canada has very strict laws regarding the use of this teminology. It may or may not be a good thing that Technologists are not government registered. Perhaps its good because its less of a bureaucratic hurdle for graduates of technology programs to be established in their profession. I did find from Wikipedia, that there is such a thing as Certified Engineering Technologist in Canada and a similar group in the UK. There is also a professional organization of industrial technologists in the US. See http://www.nait.org/. It reminds me of how the term "General Contractor" may be used. Technically anyone can call themselves a contractor. But many states and municipalities require licenses to work in that area. Probibly its more about the govening bodies making money and little else. There is no such thing as a General Contractors examination.
In California one must have a state licence in order to advertise as a contractor. A friend of mine used to install garden irrigation systems as a sideline until he was reported to the state. http://www.cslb.ca.gov/ CA also has exams for contractors http://www.cslb.ca.gov/Applicants/ExaminationStudyGuides/
This is an aside.... In what seems like another lifetime ago I got a Novell Certified Netware Engineer, (CNE). Its not worth that much these days but it did mean a lot in the day. It certainly was not an easy thing to get. There are other certifications as well, MCSE, Cisco CCNE (regarded as having the most rigorous testing standards) and so on. As far as De Jure regulation of the IT Profession, I do not think it registration exists. But one thing I do know is that in IT, the technology changes year after year and its really difficult to gage knowledge of a IT Professional. Just about anything you learn today will be obsolite in five to ten years. For that reason there are no legal examinations for IT professionals. I suppose getting a degree of some kind would be helpful though.
Oh, the Canadian Information Processing Society has been trying very hard to push for "IT certification" above and beyond post-secondary education. The continuing education requirements of the CIPS ISP designation almost requires the holder spend as much time on professional development as on actual paid employment; this is unreasonable in my view unless you work for the government and can snowball your manager with a pile of manure. Having worked in IT for more years than I care to remember my observation is a degree or diploma does not prove the candidate is competent. There are those with formal education and those who are self-taught. There are those with a natural aptitude and those who were only drawn to IT because it pays better than flipping burgers, but they'd gladly flip burgers for an IT salary. Unlike medical doctors, information technology practitioners are not evaluated on the basis of a standard body of knowledge but on a quickly moving escalator of new technology and products. Do you see any doctors needing certification in Aspirin 1.0? Tylenol 2008? CorpXYZ Chest X-Ray Reading System? Of course not, yet this is common in the IT world.
