For years I claimed my MBA from a regional CSU was worthless, now CNBC says they all are

no_vaseline_IHB

no_vaseline_IHB

New member
<a href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/29895258">http://www.cnbc.com/id/29895258</a>



<blockquote>The truth is that the relevance of the technical training allegedly offered by the MBA was always overblown. The idea that there is some body of knowledge pertaining to business management that can be packaged up and distributed to the business universe in two-year course-lets?well, it sounded good about a century ago, when it was first conceived. Maybe it still had merit when the schools were turning out only a few thousand graduates per year. But it certainly stopped making sense well before the schools achieved their current level of production of a whopping 140,000 or so graduates per year. The empirical evidence on the contribution of the MBA to individual career performance seems to bear this out?mainly because it doesn't exist. </blockquote>


The first to fall were the small regional MBA degrees. Now, the top tier B schools are getting pinched.



Discuss!
 
[quote author="no_vaseline" date=1238128451]<a href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/29895258">http://www.cnbc.com/id/29895258</a>



<blockquote>The truth is that the relevance of the technical training allegedly offered by the MBA was always overblown. The idea that there is some body of knowledge pertaining to business management that can be packaged up and distributed to the business universe in two-year course-lets?well, it sounded good about a century ago, when it was first conceived. Maybe it still had merit when the schools were turning out only a few thousand graduates per year. But it certainly stopped making sense well before the schools achieved their current level of production of a whopping 140,000 or so graduates per year. The empirical evidence on the contribution of the MBA to individual career performance seems to bear this out?mainly because it doesn't exist. </blockquote>


The first to fall were the small regional MBA degrees. Now, the top tier B schools are getting pinched.



Discuss!</blockquote>
Nothing to discuss...CNBC's reporters are worthless. It's not the education per se that you pick up at B-school, it's the ability to work with others as most all the classes have significant group assignments as well as expanding your network base. There is definitely more intangible value and tangible value with an MBA, especially if you go to the right school.
 
[quote author="usctrojanman29" date=1238128884][quote author="no_vaseline" date=1238128451]<a href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/29895258">http://www.cnbc.com/id/29895258</a>



<blockquote>The truth is that the relevance of the technical training allegedly offered by the MBA was always overblown. The idea that there is some body of knowledge pertaining to business management that can be packaged up and distributed to the business universe in two-year course-lets?well, it sounded good about a century ago, when it was first conceived. Maybe it still had merit when the schools were turning out only a few thousand graduates per year. But it certainly stopped making sense well before the schools achieved their current level of production of a whopping 140,000 or so graduates per year. The empirical evidence on the contribution of the MBA to individual career performance seems to bear this out?mainly because it doesn't exist. </blockquote>


The first to fall were the small regional MBA degrees. Now, the top tier B schools are getting pinched.



Discuss!</blockquote>
Nothing to discuss...CNBC's reporters are worthless. It's not the education per se that you pick up at B-school, it's the ability to work with others as most all the classes have significant group assignments as well as expanding your network base. There is definitely more intangible value and tangible value with an MBA, especially if you go to the right school.</blockquote>


In other words: Bush.
 
[quote author="No_Such_Reality" date=1238132872][quote author="usctrojanman29" date=1238128884][quote author="no_vaseline" date=1238128451]<a href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/29895258">http://www.cnbc.com/id/29895258</a>



<blockquote>The truth is that the relevance of the technical training allegedly offered by the MBA was always overblown. The idea that there is some body of knowledge pertaining to business management that can be packaged up and distributed to the business universe in two-year course-lets?well, it sounded good about a century ago, when it was first conceived. Maybe it still had merit when the schools were turning out only a few thousand graduates per year. But it certainly stopped making sense well before the schools achieved their current level of production of a whopping 140,000 or so graduates per year. The empirical evidence on the contribution of the MBA to individual career performance seems to bear this out?mainly because it doesn't exist. </blockquote>


The first to fall were the small regional MBA degrees. Now, the top tier B schools are getting pinched.



Discuss!</blockquote>
Nothing to discuss...CNBC's reporters are worthless. It's not the education per se that you pick up at B-school, it's the ability to work with others as most all the classes have significant group assignments as well as expanding your network base. There is definitely more intangible value and tangible value with an MBA, especially if you go to the right school.</blockquote>


In other words: Bush.</blockquote>


Ouch.



Oh, and USC gets an F- for not reading the article, else he'd of tossed Slate.com under the bus and not CNBC.
 
While generally I agree that alot of MBA's are not exactly worthwhile, I do believe any and all education is worth it. I also believe that alot of education institutions have made their places "diploma factories", just add $$.



Bush is a prime example that wherever you are, money makes the process much smoother. While his Harvard MBA may be a source of pride (some say he was not cut any slack, but if you get caught and thrown into jail and then have the commanding officer RELEASE YOU ... uhhh you're connected) i do believe his connections made the degree less meaningful.



I'm just annoyed at a Phd in engineering pays SOooooo much less than almost any business jerks MBA.



oh well...

-bix
 
[quote author="no_vaseline" date=1238133522][quote author="No_Such_Reality" date=1238132872][quote author="usctrojanman29" date=1238128884][quote author="no_vaseline" date=1238128451]<a href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/29895258">http://www.cnbc.com/id/29895258</a>



<blockquote>The truth is that the relevance of the technical training allegedly offered by the MBA was always overblown. The idea that there is some body of knowledge pertaining to business management that can be packaged up and distributed to the business universe in two-year course-lets?well, it sounded good about a century ago, when it was first conceived. Maybe it still had merit when the schools were turning out only a few thousand graduates per year. But it certainly stopped making sense well before the schools achieved their current level of production of a whopping 140,000 or so graduates per year. The empirical evidence on the contribution of the MBA to individual career performance seems to bear this out?mainly because it doesn't exist. </blockquote>


The first to fall were the small regional MBA degrees. Now, the top tier B schools are getting pinched.



Discuss!</blockquote>
Nothing to discuss...CNBC's reporters are worthless. It's not the education per se that you pick up at B-school, it's the ability to work with others as most all the classes have significant group assignments as well as expanding your network base. There is definitely more intangible value and tangible value with an MBA, especially if you go to the right school.</blockquote>


In other words: Bush.</blockquote>


Ouch.



Oh, and USC gets an F- for not reading the article, else he'd of tossed Slate.com under the bus and not CNBC.</blockquote>
I didn't, the computer that I'm on at work is not user friendly for clicking onto links. That being said, CNBC sucks anyways...I watch it with the sound offer because all they keep talking about the past two weeks is that we've hit the bottom and we are in the bottoming process. I hope their GE stock goes to $0 so then can STFU! haha
 
From what I understand typical B-school is about $80k? If you wanna network why not take $80k and just throw parties every month to meet some new people.
 
I have always believed that if an MBA is not from a top 10, top 15 school, it is probably not worth getting (no offense to an anyone who holds an MBA from a non-top 15 school). And it is only worth it, because it shows you were smart enough (or qualified enough) to be able to go to a top notch school, so it just distinguishes you from the rest of the pack, basically validates that you are very smart. What you actually learn in school is over-rated, nothing beats hands on experience. At my last company, i worked with MBA's from Kellog, Wharton, HBS, UCLA - all of them were very very smart and executed very well. During my years as an auditor, I interacted with MBA's from CSUN, CSLA, SDSU, etc and those folks were not very impressive.



This basically applies to most degrees/certifications. I am a CPA from a big four background, this may sound elitist, but in my limited interactions with non-big four/six CPA's, they just dont compare. They dont get the same level of training or deal with a lot of public companies and/or complex transactions, so they dont develop the same skill set as a big four CPA.
 
[quote author="qwerty" date=1238137238]I have always believed that if an MBA is not from a top 10, top 15 school, it is probably not worth getting (no offense to an anyone who holds an MBA from a non-top 15 school). And it is only worth it, because it shows you were smart enough (or qualified enough) to be able to go to a top notch school, so it just distinguishes you from the rest of the pack, basically validates that you are very smart. What you actually learn in school is over-rated, nothing beats hands on experience. At my last company, i worked with MBA's from Kellog, Wharton, HBS, UCLA - all of them were very very smart and executed very well. During my years as an auditor, I interacted with MBA's from CSUN, CSLA, SDSU, etc and those folks were not very impressive.



This basically applies to most degrees/certifications. I am a CPA from a big four background, this may sound elitist, but in my limited interactions with non-big four/six CPA's, they just dont compare. They dont get the same level of training or deal with a lot of public companies and/or complex transactions, so they dont develop the same skill set as a big four CPA.</blockquote>
I'd stay that a top 25-30 MBA program is worth it. You can't compare SDSU to UCLA or even USC.



Which Big 4 did you work for? I worked at PwC in Costa Mesa/Irvine back in the PW days.
 
[quote author="qwerty" date=1238137238]I have always believed that if an MBA is not from a top 10, top 15 school, it is probably not worth getting (no offense to an anyone who holds an MBA from a non-top 15 school). And it is only worth it, because it shows you were smart enough (or qualified enough) to be able to go to a top notch school, so it just distinguishes you from the rest of the pack, basically validates that you are very smart. What you actually learn in school is over-rated, nothing beats hands on experience. At my last company, i worked with MBA's from Kellog, Wharton, HBS, UCLA - all of them were very very smart and executed very well. During my years as an auditor, I interacted with MBA's from CSUN, CSLA, SDSU, etc and those folks were not very impressive.



This basically applies to most degrees/certifications. I am a CPA from a big four background, this may sound elitist, but in my limited interactions with non-big four/six CPA's, they just dont compare. They dont get the same level of training or deal with a lot of public companies and/or complex transactions, so they dont develop the same skill set as a big four CPA.</blockquote>


I've worked with consultants from the big-four, can't speak to the accountants, but from a consulting standpoint, they're just like anyplace else, 10% good, 90% billable seat warmers. It seems more impressive because the big four are good about only letting the top 10% primarily interact with decision makers.



As for MBA's, I'll hazard the difference is motivation, since frankly, you get out of school what you put into it. Most non-top tier schools are diploma factories and many students are looking to do the minimum to get a B and get out. The difference you see in the top tier is most are fighting not only for survival, but top billing in the class.
 
I have a MBA degree that my previous workplace paid for, and I got a raise upon graduation. Economically speaking it was fruitful for me, but most MBA grads never really use their degree.



I'll quote one of my mentors, that an investment in yourself, is almost always a good investment.
 
[quote author="momopi" date=1238146792]I have a MBA degree that my previous workplace paid for, and I got a raise upon graduation. Economically speaking it was fruitful for me, but most MBA grads never really use their degree.



I'll quote one of my mentors, that an investment in yourself, is almost always a good investment.</blockquote>


two words... breast implants
 
I agree - it is what you put into it. Admittedly I didn't go in for the right reasons - I originally pursued my MBA because well, I wanted to make more money faster. The degree didn't make me any smarter but what it did do was make me more confident, assertive and exposed me to a lot of industries and theories that I had no idea about before I went in. I was also active in school government and worked part time and had a hell of a time at the socials.



So for me, B-school was less about the classes and more about the experience. But I'd say that's true for most people who are going to college-it's not about what you learn in class but the journey and opening your eyes and opening your mind. I didn't get some 6 figure job right out of B-school but it put me on a path for success.



Ironically enough, I scored one of the competative big four jobs, but not even as a senior; I started at the same rank as people straight out of college, but making about 15k more. At the time I was really proud but after being there for a couple years, I realized I probably was hired because I was attractive enough and could represent the firm in a positive light because I was reasonably intelligent. I'm not all that impressed by the big four - a lot of the senior managers didn't strike me as particularly smart - while some really WERE bright and super cool, most seemed like their success was because they were willing to stick it out and not leave.



For me, getting an MBA wasn't a waste of time and realistically it hasn't been the reason I was hired at any of my three jobs since B-school (it certainly hasn't hurt, though) and I also never felt entitled to a big fat salary or a management job right out of school. I think that sense of entitlement has really given an MBA a bad rep.
 
[quote author="Irvinian" date=1238147038][quote author="momopi" date=1238146792]I have a MBA degree that my previous workplace paid for, and I got a raise upon graduation. Economically speaking it was fruitful for me, but most MBA grads never really use their degree.



I'll quote one of my mentors, that an investment in yourself, is almost always a good investment.</blockquote>


two words... breast implants</blockquote>
Good boob job = a gift that keeps on giving
 
*taps finger while waiting for someone to complain that the breast implant method only works for women, and is therefore sexist and unfair to men*
 
[quote author="ohnelly" date=1238147701]I agree - it is what you put into it. Admittedly I didn't go in for the right reasons - I originally pursued my MBA because well, I wanted to make more money faster. The degree didn't make me any smarter but what it did do was make me more confident, assertive and exposed me to a lot of industries and theories that I had no idea about before I went in. I was also active in school government and worked part time and had a hell of a time at the socials.



So for me, B-school was less about the classes and more about the experience. But I'd say that's true for most people who are going to college-it's not about what you learn in class but the journey and opening your eyes and opening your mind. I didn't get some 6 figure job right out of B-school but it put me on a path for success.



Ironically enough, I scored one of the competative big four jobs, but not even as a senior; I started at the same rank as people straight out of college, but making about 15k more. At the time I was really proud but after being there for a couple years, I realized I probably was hired because I was attractive enough and could represent the firm in a positive light because I was reasonably intelligent. I'm not all that impressed by the big four - a lot of the senior managers didn't strike me as particularly smart - while some really WERE bright and super cool, most seemed like their success was because they were willing to stick it out and not leave.



For me, getting an MBA wasn't a waste of time and realistically it hasn't been the reason I was hired at any of my three jobs since B-school (it certainly hasn't hurt, though) and I also never felt entitled to a big fat salary or a management job right out of school. I think that sense of entitlement has really given an MBA a bad rep.</blockquote>
Good job. Which Big CPA firm did you go work for? I too was working full-time and going to school part-time, although I quit my job after the first year and finished up in 2 years like a full-timer. In my case, the employer that hired me out of B-school counted the 2 years that I went to school as work experience.
 
[quote author="momopi" date=1238149759]*taps finger while waiting for someone to complain that the breast implant method only works for women, and is therefore sexist and unfair to men*</blockquote>


YES! It is unfair.... and i'm LOVIN' EVERY SECOND OF IT! :lol: :vampire:



-bix... aka B (0)(0) ix
 
[quote author="usctrojanman29" date=1238138314][quote author="qwerty" date=1238137238]I have always believed that if an MBA is not from a top 10, top 15 school, it is probably not worth getting (no offense to an anyone who holds an MBA from a non-top 15 school). And it is only worth it, because it shows you were smart enough (or qualified enough) to be able to go to a top notch school, so it just distinguishes you from the rest of the pack, basically validates that you are very smart. What you actually learn in school is over-rated, nothing beats hands on experience. At my last company, i worked with MBA's from Kellog, Wharton, HBS, UCLA - all of them were very very smart and executed very well. During my years as an auditor, I interacted with MBA's from CSUN, CSLA, SDSU, etc and those folks were not very impressive.



This basically applies to most degrees/certifications. I am a CPA from a big four background, this may sound elitist, but in my limited interactions with non-big four/six CPA's, they just dont compare. They dont get the same level of training or deal with a lot of public companies and/or complex transactions, so they dont develop the same skill set as a big four CPA.</blockquote>
I'd stay that a top 25-30 MBA program is worth it. You can't compare SDSU to UCLA or even USC.



Which Big 4 did you work for? I worked at PwC in Costa Mesa/Irvine back in the PW days.</blockquote>


I worked at E&Y in downtown LA. I left after almost 7 years. I was an audit manager when I left.
 
[quote author="qwerty" date=1238155476][quote author="usctrojanman29" date=1238138314][quote author="qwerty" date=1238137238]I have always believed that if an MBA is not from a top 10, top 15 school, it is probably not worth getting (no offense to an anyone who holds an MBA from a non-top 15 school). And it is only worth it, because it shows you were smart enough (or qualified enough) to be able to go to a top notch school, so it just distinguishes you from the rest of the pack, basically validates that you are very smart. What you actually learn in school is over-rated, nothing beats hands on experience. At my last company, i worked with MBA's from Kellog, Wharton, HBS, UCLA - all of them were very very smart and executed very well. During my years as an auditor, I interacted with MBA's from CSUN, CSLA, SDSU, etc and those folks were not very impressive.



This basically applies to most degrees/certifications. I am a CPA from a big four background, this may sound elitist, but in my limited interactions with non-big four/six CPA's, they just dont compare. They dont get the same level of training or deal with a lot of public companies and/or complex transactions, so they dont develop the same skill set as a big four CPA.</blockquote>
I'd stay that a top 25-30 MBA program is worth it. You can't compare SDSU to UCLA or even USC.



Which Big 4 did you work for? I worked at PwC in Costa Mesa/Irvine back in the PW days.</blockquote>


I worked at E&Y in downtown LA. I left after almost 7 years. I was an audit manager when I left.</blockquote>
Very cool, I worked 4 years at PwC and left as an experienced senior. You are right about the quality of people even at the Big CPA firms. Some of the folks ever super sharp and smart as can be while most others were very average. I'm working on getting my CPA license as we speak. Chicks dig CPAs. haha
 
[quote author="momopi" date=1238149759]*taps finger while waiting for someone to complain that the breast implant method only works for women, and is therefore sexist and unfair to men*</blockquote>


<a href="http://www.blackjackhero.com/blackjack/players/brian-zembic/">Depends on if you gamble or not.</a>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top