5 ms·

> when the company is taken over by MBAs and activist investors I really get tired of this sentiment because it’s become a lazy stereotype. Activist investors

by MR4D 4y ago

> when the company is taken over by MBAs and activist investors I really get tired of this sentiment because it’s become a lazy stereotype. Activist investors come around because of bad management. Bad management is irrespective of the MBA. Satya Nadella of Microsoft is a much better CEO than Sundar Pichai, and both happen to have an MBA. For reference, over the last 5 years, Microsoft stock has grown over 150% (not counting dividends) while Google has grown about 70%. Chuck Robbins, CEO of Cisco, has a degree in Math with a concentration in CS, but no MBA and has only grown the stock by about 12% before dividends. Mark Zuckerberg of Meta, studied CS at Harvard, but Never graduated. He has lost about 25% for investors over the past 5 years. I choose stock returns because they are what fund most people’s retirement accounts (usually via a mutual fund owning them). The companies are all significant tech companies of roughly $200 billion or greater.

Haga 4y ago
[dead]
kelnos 4y ago
It feels a little disingenuous to cherry-pick a few CEOs who fit the mold of your argument. Are theses results vs. educational background representative of a wide range of CEOs? Somehow I doubt it. But you haven't presented evidence either way.
- simonjgreen 4y ago
  MR4D has picked 4 of the 7 companies named in the comment they are replying to. This to me is specifically addressing a much shorter and less researched statement. It unnecessary to cast shade on a simple factual reply for not being an industry wide scope research paper?
  - kelnos 4y ago
    MR4D started with: > I really get tired of this sentiment because it’s become a lazy stereotype. To me, the comment was presented as general evidence that MBAs run companies better than people with non-business educational backgrounds. Otherwise, what's the point?
ChuckNorris89 4y ago
>For reference, over the last 5 years, Microsoft stock has grown over 150% Yeah, If you zoom out on Microsoft stock, it's always been going steadily up. It never went to the moon but it also never had any major long term dips. Which is why I'm bullish on Microsoft. They seem to be taking very good strategic decisions. Their focus on linux and WSL, data centers, cloud and services, VSCode, swooping up heavy gaming IPs, now ChatGPT. Same with Apple. If only they could remove the suck from Windows 11 and Teams that would be great. Google on the other hand, seems like it's heading to become the next Yahoo! looking on how the quality of most of its products has declined or they have cancelled.
- IshKebab 4y ago
  Funny you should complain about the quality of Google's products just after mentioning how Teams sucks. Google Meet is the only videoconferencing system I've used that works reliably almost like a phone call. I've used Zoom and WhatsApp extensively too and those both suck in comparison. Like not just "worse quality" but painful to use.
  - ChuckNorris89 4y ago
    Sure, Google meet maybe better, but how many people pay with money for Google meet? Meanwhile, Microsoft has customers that pay with cold hard cash for their Office 365 subscriptions, even if some of their products suck, they still make plenty of money. Whereas, if any major regulatory body from EU or the US were to crack down on Google's ad tracking empire, a lot of their products would collapse as there's nobody paying for them with actual money.
    - IshKebab 4y ago
      > how many people pay with money for Google meet At least my company does. And my girlfriend's. I think gapps is quite popular. (Yes I know Meet is free, but it's well integrated into Google's paid ecosystem.)
- hamburglar 4y ago
ROTMetro 4y ago
How much growth has Facebook stock had from the first day Zuck was in charge until now? I mean you need to take people's entire tenure not random periods of your choosing.
015a 4y ago
> Bad management is irrespective of the MBA. It sure is, but just as "googling something" means searching it, the zeitgeist doesn't care. I think this should severely worry MBA programs, and those with the degree. People quote the successful leaders who hold MBAs, while simultaneously ignoring the many who don't, or the many who have it but have failed. It's almost like it doesn't matter; because it genuinely isn't correlative beyond "I'm interested in business, let's get an MBA" (meaning, there is a pipeline bias in the statistics, but that doesn't independently validate the incremental impact of the degree).
- jwestbury 4y ago
  Which zeitgeist? I'm not sure the anti-MBA sentiment has manifested to any significant degree outside of engineering professions; and in those professions, "MBA" is just a convenient way to group together "people who don't understand engineering," which itself is really just shorthand (knowing or not) for "people who have a different understanding of the business." MBA programs have no need to be worried, because the people who generally control businesses know better.
ryloric 4y ago
I guess it's not about having an MBA, instead having their mental framework being a great fit for the company's needs at that point. If one has an MBA but still flexible enough to change their mind and not rigidly stick to their models they'll be fine. Satya has an MBA but his notions of value don't seem rigid or short-term, so he's very successful.

by MR4D 4y ago

Haga 4y ago

[dead]

kelnos 4y ago

It feels a little disingenuous to cherry-pick a few CEOs who fit the mold of your argument. Are theses results vs. educational background representative of a wide range of CEOs? Somehow I doubt it. But you haven't presented evidence either way.

simonjgreen 4y ago
MR4D has picked 4 of the 7 companies named in the comment they are replying to. This to me is specifically addressing a much shorter and less researched statement. It unnecessary to cast shade on a simple factual reply for not being an industry wide scope research paper?
- kelnos 4y ago
  MR4D started with: > I really get tired of this sentiment because it’s become a lazy stereotype. To me, the comment was presented as general evidence that MBAs run companies better than people with non-business educational backgrounds. Otherwise, what's the point?

ChuckNorris89 4y ago

>For reference, over the last 5 years, Microsoft stock has grown over 150% Yeah, If you zoom out on Microsoft stock, it's always been going steadily up. It never went to the moon but it also never had any major long term dips. Which is why I'm bullish on Microsoft. They seem to be taking very good strategic decisions. Their focus on linux and WSL, data centers, cloud and services, VSCode, swooping up heavy gaming IPs, now ChatGPT. Same with Apple. If only they could remove the suck from Windows 11 and Teams that would be great. Google on the other hand, seems like it's heading to become the next Yahoo! looking on how the quality of most of its products has declined or they have cancelled.

IshKebab 4y ago
Funny you should complain about the quality of Google's products just after mentioning how Teams sucks. Google Meet is the only videoconferencing system I've used that works reliably almost like a phone call. I've used Zoom and WhatsApp extensively too and those both suck in comparison. Like not just "worse quality" but painful to use.
- ChuckNorris89 4y ago
  Sure, Google meet maybe better, but how many people pay with money for Google meet? Meanwhile, Microsoft has customers that pay with cold hard cash for their Office 365 subscriptions, even if some of their products suck, they still make plenty of money. Whereas, if any major regulatory body from EU or the US were to crack down on Google's ad tracking empire, a lot of their products would collapse as there's nobody paying for them with actual money.
  - IshKebab 4y ago
    > how many people pay with money for Google meet At least my company does. And my girlfriend's. I think gapps is quite popular. (Yes I know Meet is free, but it's well integrated into Google's paid ecosystem.)
hamburglar 4y ago

ROTMetro 4y ago

How much growth has Facebook stock had from the first day Zuck was in charge until now? I mean you need to take people's entire tenure not random periods of your choosing.

015a 4y ago

> Bad management is irrespective of the MBA. It sure is, but just as "googling something" means searching it, the zeitgeist doesn't care. I think this should severely worry MBA programs, and those with the degree. People quote the successful leaders who hold MBAs, while simultaneously ignoring the many who don't, or the many who have it but have failed. It's almost like it doesn't matter; because it genuinely isn't correlative beyond "I'm interested in business, let's get an MBA" (meaning, there is a pipeline bias in the statistics, but that doesn't independently validate the incremental impact of the degree).

jwestbury 4y ago
Which zeitgeist? I'm not sure the anti-MBA sentiment has manifested to any significant degree outside of engineering professions; and in those professions, "MBA" is just a convenient way to group together "people who don't understand engineering," which itself is really just shorthand (knowing or not) for "people who have a different understanding of the business." MBA programs have no need to be worried, because the people who generally control businesses know better.

ryloric 4y ago

I guess it's not about having an MBA, instead having their mental framework being a great fit for the company's needs at that point. If one has an MBA but still flexible enough to change their mind and not rigidly stick to their models they'll be fine. Satya has an MBA but his notions of value don't seem rigid or short-term, so he's very successful.