Hi Jim,

You know I have a phenomenal amount of respect for you and your ideas, but
on the price of the CWA we will have to agree to disagree. I know, of
course, that the point of the CWA is to test the ability of the person to
"do the job." Street smart, not book smarts. I get it.

I do not think the current cost of the CWA is justified for the audience for
which it is intended. It is WAY too expensive. I also think that the CWA
has been met by people with real experience in real corporations who hire
real people with a lot of skepticism, much of it non-public dismissal of the
CWA (at places like the Lobby Bar). Some of the skepticism involves why an
association in a nascent, small industry would create a test that:

*Appears to be short-sighted in the way it was messaged and marketed from
the *beginning* by effectively saying "if you do not have a CWA, then you
are not a real web analyst according to the WAA." Meanwhile 99% of real
analysts don't have one. When I was asked to support the CWA as an
"influential industry contributor" prior to it being released, I said "No
way, it's a foolish idea to tell people they aren't web analysts -
especially those who have experience and are highly educated. It will have
backlash." And then I complained the cost of the test was too high (for a
test created for free, realizing test centers cost money). I was very vocal
to the BoD, and you know this, that the retest cost was absurd and
indefensible. Then, the cost of the retest was lowered to what I still
think is too high, but much more affordable for the audience.

*Doesn't ask questions that determine true analytical expertise. I think
someone wrote a blog post that basically said, these questions aren't
relevant to what I've been doing for years.

*Only makes sense for consultants or vendors not for practitioners. Because
consultants and vendors can use the CWA as a differentiator. Practitioner
hiring-managers tell me "who cares, I don't have one nor do I need one."
And, as I always, say I'd hire experience and good, non-gossipy,
non-backstabbers, autonomous-multidimensional people with numeracy over
a-CWA every time. :-)

*Has KPIs around adoption that appear to be poor. How many active WAA
member or total members are CWA? Forget that question, I was told that the
WAA does not know how many active members it has at eMetrics SF when I asked
"how many active members do you have who have volunteered in the last six
months or logged onto the site in the last 30 days." My quick read of the
number of CWAs indicates that, at best, adoption is very slow. And if the
WAA can't tell me how many active members it has in 10 seconds, then I can't
believe real pricing analysis was done on this CWA product.

However the most common complaint I hear from everyone I have asked is that:

*The CWA is too expensive. An entry-level analyst will make somewhere
between $45-85k depending on market. That means budgeting, in perhaps a way
that neither you nor I nor many other industry leaders have to do (but I
sure remember doing Jim). Thus, charging someone, *in this economy*, a
week's take-home salary to take a test that qualifies them for a job they
are already doing is a very, very poor pricing decision. And that is why
the adoption has been lackluster. In addition, the UBC courses in total
cost A LOT more than the CWA exam, so that is not a viable option for most
people.

Thus, the obvious solution is to make the exam available for FREE to ALL
current WAA members for a period of time to promote adoption by the
industry. I would say free for 1 year or perhaps less. A free offering
would help promote the adoption of the CWA, counter the most common critique
that is preventing many people from taking the exam, and help qualify
analysts to grow our industry (not create polarity and division based on the
economics around a piece of paper from a test written for free by
volunteers).

And in no way should this nascent industry association be creating a test
that may prevent qualified people from getting interviews - without making
it UNIVERSALLY affordable.

Then evaluate the data around adoption and WOM after the free period. The
data will show positive that a free period will have promoted adoption,
credibility, and real industry support and recognition for the CWA, which is
not happening at all now and will not happen at the current price.

Until it's free or less than $250, I will not advocate for it, use it as a
basis for hiring (though sure it's nice to see), nor will I take it (unless
both Eric T Peterson and Avinash take it). Just like hundreds of other WAA
members will not. Keep in mind the only people advocating for it are people
with CWAs, people on the WAA BoD, and poeple making money in some way from
the test.

Apologies for being divisive or controversial, but as you know, like you, I
actually care about this industry and its growth. I feel obligated now to
say what MANY people have been saying in private for a LONG time - because
either people expect me to continue to fight the good fights or no one else
has the Balls and/or the Time to do so.

The CWA cost is indefensible in this economy for the intended audience.
Period. Bottom-line. Done. And if the WAA continues to price it the way it
does, it will remain an controversial artifact of great industry skepticism
and poor adoption.

Judah


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]