Is getting an MBA worth it?
Ok so this summer I will start working as a first year analyst, and was curious about what you guys think about the need/value of getting an MBA later on in my career?
I know this is still a couple years out, but say I work in banking for 2-3 years, would it really be worth it to get an MBA afterwards? Or would I be better suited financially to move up to an associate position, aim for PE, etc.?
Just curious what thoughts are on this.
From what I've gathered, the argument for an MBA is very case-by-case dependent and largely dependent on your career goals.
For instance, if you're intent on climbing the corporate ladder at an investment bank in a capacity outside of simply sourcing deals as an MD, it is probably a useful, if not necessary, feather if your cap. A H/S/W MBA goes a long way in the pursuit of the C-suite and is probably par for the course. If you are looking to be a career banker, I think the idea of getting an MBA is antiquated and unnecessary. You don't need it to be a successful MD. If you are looking to join a hedge fund, it is equally unnecessary and may even be viewed as a negative, because you're essentially advertising that you couldn't hack it grinding any longer or couldn't break in, and elected to "go for your MBA" (aka take a break).
Otherwise, MBAs are useful in one of three cases: A) You are unsure of what domain in finance you ultimately want to call home (PE/HF/IB) after doing your 2 + 2, so you go to business school to have some time to figure it out B) You are so burned out from banking or PE that you need a break to recover, or reorient your career trajectory C) You are following the traditional "partner track" for PE, which historically requires pre-MBA PE experience in addition to an MBA and then rejoining post-MBA
The problem with MBAs for (sane and rationale) people already in finance is they represent a huge opportunity cost in terms of lost income and time for an at best marginal reward. If you are already in banking or at a hedge fund, you are probably looking at $600-800k opportunity cost.
Thanks for that, very helpful. I think the opportunity cost is really the biggest thing for me and trying to decide if that the payoff in the end will be worth it.
If it's not completely "necessary", it seems like it could be a waste of time & money for a marginal reward.
The only reasons that people go to bschool are: 1. they think it is some magical reset button that'll catapult them in the direction of BB/PE/HF/MBB glory regardless of the fact that they possess no people, business, or analytical skills (your resume still fucking sucks) 2. they are ashamed of their educational pedigrees and think that spending 20 months learning how to incorporate the word "granular" into every 3rd sentence with 914 of their closest classmates on 'selective' campuses housing 14-year-olds smarter than them (I am looking at you, child genius with the absurdly large backpack) will make up for their having earned degrees in Sociology from no-name LACs (YOUR HARSHEST CRITIC WILL ALWAYS BE YOURSELF, BUD, REMEMBER THAT) 3. they have no fucking clue what is going on. Seriously. Someone throw them a bone here 4. they are so burnt out that they need to go into mini-retirement for 2 years to allow for their scoliosis and depression to sort themselves out 5. they dont speak English but really wanted to study in America because 'Friends' was a really cool show and why the fuck not
Why would you leave for bschools to come back as a post-MBA associate when you can just get promoted or lateral on out of here do you hate yourself or something
I swear this question gets asked once a week.
I mean if you're thinking about going for an MBA immediately after banking I think it's completely not worth it unless you're planning to change to an entirely different industry. If you want to stay in finance, it's definitely better to either stay and get promoted, or recruit for PE, HF, etc. PE might require to get an MBA at some point, but even then there's the chance for direct promotion. Why invest so much money and a few years of your life unless you absolutely need it to move up. Most don't.
Little shameless plug here, but I actually wrote a book on this exact topic. I'm an MBA grad who did Computer Engineering in undergrad, and I interview a few finance focused graduates. Check it out here:
http://lifeafterschool.co
Is an MBA worth it? (Originally Posted: 07/29/2017)
I just started working full time at a big 4 consulting practice within technology, and I took my GMAT this summer. With another month or two of studying I should have a 720-750 score no problem. However, I have recently begun to consider the opportunity cost of an MBA and how I would be in a position at my firm in 2-3 years that many people get MBA's to get to.
I have adopted the mindset of MBA business schools">M7 or bust if I go, but I'm curious if there is anyone out there that would advise against an MBA for someone in my scenario or if not why you think it would be of value for someone in my position.
I understand an MBA would be useful if I decide I want to stay in consulting and would like to work at an MBB, but in regards to VC or PE (or maybe just strategy work in industry) is there really that much of a value add dropping the 200k and forgoing two years of a 100k+ salary?
Would love some input!
You just started working so you don't have to make this decision until later. Focus on your GMAT prep. Now (right out of school) is the best time to take it trust me.
2-5 years from now who knows where you'll be. Maybe you hate your job and need an exit plan. It happens to a lot of people. You'll be glad you have that strong gmat score already banked.
Yeah I've been told I'm stressing way too much about trying to plan the future, thanks for the insight.
big 4 tech consulting --> VC/PE is more or less impossible so if that's your goal and you're able to get into an MBA business schools">M7, it probably makes sense to go. You'll likely need a 750+ though assuming you're a white male given big 4 consulting isn't a big feeder into the MBA business schools">M7
Want to transition into acquisitions - MBA worthwhile? (Originally Posted: 11/13/2014)
Hey ya'll. First time poster here. I've been doing a lot of research lately, which actually led me to WSO not too long ago. I would greatly appreciate any insights or advice you can give. Anyways, to give a little background, I have my undergrad in Hospitality Business and a specialization in real estate and development. Ended up getting a job out of college in CRE brokerage, where I have been working for about 2.5 years. It's a smaller family owned brokerage firm, but a big player in my market. I very much enjoy the work, the work-life balance is great, but the 100% commission based comp is rough. Also, I can see myself moving from this city someday and starting over from scratch in a new market will be very difficult. I'm very interested in shifting my role towards acquisitions. From my research, I've seen a lot of people get into acquisitions by way of entry analyst positions. All of which require extensive financial analytical and modeling experience and know-how. I do not have much financial background. My brokerage experience thus far has been primarily user sales and leases, not much in way of investment sales. I am wondering, do you think it would be beneficial for me to pursue an MBA in finance or real estate? Or do you think I have enough work experience in brokerage that I could just take some financial modeling classes and just shoot for the job and make the switch without an MBA? Thanks again!
If you want to get some background in RE financial modeling I would suggest checking this out: https://www.getrefm.com/refm-certification-program-in-excel-for-real-es…
Also, get a copy of the following book, and doing all the exercises there: Real Estate Finance And Investments: Risks And Opportunities, by Peter Linneman, Ph.D.
Thanks for those suggestions. Both look very helpful!
Would you recommend doing the coursework for the CCIM accreditation? I'm pretty sure they cover a lot of the RE financial modeling that the REFM certification does.
see if you can break in without an MBA, because crazier things have been done. in your favor are that you are still quite young, you have a couple yeras exp., and it sounds like you have a good college degree. you could also look at the CFA as an alternative to an MBA, even though that would be a bitch obviously.
CFA? Really?
First of all, getting your CFA in order to join a RE PE shop is a waste of time. I failed the CFA 1 exam four years ago (thankfully) and never looked back. I would focus more on sellable skills. Can you model? Learn basic modeling or at least the lingo. Can you talk the talk? Yes, assuming you were a broker. Pitch your brokerage experience, show your ability to see the deals from the other side of the table and filter through broker BS when you're sourcing.
Second, the MBA... these degrees are increasingly expensive and burdensome. It may help you get in the door, but in terms of pay raises or starting position, the degree may not be as helpful. I work side by side with many Ivy guys and we all make about the same.
Start hustling. In order to get my job, I emailed 10 local companies CEO's every couple weeks for 6 months. I also reached out to HR, other division heads. Anyone and everyone. Stick in there man.
Thanks for your insight. Yea, my hesitation with the MBA is the fact that I'd be putting myself 100k in debt for a position and career path I could've navigated without one. I lack in financial modeling, but I know the ins and outs of facilitating a deal. Obviously, I'm only 2.5 years in brokerage so there is always MUCH more to learn. Every deal comes with new challenges and lessons. But I understand the process of facilitating a deal, from negotiations to due diligence management to closing. As for financial modeling and analysis, I'm a fast learner and I'm familiar enough with the lingo already.
Question: What sort of position do you have? If more senior, what was your entry level position?
Thanks for your insight. Yea, my hesitation with the MBA is the fact that I'd be putting myself 100k in debt for a position and career path I could've navigated without one. I lack in financial modeling, but I know the ins and outs of facilitating a deal. Obviously, I'm only 2.5 years in brokerage so there is always MUCH more to learn. Every deal comes with new challenges and lessons. But I understand the process of facilitating a deal, from negotiations to due diligence management to closing. As for financial modeling and analysis, I'm a fast learner and I'm familiar enough with the lingo already.
Question: What sort of position do you have? If more senior, what was your entry level position?
You guys can shit on the CFA, and I certainly don't want one or have one, but the guy is in leasing and wants to get out into a financial analyst job. That means he wants a career change. Without an MBA, he's going to have to get creative. I know some big guys who do direct real estate investment who have a CFA. Huge pain in the ass but I would respect someone for having it.
To piggyback on Prospie, there are some big time guys that have a CFA. The CIO at a reputable IM (>$30B in AUM) said that if he had to give anyone advice he would say unless you can get an MBA from a top 10 school he would recommend getting a CFA. He said he respects anyone that can get it, as its a ridiculous time committment and extremely difficult. Shows dedication and intelligence without dropping the same amount of money that you would for a B school.
To piggyback on Prospie, there are some big time guys that have a CFA. The CIO at a reputable IM (>$30B in AUM) said that if he had to give anyone advice he would say unless you can get an MBA from a top 10 school he would recommend getting a CFA. He said he respects anyone that can get it, as its a ridiculous time committment and extremely difficult. Shows dedication and intelligence without dropping the same amount of money that you would for a B school.
I don't know how it is your neck of the woods, but it seems like over night the master's degrees in real estate have taken off in the D.C. area. Transitioning careers and moving up in positions can all be done around a $30,000 RE program.
I passed L1 of the CFA exam (quit afterwards) and while I think it's a completely worthwhile program, it is totally and utterly useless for real estate. Of the 300 hours or so I spent studying for L1, about 3 hours was dedicated to real estate. You'd be better off getting your real estate license and a master's degree in real estate and networking within that program.
That's what I've heard about the CFA, although I can see the earlier poster's point that just by having the CFA speaks volumes to a potential employer because of the difficulty and time commitment to obtain it. I don't doubt the benefit of the CFA, but I do not think it is entirely necessary for what I'm trying to achieve.
My neck of the woods doesn't have any notable RE masters programs in any of my in-state schools. I have been looking more and more into those instead of an MBA because of the cost associated. Thanks for your feedback.
As I mentioned before I would suggest getting a REFM certification to boost your financial modeling skill set. Not so much for the actual certification, but for the fact you actually need to practice in order to take the tests.
I think an easier transition would be to go from where you are today (brokerage - leasing) to investment sales at a good firm. There you will get the modeling experience you are seeking and build relationships. After a year or so, you can then transition to the principal side. Or some sort of masters in real estate if MBA is not for you.
I would not discount the CFA Program too quickly. You can do it while working, it costs peanuts and gives you a broader financial skillset than other RE candidates. There is plenty of irrelevant stuff, but that will be the case in an MBA program too. Plus, there is a certain hunger to someone smashing CFA while working compared to taking a year off to drink in an MBA program, and RE loves people with hunger. If you sit L1 in June and L2 the following year you will have completed two levels in 18 months while still earning cash in the meantime. Depends on how you trade-off time vs. cash vs. lifestyle though.
MBA is it worth it, or only for Blackstone type firms? (Originally Posted: 04/20/2016)
I has having a discussion with an analyst at a MM commercial mortgage firm, he was going back to get his MBA in order to move to a REPE. I was not sure that he necessarily needed to take on the debt, but he said that because his experience was with vanilla low leverage mortgages albeit 1B in deal flow over 3 years that he still had to.
Makes me wonder if I should go back to school as I see soooooo many job ads saying "MBA preferred". However are there certain positions that require it? Are there certain levels or areas of real estate that while a MBA is not required it is hard to get into without it?
Also interested. It seems in the RE world, an MBA is not required to get to the top or become highly successful as experience is more important than taking useless MBA classes that won't add much, if any, value to on the job knowledge. However, I know the top tier terms can be sticklers for degrees, especially as you approach the top of the ladder so would love to hear what others, from all parts of the industry, have to say on the topic.
What I've always been taught is how much the network matters. I'm now of the belief that you're just buying into a network and thus if you do get a good MBA you're just getting a better network to get into REPE.
Value of average MBA programs? (Originally Posted: 11/24/2010)
I teach a gmat course, and my students often ask me for advice on this. I generally tell them to go to the best school they get into, but some simply can't break a 600 (or 500 sometimes), and/or have poor undergrad grades, and/or don't have [have never had] a full-time job.
Who benefits from going through average MBA programs? It is worth the direct/indirect costs for anybody? I am thinking an engineer who wants to become a manager, but all engineers I have taught have done very well and went on to good schools. What about the programs with average gmat scores in 550-600 range? Are they worth it for anyone? I am thinking government jobs where an MBA automatically means a raise. But is that really it?
That depends on a lot of different factors. Employers evaluate candidates on their whole profile, not just the name of the school on their MBA degree.
In general, I don't think anybody would benefit from attending a sub-par business school (550-600 avg is sub-par). There are a lot of reasons for this, but I wont even go there.
There is NO job where an MBA is absolutely necessary and an MBA will NEVER guarantee a higher salary or a higher paying job.
I feel like doing an MBA program without a full time job is like having sex with a model without being able to use your hands
There are many good schools that can help you get a promotion in your job and do not have high GMAT averages. I would suggest that if you cannot get into a top MBA program that you go part time while still working.
MBA tends to be something middle managers need to get. I think in a lot of cases it is a good thing since you usually have people with no business UG or people who have been out of school for a while and need a refresher. In that case an MBA is helpful.
Most employers offer tuition reimbursement so it doesn't cost anything.
Everyone needs to keep in mind that very few people want to work in IB. Someone working in Minneapolis doing F500 marketing or something doesn't need a UChicago MBA. They could go to U Minnesota at night and get a nice refresher and advancement in their job.
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/95/best-business-schools-09_Best-Busin…
sort by gmat and look for the ranges you're talking about. generally i can see that with 550-600 gmat one can expect to make about 50-60k all in right out of school, with a 5-year salary reaching 70-90K. that's not awful, and the 5-year gain is anywhere between 5-30K (meaning it's worth it. most break even within 4 years, give or take. they can expect to work in corporate finance or marketing.
I dont know, if there are students that didn't have good grades in undergrad, can't do good on the gmat, and haven't had full-time jobs they SHOULD NOT be getting an MBA. Nor should they be admitted into any MBA program...this is why the degree is becoming diluted.
I don't agree with Obama on too many things (even though I am not a conservative), but his goal of eliminating the stigma of community colleges is something I strongly agree with. Not everyone is destined for a high level job so they shouldn't be wasting their money and time by straddling themselves with debt just to become an executive assistant or something. Don't get me wrong, I am no one special and don't think I'm necessarily elitist, its just the sad fact that not everyone can be rich and successful and sometimes being realistic can save yourself some money.
Sorry for the rant, back to your original point...I went to non target state school for undergrad and University of Miami for my MBA (ranked around 40-50th) and went straight into private equity. Pedigree sin't everything, the student needs to be fully prepared or I feel the experience would be a waste.
Please let me know if you think I'm way off here...I would like to hear some of your opinions.
^^^ How the hell did you go straight into PE? Is it a 1-person firm? lol Congrats bro.
networked like hell and really busted my ass in grad school...
Its certainly not KKR, but the comp, hrs, and work are all great.
I knew the traditional route was going to work for me for a while now so I found an alternate path
Sent you a PM WiggityWACC
There are a lot of boutique PE firms around that you can break into with networking and a regional degree.
SB for the name "wiggityWACC". Too brilliant to describe.
In recent years, the average GMAT score worldwide is 570. There is no acceptable or minimum score. What score you should obtain depends on which school you are going to apply to. Generally the higher the school ranks the higher score you must obtain. For the top 50 programs the averaged GMAT score is 660.
I am sorry but you joined WSO to say THAT?
Is bschool worth it for me? (Originally Posted: 11/17/2016)
I'm now 4 years out of college and am thinking about whether business school is in the cards for me. I'm having trouble thinking this through on my own and would love to hear anyone's opinions. My questions are whether there would be any direct benefits for my career, and if not, whether the life experience and network are worth the investment anyway.
I already work at my dream job on the buyside (albeit at a respected boutique and not a mega-fund) in a post-MBA role. I very much enjoy what I do, I already have the CFA designation, and I have no intention to switch to another line of business.
In my mind, I would be going to business school 1. for a broader business education (I was a liberal arts major in UG), 2. to potentially move into a megafund in a similar role that I am in already, 3. for the networking and life experience, and 4. maybe a little for the bragging rights. Is that worth $200k+ and the opportunity cost? Are there other factors I should be considering?
Given where you're at in your career (post-MBA position in a job you enjoy and you seem to want to stay in finance at least in the short- to medium-term), from a purely career perspective, no it's not worth it.
So it comes down to whether it's worth paying $200K from a personal development perspective - 2 years off, meeting new people, etc.
hope you consider the loss of stability. people often see stability as cash flow ONLY; however, losing stability also means anxiety of your life - the job you want vs. jobs you did? where is that new job? Am I welcomed to return to my firm now? How to get moving? Granted that they can work themselves out, it's still a huge friction.
at the same time, get MBA before you need it - is a valuable option. My friend tells me it's like buying an insurance before finding things that makes you ineligible for insurance. While stability is now nice, fluctuations will have more shaking for you I guess. Can't completely suggest one side of things.
Doesn't that answer your own question?
Sounds like you need to read CompBanker threads: http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/to-anyone-considering-an-mba
Can you move to a larger fund without the MBA or are there non-competes?
Sometimes people have trouble interviewing while holding down a demanding buyside job, or their buyside job has such strict non-competes that it's better to take the 2 years.
To answer your 4 points: 1. Not worth it for this unless you want to leave buyside (which you don't). 2. I'll leave this to those with more experience doing buyside recruiting. I assume you're at a hedge fund, not PE due to your CFA. From what my friends tell me, HFs don't really care very much about the MBA from a prerequisite standpoint. 3. Maybe. This is the only reason I would consider going if I were in your shoes. The network does matter, but it depends. How strong is your undergrad/current network in your industry? For instance, my undergrad network in certain industries is actually stronger than my MBA network (and the converse is true in other industries). 4. I'd be leaning strongly towards "no", but it depends on how much you value number 3 above.
Why do Ibankers value MBAs so much??? (Originally Posted: 02/19/2010)
A bank that I'm interviewing with has a policy that analysts MUST return to school to get their MBA prior to being promoted to Associates.
Why would they adopt such a policy? (What benefits do the bank see in requiring an MBA?)
Because 2 years of being an Excel robot crushes your social skills and social network- both key to actually growing your business/career.
The MBA experience rebuilds and multiplies that social capital, and you can learn some cool stuff too.
So it's really just for the networking/social experience?
Can you make an argument that you can become a better manager, and also gain stronger finance skills from an mba?
Of course you can make that argument.
An analyst has an incredibly narrow view.
An MBA expands that, broadens it.
If you push yourself, some of the quant-heavy finance MBAs can give you some neat skills. Most people will at least become much better at accounting quirks.
http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/analyst-attitude-toward-new-assoc…
Lots of analyst programs have traditionally been springboards for other opportunities. The focus on "exit ops" is pretty high, and traditionally Analysts have been welcomed in the buyside or bschools. These exit ops have dried up in recent years. Bschools are flooded with admissions due to the recession, and the number of buyside firms hiring has shrunk.
UG -> Summer Analyst -> BB Analyst -> Buyside/Bschool is the traditional path.
Anecdotally, it seems like more Analysts would be excited to be promoted to Associate in the current environment. Honestly, I'm not sure why more aren't directly promoted.
The number one reason people go to get an MBA is to work in IB. So anyway, these kids invest $120k in their education to work at a BB. And that's exactly what these banks are looking for. Talented, successful kids who really, really want to be bankers. By the time that you get admitted to and graduate from a top MBA, the banks can be pretty confident that these are reasonably smart kids.
UG -> Work Exp. -> Bschool -> BB Summer Associate -> BB Associate is the traditional path.
"The number one reason people go to get an MBA is to work in IB."
That is definitely not the number one reason people go to get an MBA.
Is the MBA becoming a useless degree? (Originally Posted: 10/19/2009)
lately a trend has been developing (or seems to be developing) whereby various firms looking to recruit managers (or management consultants) are tuning down their MBA recruiting and are gradually pulling more of their hires from other disciplines. how accurately depicted is this trend? how relevant is this amongst the consulting industry leaders (MBB)?
Haven't heard about this. What are your sources, and what are other disciplines?
Aren't you a college student in Israel? What "trends" could you possibly be referencing?
It's my impression that the big consulting firms have increased their hiring of non-MBAs and experienced hires, but not meaningfully. If you want to work for MBB, you're best bet is still to get hired out of college or business school.
Check this link out if you're interested in seeing some advice written by current and former MBB consultants for people interested in consulting http://bit.ly/m2a5n
Gotta Mentor www.GottaMentor.com Connect to the Advice & People You Need to Achieve Your Career Goals
@m2 - it's an article in an israeli business journal, so i can't give you a meaningful link unless you wanna use google translate. in which case it's http://www.calcalist.co.il/local/articles/0,7340,L-3364465,00.html
for the sources - the article quotes a bunch of academics and the ceo of israel's top cellphone firm, also operating in singapore or somewhere there... israeli academics but also henry mintzberg of mcgill, pfeffer of stanford, and keling (spelling?) of berlin's steinbeis. they also quote in the article people from mck and DEshaw
@ideating - aren't you unemployed? in israel we only name as colleges those institutions who have no admission criteria other than money to spend. i study at a university. also unlike your colleges, our students are for the most part (the one worth mentioning) army veterans of some sort or other. don't patronize me. when you went to college you were a snot-nosed kid who knows nothing. the fact that i'm getting my BA at the age of 21 rather than 18 and after a military service should be self explanatory, at least to a degree by which you wouldn't have to share those pointless comments of yours. got something productive, i'll be happy to listen and i'll even be nice :) otherwise, just stick a :P at the end so i know you're joking.
I'd say you're not quite right dagro, at least not for consulting.
Yes, consulting firms are more open to non-traditional hires (law, medicine, phds, etc), but the surest way in is still a top mba.
The trend away from mbas was really notable among banks back when things were competitive (pre - recession) and they'd rather keep their best people with direct promotion rather than send them off to bschool. I don't know how that is working out now, though of course for some things (trading) mba is becoming increasingly unnecessary.
But every single top consulting firm and BB is recruiting heavily at my program right now.. getting to the point where firms are coming back for multiple pitches bc they're concerned about losing out to other firms.
Has An MBA Become Redundant? (Originally Posted: 11/29/2012)
I stumbled upon an interesting article, "Would The Economy Be Better Off Without MBA Students" on The Economist earlier. Now I'm sure this debate is not new to anyone but perhaps not highlighted enough these days.
Seeing that I don't have enough points to post links, here are some key excerpts:
I found this to be a very interesting article and, as a college student who still has to consider whether an MBA is the way to go, very relevant. What are your thoughts?
I believe that there will be an increasing push for specialist masters, the rise of the masters in finance, financial engineering and the like demonstrate that there is more of a value to this than the MBA, particularly with a first year that is regarded as a joke. The issue is that MBAs lack real rigor and don't provide real skills.
there are still large banks and other reputable employers who reserve top entry level jobs for MBA graduates (i.e. management rotation programs). as long as these programs exist the mba remains relevant...
Never underestimate the importance of culture("It's an institution!") in economics, regardless of how impractical the matter at hand may be.
investment bankers don't even manage other people, banks who hire from MBAs are so superficial
entrepreneurs and engineers are the real builders of society, not pompous investment bankers and traders
How many people go get their MBA to work for the same firm in the same group anyways. MBA is an excuse you give your company to leave on an affable note and get a job in something that you feel is better.
I agree, whether people like it or not, the MBA still holds significance due to the modeling system of "higher degree" = "better equipped for a more executive job". Is this right though?
This whole "MBAs are not relevant" narrative tends to rely on one underlying assumption that is fundamentally wrong:
That b-schoolers are heading to "management" or executive positions in the short-term after b-school.
If this assumption were true, then yes, all this discussion about b-schools not teaching "management" is valid. That, and the fact that these critics take the b-school sales pitch at face value (about training future leaders and all that bullshit).
However, here's the reality:
Most b-school students are in their mid- to late-20s.
Most management or executive type positions are filled by those in their 40s and 50s.
So there's essentially a 20 year gap between what you learn in b-school, and where you're in a position to be a C-level type of exec where these "management" issues become front and center.
But in the interim, as you progress in your career, you will be relying on your technical/analytical skills - yes, over time less and less as you progress up the ladder, but in the short term (first 5 years out of b-school), the majority of jobs you'll take are analytical in nature - you're being paid for your productivity (crunching numbers, doing the grunt work) and less on your "management".
And with that, the MBA actually does a pretty good job. B-schools will publicly say it's all about executive leadership, vision, etc. - because that stuff is far sexier to talk about. But they know the reality is that they have to prepare grads for the kinds of jobs in the short-term that are far more "functional" in nature (hard skills), and they do a pretty good job of that.
As an associate in IB/PE until you're a junior partner - it IS about your technical ability (not just finance, but being able to break down and analyze a business). Same with mgmt consulting when you're staffed on projects. Or working at a F500 -- for those first 5-10 years, you're basically being paid to provide analytical and research support for the execs and clients, no matter what industry you're in.
No matter what industry you end up in post-MBA (even non-profit) - the value that recruiters ascribe to the grads is their analytical or technical horsepower. That's what the jobs are mostly about, and that's what they're paying them for. It's not to groom them to be CEOs - because fresh MBA grads are far too young and inexperienced for that (see above - there's a 10-20 year gap before most people are mature enough to be able to run large groups of people).
And so all that technical stuff you learn in b-school, whether it's cost accounting, how to put together different kinds of valuation models in your finance classes, knowing the 4 P's of marketing, some of the frameworks you learn in your strategy classes (Porter's Five Forces, etc.) all can be immediately useful in your first 5 years post-MBA.
As for the long-term - IT IS IRRELEVANT.
That doesn't make the MBA useless (see above - it can be very valuable and practical for the short-term). But that's just reality of the world.
In the long-run, nothing we do in the short-term really matters. Because the long-run is non-linear. At the executive level (i.e. someone in their 40s and 50s) - it's irrelevant what their background was in their 20s (whether they did an MBA, engineering degree, etc. - because that's ancient history). So much time has passed between their youth (20s) and adulthood in their professional and personal lives that whether someone is competent or not in their 40s/50s has everything to do with their individual circumstance and not to what degree they did in their 20s.
Consider this:
In 2012, think of a 45 year old executive. Any industry. Say they did their MBA 20 years ago.
That was in the early 1990s. It was BEFORE THE INTERNET. It was before China was even on the radar screen (just a few years removed from the Tianammen Massacre in 1989). What was India? It was when everyone thought the Japanese were going to own the world. Apple was a joke. We were typing our essays on TYPEWRITERS. A personal computer was something graphic designers used, or kids used to play video games on. Economics was focused mostly on domestic stuff - the whole "globalization" thing was just around the corner. It was a completely different world.
So with that - how relevant is their MBA today? How much will they actually draw upon for what they are doing today? Think about how much the world has changed since then (and some of you were barely born back then hahahaha)
Even in my case -- I went to b-school more than 10 years ago. At Wharton, they "pioneered" a major called the E-COMMERCE MAJOR. I'm dead serious. It was lauded as forward thinking, innovative, etc. back in 1999/2000. And think of it now: who would ever put "ecommerce major" on their resume? Even in the last 10 years, so much has changed.
And you can only imagine given the rate of change in our world (not just technology, but our economy, how different cultures/nations/etc relate to one another, etc) will affect what happens 10-20 years from now. It's stuff none of us can even possibly imagine.
In sum, the MBA can be very useful - in the short-term, but irrelevant in the long-term. But we all have to take care of the short-term as that is what's in front of us. Long-term: who the hell knows what will happen anyhow?
Et suscipit est sunt magnam voluptas similique. Iste sapiente perferendis illum doloremque voluptates placeat officiis culpa. Veritatis laboriosam quo impedit eveniet. Praesentium voluptatem vel qui sed cum laudantium a.
Sit blanditiis at sed accusamus distinctio. Suscipit aspernatur iusto nam id quos perspiciatis omnis.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Ipsam perferendis deleniti mollitia optio quas. Saepe quos blanditiis ducimus corrupti. Culpa non omnis consequatur libero. Vel odio repudiandae corporis.
Nobis inventore est ut libero voluptatum et in. Sed cumque aperiam modi in.
Veniam sit fuga officiis dolor consequatur pariatur itaque soluta. Eum reprehenderit odio delectus autem quibusdam ut incidunt. Et qui nam dignissimos ullam iste est. Officiis eum minus ullam autem incidunt laborum voluptatem voluptates.
Non rerum commodi nam ipsum. Assumenda voluptatibus enim nam dolor blanditiis qui. Aut aut voluptas vitae repellat qui consequuntur omnis. In tempore eos placeat et et. Dolore quos distinctio repellendus nulla recusandae sapiente velit voluptatum. Consectetur est aut nisi cumque.
Repudiandae ipsum fugit neque eius inventore sed. Consequatur ipsum voluptate quaerat quidem.
Reiciendis ut fugit ut architecto dolor nobis aut. Nesciunt qui expedita soluta qui ut est tempora. Consequuntur ducimus iusto placeat consequatur omnis. Qui porro aspernatur deleniti.