Why we have never hired an MBA

The first genuinely complex system I built in my career, back in the mid-90's, was a scripting language. It did indeed force me up against a lot of background I didn't have; I had a very good mentor though and largely did learn it by doing.

I've since learned-by-doing distributed systems (quorum and 2pc commits and logical timestamps in one sprawling system we built around 2000) and routing, graph theory (for routing and later for analyzing binaries, also graph visualization, which is a tricky problem), code generation for compiler backends, and very large scale data storage (for instance, in order to sample all the flows running over a tier 1 NSP backbone). To that obviously add all the security and cryptography stuff; I've always been involved in security but I consider myself a developer by training.

There are things I have run up against that have been too challenging to just learn. Linear algebra was one of them (although I've been slowly clearing that hurdle). RF and signal processing another. But those things are the exception, not the rule.

I might also contest how simple operating systems are fundamentally. They just move bits around, yes, but they're moving bits to and from a very complicated asynchronous and sometimes distributed system, and bridging it to code that runs under artificially simplified assumptions. It's true that most of it tends not to be interesting from a data structures perspective --- especially back in the 90's, when the whole process list and every TCP TCB were just stored in simple linked lists --- but there are parts, like the virtual memory system, that are much trickier. And all of that code runs in a much more complicated environment than userland.

The typical routes out of MBA programs are managerial or consulting roles. That's great; the degree was designed to give future managers a broad, intellectual understanding of business as practiced by large American corporations.

Startups don't have those roles. At all. If you've hired right, everybody has smart opinions and nobody needs much management. What you need is people who can get things done right now. People with experience in designing interfaces, in interviewing users, in banging out prototypes, in running ad campaigns.

MBA programs teach a lot of great stuff. But none of my friend with MBAs got significant hands-on practical experience there.

I do think that these folks can add value in much larger organizations, but in my experience, the only good ones are the ones who would be useful on small teams. In short, a "software architect" who couldn't immediately transition to a highly productive role writing code almost certainly isn't a good software architect. A "user experience designer" who couldn't immediately sit down with a programmer and start creating a polished site almost certainly isn't a useful "UX Designer". And by could, I also mean would. The good designers and architects are kind of delighted to get a chance to get their hands into code again.

It sounds like the problem with MBAs (based on this essay) is that they seek those higher level roles 1) where they don't exist, or 2) without the more hands-on background that seems to be a prerequisite for success at a more abstract level.

I do sympathize with the people who object to the "black mark". A black mark is a conviction for embezzlement, not a degree honestly earned (albeit of potentially dubious value). But you know, filters are both a luxury and a necessity. Some people won't look at any resume that doesn't have a CS degree from a top school. If you're so deluged with candidates that you can afford to (and need to) do this, obviously you're in a position or real strength.

Aside from my "black mark" objection, I think the rest of this essay is spot-on. The rejection is based more on a conversation than a rigid filter, he engages with the interested candidate a bit to see how they might fit.

Now, a PhD in CS is a bit of a double-edged sword. It's often a danger sign that someone has spent too much time on just one theory. I wouldn't recommend getting or using a PhD as a signal of being a good developer since there is way too much variance.

(Ob: I have also worked with great developers with no formal education.)