St. Josephs College of Maine

I appreciate the input mourningdove. I may PM you with a couple of questions as I can't think of any now.

 

I looked into St Joe's about 2 months ago. I even called their MBA Director to talk. He was not the most friendliest or the most helpful guy. After looking deeper, asking a lot of questions...I decided that St. Joe's MBA Program wasn't for me. Some of these factors are:

1) Brand new program.
Not that many people have been through it. The school is still very much more slanted toward their undergrad programs since that's what they're known for (undergrad liberal arts).

2) Took almost no transfer of credits from any past classes (business grad level) that I have done.

3) Has no parallel version of the program for their ground school. The MBA program is only available online.

4) They couldn't seem to get it straight if there were exams included or not. The financial aid people were quite useless when I asked them how would one qualify through their program, etc. They would say, "you have to take an exam" but when I asked the Director, he said, "there are no exams." It was just plain frustrating. I've talked to many schools and never had so many issues getting a straight answer from a financial aid department.

 

I've got to be honest...when I called them they were very nice and helpful. As for being a unique MBA, they are, therefore not many graduate level credits will transfer.

As for your experience...that is interesting. Have you spoken to anyone else who had a difficult time with them?

 

Well they never returned my emails. I didn't get a good vibe when I talked to them earlier, as the previous poster mentioned not too helpful or knowledgeable. And I got to looking at the course list and I figured the classes sounded kind of wierd, I wanted something more standard. Also, I looked up the book requirements at the bookstore and didn't like the quantity of items they make you buy.

I've had a good experience so far with Salve Regina, they've been pretty nice, plus you can try before you buy, 3 graduate level courses. Also, some of the self paced classes they offer don't even require books.

 

The MBA at St. Joe's is really more of an organizational behavior degree than an MBA in the true sense.

I forgot to add that the other thing about the program that I did not like. You don't participate in a bulletin board with other students. It's a strict 1:1 email based type of correspondence with the instructor since it's basically a self-pace, self taught type of program. To paraphrase a question I asked to the MBA Director. "How can a program in leadership teach you to interact and 'lead' if you don't have anyone to interact with but yourself?". Regardless of the major, any org behavior or MBA program gains its strength from the interaction you have with others. Not necessarily in doing group assignments, etc. but in learning with others and from others. Leadership is a team thing, in particular to the topics that St Joe's program is in. It's not about self-leadership for you to be an individual contributor but to lead to become a better manager, etc. I am by nature a person who doesn't like groups, crowds too much but even I understand the benefits of learning from others and with others. This aspect of the program really concerned me.

 

I see your point….but I also see the point of the degree. I manage about 14 to 15 people right now. I am always in a leadership position...even when I don't want to be. I don't need anymore exposure to people and management...I'm tired at the end of the day. But being able to stand back and evaluate what I am doing at work, by quietly studying the theory while doing school work, kind of works for me. I apply what I am learning while at work.

 

For me, I think that any manager can learn to be a better manager or leader by learning from others and what they've done (both bad and good). Work is where you practice what you know. School is where you learn your skills and knowledge. If you look into the so-called top tier programs, you'd notice that their programs are designed for a lot of interaction between students so that each student can be both a learner and teacher. For example, some one who manages a small team could learn from you, a manager of a mid-sized team. And you could possibly learn from a manager who has lead very large teams in a large company. My point is this, managing isn't done in a void and the art of managing (not the science of it) is all about learning the skills and insights to do so from others who are good at it. Why do people take expensive leadership seminars? Because they want to learn from someone who has a lot of experience and insight into team or business issues. Studying management is not the same as studying information systems or programming where you just need to understand code or systems design and architecture and where limited exposure to others and their thoughts is more or less OK. Even so, I would say that a good systems architect can learn to be a better one through peer reviews, etc. For me, I want to be in a program that will give me more than a relationship with books and 1-2 professors. I want to be exposed to different ideas from diverse and experienced managers and I want to be a better leader/manager from having gone through a great learning experience (MBA). When I asked the St Joe's MBA Director about how one can learn to lead when one doesn't even learn with others. He had no real answer for me. His answer back was "the program is what it is". More of a take it or leave it type of attitude. I really wasn't impressed with that.

If you are interested in leadership based type programs, have you looked into MS in Management or even an Org Behavior degree program. They emphasis a lot in leadership and management and you also get to interact with other managers.

 

Actually yes, I have looked into a MS in Management but decided I would also like to understand more about business. Not only that, but the whole "leadership" thing is really not something learned in any kind of class environment. I work with several managers now that have both more experience and education than me that are terrible leaders.

I also make a distinction between a leader and a manager. A manager has authority, a leader has power...the two are not the same. You could be the lowest worker bee on the totem pole and still have oodles of leadership that make people want to follow you and listen to you. You may also be an executive for a fortune 500 company that can't even remember the name of your secretary who would sooner urinate in your mug than pour you some coffee.

The degree is what it is...From what I gather a business degree with a lot of introspection...with theory. This makes a (already) leader, a better leader.

I think this is an applied degree for those already in leadership positions. I really don't think you will learn any more about leadership in a sterile lab or classroom environment than you would from interacting with lots of other people. Collaboration of ideas is a good thing however and I recommend it, like those seminars you were speaking of, however I generally find that few businesses are run as poorly as a college (at least customer service wise) and thinking that a college will teach you everything you need to know about anything is very narrow.

I think we just may have to agree to disagree...however I am up for debate.

 

I respect speedoflight's analysis, and I do not begrudge him his belief -- and a valid one it is, at that -- that the work of acquiring an MBA is well-served by a less isolated sort of methodology than what SJCME's MBA program employs. But, by that opinion, and his questions, he reveals that he has missed some of our other conversations about SJCME's MBA program in other threads.

As to the "group discussion" methodology being superior, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If I want to be in group, I know where to find it. If I'm going to pay a university to open my skull and put knowledge into it, then I want to hear from the university, not from fellow classmates who may or may not know how to punch their way out of a paper sack. Just my opinion, mind you.

As for the rest of it, speedoflight comes to this table with the more traditional, classical view of what makes an MBA program effective. That viewpoint, in addition to championing the group-discussion kind of methodology, also tends to espouse the notion that an MBA isn't an MBA if it doesn't contain all the standard accounting, finance, management, statistiics, organizational behavior, etc. coursework that most all other MBAs contain... and which SJCME's MBA clearly doesn't contain (or, if it does, it contains not nearly as much, at any rate).

That is a perfectly valid -- perhaps even sound -- criticism of SJCME's MBA program; and I respect it. But the thrust of most of our conversations around here about SJCME's MBA lately has been how unusual it is compared with nearly all other MBA programs out there; how it doesn't contain anywhere near the amount of all the traditional courses as most MBA programs out there; and how it is made-up, in largest measure, of the kind of coursework to which most other MBA programs tend to only allocate perhaps 3 to 9 hours... ostensibly because that's pretty much all that's left by the time the other 30 hours or so have been taken-up by statistics and organizational behavior and accounting and finance, etc. Part of that which those to whom the SJCME MBA program is appealing cite, as strengths, the very differences that speedoflight criticizes.

In speedoflight's view, perhaps SJCME's MBA is more of a masters in organizational behavior. From the MBA traditionalist viewpoint, that would make some sense. And that's fine. But to those who like and understand the SJCME program, it's finally an MBA that does more than merely pay lip service to "leadership" by allocating substantially more of its coursework to that general subject than the mere 3 to 9 hours of it that other MBAs -- which also claim to be in "leadership" -- tend to allocate.

That allocation, and shifted focus, reflects SJCME's different approach to the art of management. And it is an art. Managers for whom their craft is a science tend to be of the left-brained type for whom I, for one, would never want to work; nor of the type that I'd ever want to be. SJCME's approach to education, just generally, comes from a different place than that from which the hardcore, down-and-dirty, business-oriented colleges and universities tend to come. SJCME's MBA program has a a much stronger people focus, and holistically ethical orientation.

Perhaps SJCME's is an MBA that is better suited to business administration undergrads who already have about as much accounting, finance, and statistics as they'll likely ever need (or, if not, as can be easily supplated by a weekend seminar). Maybe that's the problem. Perhaps SJCME's MBA should not be compared with MBAs that are offered to non-business-administration undergrads. For those type of students, lots of accounting, finance and statistics, with comparatively little left over for such comparatively esoteric pursuits as "leadership" might be more in order; and for them, perhaps the SJCME MBA is probaly not a good choice. Who knows.

All I know is that for me the SJCME MBA -- and SJCME itself -- is very attractive. I've already learned, and put into practice in 30 years of business, all the accounting, statistics, finance and other similar coursework I can stomach. So, were I in the market for an MBA, the SJCME program would be very attractive, indeed. But that's just me. And friendorfoe, too, apparently.

I believe that speedoflight's criticism and analysis is to be taken very seriously by the reader here. There's wisdom in it. I believe that those interested in a more traditional, classical, hard-hitting, no-nonsense, take-no-prisoners MBA should heed his advice.

Those who already have the core business learning under their belts, and who want to explore comparatively oft-ignored (by most MBA programs) aspects of management and, most specifically, leadership will, I believe, find the SCJME MBA to be quite satisfying... maybe even life-altering. That is what, if he'll permit me to speak for him, I believe friendorfoe sees in the program. It appeals to the part of him that couldn't care less about competing with the more traditional MBA holders out there who are vying for all the top management jobs in all the highest-paying industries. By the end of the SJCME MBA program, I believe that friendorfoe will feel like he's really gotten something from the program... in the same sort of sense that one might feel like one's gotten something from a non-credit, purely-self-improvement type of program in which one might enroll at some point in one's life.

If, because of all that, SJCME shouldn't really have called its MBA an "MBA," but, instead, should have called it an MA or MS in Organizational Behavior or Leadership, then so be it. But that's not what it calls it. And when he's done, friendorfoe's business card will look just as impressive with "MBA" after his name as will speedoflight's.

As for certain people in certain departments at SJCME not being too knowledgeable or helpful; or their giving conflicting information; or even their not answering emails, this can be said of every college or university now and then. As programs grow, there are always new hires who may or may not know all the answers yet. There will always be emails that get lost or go unanswered for one reason or another and must be re-sent with the words "SECOND REQUEST" at the top to notify the recipient that this is the second time one's had to ask. I've got an email like that into SATS right this very moment which hasn't been answered since I sent it about a week ago. I'll give it another few days and re-send it and I'm sure someone will send me a nice, apologietic reply which ultimately answeres all my questions... or, if not, then sends me to someone who can. The same can be said of telephone calls. If I'm talking to a person who isn't helpful, I, for one, am just obnoxious enough to plainly state to the person with whom I'm talking that I don't think they know what they're doing and I ask for someone who does. I sugarcoat it, of course, but I'm sure it's clear to them what I mean. And I don't lose a minute's sleep in life over my utilizing that kind of approach; nor, consequently, am I able to say, as some here have, that I emerged from any such phone call having not gotten what I called to get. Perhaps those who have such problems in life should use their MBA electives for some courses in assertiveness.

I, for one, have never had anything but pleasant, helpful, caring (and I emphasize the word "caring") conversations with people at SJCME. I've had a couple emails (out of many more than that) go unanswered so that I had to send another with "SECOND REQUEST" pasted across its top. No big deal. SJCME hasn't earned its reputation for not treating its students like cattle by jerking people around. The reader, here, should consider the unfortunate SJCME experiences of some, as described herein, to be exceptional and by no means the norm.

Or so it is my view and opinion.

 

Well said Gregg, I think you got me pegged pretty good. As for the accounting, statistics, etc....I'm not really big on that. Is it part of business? Sure, is it important? Sure. Should I get a degree on it? Nah...I can learn that (if needed) in a For Dummies book (of which I am a huge and grateful advocate)...should the time arise. Or I can enroll in an accounting certification course etc.

Recently with the scandals like what we saw at Enron, we observed guys who are very good at crunching numbers and very poor in looking at themselves in the mirror...thus lots of people lost everything they had.

I'm not saying that an MBA in ethics or leadership would have changed that, but the kind of person who takes an MBA in such an area would really be subjecting themselves to a lot of abuse if indeed, they did not believe in it. It would make much more sense for THAT person to take a traditional MBA. And for those of us who are hard core business types, don't forget what business ultimately is all about.......*PEOPLE*..........but that doesn't mean that a traditional MBA is not valuable...those skills are very much in demand.

I for one believe that St. Joe's has appropriately named their MBA a Masters of Business Administration....after all, isn't "Administration" a leadership position? If we were to examine and define administration and then define management...there would be a strong correlation between the two...with administration being more focused on the big picture and management being focused on the human factor. However having a big picture view while keeping the human factor the priority is groundbreaking...but shouldn't be. Every effective leader knows that it is PEOPLE, not him/herself that makes an organization work.

Plus people don't generally see an MS or MA with the same prestige as an MBA...generally because of the success of the MBA degree seeing advancement to the top of business, thus you will have some outstanding leaders not reach their potential because of this perception...kind of like accreditation, huh?

Most of all remember....not all degree programs fit all people...


"If everybody is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking." ---(George S. Patton)

 

Well Des Elms, I agree you make some valid points ! Here is what I have issue with in this rucus, Yes SJCME's program is called an MBA program and they can all it anything they want as far as I am concerned. That said IMHO I think it's more of a marketing ploy on their part. I like SJCME's program but I do believe it should be a Master of Leadership degree.

Of course because this is a "MBA program" it would be interesting to see how they compete with more traditional MBA's. How often they are recruited by fortune 500 companies and how many are able to move on to a Doctoral program in Business Administration with out taking the Master's classes first. I honestly think that they may be doing their students a disservice to call this program an MBA program because people have certain expectations of MBA's. I fear that this program may let both graduates and potiential employers down.

that of course is just my opinion.

 

Well, of course! Who do you think you're dealing with, here!

[pause, for shock value]

Oh, relax! I'm just screwin' around!

There may be something to that way of thinking... I dunno. To argue it, we'd have to get into, among other things, how the "standard" for what makes an MBA is but a defacto standard and, therefore, one from which a regionally-accredited institution like SJCME may deviate without disgracing the title.

Not well, I'm guessing, in certain circles. The MBA traditionalist will not be impressed... as you and speedoflight are succinctly demonstrating here. This also harkens back to the value and utility of AACSB-accredited vs not-AACSB-accredited MBAs. It obviously depends on where the competition is taking place. I'm thinking that the typical SJCME MBA student would not be likely to want to work for a Fortune 100 or even 500 company... unless, perhaps, as the company chaplain.

Not often, if thinking like speedoflight's and yours is indicative of Fortune 500 thinking. Having worked for and consulted with many Fortune 500 companies, I can tell you that it is, by the way; so I'm more-than-certain that your not-clearly-articulated, but clearly-intended, point that the SJCME MBA might not be attractive to Fortune 500 companies is true. But pursuant to friendorfoe's excellent Enron point, more's the pity.

Now, on that one I think you might be more pessimistic than is warranted. I believe that the SJCME MBA might very well qualify as requisite to many DBA programs... especially if it's not the only business administration degree that the candidate has. As I pointed-out in my earlier post, perhaps the SJCME MBA is best-suited to a potential DBA candidate who also has a strong (and I emphasize the word "strong") undergraduate business administration degree.

Hmm. That's very strong language, Rivers... but I'm not saying it isn't appropriate. Hmm. I gues I'd need to think on that for a while before opining too much. My gut is that that's quite an overstatement, but you may be right under certain circumstances. Again, I'd need to ponder it for a while... and will.

Good post, though, Rivers. Lots to think about.

 

In all fairness to non-AACSB programs, I must sayMost follow a very similar guidlines reguardless of professional accrediation. So if you compare Amberton(RA only) to HBS(Harvard Business school and yes RA and AACSB) for example,you are going to find alot of similarity in the required courses.

It was only intended becasue I can not speak first hand of what fortune 500 companies are currently recruiting, but I do know that that is considered prestigeous by most MBA programs to be recruited by the Fortune 500.

I am not saying that they would have to take the leveling classes(foundation) classes but I was more so implying that they would be more likely to have to take the MBA classes in a DBA or PHD program where as they would be wavied for most other MBA graduates.(e.g. the lack of quantitative Stats, or Accounting).

my language is more geared at the fact that I feel that the program is Master of Leadership program incognito. Not that it makes it a bad program, just misrepresented. As you said in an earlier post it will look just as good for an SJCME grad to put the MBA behind thier name as anyone else. I of course agree with that assement as the degree is currently presented! At the same time I think there is a certain level and body of knowledge that comes with an MBA or even a MS in management and I feel that this program does not meet that standard(ok so I guess I like strong language).

 

Taking a look at Amberton’s MBA…since they were mentioned.


Program Prerequisite:

Prerequisite to the M.B.A. program is a bachelor's degree in business; otherwise, the student must either have had the following classes or their equivalent or must take the courses.

BUS3104 Statistical Analysis I
BUS3305 MGMT Processes/Info Sys
BUS3310 MKT Structure/Comp Analy
2-BUS4113 ACCT & Finance For Mgrs

Required Graduate Studies: 6 Hours

RGS6035 Research Methods
8-RGS6036 Ethics: Decision Making

Major Course Requirements: 18 Hours

HBD6771 Conflict MGMT/Resolution
....what do you think???HBD6776 Ldrshp Theories/Practice
6-HRT6575 Organizational Change
....can you find a match ???MGT6175 Mgmt: Responsibility/Practice
5-MGT6177 Human Resource Mgmt
7-MGT6203 Strategic Management

Business Administration Electives: 6 Hours
Selected From:
BUS5110 International Business
3-ECO6140 Managerial Economics
FIN6186 Managerial Finance
4-MGT5172 Analysis/Design Of Organ
MGT5193 Negotiation Skills for Managers
MGT5203 Operations Management
MGT6101 e-Commerce Essentials
MGT6102 e-Commerce Marketing
MGT6103 e-Commerce Financing
MGT6104 e-Commerce Management
MGT6106 Law Appln For Managers
MGT6172 Human Resource Management Law
MGT6174 Issues in Organizational Staffing
MGT6176 Compensation Management
MKT5153 Consumer Behavior
MKT6210 Marketing Management

Electives: 6 Hours
Electives may be selected from any discipline


Taking a look at St. Joe’s…..


Core Courses
4-MB500 Business/Organizational Dynamics
MB505 Knowledge-Based Decision Making
2-MB510 Financial Principles & Policy
MB520 Self-Leadership
8-MB530 Ethical, Social & Environmental Responsibility
3-MB540 The Economy as a System
7-MB550 Corporate Strategic Leadership
MB560 Quality Leadership

Quality Leadership Specialization Courses
MB641 Quality & Its Improvement
MB642 Leadership for Learning & Improved Performance
6-MB643 Leadership: Order & Change
MB650 Cross-Cultural Leadership
5-MB651 Strategic Leadership of Human Resources
3-MB660 Economics: Past, Present & Future


Well so far I have found 8 classes that bear at least a strong resemblance to each other....probably not exactly the same but cover the same type of area...albeit most likely a different approach.


I've numbered the matches I've seen like (1-***) so 1-*** equals 1-***.

Input from people who know better than me welcomed here.

So far the degrees don't look like they are from different planets.

 

It is interesting that DesElms thinks that I hold a traditionalist viewpoint about the MBA because in reality I don't. I have read greatly about the differences in MBA programs, some being more qualitative and others being a little more quantitative, etc. I have even held a "qualitative vs. quantitative" program discussion with a friend who is an MBA Director. I am of the opinion that currently most MBA programs are more slanted toward the quantitative side but rather than delving right into criticizing that, I know that they are that way for some very strong reasons. I don't think that the average MBA program (even from the top tier schools) can give you enough depth in any particular subject (leadership, marketing, accounting, etc. etc.) to become a subject matter expert because you only take between 3-5 classes in any subject. It is designed to give you a "well-rounded" training in management. You are perhaps expected to gain your "specialty" after acquiring your MBA and then going for an MS in that subject matter or perhaps even going directly into that MS itself.

I was very drawn to SJCME's MBA program at first because it was qualitative versus being quantitative but...I cannot overlook the fact that it lacks in what other schools have and in this, I do mean an ability to have a insight into what others' perspective/viewpoint. For me, I don't think it's good to just have a 1:1 correspondence with an instructor without a more well-rounded viewpoint from others. I even looked at the curriculum of MS in Management (in Leadership) and MS in Org Behavior programs and without a doubt, SJCME's MBA has a *much* closer connection to these programs in terms of required classes, core curriculum, etc.

Rivers writes:
my language is more geared at the fact that I feel that the program is Master of Leadership program incognito. Not that it makes it a bad program, just misrepresented. As you said in an earlier post it will look just as good for an SJCME grad to put the MBA behind thier name as anyone else. I of course agree with that assement as the degree is currently presented! At the same time I think there is a certain level and body of knowledge that comes with an MBA or even a MS in management and I feel that this program does not meet that standard(ok so I guess I like strong language).

I am inclined to agree with Rivers' comment, and as mentioned, I feel that SJCME's MBA is more to being a Masters in Mgmt in Leadership or Masters in Leadership. The MBA wrapper that SJCME gives the program is just a label. And as Rivers said, unfortunately you also don't gain that body of knowledge gained from an MS in Leadership from SCJME's MBA.

I have worked with many people who hold MBAs and in big (Fortune size) and small companies. I have never encountered any manager including myself who has ever required a candidate's MBA contain x,y,z classes, etc. Most people don't care if you took Stats, Accounting, blah blah. They just want to see you have the said degree, have the experience and can produce results. You must remember always that most of the people in this forum are much more knowledgeable about programs and their curriculums than the average Joe.

I am not trying to persuade or dissuade you from SJCME. It may be the perfect thing for you. When I examined it very closely after much research, thought, discussion with friends...I found that the program was not for me. At the end of the day, I was not comfortable with a program that would give me an "MBA" but perhaps not the depth and interaction I would like. I asked myself, do you merely just want to say you have an MBA, regardless of where or what that MBA is about, or do you want to have more than that.

While I respect DesElms' viewpoint, I would also note that thus far, none of the people who have responded to this thread here have undergone the SCJME MBA program and hence cannot give you first hand experience of being in it. The closest insight is from someone who has attended their undergrad program or perhaps might have close knowledge of the school itself which is NOT the same as experience in being in their MBA program. It would be interesting to talk to someone who has undergone or is currently going through the SJCME MBA program.

 

No argument there.

 

Nor should they you are comparing two different "leadership" degrees. I must also say though bearing resemblance and actually being similar are two different things. For example, you can take a survey of statistics class that only requires alegbra as a pre req. or you can take a Statistics class that requires Calculus as a prerequisite. They will share a strong resemblance, but I am willing to go out on a limb here and say that the course work will not even be in the same Galaxy.

The proof of course is in course descriptions,syallbi and textbooks.

 

I agree...without looking in depth at the catalog it is hard to make any type of determination.

Perhaps I will think this St. Joe's MBA over a little more closely...however I really don't work in business, but the point of an MBA is to have the skills of an MBA, thus an MBA without skills would make me a.......



.............poser.

What do you think Gregg?


I really like the concept of St. Joe's...but who wants to be a paper tiger?

Then again I'm fairly comfortable with not working in a fortune 500 company.....I would like the ability to work myself into an executive position in a local government though.

 

Oy. See... I knew this was where this thread was heading. Nice work, speedoflight and Rivers: Now friendorfoe is second-guessing his choice of SJCME's MBA program. I respect the viewpoint you guys are espousing, but it's MBA status quo. And that's precisely what SJCME's program is trying not to be... while still legitimately being able to call itself an MBA.

And it is an MBA, friendorfoe. I've thought more about the it's-really-just-master-of-organizational-somethingorother-in-MBA-clothing allegation and argument, and it just doesn't hold water. That's bona fide MBA-quality coursework you're seeing there. It's just not bogged-down with statistics and accounting and finance and whatever else most people with MBAs today wish they hadn't had to take. Mysery, remember, loves company. The status-quoers want you to suffer like they did... or plan on doing, as the case may be.

The recruiting they're talking about is Fortune 500 companies coming to the school and recruiting grads. That's a decidedly residential school sort of thing in the first place. I doubt it would make a whit of difference one way or another for a distance learner.

If the Fortune 500 argument is going to be made, then let's make it in the arena where it's more like to happen for a distance learning SJCME MBA grad: In the marketplace... where the candidates are responding to postings at Monster dot com, etc. In that environment, I don't believe anyone is going to be looking at/comparing the specific coursework... a point that was earlier made -- actually, more like conceded -- here. Only if the job were so specialized that certain kinds of MBA coursework were essential would such a thing ever be done. What the potential employers will do, however, is make sure the MBA is accredited... probably regionally accredited, but in many cases, who knows, the nationally-accredited Ashworth MBA might do, too... just so it's in the book where the HR person looks-up the school to make sure it's accredited by a USDE- and/or CHEA-approved agency. Beyond that, sure, some HR people will make sure the MBA is also AACSB-accredited, too. But as I said earlier, I'm not sure I'd ever want a job that required that kind of pedigree of my MBA... but that's just me.

As for a local government job, it's difficult to imagine any local government agency turning-up its nose at a regionally-accredited MBA in Leadership, like the one SJCME offers, under virtually any circumstances. You may rest assured that as long as SJCME is listed in the book that lists institutions of higher learning that are accredited by agencies approved by USDE and/or CHEA (which SJCME, as a regionally-accredited institution, most certainly is), then you'll be golden.

You'll most certainly not be a "paper tiger" or a "poser" for godsake! Up to a point, an MBA is an MBA is an MBA is an MBA. Most employment out there -- even among Fortune 500 companies -- never even comes close to crossing said point. Let's not, after all, get carried away, here.

I remember when you first discovered the SJCME MBA, friendorfoe. I noticed it right away because it was the same kind of reaction that I first had to it. There's unquestionably something different and more holistically attractive about it. It's difficult to articulate, but you nevertheless got it right away. If you believe you'll be taking your MBA into hot-and-heavy, head-to-head competition with bright, young, willing-to-sell-their-souls MBA grads for top-tier, people-would-kill-for-them, high-paying, Fortune-anything, rat-race, new-Mercedes-every-two-years, no-time-for-marriage-or-family, bereft-of-ethics-like-the-Enron-guys, spend-too-much-time-at-Hooters, die-of-an-early-heart-attack jobs, then by all means go get a more traditional MBA like speedoflight and Rivers have got your head all turned-around, thinking about, now.

If you want "MBA" after your name, legitimately; and you want your MBA to be just as attractive for its simply being regionally-accredited (AACSB be damned) to most (and I stress the word "most") employers; and if, along the way, you'd like to emerge from the program likely to be a just plain better person, on top of being a better manager, then stick with your decision to go to SJCME for your MBA in Leadership and stop being so easily distracted.

Or so says me... for what that's worth... which my ex-wife will tell you ain't very damned much!

 

Actually Gregg...I agree with you 100%. The only thing that concerned me, was as pointed out earlier...I didn't want to be expected to have a skill set that I didn't have. Upon looking further (and thinking deeper) I have decided that this is a specialized MBA that makes no effort to hide its emphasis.

If the St. Joe's MBA will equip me with the tools needed that an MBA should have, then I am all for it….which I believe it will. I don’t think these guys gutted out the *core* component of an MBA just to “sucker” graduate students into thinking they are learning business when in fact they are not.

Regardless, I believe that St. Joe's MBA is really more than a mere marketing ploy. I believe it is a fresh look at an established degree.

I've said it before and I'll say it again....St. Joe's MBA is really ahead of it's time. I think as more cooperate scandals occur we will see an increase in the call for integrity and real leaders.

A perfect example is General Honore in New Orleans. The Governor, Mayor heck even the President couldn’t pour water out of a bucket and low and behold a “LEADER” emerges and gets shit done. That’s what I’m talking about!

As for the MBA course work...I have looked at a LOT of schools:

NUC, Taft, Amberton, St. Joes (of course) etc....and I have seen a great varying amount of MBA courses. For instance, at NCU you can get an MBA in Criminal Justice....Does it make it less of an MBA?

I don't think so; I think it makes it a graduate business degree with an emphasis in administering in the area of the specialization.

I guess you could call me an academic "liberal". I believe schools and coursework have to evolve with society and the marketplace.