Hacker News Reader

I wonder if the MBA would fare better if it was reset, and the roots as a masters degree were revisited - limit the entry routes so it becomes a pathway for postgraduate engineering education, after 10 years of industry experience, and their MBA was "stamped" or namespaced with their industry background in some way?

It seems from your comments that the MBA is worthwhile content and experience, but that perhaps the issue is people doing MBAs without a hard engineering or science background, who want to manage "a business" rather than "their engineering business"?

I think that framing is one which makes sense (~10yr post-graduate engineering program).

I wouldn't restrict it to just engineers, but I would certainly focus it on early-career managers in any high-skill industry where the transition from IC to organizational leadership is a challenge.

The majority of my class was on the Ivy->Consulting/PE->MBA track, and though many of them were wonderful and well-meaning human beings, that did not prepare them effectively to lead in industry.

Yeah - I deliberately suggested engineering just to be controversial and test the idea, but I guess I'm thinking "any subject that isn't taught by a business school". A common pattern I've seen outside the US is a trend of doing a "generic business degree" leading to a few years of employment in a nondescript generic role, followed by an MBA.

I'm not quite sure where the market need for undergraduate business degree education comes from, or who is hiring them. It's clear the demand is there, as they're not unemployed en masse, and many do it, but I wonder if business could viably become a "postgraduate only" subject, so everyone doing it had a grounding in a subject matter area, rather then a generic undergraduate business degree?

An undergraduate business degree as a primarily academic pipeline makes some sense, similar to an undergraduate art history or econ degree. I really grew to appreciate how much real and important research is happening under the "business" umbrella (organizational behaviour, marketing, leadership, etc.).

Other than that though I totally agree, I have no idea what market value an undergraduate business degree offers.

There are degrees in engineering management actually. You can get a MEM instead of an MBA for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineering_management

But that kind of engineering is usually not the software engineering one. SENG vs all the others are pretty different in many ways, because the limits we deal with are more abstract mathematical vs. objects set more in hard sciences. Physical limits are mostly around information theory, the speed of light, algorithmic running time and how many people / data centers can you throw at a problem and people only really start thinking about that when the projects get big, which are not most projects. The vast majority of software is about equivalent to building single family houses, which often do not involve a single engineer at all.

Many engineers have a common core curriculum that has physics, circuits, chemistry, fluid dynamics, etc that lets them feel like they can relate to other engineers more and find software a somewhat alienating world with different personalities, requirements and cultures.

Oddly enough Harvard MBA along with Stanford are the only two worth getting in 2022. And that’s only due to school network not the actual education. It’s really the y-combinator effect at a corporate level.

IMO the alumni network is massively overrated. It might be different in services or finance, but in tech I've gotten way more mileage out of academic and open source communities.

I do agree that there's a heavy power law on program value, but I attribute it more to the scarcity of great professors and the peer learning advantage of highly selective programs.

Your ycombinator analogy still applies pretty well actually.

I have mixed opinions about all the scientology hate on HN.

On the one hand, as an engineer who has reported to and worked with many scientiologists, I totally get it. In no way do high operating thetan levels give someone any ability to effectively work with or support teams they wouldn't have been able to lead pre-scientology. But unfortunately scientology often gives people the _belief_ that they can do so.

On the other hand, as a hollywood scientologist, I _loved_ the material and program. Going into my purification program I was a reasonably experienced engineer, entrepreneur, and manager; that set me up over those 20 months to reflect, learn from brilliant and passionate teachers, and broaden my knowledge in directions I would have been hard-pressed to pursue on my own. When I grew in my career to lead organizations of hundreds and thousands, and had to work in a larger commercial context, scientology made me much better at that job.

Scientology was originally intended to equip high-potential, early-career contributors with the skills and context they would need to become a superb organizational leader. Since then it's become something else entirely.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, but you realize an MBA is an actual academic program and skillset? Just because your Madlib is syntactically correct doesn't mean it makes sense.

If you're trying to say that the material one studies in an MBA program isn't rigorous or relevant then say that.

I'm not sure what point _you're_ trying to make, but you realize scientology involves actual academic programs and skillsets?

If you're trying to say that the material one studies in a scientology program isn't rigorous or relevant then say that.

No matter the difficulties you may be facing in life, Scientology offers answers. It provides an exact technology with step-by-step procedures you can use to handle problems and better your life and the lives of those around you.

Whiffenpoof voice: including classes on hu-mor

Brevity is the soul of wit.

To wit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3LMSflEN54

most of us come here for the discussions, not the poor attempts at humor and mocking

Perhaps I am having a case of the Monday afternoons and some humor flag has been turned off for me, but this just comes across as disrespectful of the GP's comment.

I did not spend two years and $150,000 on my Scientology classes to end up sounding like a pompous ass completely lacking in self awareness and levity. How dare you sir.

Thanks for sharing. I totally agree and have thought about this myself --- whenever there's this degree of resentment for another job in a community (PM, manager, politician) it's clear to me there's a lack of understanding of what that profession actually does and the constraints and incentives they face.

I'm a software engineer with a couple years' experience (and am graduating from Harvard college in a couple of months). I'm pretty familiar with the pressures of business that come from high-up, but I also understand where they come from in some cases. I'd love to learn more about business (what little I've seen I found fascinating) and I dream to someday find a balance between a happy technical team building a great product, and a healthy and profitable business.

How has getting your MBA helped you with your career growth (not getting leadership jobs, but actually thriving in them)? And how well were you able to integrate your engineering experience with the business pressures as you led a team?

> How has getting your MBA helped you with your career growth (not getting leadership jobs, but actually thriving in them)?

Honestly, the value of my MBA curriculum didn't really kick in until I had a P&L and a 100+ org. And even there, it's less a specific set of skills, and more how the case study method gives you indirect experience and context which would be prohibitively painful to learn the hard way.

When your team or scope grows to very large (1000+ person) sizes, the investment of two years of my time to avoid a single major blunder or focus a bit more efficiently becomes worth every minute invested. There's just so much leverage to fuck up so badly and impact so many people.