"Is the MBA Obsolete" and SJCME

Can't get enough of talking about SJCME's intriguing MBA program.

The US News rankings site carries an article discussing the real-world utility of the MBA, noting that young MBA grads have their heads full of quantitative methods and nothing else.

Quotes:

"...according to at least one recent critic of the master of business administration degree, it's all a big, fat waste of time. "Conventional M.B.A. programs train the wrong people in the wrong ways with the wrong consequences," Henry Mintzberg, a professor of management studies at McGill University in Montreal, wrote last year in a book harshly attacking today's B-school system ["Managers Not MBAs: A Hard Look at the Soft Practice of Managing and Management Development"]

moreover:

"...M.B.A. skeptic Jeffrey Pfeffer--himself a professor at Stanford University's Graduate School of Business--notes that there are plenty of thriving companies (Southwest Airlines, Pixar, and Men's Wearhouse, to name a few), not to mention entire countries (Japan, Germany, China), that have done just fine without large numbers of business school graduates. "There is little evidence that mastery of the knowledge acquired in business schools enhances people's careers," he wrote in an eye-opening 2002 study."

As the discussion relates to the leadership-focused SJCME MBA program:

"In an effort to tackle these criticisms, many top schools are beginning to take steps to supplement brass-tacks classes in accounting and marketing with segments on leadership, collaboration, and the like....

Some schools require a sequence of three or four quantitative foundation/pre-req courses. If SJCME followed suit they'd raise the cachet of their ethics- and leadership-centric offering. The climate is right - SJCME could position itself as Brand Leadership.

 

Hi Daniel - It seems that I've become lost in the alphabet. Can you please tell me what SJCME means? It doesn't seem to be in the article you linked to and there's no other reference/link in your post. If you want it to be seen as a "brand" then it ought to be clear what you're referring to. Thanks for the help.
Jack

 

I believe he is referring to Saint Joseph College of Maine possibly. Just remember people talking about it on the site and how pretty the campus is etc. If I am wrong I am sorry!

 

St. Joseph's College of Maine (SJCME) which is http://www.sjcme.edu.

EDIT: Oops! I see JoePan got in there and answered the question while I was typing this post. Oh, well... I'll leave it; but I just wanted to point out that I wasn't trying to be repetitive. JoePan's answer would have been sufficient if I'd known it was gonna' beat mine to the punch.

I'm sort of responsible for referring to St. Joseph's by "SJCME" around here... and maybe causing others to do so. In my defense, though, I don't believe I've ever done so in a post without doing it the way the AP stylebook says to do it, and that's to type-out/spell-out the entity's full name on its first occurance in the piece, followed immediately by its acronym/abbreviation in parenthesis; then refer to it only by said acronym or abbreviation starting with the second occurance, to the end of the piece.

So, therefore, whenever I write about SJCME, the first time I refer to it I write:

• St. Joseph's College of Maine (SJCME)

and then every time in the piece, thereafter, I just write:

• SJCME

and had the thread-starter done that, it would have been more clear. Writing, in life, according to a stylebook -- at least to a point -- has its virtues.

As a fan of SJCME and the very MBA program to which the thread-starter refers, I like his thread-starting post, of course...

...but if I'm to be fair, even he now deserves my dreaded, now-becoming-standard, boilerplate reminder that I'm now inserting into all threads where it's appropriate (and in which I happen to notice it's needed):

• PLEASE PROVIDE A LINK IN YOUR THREAD-STARTING POSTS TO THE WEB SITE OF THE ENTITY/ENTITIES ABOUT WHICH YOU'RE INQUIRING/COMMENTING SO THAT THOSE WHOSE OPINIONS/COMMENTS YOU SEEK WILL NOT BE BURDENED WITH HAVING TO GOOGLE SAID ENTITY/ENTITIES AND FIND ITS/THEIR WEB SITE(S) THEMSELVES; AND ALSO TO ENSURE THAT THE WEB SITE(S) THEY FIND IS/ARE, IN FACT, THAT/THOSE OF THE ENTITY/ENTITIES ABOUT WHICH YOU'RE INQUIRING/COMMENTING.

I'm not trying to nag on or embarrass, or single-out anyone, mind you... but this business of thread-starting posts which refer in casual, off-handed, familiar ways to institutions -- assuming that everyone is as up-to-speed thereon as the thread-starter -- is starting to get out of hand around here.

Whew! Okay... now that that's out of the way... on to actuallly responding to the thread-starter:

Indeed, Daniel, it is difficult to stop talking about SJCME's MBA in Quality Leadership, isn't it. As is clear from its unusual (by typical MBA program standards) curriculum, SJCME seems determined not to graduate people therefrom who "have their heads full of quantitative methods and nothing else." Hence, at least one of the reasons it's among my favorite MBA programs floating around out there... it's unambiguous ethical and leadership components, and its being offered by a university owned by one of my favorite herds-o-nuns being the other two.

According to the parts of the article you cite, SJCME is ahead of its time, no?

 

Thanks Joe. I'm just trying to keep up with the acronyms.
Jack

 

Yeah It's determined to graduate people without ANY quantitative methods! It also lacks an Accounting component or anything that resembles one!It appears to me that this MBA does not follow the common AACSB, ACBSP or IACBE course structure. This is a bit of an issue only because your future employer/next academic venture may expect you to have a certain skill set when acquiring an MBA. In St. Joseph's College of Maine you may not acquire these skills. On the other hand something may be said for the fact the Skills you obtain at SJCME may better perpare you for the real world. That of course is subjective and it would be very difficult to measure.I do not fault the program for not having a quantitative methods requirement, I think that alot of MBA programs are to bent on Quantitative methods! I would like to see some more traditional Business Administraion classes like accounting and marketing in the program however. It appears tro be a little weak IMHO on the Business Administration side(even when we ignore quantitative methods)

Better watch out some may construe that you are calling the good sisters,cattle.

I honestly think the article hits the nail on the head here

 

Thankgod.

Everything's a tradeoff. That's, in part, why friendorfoe, who is planning on getting the SJCME MBA come hell or high water, has been asking around, around here, about ways to augment his core business knowledgebase with some kind of business certificate or diploma program.

To the exclusion of that on which SJCME's MBA might, I admit, tend to overfocus.

I would not argue with you, there. But I would not consider that to be a fatal flaw.

Of course they know I'm not; but even if I were, I've never met one of them -- and I've met several -- who didn't have a good sense of humor... about themselves, as well as nearly all else. That is yet another reason why I'm a real fan.

And I honestly think that article is talking about MBA programs that, unlike SJCME's, have begun to realize that ethics and leadership is important, but respond to that realization by inserting one introductory course in each area into the core; and are then satisfied, wrongly, that that'll do it. We're seeing more and more of that in MBA programs.

SJCME, on the other hand, is saying, in essence: Look, if you don't know your accounting and finance and statistics before you ever apply here, then perhaps ours is not the program for you. Go learn that in your undergrad, or in a graduate certificate program, where it belongs. This program is intended to make you a more ethical, talented -- maybe even gifted -- leader in business. On that score, we will not fail you.

As the article suggests, more heavily-quantitative MBA programs which only pay lip service to ethics and leadership with a mere course in each forced, awkwardly, into their core most definitely fail on that score. Therefore, I agree, completely, with that of the article which you quoted because I know it's not talking about the likes of SJCME's intentionally-unusual MBA.

 

Well...I have to chime in.

I called St. Joes (SJCME aka St. Josephs College of Maine) and discussed the light business requirements of the MBA they offer. I cannot accurately quote the person I spoke with except I remember them distinctly saying:

"...we approach the aspects of business from the human side..."

and

"...this is an MBA and the focus is on business...."

the idea is that you are focusing on how business operates as a "human" endeavor...which to me makes sense due to the fact that business is all about humans....

That being said, I do plan on getting a business undergrad/graduate cert. to make up for the lack of formal business mathematics and finance portions....Rutgers University

http://camden-sbc.rutgers.edu/cme/online-business-management-training.htm

to round out the missing core curriculum....which as Gregg said is a trade off.

Is the degree ahead of its time? I think so. So many MBAs running around with poor people skills, no ethics and not even a basic ability to lead cattle have somewhat tarnished the letters "MBA".

Is the degree weak on finance, etc? Yep, but I'm not bashing University of Texas McCombs School of Business for offering an MBA that's weak in any type of identifiable ethics or leadership curriculum.

http://mba.mccombs.utexas.edu/students/academics/curriculum/index.asp

Notice they have a class called Managing Human Capital? Now I'm not knocking them, but just the name of the class shows the depth of the humanity in the degree, no?

As for the quote:

"Will innovations like these satisfy all the critics? Probably not. Mintzberg, for one, says it's inherently impossible to teach leadership to 25-year-olds who lack any real background in management."

I adamantly disagree. The above quote would certainly be a surprise to the U.S. Army's OCS....(Officer Candidate School) which while it does turn out some turds (every school does) it also has a process to weed non-leader inclined students to more productive venues....like peeling potatoes.

I seriously doubt someone interested in becoming a leader would sit through St. Joes and maliciously complete their degree. They would be BORED OUT OF THEIR MINDS!!! If you don't give a rats butt about leadership...why would you take the MBA from St. Joes? I think the degree is intended to attract people with a desire to become a leader, which is the single most important aspect of any leader who has ever lived.....desire....calling....grit....call it whatever but it all comes to personal will. Anyone wanting sincerely to become a leader, that even has the most basic spark, can be made into a leader; perhaps not a George Patton or an Abe Lincoln, but a leader nonetheless.

 

Wait a minute! Are you saying that I resemble that remark?

 

Nope... not unless you have poor people skills, no ethics and lack a basic ability to even lead cattle.

What I'm refering to specifically is the 24 year old hot shot...we all have met this guy...with a Corvette, an attitude and an MBA....

You don't have a Vette do you?

 

IMO, the credibility of the program suffers by calling itself an MBA, but as a "Masters in Leadership and Ethics", it is dynamite. I agree that when you tell someone you have an MBA, there are certain expectations that come with it which the St. Joe's program does not fulfill. Although the program may be a pioneer in revolutionalizing the MBA curriculum, the St. Joe's program will not be taken seriously in the business world. But did I mention I love the courses???

 

I don't know....I would argue that it would be (and should be)taken seriously if for no other reason than...

1.) It is an MBA
2.) It is a RA school
3.) The school has a good reputation and
4.) It is concerned with "business" whereas a MSL "Masters of Science in Leadership http://www.sckans.edu/msl/index.php?page_ID=1384 seems to be concerned with Leadership as a discipline within itself and in generic form....whereas St. Joes concerns itself with leadership as a trait (like the MSL) and its role within the business dynamic (unlike the MSL).

 

I had to reply …
How about 26, a vette and an over advertised, overpriced, kinda-sorta MBA?

I am actually thinking about doing the Morehead State MBA. They will give me "credit" for 9 UoP hours. Silly to think about, I know.

 

You fit the mold....you don't call people "Sport" do you?

BTW...if you've already finished your MBA at UofP I don't see what a second MBA would have to offer you...except relieving you of some cash...which doesn't sound very MBA'ish to me.

 

Ha. Nope. Although there is this @ss that calls everyone "big shooter". I hate it.

Big Shooter - who says that?

 

That's a new one...I worked with a guy who called everyone "Killer" and give you a little back rub type of thing everytime he walked up behind you and joined a conversation. I hated that crap.

 

Alrighty...how about "Master of Science in Business Leadership and Ethics?" I am not knocking the program, just questioning the title of MBA in describing it. I think the course selections are excellent!

Personally, I am very weak in math. I would not want to get this particular MBA and have people assume I have math capabilities that I don't have.

Maybe it just me...

 

I'd say you are completely wrong in this matter! You used Southwestern College(KS) as an example of a Master of Leadership program, which is fine but had you done more research you would have found these DL Master of Leadership programs that have as much if not more business administarion classes as SJCME! Some even include Quantative methods!
I touched upon the fact that this "MBA" program did not follow the similar AACSB,ACBSP and IACBE course structure which is fine it doesn't have to, It's not accreditited by any of them(nor would it be unless they completely revamped their defination of MBA). Also there is some controvery over the effectiveness of professional accreditation and that is fine it doesn't have to be a PA degree,but should follow some guidelines as to what is expected of an MBA look at Heriot-Watt's MBA they are not PA and still very much a true MBA in every sense. I have to agree with JH50 in his initial view of this program! One thing can be said for professional accreditation like it or not you know the program will include what most expect from an MBA program. You could get a certificate from another school to suppliment the loss in certain areas but if you need to do that to get all the same core courses as another MBA it would seem to me that it is not an MBA or what most people expect in terms of an MBA's knowledge. Just my opinion

Here is alist of links of Master of Leadership DL programs for your reading pleasure:

http://www.bellevue.edu/degrees/mldr.asp#mldr

http://www.nu.edu/Academics/Schools/SOBM/ManagementMarketingE/Degrees/720-815.html

http://www.mountainstate.edu/majors/whystudy/sl/MSSLBrochure.pdf#search='Master%20of%20science%20in%20Leadership'

http://www.capella.edu/schools_programs/business_technology/masters/leadership.aspx

http://www.leadership.duq.edu/home/main.cfm?SID=130
leadership and ethics. There are more leadership programs offered by Duquesne

If need be I can add B&M programs to better support my post but seeing this is a DL board,I only mention DL programs.

 

Good! With the possible exception of myself -- and at this point, I'm thinking it's no longer true in my case -- you have researched the SJCME MBA about as well as anyone. I dare say you are now the resident expert thereon. I was hoping you'd join us here. Thank you.

Ah! So that's the one you've now decided on. Good. It, too, is a winner.

Oh... I dunno... I think that pretty much describes Ted.

(Just kidding!)

You know what? SJCME should change

• MB510 Financial Principles & Policy

into

• MB510 MBA accounting, finance and statistics

and redesign it and make it into a four-hour course... or maybe even a six-hour course that spans two semesters. Or... what the heck... just keep it a three-hour course. Who knows.

My point is, I realize that other MBA programs devote one 3-hour course to each; but covering only the absolute accounting/finance/statistics essentials that any self-respecting MBA ought to know in a single course is actually in keeping with SJCME's obvious attitude toward those subjects and their relative importance in what SJCME considers to be a proper MBA program where ethics and leadership reign supreme. Doing so would go a long way toward eliminating what is obviously a sticking point for MBA purists with regard to the SJCME program; and it would pretty much satisfy/assuage the fears of the friendorfoes of the world who want to make sure that their baseline accounting/finance/statistics knowledge will not be unworthy of the "MBA" letters behind their names.

Exactly! Exactly! Yes! That's it! That's it, on the nose! In that simple example, what is wrong with most MBA programs, and what is right about SJCME's, is summarized... and eloquently. The term "human capital" has always made me not just squirm, but has always made me sick. It is the most insensitive, wrong-headed term -- behind which is an equally wrong-headed business sensibility -- the embracing of which by today's MBAs is precisely what leads to the likes of what we've seen at places like Enron in the past few years. "Human capital," mygod... when humans are thought of in that way, it's no wonder the smarmy little bastard ivy league Enron MBAs were caught on tape chuckling about the money they were gonna' make by causing artificial shortages for Californians on the electrical grid.

All anyone has to do to know what friendorfoe is talking about here is root around on the web until you find those recordings and just listen to them. It was shaden freuda, at its most virulent! People's lives were ruined by those shortages that summer; fake shortages, trumped-up by MBAs with no souls who embrace business sensibilities that are able to see people as "human capital." Any human with an ounce of compassion in them -- just one lousy ounce -- cannot listen to those tapes and the delight in the misery that those soulless bastards knew they were about to inflict on unsuspecting Californians, and not agree that there is a special place in hell waiting for them!

SJCME's MBA is, in my opinion, a thoughtful response to what today's MBA has become. Note its glaring lack of any courses in such things as Sun Tzu and the Art of War upon which so many MBA programs of the '90s, and even today, still focus. It is such graduates -- bereft of business ethics because of their "all's fair in love, war and business" MBA training -- that breeds such as the dickless little sonsofbitches who perpetrated such hoaxes while in the employ of the godless Enron... and with its blessing. May they rot in hell!

(Whew! That certainly felt good!)

Well said. friendorfoe has become a true believer. He completely gets what SJCME is trying to do with that MBA. That so many MBA purists/traditionalists don't get it is part of the problem... and part of what makes SJCME's MBA such a breath of fresh air. It's no accident that it's a school owned by the Sisters of Mercy who offer it; rather, it's providence. May it set the tone for MBAs for the next hundred years! From my typing fingers, to God's ears... er... web browser.

God reads DegreeInfo, you know.

But it's not a Masters in Leadership and Ethics. That's just what MBA purists/traditionalists wish it were called so that the bereft-of-ethics/leadership MBA that they have won't seem so cold as the trend toward less numbers and more people skills among MBAs gains momentum. SJCME's MBA is not mis-named. MBA purists/traditionalists are simply misguided... and maybe more than a little jealous.

Which renaming/redesigning MB510, as I outlined above, would fix in a jiffy.

Wanna' bet?

As a means of avoiding getting your head lopped off around the likes of me in this thread, yes... you did.

(Just messin' widcha'! Relax!)

No! See... you're still not getting it. SJCME is saying, in effect:

• Look. The traditional MBA programs have screwed it up... missed the boat. Here's what an MBA should really be all about. It's you who have the misnamed degree.

This is about trailblazing, not conformity. SJCME is elbowing its way into the world of MBA traditionalists/purists while making no apologies for what it's calling an MBA... and saying, in effect, "Deal with it!"

Why? Save for a stronger showing in the areas of accounting, finance and/or statistics, what does it lack which should deprive it of the right to call itself an "MBA"? This is starting to sound more like sour grapes than an argument with objective merit... sort of like, "Dammit! I had to suffer through all that quantitative analysis stuff before I got to put 'MBA' behind my name! SJCME grads shouldn't be given a pass!"

But just not for an "MBA," right? Would changing MB510 in the way I proposed round-it-out for you so that you would not choke so on the "MBA" moniker?

No! It's not just you. Again, that's, in part, why friendorfoe wants to round-out with a certificate of some kind. You've got a perfectly valid point, there! Bravo! I wonder if the solution is to suggest that SJCME's MBA is not really an MBA; or, rather, to suggest to SJCME that:

• they maybe re-work MB510 as I've proposed; or,
  
• that they maybe offer more traditional MBA accounting, finance and statistics as electives; or,
  
• that they maybe offer a pre-MBA certificate that covers those things and then make it a requirement for MBA applicants whose undergrad and/or additional certs/diplomas do not adequatelly prepare them in those areas.

Just an opinion, mind you... just an opnion.

 

Steve,
If you have any questions about Morehead don't hesitate to ask them(of course in another thread,PM,Email or whatever). I don't want to hijack this fine thread.