My CAD Exam Experience: Why “Certified Application Developer” Falls Short of Its Promise

[mfhaciahmetoglu]

Hi all,

I recently passed the ServiceNow Certified Application Developer (CAD) exam. The experience left me with a strong urge to share honest feedback about the test’s quality and the gap between its name and what it actually measures.

The title “Certified Application Developer” carries weight. It suggests a developer who has moved beyond basic configuration into the realm of true application-building expertise, someone capable of designing and implementing clever, impactful, and valuable solutions, and navigating the platform’s complexities with confidence. After more than three years working intensively on ServiceNow, during which I have implemented many things from intricate multi-stage workflows to full applications in UI Builder, from subtle yet complicated customizations (yes, I know, forgive me) to advanced scripting that powers critical business logic (which all in all proved me the enormous strength of this platform), I approached the CAD expecting a rigorous validation of those skills.

What I encountered instead was a test that feels quite removed from the realities of development. They rarely ask you to reason through a real-world scenario or demonstrate why one approach is superior to another in a given context. Instead, the exam leans heavily on memorization: the exact signature of an API method, the inheritance hierarchy of an obscure table, the location of a toggle buried deep in system properties. These are details any competent developer can retrieve from documentation in moments or AI now, yet they dominate the question bank. What is the value of these questions?

To answer this question, we gotta reflect on what the real strength of being a developer is, especially in an age of AI where writing codes are getting increasingly simpler. 

My answer, and I would be happy to hear other people's opinions as well, is the unique combination of expertise and imagination, which is honed by experience.  ServiceNow is an immensely versatile platform. I liken it to playing with Lego toys, though it promises a much superior "play" due to an overwhelming abundance of choices. A developer is the person who knows how to navigate this abundance in a way that falls in line with best practices, chic, confidence, and value. The question is then whether this CAD tests this knowledge or not? Anyone who took it would readily concede that no, it does not. One needs hardly any expertise or imagination to pass this test.   

There is no room to entertain any solution, no opportunity to explain a design decision, no challenge that mirrors the ambiguity and constraints of actual projects. In short, the exam tests whether you have studied the right trivia, not whether you can build applications that deliver value.

This is a missed opportunity, both for ServiceNow and for the community that depends on its certifications. I have other certificates from other platforms and must admit that their tests were much more precise with scenario-based exercises that actually need thinking, performance trade-off analyses, and so on. Such formats produce credentials that employers respect because they reflect skills that matter in the workplace. The CAD, by contrast, risks becoming a checkbox rather than a badge of proficiency.

To anyone preparing for the exam and anyone who takes this certificate as a sign of expertise, my advice is simple: treat it as a baseline, not a capstone. Use it to confirm a sort of familiarity with the platform’s breadth (in which case, I wouldn't be surprised if someone who never used the platform has passed this exam, either), but do not mistake passing for proof of mastery. Build real solutions, contribute to the community, dive into Now Learning labs, and push yourself on projects that force you to think, not just remember.

And to ServiceNow: the platform and its developers deserve a certification that truly reflects what it means to be an application developer. Let’s evolve the CAD into an assessment worthy of its name.

Best,

Firat

[GlideFather]

Hi @mfhaciahmetoglu,

thank you for sharing your experience. I passed my CAD roughly a year ago and what I remember from it is that I liked it more than any other certs I passed before or afterwards (CIS ITSM, CSM, HAM to get a picture), which is in contradiction to your experience 😄 but yours is fresh unlike mine.

You are right that the concept of the exam is more "general", but I think it cannot be done much differently. Because (custom) development will rather vary and each developer will provide different code. Also this would differer module by module, industry by industry and by overall client's maturity of the processes. It would require to have something like "CAD Insurance", "CAD Automotive", or "CAD ITSM", "CAD SAM"....... 

If you check the target audience as per the exam blueprint,

Exam Audience
The ServiceNow Certified Application Developer exam is available to ServiceNow customers, partners, employees, and others interested in becoming a ServiceNow Certified Application Developer.

it gives you the idea that it cannot be "hardcore" developer stuff, rather it is like opening the gate for less technical people to get some idea about capabilities rather than to prove that you know it all by heart.

I absolutely agree that some questions might seem ridiculous, it makes no sense to remember something that you can find in 40 seconds if any instance is available at the moment (applicable to all ServiceNow exams).

Another thing you mention - the AI - I would be very careful about it, at least as of today the codes or ServiceNow agenda provided by chatGPT or Copilot is anything but helpful. It's good to generate some text but for the ServiceNow development it seems to tackle your legs rather than to help you, this might improve in the future but when you ask Copilot about OOTB you will get absolute rubbish that slow you down compared to find your own answers yourself :))) 

I don't know what I tried to say here, it was like thinking loud... let me know what do you think about it and feel free to further discuss things.

Have a wonderful day! 

[mfhaciahmetoglu]

@GlideFather, thanks a lot for sharing your comments. 

Indeed, if the certification is just to convey some ideas about one's ability to tackle issues on the platform, the exam structure might make sense but then I would say this is perhaps a contradiction to the very idea of the certification... 

Regarding AI, in my experience, it has been an amazing companion throughout the entire release cycle: from design to implementation...  Sure, it does not always give accurate answers, but more often than not, it provides valuable input to consider. Even better, it can act as a very precious consultant to have correspondence to reason together. And I can only imagine it will get better.

Best,

Firat