In the world of cybersecurity, there’s an ongoing debate that deserves more attention: Why do companies and more notably, federal government employers often prioritize certifications over real-world experience when hiring cybersecurity professionals?
This question has become increasingly relevant as the cybersecurity certification industry continues to boom. Organizations like CompTIA, ISC2, ISACA, EC-Council, and Cisco collectively generate millions each year from certifying future professionals. These certifications are often the gateway into the field, especially for individuals aiming to work in cybersecurity roles supporting the Department of Defense (DoD) or other federal agencies.
But the overreliance on certifications raises a critical concern: are we prioritizing the appearance of qualification over actual competence?
The Certification Boom and Its Misalignment
Certifications are built on private industry standards, which often don’t translate well to federal cybersecurity environments. While the fundamentals such as system accreditation, user training, and hardware/software testing—should be universal, the priorities diverge sharply. Private industry typically focuses on mitigating monetary loss and reputational risk. In contrast, federal agencies are far more concerned with safeguarding classified information, national security interests, and the integrity of mission-critical systems.
This disconnect becomes more evident when certified professionals transition into federal environments without prior experience. Many lack a clear understanding of the customer’s needs, DoD-specific processes, and the vast governance structure that federal cybersecurity must navigate.
The Role of DoD Directive 8570.01
When DoD Directive 8570.01 was first issued in the early 2000s, it seemed like a much needed step forward. It provided a unified cybersecurity (then called Information Assurance) baseline for all DoD employees—civilians, contractors, and service members alike. The intent was noble: ensure that everyone managing or interacting with DoD IT systems met a standardized competency level.
However, the unintended consequence was the emergence of a certification-centric culture. Over time, certifications became the minimum bar not just for employment but also for contract award consideration. In many cases, hiring decisions were made based on how many certifications a candidate held, regardless of their real-world DoD cybersecurity experience or understanding.
By around 2013, the cracks in this system became more visible. Many newly hired professionals, armed with an impressive suite of certifications, showed up with little practical knowledge of how DoD enclaves function, how to navigate service-specific policy layers, or how to support mission objectives effectively.
Contractors and the Illusion of Qualification
This overemphasis on certifications has also introduced a troubling trend among DoD contracting companies. These firms frequently showcase their highly certified staff to bolster their technical capability claims in proposals. The certifications look good on paper and help win contracts—but what’s on paper doesn’t always reflect what’s in the field.
As a result, federal customers are often blindsided, believing they are receiving top-tier talent, only to discover these employees lack practical experience, adaptability, or even basic work ethic. In many instances, certifications were used not as proof of skill, but as a shortcut to bypass more rigorous vetting of actual capability.
A Missed Opportunity: A Federal Cybersecurity Certification
The federal government—particularly the DoD—invests millions annually into developing cybersecurity policies, standards, and governance structures tailored to their unique environments. These efforts span not just high-level directives but also cascade down to COCOMs, service agencies, brigades, battalions, and even individual units.
Given this immense investment, it seems like a missed opportunity that the DoD does not have its own internal certification program designed around its specific cybersecurity requirements. Rather than relying solely on commercial certifications, the DoD could develop a layered certification model that tests both knowledge and applied skill in areas like enclave management, RMF (Risk Management Framework), DISA STIGs, and cyber threat response tailored to federal threat models.
Striking a Balance Between Certifications and Experience
Certifications are not inherently bad. They serve a valuable purpose, especially in validating a baseline of knowledge across a large and decentralized workforce. They also help those new to the field establish credibility and break into the industry. However, they should never be used as a replacement for experience—particularly in the public sector, where the stakes are much higher.
The future of cybersecurity hiring should be about balance. We need a system that combines the strengths of standardized certifications with the irreplaceable value of real-world experience. Hiring managers, particularly in federal agencies, must weigh both when selecting candidates and awarding contracts.
If the DoD and other federal agencies want to build resilient, capable cybersecurity teams, they must go beyond the checkbox mentality of certification. Instead, they should invest in training programs, mentorship, and in-house certification pathways that align with their unique missions—ultimately ensuring that those tasked with defending our nation’s digital infrastructure are prepared not just on paper, but in practice.