I'm probably going to misquote him but Amos Michelson who was the CEO of the billion dollar company Creo, and a Stanford MBA, used to say that you can teach someone intelligent the useful bits from the MBA program in a week. He tried to get every Creo employee to know those useful bits so they can make the best decisions for the company.
MBAs as CEOs
141–150 of 167 posts
Re: MBAs as CEOs
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>Satya Nadella doesn't give a fuck about a 5% latency reduction on the Bing landing page. He might if you are a smart engineer and demonstrate that that 5% reduction in latency results in $100 million additional revenue per year by way of more users and more ads. I just made up that number, but still. My point is, at the end of the day one doesn't need an MBA to draw the connection between their technical endeavors…
He is a very bad CEO if he can't understand that a 5% reduction in latency results in $X of extra revenue by himself¹. If an engineer can articulate his companies business cases better than him, MS board would better put that engineer as CEO. 1 - Even if "by himself" here means just taking the initiative to ask somebody
He shouldn't have to ask. You have to imagine that when you're at that level you're dealing with a magnitude more problems, and rely on your team to inform you of changes and their high-level impact.
Re: MBAs as CEOs
#143I think it's more useful to think of MBAs as ordination into something like the Jesuits of American Corporatism. Late Capitalism in the US has evolved in such an obviously unequal and environmentally dangerous way that the only recourse we have is to a kind of "mystical" rhetoric. In this kind of system, being some kind of guru is just as important, if not more, than one's actual business acumen. Hence all the TED ta…
>Late Capitalism
This is where I stopped listening.
Re: MBAs as CEOs
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think this is an MBA vs STEMLord thing. Rather an MBA versus "everything else" thing. Especially studies and experiences that really are mind-broadening: """The strange thing about my utter lack of education in management was that it didn’t seem to matter. As a principal and founding partner of a consulting firm that eventually grew to 600 employees, I interviewed, hired, and worked alongside hundreds of busi…
> “win-win situation” There's something on that phrase that really hits me very hard, so that every time I hear it, by reflex I'll start looking for the exit and what paths I may take to run there.
I have the same reaction to the word "opportunity" thanks to some pretty horrific past managers (who of course had MBAs).
Re: MBAs as CEOs
#145I'm aware that HN is a pro-engineering, anti-MBA group of folks, but hopefully my perspective helps add a bit of color from the other side. I got a BS and MS in Computer Science and ended up working as a software engineer for a number of years. After a while, I was left wanting more, so I enrolled in an MBA program. IMO, 50-60% of classes in business school are fluff leadership rah-rah self-development bullshit. But…
Can you talk more about your experiences? Did you go to a top program? A full time program? Do you think it's worth it if you already have an MS and are currently a first line manager and team lead?
BS & MS in CS. Worked at one of the big 4 (google/apple/amazon/facebook). Got my MBA from a top 10. Currently in venture capital. If you want to stay in engineering, there's no need for an MBA. It only helps if you want to pivot.
Re: MBAs as CEOs
#146I'm aware that HN is a pro-engineering, anti-MBA group of folks, but hopefully my perspective helps add a bit of color from the other side. I got a BS and MS in Computer Science and ended up working as a software engineer for a number of years. After a while, I was left wanting more, so I enrolled in an MBA program. IMO, 50-60% of classes in business school are fluff leadership rah-rah self-development bullshit. But…
But certainly they care about hiring competent people and being able to recognize, retain and reward competent people within their organization. In contrast, if your organization is full of business-oriented people, it becomes a self-reinforcing downwards spiral, because: - business oriented developers are biased towards competition. development is a collaborative effort. - many business oriented developers downplay…
If you're going for an MBA, the intention is to pivot away from an engineering position. There's no reason to get an MBA if you want to stay as a SWE.
Re: MBAs as CEOs
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have an MBA from one of the top 3 programs, and I see a lot of evidence to support this, but I disagree that it's a lack of conviction. I came from a diff't background than most of my classmates, but the sense I got was that, for a lot of them, life was a series of clearly defined competitions & steps. I took to calling it the Gilded Pipeline, but in general, it was ivy undergrad -> banking/consulting -> private eq…
diff't ??
diff't = different
Re: MBAs as CEOs
#148> So why do they persist in promoting this education for management, which, according to mounting evidence, produces so much mismanagement? > The answer is unfortunately obvious: with so many of their graduates getting to the “top”, why change? But there is another answer that is also becoming obvious: because at this top, too many of their graduates are corrupting the economy. The MBA is a graduate degree that is th…
Just out of interest, but what do you think someone qualified to run technology at a hedge fund should do on a daily basis?
Re: MBAs as CEOs
#149I think it's more useful to think of MBAs as ordination into something like the Jesuits of American Corporatism. Late Capitalism in the US has evolved in such an obviously unequal and environmentally dangerous way that the only recourse we have is to a kind of "mystical" rhetoric. In this kind of system, being some kind of guru is just as important, if not more, than one's actual business acumen. Hence all the TED ta…
>Late Capitalism This is where I stopped listening.
Some of us think Capitalism will not be the dominant organizing principle for resource management forever. Like many other -isms we expect it to have a beginning (growth) phase, a middle (status quo) phase, and an end (decline) phase. Some subset of those believe we are in the late stages of it already, thus discussion of "Late Capitalism". That doesn't necessarily mean total death—Monarchism and Totalitarianism still exist—it just means other organizing principles will be more dominant.
Others (you, perhaps?) think that Capitalism is the final form of our resource management ecology. To them, it just represents acceptance of fundamental laws of resources: property, policing, valuation, and money are inevitable constructs in any sane, functioning society where resources move semi-freely.
I respect people who believe the latter. But I am in the former category, and I (obviously) think that's a reasonable position as well.
What about capitalism-as-a-phase is so absurd to you that its suggestion immediately and completely discredits the speaker?
Re: MBAs as CEOs
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Late Capitalism This is where I stopped listening.
Some of us think Capitalism will not be the dominant organizing principle for resource management forever. Like many other -isms we expect it to have a beginning (growth) phase, a middle (status quo) phase, and an end (decline) phase. Some subset of those believe we are in the late stages of it already, thus discussion of "Late Capitalism". That doesn't necessarily mean total death—Monarchism and Totalitarianism stil…
>Some of us think Capitalism will not be the dominant organizing principle for resource management forever.
markets aren't going away, unless you threaten humans to stop such actions with violence.