

Why having an MBA is a negative hiring signal (for startups) - dalton
http://daltoncaldwell.com/why-having-an-mba-is-a-negative-hiring-signal

======
joezydeco
Can't have this without quoting Kawasaki's Valuation Formula for startups:
Value = (500K * Engineers) - (250K * MBAs)

~~~
dalton
I would have put that in the post, but it seemed too snarky.

I also considered linking to this:
<http://whartoniteseekscodemonkey.tumblr.com/>

:)

------
joewadcan
Even as an MBA I agree with his thesis that the degree is a negative signal...
however that's only true for the early stage tech-based startups. And while
that subsection might be 99% of the HN crowd, as a whole for the US it's a
pretty small chunk (by count).

I love the notion that MBA's get the degree to get rich. In reality most folks
at the top tier schools do the analysis of comparing opportunity costs and
realize they may not recoup the investment for 10/15 years! The reason most
people get the degree is to switch careers, learn new skills, and build their
network.

I'm a bit biased here at UC Berkeley, but I'm actually inspired to see all the
startups come out of our class!

------
adahm
I just feel like we should caution against stigmatizing large swaths of
anyone, be them technical v non-technical, MBAs, Berkly CS v Standford CS,
Vegetarians v meat eaters, or whatever the case may be. If there's one thing
that's been proven by startups it's that it's all about finding exceptional
individuals, in whatever shape or form they come in. I know there are
qualifications at the beginning of the post, but I still feel like point
number 2, "Entitlement" can be roughly translated to "MBAs are entitled,
overvalued egotists". While I agree this happens to be the case sometimes, I
do not have an MBA but did do business undergrad so I know the type, the best
people will always rise to the top. So while I totally agree that hiring an
MBA just to have an MBA is a terrible idea, there will be MBAs who provide
startups with INVALUABLE help because of who they are as individuals. Just
like hiring a Stanford CS major doesn't automatically mean you hired the best
possible programmer, hiring the best possible programmer does that. Hiring
based upon intelligence, perseverance, creativity, know how, how someone fits
into the team, etc. etc. will put any startup in the best position to be
successful. And those people come from everywhere. They may not have even
finished college, maybe they worked in a completely unrelated field, maybe
they traveled for a while, or decided to give professional archery a try. If
they're smart, they're smart. If they fit in, they fit in. No need to limit
where startups should be looking for people, its already tough enough to find
amazing talent.

~~~
dalton
um did you read the first paragraph of the post?

------
pbreit
Pretty straightforward, reasonable argument. Under opportunity cost (or
another heading), I'd include the cash outlay for business school which can be
$50-100k, plenty of money to fund 18 months of starting something up.

------
devinmontgomery
Being an MBA and having spent a lot of time with a large cohort of the same,
the "Entitlement," "Misguided Thinking,"and "Selection Bias" critiques sound a
lot more like the caricature that's made of MBAs by non-MBAs (or self-loathing
MBAs trying to impress non-MBAs) than the vast majority of real people who
have the degree. If this represents the majority of the MBAs you've met, then
I fear you have an unrepresentative sample. We had those folks, for sure. But
they were the dorks and the minority.

~~~
pasbesoin
In my anecdotal experience (albeit typically in larger corporate
environments), many of those possessing or actively pursuing MBA's are or
present themselves as fairly sincere. Nonetheless, they often simply have a
_perspective_ and approach that is not very useful for the problems at hand.
Or they go about solving the _wrong_ problems. Things get all (re)organized
for a year or two, and perhaps the activity looks progressive. Perhaps it
somewhat masks underlying circumstances.

But... moving dollars and org around does _not_ , of itself, motivate nor
solve production problems.

And a lot of those same people seem to embrace typical "HR best practices" in
a rather claustrophobia-inducing fashion.

Mine is just a rather narrowly informed anecdotal experience. But many of the
MBA types around me have not/hardly inspired me.

------
gawker
I hope I can be the outlier. I'm doing an MBA but I'm also working and
whenever I do have free time, I try to get some coding done for some project.
I disagree that strategy > implementation - I believe they both go hand in
hand but slightly more to implementation. I don't think I'm entitled to
anything but I do think that I have learned some things of value in school.

However, I do agree that there is an oversupply of MBAs who do not actually
add value. I won't be one of them though.

------
it33
Maybe run an A/B test?

Suppose 1) you had 1,000 resumes of near identical startup-ready backgrounds
(top tier CS, design, entrepreneurship experience etc.), and 2) of those
resumes 10 also had top tier MBAs. Which resumes would you prioritize reading?

If you believe an MBA is a negative hiring signal, then you'd read 990 other
resumes first--which doesn't make sense to me. I may be missing something...

------
supercanuck
Is it ethical to leave the MBA off of the resume? For some of us, it was
simply a box to check in order not to stunt our future growth.

~~~
fatjokes
Then you'd have to explain the 2 year gap...

------
geebee
Interesting observations around strategy and implementation. I agree with the
reasoning behind the idea that at a startup, implementation > strategy... but
it does still keep these notions separate. Is it going to far to say that
implementation = strategy = idea? Do successful startups actually draw a sharp
distinction between these things?

------
lambersley
IME, this isn't only applicable to start-ups. The same considerations need to
be taken into account when filling a senior professional or mid-level
management role within a large enterprise. Doers verus Thinkers.

------
pasbesoin
Making > managing.

And/or, making precedes managing.

I've seen, as a small minority of my experience, some very good management.
But, that good management always _understood and respected its context._

------
Mz
I am reminded of an anecdote I read years ago in a book by an entrepreneur. He
related a conversation he had with another entrepreneur who did happen to have
an MBA. Mr. MBA had a lot of fancy numbers and analysis written up but no
customers nor any real idea how to get them. The author had customers and
revenue. While he envied the MBA his education and wished he had similar
analytical ability/tools, he also took it as a "count your blessings" moment
and did not expect the MBA's business to make it.

I am also reminded of all the business books I have read which did not result
in a business being born. I have had a business bank account, registered
business names, written business plans, etc. It was all style and no
substance. It was all window dressing. I am still trying to figure out what
spark turns into flame in this regard.

