A few weeks ago, I explored why the Salesforce Certified Technical Architect (CTA) is still worth pursuing in 2026. Speaking with CTA Svet Voloshin, the argument made was that it sharpens how architects think, communicate, and make decisions under pressure, ultimately making you a more complete architect. As the platform grows more complex, those qualities have become more integral – but that doesn’t automatically mean the CTA is right for everyone.
Across the ecosystem, more architects are stepping back from the path as cost, time, and trade-offs come into question. And when you start looking closer, the hesitation feels less like doubt and more like rational reconsideration. After sitting down with Salesforce Architect Frank Mamone and asking other architects about the CTA, it was clear that the conversation was a lot more complicated. The CTA process may be valuable, but the certification itself? That’s where things become more nuanced.
Why More Architects Are Stepping Back from the CTA Path
The overall hesitation around the CTA isn’t new, but it does feel more prevalent at the moment. It seems as though more people are looking beyond whether they can do it, and are considering whether they should. When you break down the reasons, the decision often comes down to a series of practical trade-offs rather than a lack of ambition.
One consistent theme I’ve noticed across the ecosystem is that the CTA isn’t defined by its hefty price tag, but by the scale of commitment it demands.
In SF Ben’s 2025 Architect Survey, the top reason architects gave for avoiding the CTA was the time and effort it required, which is hardly surprising. Preparing for the CTA isn’t something that you squeeze into evenings over a few months. It’s very often a multi-year process that runs alongside full-time work and personal commitments.
That mammoth challenge becomes even harder when the scope itself feels unclear. As Principal Technical Architect Justin Dixon puts it, the breadth of the CTA can feel disproportionate compared to what is actually needed to pass.
“I was heavily disappointed with how large the scope of the CTA can be, which makes preparing for it so difficult,” he said. “It’s not shared explicitly in an open way with candidates.
“I will say the first year of learning CTA was very valuable to me. Deep analysis, presentation skills, architectural thinking. But it then moved to just memorizing facts and spending hours drawing the same diagrams.”
For many architects, this introduces a friction around whether they can really justify investing years of focused effort into something that isn’t fully defined.
Alongside the time commitment, questions around return on investment also surface. The CTA still carries prestige, and there’s no denying that. But as our survey showed, relatively few architects are pursuing certifications primarily for financial gain. For many – especially those already established in senior roles – the incremental benefit feels less certain.
Salesforce and AWS Technical Architect Chris Unitt captured this issue well, saying: “I don’t think it’s as valuable as it was 5-6 years ago, but still a very prestigious certification. I personally can’t justify the effort.”
As Chris suggests, the CTA hasn’t necessarily lost its reputation, but the gap between effort and guaranteed outcome appears to be wider than it may have been before, especially when its value depends on how well employers understand it.
Overall, all these factors point to the fact that more architects are avoiding the CTA for very valid reasons, not because they’re intimidated by it by any means. Time, relevance, and ROI all come into play, and when those are weighed up, skipping seems like a strategic decision.
Is the CTA Training More Valuable Than the CTA Itself?
One of the most interesting perspectives comes from Salesforce Technical Architect Frank Mamone, who went through the process himself and got all the way to the CTA review board.
This opens up an important perspective where he has experienced the full weight of what it takes to reach that level, even if he ultimately didn’t pass the board itself. And because of that, his view isn’t that the CTA lacks any value, but that the value may not sit where most people expect it to.
“After I did it, I didn’t find having the paper itself, the certification itself, brings any much value except probably in certain circumstances,” Frank explained. “In general, I’ve never seen anybody ask for a CTA.”
He also pointed out that in most cases, hiring decisions are still made based on real-world experience rather than credentials alone.
“What I see in the market is that people will hire you based on your accomplishments… having a paper doesn’t necessarily mean you’re accomplished, it means you’re accomplished getting that paper, which is a different thing.”
Where his view slightly shifts is when the focus moves away from the eventual outcome and toward the whole process – which is exactly what makes it valuable.
“If you ask me about the training itself, that is absolutely invaluable. The objective is to solve a very difficult scenario in three hours with no internet or resources. So what does that tell you? It’s completely unrealistic! It doesn’t apply to the real world at all.
“[But] the learning process to get there… because it’s such a difficult bar to beat, it’s fantastic, it’s really worth it.”
As he mentions, that three-hour scenario doesn’t reflect how real architecture works in practice. But rather than dismissing that, he believes it’s important to frame it as a training mechanism that ultimately will make you think in a different way.
“In a real-world situation, what you do there in three hours you probably do in months – you have meetings, you get all the details. Here, you’re working basically on huge assumptions.
“It forces you to think differently… normally people stray away from stuff they don’t know, but here it kind of forces you to consider everything. It changed everything for me… The time it takes me to solve solutions is very quick, because I’m so used to doing it so quickly.”
“It was a way of thinking. I was considering everything – security, data, large volumes, all of that.”
Perhaps the most telling part of Frank’s perspective is how he frames success. Even without passing the board, does he still see reaching that level and getting that far as meaningful validation?
“Absolutely, completely valid”, he said in response. “When you go to these boards, there’s a lot of luck involved… you don’t know what scenarios you’re going to get, you don’t know who you’re going to get [as judges].”
Because of this, his advice is not to treat the CTA as the only true, valid outcome from the full journey you go on.
“Do the training as if you’re going to the board. Even if you want to go to the board and fail, it doesn’t really matter at that point.
“If you’re doing it… It’s more about personal accomplishment. But it’s not going to give you a lot of leverage anywhere else. It will give you some, but not a lot.”
Final Thoughts
It’s important that we note that this isn’t a critique of the CTA itself or the architects who have or are currently pursuing it. The certification, of course, remains one of the most respected achievements in the Salesforce ecosystem, and for many, it’s still a deeply worthwhile path. If you’re looking for that perspective, it’s worth revisiting our earlier conversation with CTA Svet Voloshin, which explores exactly why it continues to hold value despite its obstacles.
What we’re seeing change is how architects weigh it rather than its prestige. The decision is increasingly shaped by the trade-offs we mentioned – the time it consumes, how it aligns with your career, and the true ROI. For some, those factors still clearly point toward the CTA, but for others, they don’t, and that choice is becoming more deliberate.
Frank’s perspective definitely offers an important middle ground on this. The cert itself may not always deliver proportional external value, but the journey toward it can be transformative. In that sense, the CTA may no longer be a universal end goal. But the level it represents and the path it demands still matter just as much, if not more, than the destination itself.
