Product VS Skill Based Certification Exams | Which is Better?

Have you ever debated which is better? In this video, three Microsoft Certified Trainers discuss the two types.

Watch my 90+ courses on Pluralsight (opens in a new tab)

Video Summary

• Transition from product-specific to role-based certifications: Initially, Microsoft certifications were product-specific, like SharePoint or Exchange. Now, they focus on roles, such as Power Platform App Maker, requiring knowledge across multiple products.
• Role-based certifications align with job functions: The shift to role-based certifications aims to match what people actually do in their jobs, making it more practical and relevant for professionals.
• Development of role-based certifications: Subject matter experts create a list of necessary skills for roles like Azure Administrator. Training courses, learning modules, and exams are then built around these skills.
• Applied skills for niche areas: While role-based certifications cover broad roles, applied skills certifications address specific, niche areas, like basic Power Platform flows or storage accounts.
• Combining role-based and product-based certifications: Microsoft is now offering a combination of role-based certifications and product-based applied skills, providing a balanced approach for professionals to showcase their expertise in both areas.

For more information, read the transcript blog below, or watch the video above!

Video Transcript

A few years ago—wow, time passed by quickly—we used to have product-specific certifications. You would be SharePoint certified, Exchange certified, Skype for Business certified, or even C certified. Each certification was tied to a product. To give a clear example, which is not the case today, you would have separate certifications for Power Automate, Power Apps, and Power BI, rather than a role-based certification like Power Platform App Maker, which now requires knowledge of all of them.

Then Microsoft decided to shift away from certifying individuals for just one product. Unless you were lucky—like with Teams, for example—even then, you needed to know SharePoint and a variety of other technologies. Thiago, I remember when this shift was introduced, you were quite passionate about the change. Now that it’s been seven or eight years—wow, time has flown—what’s your take on it?

Just as a disclaimer, and why Vlad phrased the question this way, I was the author of the official training for Azure Developer and Azure Architect before we had role-based certifications. When we started building those, along with the Azure Admin certification, we considered that while the product itself was Azure, Azure had already become vast, and we foresaw how much bigger it would grow in the coming years—which, of course, has already happened.

Even before role-based certifications were formally introduced, the Azure certifications (70-532, 70-533, and 70-535) were already structured around roles. I’ve always been a strong believer in role-based certifications because I want people to be certified in a way that prepares them for their actual job responsibilities. That’s the ultimate goal: a certification that reflects real-world tasks.

Previously, before the cloud era, if you were a system administrator, you had to know networking, Windows Server, Linux, and many other technologies. To truly validate your skills, you had to collect multiple certifications. And that’s just within Microsoft—never mind certifications from other vendors. But with role-based certifications, we focus on specific job roles. For example, an Azure Administrator, Azure Developer, or Azure Architect certification is structured around what someone in that role actually does.

The process of creating these certifications is fairly straightforward. A group of subject matter experts compiles a list of key knowledge areas required for a specific role, such as Azure Administrator. Based on that, Microsoft develops training courses, Learn modules, and exams. Of course, there’s always room for debate—some might argue we need more Kubernetes, others less, or more VMs versus fewer VMs. But overall, I believe these certifications work well.

Do I miss product-based certifications? In some niche areas, yes. That’s where the new applied skills certifications help fill the gap. For example, if someone works primarily with Power Platform and needs to build simple flows, there’s an applied skills certification for that. If someone works specifically with Azure storage accounts, there’s a certification tailored to that niche. These targeted certifications provide value without requiring someone to learn an entire platform.

That’s why I think this new approach is a great balance. And I hope this answers your question.

To add one more point quickly—I wish we had something similar for Power Platform functional consultants. I’m a big Power Automate user, and I wish there was a certification specifically for Power Automate. Microsoft seems to be addressing this with applied skills, where we now have both role-based certifications and product-specific applied skills. That creates a win-win scenario.

For instance, if someone in HR is really good at Power Automate, they should be able to earn a credential that proves their expertise without having to learn Dataverse solutions, which they may not even have access to in their work environment.