3 ms·

> The problem with HBS is that they seem to claim that applying generic business skills like financials and cost-cutting to an existing industry have a similar

> The problem with HBS is that they seem to claim that applying generic business skills like financials and cost-cutting to an existing industry have a similar effect. The problem is that they don't. I think you just helped me to make a connection. I think what we are seeing is that technology skills with some business acumen out-competes pure business skill in generating efficiency. This lines up with a book I just read[0], which recommends that developers become independent "efficiency consultants". [0]https://leanpub.com/developerhegemony https://leanpub.com/developerhegemony

ethbro 9y ago
> I think what we are seeing is that technology skills with some business acumen out-competes pure business skill in generating efficiency. I wouldn't say "out-competes" globally, but rather "in the context of disruption." (Which the tech industry has largely been in for the past 80 years) The problem with MBAs is that they're not (generally) suited for the CEO role in an innovative company. A CEO is making strategic, long-term decisions, and those are vastly improved by deep, subject matter expertise. Some MBA CEOs manage to cultivate that (I'd say in spite of HBS-alike), but generally they focus on the things they already know and were taught in school. Which are exactly the wrong things to chase when you're trying to disruptively innovate. Plus HBS and the like have 100% incentive to sell their expertise as applying to as broad and high a market as possible. Rather than saying "Your MBA qualifies you for upper middle management, not leadership."