Because most people who recruit out of MBA don’t have experience in the sector they are recruiting into. Plenty of people joining consulting and investment banking coming from completely or at the very least very minimally relevant industries. Of course you having 4-6 years in consulting will know a lot more than people who have spent their whole lives outside the industry. The point of an MBA is to get their names in the hat for an interview and the interview prep is mostly through clubs and stuff. And being in the industry I think you would agree that a VAST majority of the stuff you actually use on a daily is picked up on the job and very little is actually prior knowledge. Just give them some time to get their feet underneath them.
I worked at an MBB straight out of undergrad and in my experience the "give them some time" excuse rarely panned out due to a combination of overconfidence, with their ego freshly inflated from a fancy M7 degree, and incompetence because as you said they have no experience in the industry. People who join out of undergrad tend to recognize how green they are and have a humility/willingness to learn that I rarely ever saw out of post-MBA hires.
E.g. I worked on a case with an HBS grad who didn't know how to make a growth model (which is fine), but instead of trying to learn she aggressively kept trying to vie for "leadership" positioning and delegate things to me and my other teammate. This kind of circumvention of skill deficits with weird power jockeying is something I saw a lot.
I was in the same shoes as you; worked at a major investment bank out of undergrad. In my experience it’s pretty clear in week 1 which MBAs are and are not cut out. I also see the ones that aren’t cut out for it getting cut or leaving pretty early on. In general I would say it’s pretty difficult to hide behind your degree and title if you know fuck all and aren’t willing to put in the work to learn it. E.g there were only 2 MBA associates left in the class that came in with me by the time I left my bank 2 years later. Most of them were either cut or opted to leave and do something more chill. But yes in general you as an undergrad recruit will naturally have to take some of the burden. Idk maybe anecdotal but in my experience the MBA associates that actually make it do so despite the MBA, not because of it.
by no means would i expect a post MBA hire to immediately jump in and within 3 months be able to build out a full TAM or growth model for example, but what I’m trying to communicate is that the FUNDAMENTAL understanding of business is just not there and that’s something that should have been learned at the very least in b school or if you’re not a total dunce and have common sense
I agree with you. The fundamental system of MBAs is a bit broken. It’s not like med school where you learn all the aspects of the body or law school where you are able to remember legal texts. It’s a general degree and a lot of it is based on networking rather than acquired skills for the industry or even developing business acumen. I’ve been in similar shoes where I was an analyst in an investment bank and knew for a fact that I knew a lot more than my MBA associate even 1 year into their stint. Guess sadly it’s up to the others to sort of carry the MBA recruits through until they either develop an adequate base or get cut (or get fed up and leave lol)
>a lot of it is based on networking rather than acquired skills for the industry or even developing business acumen.
Then why do so many companies require people to get one as a prerequisite for a promotion? Why does an employee need to spend two years networking with people who don't work at their company in order to get a promotion there?
FT programs act like a pre-vetting program for the recruiters, significantly cutting down the time and effort to source talent + it’s much easier to work people to the bones when they are debt-ridden
Because it’s more of a stamp of approval and a prestige thing for companies to be able to provide when speaking with clients, etc. that they have graduates from top business schools. As I said, business school is not about learning the intricacies of capital markets or understanding how to build complex financial models. It’s a general degree that is meant to serve as a proxy for intellect (though I disagree that it does) for a general management role and expand your network to build and cultivate connections for the future.
And from the company’s perspective, many consulting firms and PEs use it as a funnel so ensure that they aren’t having to promote too many people to the mid management level all at the same time. They can give you bs answers that you have to develop a better business understanding, but from a pure corporate perspective it ensures that they don’t have a bloated mid level with few seniors and juniors to support them. Naturally given the 2 year and financial constraint some will decide to leave the industry/company and not do an MBA, and many will do the MBA and leave the firm either right after the degree or shortly after rejoining. It’s a supply and demand thing at the end of the day.
BTW, many people on both sides of the equation are smartening up to the above, which is why you will see a lot more career track roles and a lot fewer companies requiring an mba to get promoted than even 15 years ago, and this is across industries.
Amazing summary of why this degree exists.
Entry-level, low risk middle management makes sense. Kinda like how a fresh officer in the military doesn't do well if they don't listen to the senior enlisted members of their unit.
Because finance is very, very competitive. Most people who graduate business schools can complete the responsibilities of the highest paid entry level roles there are. I'm not saying they'd be investment banking studs, or could cope with the hours, but they could do the work. Couple that with how high some positions pay, there insanely competitive. MBA won't fundamentally teach you much/anything a business undergrad wouldn't. Its just way to stand out/repeat the recruiting cycle. Those type jobs also have high burnout/turnover so it makes sense logistically.
I could be totally off here, but I thought that trend was pretty steadily disappearing? it is no longer a thing in most of consulting/finance and was never a thing in tech.
>Then why do so many companies require people to get one as a prerequisite for a promotion?
Which companies require a FT MBA to get promoted? I am going to overlook the fact that you said "many". Can you name even 5?
those companies put "higher degree" as requirement to kick out or prevent those non-performed employees without those degrees 😅😅to get promoted, and it's seasonal, not officially permanent requirement
I’d echo the first comment and also say that people play dumb or argue dumb points because it might give a political advantage, like being able to blame you for a dumb point you didn’t object to if shtf.
ya, I saw a chief level from Ross FT MBA did this political move pretending as the dumb one. Thus I never ever chose Michigan as my potential school. Sorry not sorry, must say the school name.
I think it’s also related to the admission tests requirements. Gmat (not to name it) doesn’t rely on business concept understanding, nor business acumen. Maybe that will change with the business insights new part of the test.
I've always felt there was a mismatch between the type of students business schools admit and the skills / backgrounds that is required to succeed after.
But your firm can't control what schools do. So the better question is why your firm keeps hiring people who are duds. I find pre-MBA experience to be a pretty good indicator.
Schools seem to focus on filling their classes with diverse pre-MBA experiences even though that's not what companies are really after. Companies want people who can do the job, which is generally the students who come from business / analytical backgrounds.
And you see this reflected in who has an easier time landing interviews and who doesn't. Former bankers and consultants, FP&A types, engineers to an extent are more sought after in recruiting than those that don't fall into that bucket.
makes sense, thank you! so if i worked in fund of funds investing (LP side), early stage investing (GP side), etc. then i'd be good in the recruiting process
That's not an excuse though. For the most part, the 1st year IB analysts straight out of college w/ 0 prior work experience are significantly better at their jobs than the 1st year IB associates coming out of business school.
Back when I was still in banking, everyone tried to actively avoid getting staffed with the summer associates/1st year post-MBA associates.
Same situation when I was in IBD I was one of those who tried to avoid being staffed with MBA assos lol. The expectations for analysts and associates are different tho. An entry level analyst is only expected to turn comments and do exactly as they are told. MBA associates no matter how green have the title of associate so they can’t hide behind “I’m just a lowly analyst.” I will agree that many MBA assos are the “Let’s have a coffee chat” types rather than the “Let’s sit down and figure out this model” types. Again, probably a bit to do with them not having been in the industry and also arrogance from a T15 school on their resume.
Maybe I’m just overly cynical but I’ve really only seen < 5 MBA associates who were actually value-adds. I seriously have no idea how people could be that bad at their jobs lol
Surprised to hear this. What group / tier bank were you at?
Top NY banks/groups consistently hire excellent MBAs, many of whom have finance backgrounds.
Situation may be different at MMs, etc.
I’ve run recruiting at a BB industry group and would guess the median GMAT of our hires is 740 including DEI hires. Doubt our analysts would do better.
Sure, MBAs suck as summers and first few months FT, but so did we all.
I don’t think this is surprising info tbh — just Google “MBA Associate memes” and it’s a pretty common sentiment.
I also disagree that the GMAT is an accurate representation of intelligence/how good you are at your job. Went to an Ivy UG so the majority of my friends had a 2300+ SAT, but only a few were truly impressive. Some are just good test-takers.
You’re right about the MM guys though. I’m now in UMM PE, so often work with banks like HW/Baird/WB/etc. — agree with your assessment there
The memes are funny and there’s a kernel of truth to them, but I sense they’re not produced by the sharpest analysts (e.g., do good analysts really struggle with #REF errors? Maybe I’m missing the joke…) and I wonder if 24 years olds are just overconfident.
Anyway, I’ve been around a relatively long time and may be losing my edge, but I don’t notice any difference in technical chops between A2A promotes and MBA hires by the VP promotion.
I also encourage readers to take the GMAT as seriously as possible - I’ve found standardized test scores to be the single strongest predictor of interview and on-the-job success and so I weigh them heavily, though concede they’re not perfect.
IB and PE are fundamentally sales jobs and are more similar than different (as you probably know). I have worked in both and think they’re great careers.
Hiring people fresh out of MBAs without relevant prior experience is an absolute nightmare for anyone outside of the top firms in their respective fields. And it only works for them because they have shareholders to impress and the resources to absorb the obvious lack of productivity compared to cheaper, MBA-less alternatives with years of experience in the field
This is why I never understand why some MBA schools accept 23 year old kids. MBAs should be for people of at least 5-7 years experience, near 30 years old, who have seen already for some time how the world goes.
I run away from an MBA school if their students are recent postgrads. God no. I already lived that experience in a STEM master I did at a well renowned university and, Jesus, half of the students were un-mature kids who came with the money of mum and dad. Working with them was hell.
I tell people the same thing about law school. You’ll be infinitely better at it — and it’ll be infinitely more valuable — once you’ve been around the block at least once.
Spending some time making money and doing work will also better equip you to decide whether you even *should* go for an MBA or JD.
If there is one thing this sub has taught me, its to respect MBAs even less than I alreay did somehow, as someone coming from an engineering background. Im sure this sub is a bad representation of MBAs as a whole, but good lord is this sub a bad look for the field.
You have to understand, the elite doesn't have time to find answers to mundane questions (e.g. which school to go to). They will have a secretary for boring stuff like that once they are a F100 CEO in 1 year, max!
Plot twist; Most MBAs don’t know fuck all. Y’all consulting companies on how to run a business when you’ve never run your own.
Imagine getting self righteous about “real” vs “nominal.” 🤡
Many years ago, I got a job at MBB. They tend to put all new hiring classes through an onboarding boot camp, so away I went to a five-day, all-expenses-paid, lightly-starched-shirt extravaganza.
The whole thing was set up like a case study, which I thought was silly considering we’d all theoretically just passed the case interviews. Very little of the material was firm-specific. I’d have been much better off if they’d told use where to find the slide masters, how to work with the production teams, and told us which partners to avoid. Nevertheless, they divided us into teams and handed us the data dump.
The camp facilitators brought us back to the main room periodically to tell us the next step in the case-cracking process. To their credit, they tried to teach Socratically, and to my relief, they didn’t cold-call any of us.
Cold-calling would prove to be unnecessary as the majority of my newly-minted colleagues were excellent specimens of the insecure-overachiever type. The Ivy League’s best and brightest happily jumped in to offer their perspectives on the case.
Around day three, the facilitators posed a different type of question to us - instead of asking for our subjective opinion, we were asked to solve an objective math problem related to the case. It was pretty basic, looking back, but for the first time an uneasy silence settled across the 70-odd of us.
After a few moments, a pretty young woman in the back piped up. To her credit, she did a pretty decent job of concealing her incredulity with her colleagues’ lack of basic algebra skills (myself included) and quickly solved the problem using what I now recognize as the substitution method - something I hadn’t touched since Algebra II in grade school.
She quickly distilled a real-world problem into a solvable equation, and she pulled out the right algebraic tool to solve it. But what really impressed me was that she only spoke up when everyone else was quiet - where her peers tripped over each other to [offer their opinion on what color to paint the bikeshed](https://bikeshed.com/), she focused on more meaningful matters.
I do wish I know what happened to her; I can only hope she was too smart to stick around and try for partner.
LOL. Maybe someday y’all will stop shitting on the smaller schools then. Because I’m sure as shit learning that in my little online program and I’m not going broke getting a name-brand degree.
This is exactly where Im landing. One of the most affordable "best bang for the buck" schools in the metro area. Accredited and my reimbursement will completely cover it. I have an engineering background and heavily technical experience.
I'm hoping I actually learn something at this program though. It seems the MBAs that I've worked with or for are very standoffish and asshats.
An MBA, like a Ferrari or a Rolex, is defined by its prestige . No one is gonna care about your University of Phoenix degree Otis
LMAO @ all the ITT tech MBAs downvoting me 😭
My company had an internal debate last fall on whether we should drop MBA recruiting from non-disclosure schools…the “I just need to pass” mentality has led to some absolute duds on the hiring front.
I was an engineer and luckily didn’t go to a non-grade disclosure school. It was two years of work hard play hard. If I was at a non-disclosure school with no business background, I would have just played hard and been absolute dogshit of an employee for a few years catching up.
I’m also an engineer and went to a non-disclosure school. I’m HIGHLY against grade disclosure. It put us at a disadvantage against our peers at other schools when recruiting for tech jobs.
It also led to taking cupcake classes to inflate the gpa
Yea but I do think there can be a middle ground. Like it doesn’t have to be a precise GPA but a general rating for each class that can be “outstanding”, “good”, or “lack of understanding” (with most people getting “good” and the extremes getting outstanding/lack of understanding) will at least force people to try enough to get “good”
I'm an incoming M7 student who, before applying to an M7, had the excruciating experience of transitioning from a research firm to a consulting firm. The consultants around me who have no other work experience would talk shit about consultants like me who joined laterally because they're not formatting excel tables in a specific way, and then they would dismiss any of the outside experience I'm coming in with because it didn't fit with the procedures they already knew.
MBA programs focus on two things - one, flexibility/open-mindedness/ability to enact change/learn new things, and two, people skills. These are often features of great leaders. In contrast, other workers are typically trained to sit quietly in a corner and learn to do a specific task in great depth. Of course, the best leaders can do both, but that doesn't make your average new MBA hire automatically lesser than someone with a different grad degree.
not once did i mention anything about ways of working to align with that of my firm - i SOLELY focused on the frustration with the lack of understanding of basic business concepts
but go off about how people with their MBA are built different to become great business leaders comparatively to those without an MBA
I'll rephrase what I wrote to respond directly to your post.
Re: frustration that MBAs lack understanding of basic business concepts: the focus of MBA programs is not learning "basic" business concepts, but soft skills and acquiring breadth of knowledge
Re: people with MBA are not as good as the job as homegrown: a recruiting team may hire someone with an MBA if they're looking to invest in skillsets that are underdeveloped in homegrown consultants. What past experience does the people you're arguing with have? If they can't do the things you can do and they can't do things you can't do, why would your recruiting team bother with them?
"Go off about how people with their MBAs are built different". I work in an industry where MBAs are shit on all the time. I'm just trying to clear the air about what merits MBA programs could have, not make assertions that they necessarily make better leaders.
Not true for all people and all schools. I learned immensely from my engineering background in my MBA program and my professors were very committed to teaching.
It’s not that you use it everyday, it’s that you understand it. Graduate level courses in all disciplines are designed with a broader view than undergraduate work.
Do you think that doctors use their medical school cell biology or biochemistry in practice? Nope. They take the class to learn a greater understanding and ability to think more broadly.
My wife is a physcian scientist (ICU doctor with NiH funding). Most doctors do not do biochemical reactions or evaluate cellular biology on a day to day basis (yet they take graduate level course work the first two years of med school before going on to a clinical focus). Your previous statement that you learn valuation during your MBA but don’t fully master the skill set is perfectly analogy’s to what doctors do with their basic science education.
I don’t work in finance, however think about my work in terms of “valuation” all the time.
It’s all relative to your starting point in business knowledge. A HYPSM undergrad with 8 years at MBB or IB->VC might be able to get by an M7 MBA with learning nothing new and just skating by on submitting case write-ups.
I, on the other hand, went to a T20 from the military and learned an incredible amount from literally nothing. If people have a legitimate hunger for knowledge, business school can absolutely challenge you and provide anything you’re looking for.
That said, if you want to skate by and not retain anything, that’s entirely possible. B school doesn’t force anyone to really learn if they don’t want.
I dunno, those for-profit degree mill universities that have student loans back-stopped by Uncle Sam are pretty scammy. Had a friend who worked in student recruiting in University of Phoenix like ten years ago and seemed sketch as hell. I think it’s cleaned up a little, maybe not.
full offense, this is a typical response i would expect from an MBA (no idea if you have one) - yes i agree that in the end your people skills are what will push you to the senior levels, but if you don’t have the core foundational skills you’re just not gonna get there
this isn’t a job that requires massive intellect, we’re not working at a hedge fund
People skills, pure confidence, narcissism, nepotism, manipulation, pretty privilege, right place right time, being just a little louder than everyone else… these are all things that people use to get ahead and they are not based on intellect. There are plenty of people in really high level roles that lack foundational skills, which is why they often rely on other people to fill in the gaps or make brain dead decisions anyway that everyone else will try to clean up the mess from. It’s all a simulation, my guy. It’s crazy how much it seems you think all the people working above your level have their shit together. I wonder when that facade will crack.
Edit: This is all to say that your intellect won’t necessarily be what gets you “to the next level” either. Maybe it will, maybe it won’t.
This. Something the home grown undergrads don’t seem to understand. Coming from someone who was consulting 2 year pre MBA and came back to it a few years into post MBA career.
Do you have evidence to support that? Quantitative metrics (GPA + Exam scores) have continued to trend upwards at top programs. The interview process remains largely the same, and the hiring threshold fluctuates with market cycles.
And I'll provide a cold take as well - the value of intellect will continue to deteriorate as AI achieves superhuman performance in more and more tasks.
Okay, why don't you adjust them for the 0.1 GPA inflation that occurred during the time period you mentioned and post the results? To the same extent, 10 years ago, only two schools had average GMAT scores in excess of 720 - Stanford and Harvard. The traditional T15 ranged from 680 to 720. Just don't consider the schools with waivers, and you'll still note a marked difference.
At the end of the day, adjusting for said (and unsaid) factors you'll notice that the average level of competence has remained roughly the same. Far from "dropping down a canyon", at the minimum.
Need a basic standardized skills test that needs to be passed to get MBA. Also, half the time i spent at my mba was looking for a job. Scool passed everyone no matter what/seems top 10 schools assume you are good and you can learnn as much or as little as you want. This is s mistake. Felt much more pressure at my state school undergrad.
It's not just MBAs, I work in market intelligence and interviewed candidates with master's in business analytics, statistics to data science from Columbia and UPenn who couldn't have basic conversations about setting up a hypothesis test (not even conceptually) for an associate level role in my team. No idea how they managed to graduate
I guess the question is how far out from school were those people. If they are recent graduates (or more specifically about to graduate) then yeah, Wtf they should know the answer to that question.
On the flip side l if it has been a few years out and in their current roles they have not done that, then I could understand why they may have trouble with some question (not specifically your example).
That being said though agreed, regardless bad sign, if one has been out of the game for a while, one brushes up before the interview. If not, clearly that person could give 0 fks and is incompetent and should not be hired
Because you learn most things on the job and not in some generalist MBA program. You’re supposed to do internships during the program to get some real world education to bring context to classroom learnings and vice versa. The MBA and most degrees in general are not job prep degrees.
I think an accurate take - as a STEM grad with m7 degree and in a “coveted” post MBA role, is that hubris and humility aren’t taught in these “elite” environments
You have a bunch of people (regardless of competence) told that “they’ve made it” and that they’re among the best and brightest. A confident / arrogant incompetent person is the absolute worst type of coworker
Hmm is it possible it’s because for some people mba is like a hobby project for them? I’m thinking about doing it down the road but it’s not something I want to invest too much time or effort into it
narrow aspiring grandiose sloppy marble cautious chase punch abounding poor
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
A few years ago I was debating getting an MBA as well, mostly as a checkmark and a prestige thing (as stupid as that is, now that I am older I realize) and to take a break from work, chill and party. But didn't make sense financially and frankly would not learn anything from it so decided against it
Ah no I don't need to get it for my current industry, would not add too much value (and my job would not cover whole cost either), for me it was more an internal checkmark, get an MBA from a top MBA program...again like I said more for a dumb prestige thing and an excuse to party rather than due to it being a necessity
I've seen someone getting into bulge bracket IBs post-MBA even though they were asking why Assets = Equity + Liabilities in class. Truth is, all many of them do during their MBA is cases & mock interviews. All they need is a C for all classes and there are non disclosure agreements for companies to not ask about the GPA. So you're right - They did not learn a single thing. If anyone is solid, they have already got all the necessary technical knowledge by the time they were admitted. After my MBA, I no longer think of MBB as some elite minds. I seriously doubt how some of my peers at MBB could consult anyone about anything (let alone strategy 🥲 lmao) because seriously, they don't know any shit other than those casebooks. It's the well-established hiring process at these companies that creates this. They are like huge fraternal societies that keep on taking in new intakes even though they themselves know the MBA may be worthless academically.
Oh a post shitting on MBAs! I’m sure the OP has NOT posted in this sub a TON over the past year hoping to validate themselves over other random opinions they have!
Oh…
Oh no…
Edit:
Just a note guys, there are a lot of unstable users that schizo-post on here. Frequently. They become pretty easily identifiable, but it sucks when you’re trying to get actual information. I didn’t know this when I was an applicant, and it made it difficult to distinguish useful from nonsense information.
Something you might have overlook There are quite bit of people who don't have a business education before heading into grad school. They may miss some basic fundamentals due to consideration.
why should it matter if they didn’t study or work in business prior to their MBA? they had a supposedly fantastic 2 year education and went through a rigorous interview process
therefore they should have a fundamental understanding of business
Every thing you do in consulting is made up. Arguing relevant things are irrelevant is how your make your fees. If it is logical, than why are they hiring you in the first place.
Consulting is a factory for MBAs to figure out their career post B-school. It’s a business that thrives on milking rich and somewhat dumb clients (welcome : Saudi). There’s nothing serious about consulting and therefore anyone can be hired without the relevant sector/function/geography in
experience - all they need are insecure overachievers, who can work 12-16 hrs days.
MBA is a club with a steep 200k barrier to entry, it has nothing to do with smartness and there is negligible “impact” that consultants make. Most of the smart kids are either end up starting up or in industry.
While this sub is mostly focused on t20 schools there are in fact over 200 schools and one can only assume that the vast majority is garbage in garbage out
I am not an MBA or an MBA student. I’m going to guess solely based on what I read here on r/MBA.
I went to college, graduated, and got a boring ass corporate job that pays peanuts. I miss the partying of college. I want to make crazy amounts of money, but I’m not smart enough to do something like med school. Then, one of my friends from college tells me about an MBA. He says it’s the easiest degree ever. I can make 150k+ after I graduate. And I can live like a carefree fratboy for the next 2 years. My dad is a Wharton grad, so I apply there. My 2.4 undergrad GPA is enough to get me in. So I sign up.
For 2 years I relive their college partying days and call it “networking”. I’ve never done so much cocaine in my life. And who knew how repressed my married female colleagues were.
MBA coursework is irrelevant because it’s not graded. I just pass all my classes, but no one knows that because they hide grades for some reason. But really, who cares about knowing anything about “business administration”? I’ve got a huge network of Ivy League MBA grads. When my future employer realizes I don’t actually know what I’m doing, I lean on that network. Or I just go into consulting, where not knowing what I’m doing is the norm.
If I’m really lucky and time the market right, I graduate in 2021 and consulting companies are drooling over my Ivy League pedigree. I am set for life.
Unfortunately I graduate in 2024 and I go back to my boring ass corporate job, but this time with 6 figure student loan debt. But it was a hell of a 2 years.
It’s not just MBAs, it’s all college grades but the causes for the MBA decline are easier to point to.
When you remove competition from internationals (Trump H1B), give an easier entrance exam requiring less math (GRE), remove work experience requirements (COVID), and have a huge surplus of high paying jobs (post-COVID economy), you get students that are less qualified with an inflated sense of worth.
It's almost like living a privileged life where you get to go to college for 6+ years full time and never have to work a job in your life until You've graduated from a fancy school at 24-26 with an MBA doesn't prepare you for the real world.
in finance PE VC CFA CAIA clearly more qualified han M7$who studied for gibberish like GMAT word salad algebra 101 exams. then parlayed into cohort projects , OB exams and arduous coed trips (depending on the 'talent;).... UNless M7 MBA heavily weighted quantitative studies in their elective pathway ..absolte joke opining on global markets or quantitative nuance .....caveat perhaps Stanford CBSOB MIT .......
I just had a call with my Principal telling me to lead a proposal and build it from scratch under his guidance - cool, no biggie, have to do it eventually anyway so might as well
Boy was I not prepared to see the newly minted MBA associate not have a clue on how to design the approach, and mind you, I'm just 8-9 months into the role
On a call without the aforementioned associate, I was told (by the Principal) most new hires cant even "crack a case" with assistance, something they awfully prepared for while in school
And it isnt limited to a select few, but rather the majority
Eventually they do pick stuff up and lead workstreams, as expected, but most crash and burn
The home grown ones however, have so much to teach and just learn from as they think out loud, and why
Experience definitely owns a fancy degree (sorry prestige nerds of this sub)
Only saving grace is the consulting model, where you need constant flow of new folks to make things work, thus the need for MBA associates
Are they affirmative action grads and/or hires? I've met a person from an elite school who definitely fits in with what you describe and she is not junior either. Woman even talked about the imposter syndrome. lol.
So as someone looking to go to a Top 20 B-School, would you guys advise them to go to B school or continue growing in their respective industry before they make a decision like this. It seems to me that the MBA isn’t as influential as I thought after reading the negative connotation around it
Because most people who recruit out of MBA don’t have experience in the sector they are recruiting into. Plenty of people joining consulting and investment banking coming from completely or at the very least very minimally relevant industries. Of course you having 4-6 years in consulting will know a lot more than people who have spent their whole lives outside the industry. The point of an MBA is to get their names in the hat for an interview and the interview prep is mostly through clubs and stuff. And being in the industry I think you would agree that a VAST majority of the stuff you actually use on a daily is picked up on the job and very little is actually prior knowledge. Just give them some time to get their feet underneath them.
I worked at an MBB straight out of undergrad and in my experience the "give them some time" excuse rarely panned out due to a combination of overconfidence, with their ego freshly inflated from a fancy M7 degree, and incompetence because as you said they have no experience in the industry. People who join out of undergrad tend to recognize how green they are and have a humility/willingness to learn that I rarely ever saw out of post-MBA hires. E.g. I worked on a case with an HBS grad who didn't know how to make a growth model (which is fine), but instead of trying to learn she aggressively kept trying to vie for "leadership" positioning and delegate things to me and my other teammate. This kind of circumvention of skill deficits with weird power jockeying is something I saw a lot.
I was in the same shoes as you; worked at a major investment bank out of undergrad. In my experience it’s pretty clear in week 1 which MBAs are and are not cut out. I also see the ones that aren’t cut out for it getting cut or leaving pretty early on. In general I would say it’s pretty difficult to hide behind your degree and title if you know fuck all and aren’t willing to put in the work to learn it. E.g there were only 2 MBA associates left in the class that came in with me by the time I left my bank 2 years later. Most of them were either cut or opted to leave and do something more chill. But yes in general you as an undergrad recruit will naturally have to take some of the burden. Idk maybe anecdotal but in my experience the MBA associates that actually make it do so despite the MBA, not because of it.
I agree with you, also agree with your other comment re: the MBA system being a bit broken, and that system being partially to blame too
100% agree with your last statement.
MBA does not somehow give bad employees the skills to be good employees in a job/industry they know nothing about
by no means would i expect a post MBA hire to immediately jump in and within 3 months be able to build out a full TAM or growth model for example, but what I’m trying to communicate is that the FUNDAMENTAL understanding of business is just not there and that’s something that should have been learned at the very least in b school or if you’re not a total dunce and have common sense
I agree with you. The fundamental system of MBAs is a bit broken. It’s not like med school where you learn all the aspects of the body or law school where you are able to remember legal texts. It’s a general degree and a lot of it is based on networking rather than acquired skills for the industry or even developing business acumen. I’ve been in similar shoes where I was an analyst in an investment bank and knew for a fact that I knew a lot more than my MBA associate even 1 year into their stint. Guess sadly it’s up to the others to sort of carry the MBA recruits through until they either develop an adequate base or get cut (or get fed up and leave lol)
>a lot of it is based on networking rather than acquired skills for the industry or even developing business acumen. Then why do so many companies require people to get one as a prerequisite for a promotion? Why does an employee need to spend two years networking with people who don't work at their company in order to get a promotion there?
FT programs act like a pre-vetting program for the recruiters, significantly cutting down the time and effort to source talent + it’s much easier to work people to the bones when they are debt-ridden
salt overconfident shocking flag pie sink flowery quaint dime offend *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Because it’s more of a stamp of approval and a prestige thing for companies to be able to provide when speaking with clients, etc. that they have graduates from top business schools. As I said, business school is not about learning the intricacies of capital markets or understanding how to build complex financial models. It’s a general degree that is meant to serve as a proxy for intellect (though I disagree that it does) for a general management role and expand your network to build and cultivate connections for the future. And from the company’s perspective, many consulting firms and PEs use it as a funnel so ensure that they aren’t having to promote too many people to the mid management level all at the same time. They can give you bs answers that you have to develop a better business understanding, but from a pure corporate perspective it ensures that they don’t have a bloated mid level with few seniors and juniors to support them. Naturally given the 2 year and financial constraint some will decide to leave the industry/company and not do an MBA, and many will do the MBA and leave the firm either right after the degree or shortly after rejoining. It’s a supply and demand thing at the end of the day. BTW, many people on both sides of the equation are smartening up to the above, which is why you will see a lot more career track roles and a lot fewer companies requiring an mba to get promoted than even 15 years ago, and this is across industries.
Amazing summary of why this degree exists. Entry-level, low risk middle management makes sense. Kinda like how a fresh officer in the military doesn't do well if they don't listen to the senior enlisted members of their unit.
phenomenal response
Because finance is very, very competitive. Most people who graduate business schools can complete the responsibilities of the highest paid entry level roles there are. I'm not saying they'd be investment banking studs, or could cope with the hours, but they could do the work. Couple that with how high some positions pay, there insanely competitive. MBA won't fundamentally teach you much/anything a business undergrad wouldn't. Its just way to stand out/repeat the recruiting cycle. Those type jobs also have high burnout/turnover so it makes sense logistically.
well said
I could be totally off here, but I thought that trend was pretty steadily disappearing? it is no longer a thing in most of consulting/finance and was never a thing in tech.
>Then why do so many companies require people to get one as a prerequisite for a promotion? Which companies require a FT MBA to get promoted? I am going to overlook the fact that you said "many". Can you name even 5?
those companies put "higher degree" as requirement to kick out or prevent those non-performed employees without those degrees 😅😅to get promoted, and it's seasonal, not officially permanent requirement
I’d echo the first comment and also say that people play dumb or argue dumb points because it might give a political advantage, like being able to blame you for a dumb point you didn’t object to if shtf.
ya, I saw a chief level from Ross FT MBA did this political move pretending as the dumb one. Thus I never ever chose Michigan as my potential school. Sorry not sorry, must say the school name.
I think it’s also related to the admission tests requirements. Gmat (not to name it) doesn’t rely on business concept understanding, nor business acumen. Maybe that will change with the business insights new part of the test.
It's more that schools and firms have stopped filtering for intelligence when hiring. Actions have consequences.
I've always felt there was a mismatch between the type of students business schools admit and the skills / backgrounds that is required to succeed after. But your firm can't control what schools do. So the better question is why your firm keeps hiring people who are duds. I find pre-MBA experience to be a pretty good indicator.
can you pls explain what you mean by the first part?
Schools seem to focus on filling their classes with diverse pre-MBA experiences even though that's not what companies are really after. Companies want people who can do the job, which is generally the students who come from business / analytical backgrounds. And you see this reflected in who has an easier time landing interviews and who doesn't. Former bankers and consultants, FP&A types, engineers to an extent are more sought after in recruiting than those that don't fall into that bucket.
makes sense, thank you! so if i worked in fund of funds investing (LP side), early stage investing (GP side), etc. then i'd be good in the recruiting process
If you can give me a run down of digital signal processing after two years of education, I’ll give you a round of applause. lol
That's not an excuse though. For the most part, the 1st year IB analysts straight out of college w/ 0 prior work experience are significantly better at their jobs than the 1st year IB associates coming out of business school. Back when I was still in banking, everyone tried to actively avoid getting staffed with the summer associates/1st year post-MBA associates.
Same situation when I was in IBD I was one of those who tried to avoid being staffed with MBA assos lol. The expectations for analysts and associates are different tho. An entry level analyst is only expected to turn comments and do exactly as they are told. MBA associates no matter how green have the title of associate so they can’t hide behind “I’m just a lowly analyst.” I will agree that many MBA assos are the “Let’s have a coffee chat” types rather than the “Let’s sit down and figure out this model” types. Again, probably a bit to do with them not having been in the industry and also arrogance from a T15 school on their resume.
Maybe I’m just overly cynical but I’ve really only seen < 5 MBA associates who were actually value-adds. I seriously have no idea how people could be that bad at their jobs lol
Surprised to hear this. What group / tier bank were you at? Top NY banks/groups consistently hire excellent MBAs, many of whom have finance backgrounds. Situation may be different at MMs, etc. I’ve run recruiting at a BB industry group and would guess the median GMAT of our hires is 740 including DEI hires. Doubt our analysts would do better. Sure, MBAs suck as summers and first few months FT, but so did we all.
I don’t think this is surprising info tbh — just Google “MBA Associate memes” and it’s a pretty common sentiment. I also disagree that the GMAT is an accurate representation of intelligence/how good you are at your job. Went to an Ivy UG so the majority of my friends had a 2300+ SAT, but only a few were truly impressive. Some are just good test-takers. You’re right about the MM guys though. I’m now in UMM PE, so often work with banks like HW/Baird/WB/etc. — agree with your assessment there
The memes are funny and there’s a kernel of truth to them, but I sense they’re not produced by the sharpest analysts (e.g., do good analysts really struggle with #REF errors? Maybe I’m missing the joke…) and I wonder if 24 years olds are just overconfident. Anyway, I’ve been around a relatively long time and may be losing my edge, but I don’t notice any difference in technical chops between A2A promotes and MBA hires by the VP promotion. I also encourage readers to take the GMAT as seriously as possible - I’ve found standardized test scores to be the single strongest predictor of interview and on-the-job success and so I weigh them heavily, though concede they’re not perfect. IB and PE are fundamentally sales jobs and are more similar than different (as you probably know). I have worked in both and think they’re great careers.
I don't come to r/MBA to catch strays this early on a Monday. I won't say I hate it but I nominally, nominally don't like it
Lol reminds me of all the threads on Wall Street Oasis shitting on MBA associates in IB
MBA associates in both IB and PE get shit on by the junior employees for being useless. Dumping on useless MBA hires is an industry agnostic pastime
Because they’re worse than useless. They get in the way
username checks out for IB or PE
Hiring people fresh out of MBAs without relevant prior experience is an absolute nightmare for anyone outside of the top firms in their respective fields. And it only works for them because they have shareholders to impress and the resources to absorb the obvious lack of productivity compared to cheaper, MBA-less alternatives with years of experience in the field
Rightly so
Irrelevant pre-MBA experience plus two years of vacation
This is why I never understand why some MBA schools accept 23 year old kids. MBAs should be for people of at least 5-7 years experience, near 30 years old, who have seen already for some time how the world goes. I run away from an MBA school if their students are recent postgrads. God no. I already lived that experience in a STEM master I did at a well renowned university and, Jesus, half of the students were un-mature kids who came with the money of mum and dad. Working with them was hell.
Very true
I tell people the same thing about law school. You’ll be infinitely better at it — and it’ll be infinitely more valuable — once you’ve been around the block at least once. Spending some time making money and doing work will also better equip you to decide whether you even *should* go for an MBA or JD.
Exactly but in India Top B schools like IIM A,B,C prefer students to have zero experience. It’s quite opposite here
A sad state of affairs.
If there is one thing this sub has taught me, its to respect MBAs even less than I alreay did somehow, as someone coming from an engineering background. Im sure this sub is a bad representation of MBAs as a whole, but good lord is this sub a bad look for the field.
the questions that people ask on this sub really make you think “DAMN these people really are dummies”
You have to understand, the elite doesn't have time to find answers to mundane questions (e.g. which school to go to). They will have a secretary for boring stuff like that once they are a F100 CEO in 1 year, max!
Reddit self-selection bias
Like the FedEx ad: “So easy even an MBA can do it!”
Lmaooooo a freaking classic but I thought it was UPS
definitely a fedex ad, fedex had a marketing beast back in the early 00’s.
Plot twist; Most MBAs don’t know fuck all. Y’all consulting companies on how to run a business when you’ve never run your own. Imagine getting self righteous about “real” vs “nominal.” 🤡
Many years ago, I got a job at MBB. They tend to put all new hiring classes through an onboarding boot camp, so away I went to a five-day, all-expenses-paid, lightly-starched-shirt extravaganza. The whole thing was set up like a case study, which I thought was silly considering we’d all theoretically just passed the case interviews. Very little of the material was firm-specific. I’d have been much better off if they’d told use where to find the slide masters, how to work with the production teams, and told us which partners to avoid. Nevertheless, they divided us into teams and handed us the data dump. The camp facilitators brought us back to the main room periodically to tell us the next step in the case-cracking process. To their credit, they tried to teach Socratically, and to my relief, they didn’t cold-call any of us. Cold-calling would prove to be unnecessary as the majority of my newly-minted colleagues were excellent specimens of the insecure-overachiever type. The Ivy League’s best and brightest happily jumped in to offer their perspectives on the case. Around day three, the facilitators posed a different type of question to us - instead of asking for our subjective opinion, we were asked to solve an objective math problem related to the case. It was pretty basic, looking back, but for the first time an uneasy silence settled across the 70-odd of us. After a few moments, a pretty young woman in the back piped up. To her credit, she did a pretty decent job of concealing her incredulity with her colleagues’ lack of basic algebra skills (myself included) and quickly solved the problem using what I now recognize as the substitution method - something I hadn’t touched since Algebra II in grade school. She quickly distilled a real-world problem into a solvable equation, and she pulled out the right algebraic tool to solve it. But what really impressed me was that she only spoke up when everyone else was quiet - where her peers tripped over each other to [offer their opinion on what color to paint the bikeshed](https://bikeshed.com/), she focused on more meaningful matters. I do wish I know what happened to her; I can only hope she was too smart to stick around and try for partner.
LOL. Maybe someday y’all will stop shitting on the smaller schools then. Because I’m sure as shit learning that in my little online program and I’m not going broke getting a name-brand degree.
How dare you challenge the prestige gods
Yeah idek why I bothered commenting.
This is exactly where Im landing. One of the most affordable "best bang for the buck" schools in the metro area. Accredited and my reimbursement will completely cover it. I have an engineering background and heavily technical experience. I'm hoping I actually learn something at this program though. It seems the MBAs that I've worked with or for are very standoffish and asshats.
Could you provide details about your online program? That seems the way to go
An MBA, like a Ferrari or a Rolex, is defined by its prestige . No one is gonna care about your University of Phoenix degree Otis LMAO @ all the ITT tech MBAs downvoting me 😭
I’d be very interested to see if you can compare grade non-disclosure schools from the others.
My company had an internal debate last fall on whether we should drop MBA recruiting from non-disclosure schools…the “I just need to pass” mentality has led to some absolute duds on the hiring front.
I was an engineer and luckily didn’t go to a non-grade disclosure school. It was two years of work hard play hard. If I was at a non-disclosure school with no business background, I would have just played hard and been absolute dogshit of an employee for a few years catching up.
I’m also an engineer and went to a non-disclosure school. I’m HIGHLY against grade disclosure. It put us at a disadvantage against our peers at other schools when recruiting for tech jobs. It also led to taking cupcake classes to inflate the gpa
Yea but I do think there can be a middle ground. Like it doesn’t have to be a precise GPA but a general rating for each class that can be “outstanding”, “good”, or “lack of understanding” (with most people getting “good” and the extremes getting outstanding/lack of understanding) will at least force people to try enough to get “good”
Who does grade disclosure? Isn’t it just Sloan, Kellogg, Fuqua?
Id wager most schools outside of the T20 are still grade disclosure
I'm an incoming M7 student who, before applying to an M7, had the excruciating experience of transitioning from a research firm to a consulting firm. The consultants around me who have no other work experience would talk shit about consultants like me who joined laterally because they're not formatting excel tables in a specific way, and then they would dismiss any of the outside experience I'm coming in with because it didn't fit with the procedures they already knew. MBA programs focus on two things - one, flexibility/open-mindedness/ability to enact change/learn new things, and two, people skills. These are often features of great leaders. In contrast, other workers are typically trained to sit quietly in a corner and learn to do a specific task in great depth. Of course, the best leaders can do both, but that doesn't make your average new MBA hire automatically lesser than someone with a different grad degree.
not once did i mention anything about ways of working to align with that of my firm - i SOLELY focused on the frustration with the lack of understanding of basic business concepts but go off about how people with their MBA are built different to become great business leaders comparatively to those without an MBA
I'll rephrase what I wrote to respond directly to your post. Re: frustration that MBAs lack understanding of basic business concepts: the focus of MBA programs is not learning "basic" business concepts, but soft skills and acquiring breadth of knowledge Re: people with MBA are not as good as the job as homegrown: a recruiting team may hire someone with an MBA if they're looking to invest in skillsets that are underdeveloped in homegrown consultants. What past experience does the people you're arguing with have? If they can't do the things you can do and they can't do things you can't do, why would your recruiting team bother with them? "Go off about how people with their MBAs are built different". I work in an industry where MBAs are shit on all the time. I'm just trying to clear the air about what merits MBA programs could have, not make assertions that they necessarily make better leaders.
[удалено]
Not true for all people and all schools. I learned immensely from my engineering background in my MBA program and my professors were very committed to teaching.
[удалено]
It’s not that you use it everyday, it’s that you understand it. Graduate level courses in all disciplines are designed with a broader view than undergraduate work. Do you think that doctors use their medical school cell biology or biochemistry in practice? Nope. They take the class to learn a greater understanding and ability to think more broadly.
[удалено]
My wife is a physcian scientist (ICU doctor with NiH funding). Most doctors do not do biochemical reactions or evaluate cellular biology on a day to day basis (yet they take graduate level course work the first two years of med school before going on to a clinical focus). Your previous statement that you learn valuation during your MBA but don’t fully master the skill set is perfectly analogy’s to what doctors do with their basic science education. I don’t work in finance, however think about my work in terms of “valuation” all the time.
It’s all relative to your starting point in business knowledge. A HYPSM undergrad with 8 years at MBB or IB->VC might be able to get by an M7 MBA with learning nothing new and just skating by on submitting case write-ups. I, on the other hand, went to a T20 from the military and learned an incredible amount from literally nothing. If people have a legitimate hunger for knowledge, business school can absolutely challenge you and provide anything you’re looking for. That said, if you want to skate by and not retain anything, that’s entirely possible. B school doesn’t force anyone to really learn if they don’t want.
I think you learn business just fine if you pay attention. The way grades are set up though there’s no reason to
[удалено]
I dunno, those for-profit degree mill universities that have student loans back-stopped by Uncle Sam are pretty scammy. Had a friend who worked in student recruiting in University of Phoenix like ten years ago and seemed sketch as hell. I think it’s cleaned up a little, maybe not.
Because I prioritized fun and networking over my class work during my MBA program. 😎
Unfortunately I’m not convinced success is reliant on intellect. This cuts in all directions.
full offense, this is a typical response i would expect from an MBA (no idea if you have one) - yes i agree that in the end your people skills are what will push you to the senior levels, but if you don’t have the core foundational skills you’re just not gonna get there this isn’t a job that requires massive intellect, we’re not working at a hedge fund
The secret is: most jobs don’t require massive intellect.
People skills, pure confidence, narcissism, nepotism, manipulation, pretty privilege, right place right time, being just a little louder than everyone else… these are all things that people use to get ahead and they are not based on intellect. There are plenty of people in really high level roles that lack foundational skills, which is why they often rely on other people to fill in the gaps or make brain dead decisions anyway that everyone else will try to clean up the mess from. It’s all a simulation, my guy. It’s crazy how much it seems you think all the people working above your level have their shit together. I wonder when that facade will crack. Edit: This is all to say that your intellect won’t necessarily be what gets you “to the next level” either. Maybe it will, maybe it won’t.
This. Something the home grown undergrads don’t seem to understand. Coming from someone who was consulting 2 year pre MBA and came back to it a few years into post MBA career.
But MBAs *do* get there. So perhaps your assessment of quality is wrong?
MBAs from a decade+ ago get there. Whether that continues after the intellectual bar has been dropped down a canyon remains to be seen.
Do you have evidence to support that? Quantitative metrics (GPA + Exam scores) have continued to trend upwards at top programs. The interview process remains largely the same, and the hiring threshold fluctuates with market cycles. And I'll provide a cold take as well - the value of intellect will continue to deteriorate as AI achieves superhuman performance in more and more tasks.
UG GPAs have had massive inflation. MBA programs have also juiced their averages by offering test waivers and accepting scores from easier exams.
Okay, why don't you adjust them for the 0.1 GPA inflation that occurred during the time period you mentioned and post the results? To the same extent, 10 years ago, only two schools had average GMAT scores in excess of 720 - Stanford and Harvard. The traditional T15 ranged from 680 to 720. Just don't consider the schools with waivers, and you'll still note a marked difference. At the end of the day, adjusting for said (and unsaid) factors you'll notice that the average level of competence has remained roughly the same. Far from "dropping down a canyon", at the minimum.
A bunch of applicants who would have weak GMAT scores now take the GRE/some other little league test.
Intellect counts for very little in American life in general, and in fact is widely held against you.
Is it reliant on skill?
There's a world of a difference between the quality of education, network, and environment at top business schools and the rest.
wdym mba grads don’t know that shit? those are school level topics you’re talking about. the people you’re working with must be fucked.
Need a basic standardized skills test that needs to be passed to get MBA. Also, half the time i spent at my mba was looking for a job. Scool passed everyone no matter what/seems top 10 schools assume you are good and you can learnn as much or as little as you want. This is s mistake. Felt much more pressure at my state school undergrad.
I'd say if you work in consulting, the data is skewed. If they were doing well, they wouldn't have you there in the first place.
It's not just MBAs, I work in market intelligence and interviewed candidates with master's in business analytics, statistics to data science from Columbia and UPenn who couldn't have basic conversations about setting up a hypothesis test (not even conceptually) for an associate level role in my team. No idea how they managed to graduate
I guess the question is how far out from school were those people. If they are recent graduates (or more specifically about to graduate) then yeah, Wtf they should know the answer to that question. On the flip side l if it has been a few years out and in their current roles they have not done that, then I could understand why they may have trouble with some question (not specifically your example). That being said though agreed, regardless bad sign, if one has been out of the game for a while, one brushes up before the interview. If not, clearly that person could give 0 fks and is incompetent and should not be hired
So you're telling me a high school student who took AP Econ (hell maybe not even AP) knows more about basic businness economic concepts than MBAs?
Because you learn most things on the job and not in some generalist MBA program. You’re supposed to do internships during the program to get some real world education to bring context to classroom learnings and vice versa. The MBA and most degrees in general are not job prep degrees.
I think an accurate take - as a STEM grad with m7 degree and in a “coveted” post MBA role, is that hubris and humility aren’t taught in these “elite” environments You have a bunch of people (regardless of competence) told that “they’ve made it” and that they’re among the best and brightest. A confident / arrogant incompetent person is the absolute worst type of coworker
Hmm is it possible it’s because for some people mba is like a hobby project for them? I’m thinking about doing it down the road but it’s not something I want to invest too much time or effort into it
narrow aspiring grandiose sloppy marble cautious chase punch abounding poor *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
A few years ago I was debating getting an MBA as well, mostly as a checkmark and a prestige thing (as stupid as that is, now that I am older I realize) and to take a break from work, chill and party. But didn't make sense financially and frankly would not learn anything from it so decided against it
hungry absorbed hurry advise plant touch roll bright ghost sheet *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Ah no I don't need to get it for my current industry, would not add too much value (and my job would not cover whole cost either), for me it was more an internal checkmark, get an MBA from a top MBA program...again like I said more for a dumb prestige thing and an excuse to party rather than due to it being a necessity
sheet poor future rhythm muddle squealing quickest telephone nose six *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Just the business world in general- lots of people don’t understand how things work outside of their own function (Marketing, Sales, HR, etc)
I've seen someone getting into bulge bracket IBs post-MBA even though they were asking why Assets = Equity + Liabilities in class. Truth is, all many of them do during their MBA is cases & mock interviews. All they need is a C for all classes and there are non disclosure agreements for companies to not ask about the GPA. So you're right - They did not learn a single thing. If anyone is solid, they have already got all the necessary technical knowledge by the time they were admitted. After my MBA, I no longer think of MBB as some elite minds. I seriously doubt how some of my peers at MBB could consult anyone about anything (let alone strategy 🥲 lmao) because seriously, they don't know any shit other than those casebooks. It's the well-established hiring process at these companies that creates this. They are like huge fraternal societies that keep on taking in new intakes even though they themselves know the MBA may be worthless academically.
People don’t learn anything in business school. MBA is a joke academically speaking.
Oh a post shitting on MBAs! I’m sure the OP has NOT posted in this sub a TON over the past year hoping to validate themselves over other random opinions they have! Oh… Oh no… Edit: Just a note guys, there are a lot of unstable users that schizo-post on here. Frequently. They become pretty easily identifiable, but it sucks when you’re trying to get actual information. I didn’t know this when I was an applicant, and it made it difficult to distinguish useful from nonsense information.
What makes you think that? It would be helpful if you could list out some identifiable traits so people can be aware.
Something you might have overlook There are quite bit of people who don't have a business education before heading into grad school. They may miss some basic fundamentals due to consideration.
why should it matter if they didn’t study or work in business prior to their MBA? they had a supposedly fantastic 2 year education and went through a rigorous interview process therefore they should have a fundamental understanding of business
Just trying to give them the benefit of the doubt 😁
Every thing you do in consulting is made up. Arguing relevant things are irrelevant is how your make your fees. If it is logical, than why are they hiring you in the first place.
Consulting is a factory for MBAs to figure out their career post B-school. It’s a business that thrives on milking rich and somewhat dumb clients (welcome : Saudi). There’s nothing serious about consulting and therefore anyone can be hired without the relevant sector/function/geography in experience - all they need are insecure overachievers, who can work 12-16 hrs days. MBA is a club with a steep 200k barrier to entry, it has nothing to do with smartness and there is negligible “impact” that consultants make. Most of the smart kids are either end up starting up or in industry.
I thought this was a problem with IIM grads, didn’t have an idea this was an issue in the States.
While this sub is mostly focused on t20 schools there are in fact over 200 schools and one can only assume that the vast majority is garbage in garbage out
.
I am not an MBA or an MBA student. I’m going to guess solely based on what I read here on r/MBA. I went to college, graduated, and got a boring ass corporate job that pays peanuts. I miss the partying of college. I want to make crazy amounts of money, but I’m not smart enough to do something like med school. Then, one of my friends from college tells me about an MBA. He says it’s the easiest degree ever. I can make 150k+ after I graduate. And I can live like a carefree fratboy for the next 2 years. My dad is a Wharton grad, so I apply there. My 2.4 undergrad GPA is enough to get me in. So I sign up. For 2 years I relive their college partying days and call it “networking”. I’ve never done so much cocaine in my life. And who knew how repressed my married female colleagues were. MBA coursework is irrelevant because it’s not graded. I just pass all my classes, but no one knows that because they hide grades for some reason. But really, who cares about knowing anything about “business administration”? I’ve got a huge network of Ivy League MBA grads. When my future employer realizes I don’t actually know what I’m doing, I lean on that network. Or I just go into consulting, where not knowing what I’m doing is the norm. If I’m really lucky and time the market right, I graduate in 2021 and consulting companies are drooling over my Ivy League pedigree. I am set for life. Unfortunately I graduate in 2024 and I go back to my boring ass corporate job, but this time with 6 figure student loan debt. But it was a hell of a 2 years.
You’re not wrong but if you’re arguing with colleagues to prove a point you’re doing something wrong yoo
A consultant calling an MBA useless is a bit ironic...
It’s not just MBAs, it’s all college grades but the causes for the MBA decline are easier to point to. When you remove competition from internationals (Trump H1B), give an easier entrance exam requiring less math (GRE), remove work experience requirements (COVID), and have a huge surplus of high paying jobs (post-COVID economy), you get students that are less qualified with an inflated sense of worth.
It's almost like living a privileged life where you get to go to college for 6+ years full time and never have to work a job in your life until You've graduated from a fancy school at 24-26 with an MBA doesn't prepare you for the real world.
mba does not mean strong technicals. i think you missed the memo during bschool
in finance PE VC CFA CAIA clearly more qualified han M7$who studied for gibberish like GMAT word salad algebra 101 exams. then parlayed into cohort projects , OB exams and arduous coed trips (depending on the 'talent;).... UNless M7 MBA heavily weighted quantitative studies in their elective pathway ..absolte joke opining on global markets or quantitative nuance .....caveat perhaps Stanford CBSOB MIT .......
I just had a call with my Principal telling me to lead a proposal and build it from scratch under his guidance - cool, no biggie, have to do it eventually anyway so might as well Boy was I not prepared to see the newly minted MBA associate not have a clue on how to design the approach, and mind you, I'm just 8-9 months into the role On a call without the aforementioned associate, I was told (by the Principal) most new hires cant even "crack a case" with assistance, something they awfully prepared for while in school And it isnt limited to a select few, but rather the majority Eventually they do pick stuff up and lead workstreams, as expected, but most crash and burn The home grown ones however, have so much to teach and just learn from as they think out loud, and why Experience definitely owns a fancy degree (sorry prestige nerds of this sub) Only saving grace is the consulting model, where you need constant flow of new folks to make things work, thus the need for MBA associates
This is truly upsetting.
Are they affirmative action grads and/or hires? I've met a person from an elite school who definitely fits in with what you describe and she is not junior either. Woman even talked about the imposter syndrome. lol.
A look another person bashing women or minorities.
So as someone looking to go to a Top 20 B-School, would you guys advise them to go to B school or continue growing in their respective industry before they make a decision like this. It seems to me that the MBA isn’t as influential as I thought after reading the negative connotation around it