Discussion in 'Business and MBA degrees' started by Kizmet, Nov 16, 2016.
EDTECH: Here's How Online Learning Will Disrupt The MBA Degree | BusinessBecause
Unlike the tech field where certs alone can get you far in many tech disciplines, in business there is a perceived value in being able to write "Cindy Learner, MBA" that these certs alone can't provide and that's taking into account the diminishing value of the MBA.
Even the PMP with as sought after as it's become is still not disruptive to the MBA overall. Employers will have to take the leap to accept this direction and that will take a lot of time if it ever happens in a widespread manner.
It's tough to take this article seriously when it says things like, "Nearly six million students are going viral."
I feel we should give them the benefit of the doubt and consider that they may have some knowledge the CDC doesn't.
The value of certificates from coursera is mainly continuing education but you are right that they cannot replace the value of a good business school MBA. MBAs are also valuable if they come from a good recognized business school but have almost no value if they come from a school with little recognition.
I have my own stack of certificates from coursera, edx, etc and although I found them beneficial, I don't think they are game changers when it comes to opportunities and selling a resume.
Some schools recognize certifications, I was able to get a BS in Technology from Excelsior from my Computer certifications from Cisco, Microsoft and other ACE reviewed training so I guess similar deals can be negotiated with Coursera, EDx, etc. This makes education a lot cheaper and allows someone to get a recognized BS degree with a low budget. One might argue that schools like Excelsior are not Harvard but good enough to get a job as they are RA accredited and allow someone to pursue a MS degree from a better school.
You should know better than to make such absurdly broad statements. People's goals can vary incredibly widely, and what will help them reach those goals can vary just as widely. For some people only a top tier MBA will do. For many others, who want to "check the box" for a promotion with their current employer, or have the skills to start a business, or whatever, an MBA from a garden variety school might work perfectly well.
The statement can be sustained with research that shows that the value of a no name MBA is very little but these studies normally assume an average person but in reality every person is different and you are right that for some people a low profile MBA might have some use. I can think about an adjunct that can use the MBA to get additional work or a government employee that can access a better pay scale because the additional education.
My point is that for those that are only interested in gaining business knowledge, the coursera option might be better as it is free and it can lead to the same knowledge that you can learn from a low profile MBA. If chances of getting a better salary with a low profile MBA are low, the expected value of this MBA might be negative so it might make more sense to get the same education from free options.
Fair enough. And it's the existence of these examples that make blanket statements less helpful than they might otherwise be.
You might like this, then:
The MOOC Revolution: How To Earn An Elite MBA For Free
MBA Blog" target="_blank" class="externalLink" rel="nofollow">https://www.nopaymba.com/
Before discovering LinkedIn and recognizing how many fake degree holders (even at the graduate level) are in mid and upper-level positions, I would've considered an MBA from a virtually unknown school to be of little use. But since discovering what LinkedIn shows this no longer comes across as a real issue anymore. If anything, the fact that your virtually unknown MBA is from a legitimate school is an advantage in that there is no chance of being "exposed" at some point. With the fake MBA the possibility is always present and in some rare cases it does happen, but not enough for my liking.
The question is, were these fake MBA holders given the degree before or after getting these management positions? My gut feeling is that they were appointed before the degree was granted. There is no need to have an MBA for applying to a management position, some people feel the need to list a fake one mainly to be able to pass the filters that many companies have when searching for candidates but the serious companies would not consider MBAs from fake schools or even sometimes from marginal accredited schools.
Yesterday I attended a presentation from a speaker that that have to use a second line to list his credentials that ranged from a BSc, MBA, MSc, PhD, CPA, etc. Who knows how many of these credentials were real or not but the speaker had the need to impress the crowd with so many credentials in order to be credible enough.
An MBA alone does not much for a resume nowadays but having it just can make your resume at least being able to make it to a second round when applying for jobs in top management or consulting.
People are getting second doctorates (Rich Douglas), several masters degrees (some people in this board even have several MBAs), etc just because internet has made them accessible. I am guilty of this trend, I have accumulated a list of credentials that keep me alive in this market and have been able to survive because of this but I have decided to stop at this point and avoid more credentials. Just yesterday a customer asked why I don't get a CRISC, CSX or similar credential as I am in the IT risk management field and don't have an IT risk certification, the customer hinted me that he might not give me more work because of the lack of credential, this made me think as there seems to be an endless need for credentials that at some point one needs to stop in order to keep your sanity.
Then that brings up an ethics issue. Should it matter when exactly a person lists a fake MBA? In an ideal world where fairness and honesty reigns over everything, listing a fake MBA would land you in hot water no matter what. However, as we all know in business, if a person is producing and producing well only the bottom line matters and that person will keep their job.
I'll also say that in an ideal world people with fake credentials wouldn't slip through into top jobs with upper-level companies, but the truth is, they do. A few have even made it to CEO.
The issue is the also the definition of a fake MBA. Can we say that an MBA in business metaphysics from a religious exempt school is fake? What about an unaccredited degree from a state approved school?
There is also the issue of people claiming credentials from legit places, how many people actually validate a credential? There are services that provide fake transcripts that are also willing to mail them in a sealed envelope with the logo of the school in question that makes it hard to validate credentials.
You are right, in an ethical world we should not be seeing these things but the last American presidential election proved that we live in a world where ethics seem to hold little value (both democrats and republicans).
As crazy as it may sound to some here, I try to put the exempt schools and unaccredited schools in a bit of a different category from the outright fakes, adding in a sort of vetting to find out if the school is operating with respectability. A school can of course be legit and carry a religious exemption and/or be unaccredited, but there has to be evidence for me that the school is operating on the up and up. For example, comparing a place like Nations University (pre-accreditation) vs. North Carolina College of Theology, I would say that Nations built up a reputation for operating a legitimate program by having rigorous and respectable academic standards and being forthright about its lack of accreditation, whereas NCCT built the reputation of operating as a diploma mill by having a lack of standards and claiming accreditation from two unrecognized accreditors. Those situations are the simple ones.
The problem comes in when there isn't enough information out there on a school. There are unaccredited and religious exempt schools operating totally under the radar. They may be good schools, they may be bad schools, you may see them listed on some resumes but you never hear anything about them. Those are the ones I worry most about because it's hard to know where to place them. Many who are aware of how the system works will simply put them in the trash pile instead of trying to figure out how to classify them, and I don't blame them necessarily because it appears safer to dismiss schools like those rather than taking a chance only to find out later they were outright diploma mills.
One of the major benefits of working for certain major corporations is that when the time comes, these organizations will foot the bill for an employee's MBA program. While the costs are probably nominal for most organizations, there is always the worry that the employee will "jump ship" shortly after completing the program, moving on to "greener pastures". Maybe there will be a push towards employers endorsing or promoting that employees pursue particular certs, with the usual bonuses for completion still attached, as a way to cut costs while also, in theory at least, "limiting" employee movement options (due to the relatively lower number of options that these certs would/could provide).
Good thought. Some companies have language in the tuition reimbursement forms that mandates you pay the money back if you leave the company within a certain period of time since receiving the funds. Cardinal Health is one company I know for sure has had this.
I remember hearing a lot that the PMP would disrupt the MBA. Didn't happen. Instead, the value of both--while still having respectable value--has decreased.
The fact that the MBA is so accessible now (i.e. damn near every school offers it), the question in my mind is, do we even need a disruption of it now? After all, even an inexpensive but legit MBA from a relatively unknown school is still an MBA and that has to have better utility than some cert from a non-degree granting online program. I feel that unless these "disruptive certs" come from a well-known and respected school (a place with a legacy and/or a mascot attached) it's nothing more than an educational marketing experiment.
You make a good point. Considering that, I'd think the disruption would speak more to price and time saving over an MBA. However, as you mentioned, if the utility is not equal it's all meaningless.
Right. So companies could always prolong that time period or move towards the certs in order to keep costs lower for them and to ensure that employees are continuing their professional development.
Separate names with a comma.