
Are MBAs the Problem? - dreamz
http://blogs.harvardbusiness.org/hbreditors/2009/03/are_mbas_the_problem.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-WEEKLY_HOTLIST-_-MAR_2009-_-HOTLIST0319
======
robertdempsey
I started my business many years ago with no formal business training and no
business experience. I've learned a lot along the way. I am now completing an
MBA, and my experience is very different than what the article's author
describes. I'm going to school while running my own company (read working
12-16 hours a day), attending business and tech events, speaking, and trying
to spend time with my family. My experience with the MBA program I am in is
that it has made me a better business person from the standpoint of knowing
what to look at and measure with my business. I didn't understand nor pay
attention to any of that the first go round and the company did horribly.
Having said that, anyone that comes out of business school expecting to know
everything, and acting like it, is sorely mistaken. That's not how anything in
the real world works. As with anything, you need experience, and that takes
time. An MBA gives you a fundamental business education, not experience.

~~~
TomOfTTB
I think anyone who comes out of any school thinking they know it all is wrong.
But that's more a personality flaw.

On the article I think the author is off-base here and I think you as a person
are exactly the reason why. Staying in school 2 more years is not a "high
risk/high return" situation at all (as the author claims). It's a no
risk/guaranteed return situation (MBA's make more in the workplace, that's
been proven by countless studies)

The real high risk/high return folks are the ones who go out and start a
business or join a startup. That's truely a risk.

Anyway, once you've disproven the idea that an MBA is a high risk action the
rest of the author's thesis falls apart.

~~~
Dilpil
Indeed- elite MBA programs aren't higher risk higher reward than less
prestigious ones. They are simply higher reward.

------
antidaily
Every MBA I know is in consulting... presumably trying to fix the problem.

~~~
alain94040
In this day and age, it would be fun to publish a list of "MBA density" by
industry or company. Compare eBay and Google with AIG for instance and tell me
which one had the highest MBA density( _).

I have no clue where to get accurate data on this. But I have full confidence
in HN community to send me a link to a reputable answer.

(_) obviously defined as the percentage of employees with an MBA degree within
an organization

~~~
anamax
AIG probably also has a higher percentage of physics PhDs than Google.

------
noodle
is there any degree or program nowadays that actually instructs a person on
how to start their own small business and run/grow it? thats not really what
MBAs do anymore. or is it just so easy that you can buy a book on amazon and
make it happen?

~~~
JeremyChase
This depends entirely on the program you are enrolled in, and the electives
you choose to take. I have an MBA from Babson and every elective I took dealt
with entrepreneurship. Some of the professors were better than others, but at
least 1/4 of my total courses were taught by people who started their
companies from the ground up. Real entrepreneurs that made money, cashed out,
and are teaching because they want to help others; these were the people I
found worth listening to.

These courses were by far the most valuable, and they absolutely focused on
how to run and grow both small businesses and enterprises. I even started my
first (failed) company and got independent study credit for it.

~~~
noodle
Babson looks pretty good -- i'd not heard of it before. although, i've not
looked, either, admittedly.

------
time_management
First order answer: No, douchebags are. It just so happens that douchebags
gravitate disproportionately to MBA programs (although the majority of MBA
students and business people I know are not douches).

To present an undergraduate analogue: in elite colleges, which invariably and
intentionally lack business programs, economics programs have a large number
of douchebags in them who see "econ" (they never call it "economics") as a
pathway to investment banking. Real economics students hate sharing classes
with them.

In colleges with business programs, the douches tend to gravitate toward the
business degrees, and leave the economics students alone. Just as with
economics, which has many serious students, there are non-douchebags who also
pursue business degrees and MBAs, obviously, and I'm sure they hate sharing
classes with the power-seeking douchebags as well. A lot of really good people
go through MBA programs into management. But douchebags also also follow that
track, because they follow money and status; it's how douchebags operate.

However, it's not even accurate to say that douchebags are the problem, since
there are about as many of them (give or take) as in any other point in
history. The difference is that the post-1980s mainstream corporate
environment favors and promotes those prone to overtalk, power-play, and
"hunger" (corporate euphemism for greed)-- in other words, douchebags.
Douchebags thrive in environments of superficiality, conformity, hierarchy,
and opacity of contribution. So now you have a system where, despite the best
efforts of business-inclined and talented non-douchebags to pursue MBA
programs and management tracks, they cannot ascend in the majority of
corporate hierarchies, because most companies have filled their upper ranks
with douchebags.

MBA programs don't cause this problem. The money and status they offer
attracts douchebags, but I've seen absolutely no evidence that they encourage
more people to become such. Moreover, the problem isn't that there are more
douchebags alive than there were, say, 30 years ago. The fundamental problem
is that large, hierarchical corporations now select in favor of douchebags
rather than against them. What degrees the douchebags have has nothing to do
with this.

~~~
jacoblyles
You've provided a funny answer instead of a substantial one.

I'm not quite sure who you consider a "douchebag" here. It carries the
connotation of a mean, shallow person. Yet you also use it to denote people
who seek status or money.

However, from my own personal experience, many of the people interested in
pursuing status and money are competent, capable, curious people who are
always looking to do a favor for others (you never know when the good karma
from those favors will come back to you!). My investment banking peers were
some of the most outstanding people I've ever met.

"Douchebags" seldom get anywhere in business unless they're related to someone
important, contrary to what Hollywood directors might have told you.

~~~
zcrar70
> you never know when the good karma from those favours will come back to you!

I think you may have inadvertently provided the definition of 'douchebag' that
you accused the poster of missing :-)

Less facetiously, I think he was referring to people for whom status and power
was an end, rather than a means or a side-effect. When you're very determined
to reach a goal, all of your actions are informed by your thinking; when your
goal is status and power, and you start treating your interactions with people
as another means to that end, you would probably fit the poster's definition
of a 'douchebag'.

I think the poster meant to contrast this to people who study a field (say
economics) for its own sake, because they enjoy it or because they hope to
make a useful contribution; by 'useful', I mean one that will benefit others
than themselves.

~~~
jacoblyles
So having a goal and being a helpful person makes you a douchebag?

Or maybe you mean that helping other people is fine, as long as you are not
aware of the fact that it is likely to help you, too?

Read the memoirs of any successful business person. They all say that treating
people nicely earns their loyalty, and is an essential part of success.

Is that "douche-y"?

Heaven forbid some asshole douchebag treats me well and helps me fulfill my
goals, just to make himself better off, too!

>Less facetiously

This whole conversation is facetious. That's the only reason why the
(juvenile) parent comment is getting upvoted. Moreover, I don't think he's
ever tried to see how far he could get in business by being a douchebag. In
practice (outside of Michael Douglas movies), nobody wants to work with them.

