4 ms·

I really don't think that's true. I started my MBA at Carnegie Mellon when I was 20. Having been in the workforce for a number of years now, I don't think I w

I really don't think that's true. I started my MBA at Carnegie Mellon when I was 20. Having been in the workforce for a number of years now, I don't think I would have gotten anything much else out of it on the academic side had I started later. The one thing I might have missed out on to a degree by going so young is the networking. I tended to spend a lot more time outside of class with undergrad students who were my own age. That being said I'm still happy I went when I did.

jonnathanson 16y ago
For clarification: are you referring to your MBA or to an undergraduate business degree? If you were in a graduate program at 20, then you're probably an outlier (in a good way!) to begin with. If you're talking about undergraduate-level business major or focus, then I think that's a different animal altogether -- and should be treated as such. My biggest concern with the MBA (master's level) right now is that it's converging too much on the same territory and same age group as the undergraduate business curriculum. There is absolutely a lot of value in an undergraduate business curriculum, but it should be fundamentally different from the curriculum at the graduate level. The fact that the two curricula are very similar right now is indicative of a problem, IMO.
- benmccann 16y ago
  My MBA. I did comp sci for undergrad. You bring up a good point that the undergrad and graduate curriculums should probably be different. However, they need to offer intro classes for the majority of subjects because most students won't know accounting and finance even if they've been in the working world for awhile beforehand. I think the clear advantage to the graduate program is that you can study only business. While I suppose I can have more intelligent conversations with other college-educated folk because I had to read Kant, Bentham, etc., I wouldn't mind having skipped all those philosophy classes in undergrad. There are also more advanced classes in the graduate business curriculum. I'm not sure what it is exactly about the curriculum that you see as problematic or would suggest changing.
  - jonnathanson 16y ago
    Nothing's wrong with the curriculum on a nominal level. It's all well and good. The problem is that you can much more fully appreciate the material when you've had an empirical base from which to view it. As we know, 99% of the best-laid plans in the business world come down, in the end, to politics. That's something you could imagine, but probably wouldn't really grok, until you'd been out in the wild and brushed up against the subject. Another example: the people. I learned a lot from my classmates at my MBA program, but that's probably because a lot of them had different professional backgrounds. If we were all the same -- no backgrounds yet, other than our majors in undergrad and perhaps some college internships -- then I'd question what these people would actually have to teach me, or me them. I'd love to see the graduate business program be a lot more selective on the basis of actual leadership experience or actual business results. Select for the people who've kicked some ass in the real world. Then make the program super peer-focused, and make the whole thing basically the Hogwarts of business badassery. A bunch of super-accomplished people getting together and, for lack of a better word, hacking business. The theories and frameworks are great, but to your point, I think a lot of that stuff is undergrad material. Or maybe core/primer/refrsher material in the graduate program.
qq66 16y ago
Your comment is exactly correct -- you wouldn't have gotten anything more on the academic side, but you missed out on the networking. Speaking from my MBA experience, the networking was 95-99% of the value.
gaius 16y ago
I started my MBA at Carnegie Mellon when I was 20 Is that taught using the "case" method? What exactly did you say in case studies when experienced managers were talking? </curious> Because an MBA is as much about learning from fellow students as it is from professors.
- benmccann 16y ago
  We did do some case studies, but probably fewer than at other schools. Having limited management experience really had no effect on my ability to participate in case studies or in class though. I was still just as able to argue that a company should have used a loss leader strategy instead of cost-plus pricing, or argue why a certain market would be winner-take-all resulting in a natural monopoly, or that another student's argument ignored the price inelasticity of the product. None of these things require that you have actually implemented them yourself in order to have a good grasp of the concepts.
  - gaius 16y ago
    Sounds very theoretical - like undergrad economics rather than postgrad level.

jonnathanson 16y ago

For clarification: are you referring to your MBA or to an undergraduate business degree? If you were in a graduate program at 20, then you're probably an outlier (in a good way!) to begin with. If you're talking about undergraduate-level business major or focus, then I think that's a different animal altogether -- and should be treated as such. My biggest concern with the MBA (master's level) right now is that it's converging too much on the same territory and same age group as the undergraduate business curriculum. There is absolutely a lot of value in an undergraduate business curriculum, but it should be fundamentally different from the curriculum at the graduate level. The fact that the two curricula are very similar right now is indicative of a problem, IMO.

benmccann 16y ago
My MBA. I did comp sci for undergrad. You bring up a good point that the undergrad and graduate curriculums should probably be different. However, they need to offer intro classes for the majority of subjects because most students won't know accounting and finance even if they've been in the working world for awhile beforehand. I think the clear advantage to the graduate program is that you can study only business. While I suppose I can have more intelligent conversations with other college-educated folk because I had to read Kant, Bentham, etc., I wouldn't mind having skipped all those philosophy classes in undergrad. There are also more advanced classes in the graduate business curriculum. I'm not sure what it is exactly about the curriculum that you see as problematic or would suggest changing.
- jonnathanson 16y ago
  Nothing's wrong with the curriculum on a nominal level. It's all well and good. The problem is that you can much more fully appreciate the material when you've had an empirical base from which to view it. As we know, 99% of the best-laid plans in the business world come down, in the end, to politics. That's something you could imagine, but probably wouldn't really grok, until you'd been out in the wild and brushed up against the subject. Another example: the people. I learned a lot from my classmates at my MBA program, but that's probably because a lot of them had different professional backgrounds. If we were all the same -- no backgrounds yet, other than our majors in undergrad and perhaps some college internships -- then I'd question what these people would actually have to teach me, or me them. I'd love to see the graduate business program be a lot more selective on the basis of actual leadership experience or actual business results. Select for the people who've kicked some ass in the real world. Then make the program super peer-focused, and make the whole thing basically the Hogwarts of business badassery. A bunch of super-accomplished people getting together and, for lack of a better word, hacking business. The theories and frameworks are great, but to your point, I think a lot of that stuff is undergrad material. Or maybe core/primer/refrsher material in the graduate program.

qq66 16y ago

Your comment is exactly correct -- you wouldn't have gotten anything more on the academic side, but you missed out on the networking. Speaking from my MBA experience, the networking was 95-99% of the value.

gaius 16y ago

I started my MBA at Carnegie Mellon when I was 20 Is that taught using the "case" method? What exactly did you say in case studies when experienced managers were talking? </curious> Because an MBA is as much about learning from fellow students as it is from professors.

benmccann 16y ago
We did do some case studies, but probably fewer than at other schools. Having limited management experience really had no effect on my ability to participate in case studies or in class though. I was still just as able to argue that a company should have used a loss leader strategy instead of cost-plus pricing, or argue why a certain market would be winner-take-all resulting in a natural monopoly, or that another student's argument ignored the price inelasticity of the product. None of these things require that you have actually implemented them yourself in order to have a good grasp of the concepts.
- gaius 16y ago
  Sounds very theoretical - like undergrad economics rather than postgrad level.