Prof Exam or MBA?

by Thomas Sim, 11 Oct 2003

To begin, I want to stress the point that pursuing knowledge is a noble course which everyone must cherish. Whatever view you might have after reading this article, I must stress that I am not against MBA or any postgraduate programmes in the pursuit of knowledge whatsoever.

Before anything else, let us qualify what is a postgraduate degree. Postgraduate degrees are in its strictest sense, degrees at Masters or Doctoral levels where a certain amount of basic knowledge (normally via a bachelors degree) has been acquired prior to taking up these research or taught degrees through a tertiary institution. They are usually the continuations of the first degree. Hence, I would not rate MBA as a definite postgraduate degree because many MBA holders and students are matured students who take up MBA as their 'first' degree. In the most common situation, MBAs are taken as a follow on of a technical degree and serves as an 'opener' to the business world. Anyway, in whatever manner it is taken, this article tries to discuss the rationale of doing MBAs or not having to do any.

I like to provide some basic assumptions before discussing further. There are two major functions that exist in a career. To me this is what marketers term as the law of duality. What it means is only two major brands would emerge in a matured market (Jack Trout). One brand would probably have 80% of the market share and the others 20%. This is the rule of 80/20.

I would like to give another analogy - in politics, it is like the leftist and rightist camps and they tend to balance each other in equilibrium. Similarly, this phenomenon happens in most organisations. There is the convergence towards 'specialist' or 'generalist' in any job requirement. The job market has this significance as in a General Manager and a technical specialist. For instance, I would relate to a CEO (Chief Executive Officer) and a CFO (Chief Financial Officer). There are of course, other specialists who are called 'CIO' (Chief Information Officer) or CLO (Chief Legal Officer). The CEO is a generalist and the CIO/CFO/CLO are specialists of their respective fields.

Professional examinations are routes to train specialists (CFO and CIO) whereby an MBA programme is usually an additional education for a person who is already a generalist (CEO). In the first place, a generalist has to have the quality of leadership, interpersonal skills, positive mindset and good language skills. Most of the working environment of a generalist is dealing with people and it is indispensable that the above qualities are already in place before one is able to lead.

The reason for most people who take up MBA programmes is the impression that it will offer a life time success to corporate career. Only a handful is doing it for the knowledge and exposure. If a research is done - I doubt if it would ever be done by an MBA school - I bet the outcome is that many MBA graduates are working for bosses who are not even graduates themselves. This just means that you don't need to be a holder of MBA to be a successful CEO or business owner.

It is a common situation where a company owner is not bothered whether one is a holder of MBA or any non-technical degree as long as one performs in the job. The bottom line is still profit and loss of the business. Inevitably being successful people themselves, the business owners only employ MBA holders to run their businesses because they being so able (monetarily and otherwise) that they have decided to enjoy life. Or, the bosses choose not to do certain 'dirty' things that suitable candidates are chosen to do it for them. He who is smart would definitely employ someone not smarter than him. Or else, who shall be in control?

Like what Jack Trout has said, strategies of a business would best be rest on the owners of business themselves. You can't rely on someone else to formulate strategies and expect it to work without leadership from within. If a smart business owner employs a holder of MBA degree, it would highly be that he just wants his reassurance and implementation, not his strategies. So, a person with MBA degree would be very much handicapped, as he is just a follower and not a strategist. Ask yourself, who is the boss? Even a specialist (Company Sec, what a disappointment!) can't get his/her boss to listen, what more a generalist?

If the reverse happens, i.e. where the business owner let one runs the business 100%, then this guy is probably a mummy's boy and the business would best be yours, not his. Of course, there are situations where the obstacles to business ownership are capital and contact, not capability.

So, this means you would be 'temporarily' on the job. When you have the capital and the contacts, you are going to set up business of your own. The irony is why pay so much (RM30K-100K) to study MBA and can't start your own business in the first place? Remember? All businesses start from small!

Of course, the common excuse is that I have only a little bit of money (RM30K-100K is a little bit!) and I am using it for a good course - career advancement or job promotion. What a good excuse!

To me, there are two reasons that one should consider MBA courses. Firstly, when one is already an owner of a business where one aspires to widen his/her perspective of business at the same time get some contacts. Secondly, one who is in love of knowledge and has the money to spend to get some contacts for future use. Remember people rub shoulders by taking up Harvard MBA! Why? You will meet the rich and influential people and thus can make business contacts with! Whatever, please forget about the fantasy of opening an MBA school to make money later? Even now, they are too many MBA courses already.

Educationists are also businessmen. Which educationist businessmen would complain when the demand of a 12 months MBA is so great that the money is triple compared to a first degree in business which takes 3 years to complete? Furthermore, you have to have a diploma or STPM before you could study for a basic degree and there is no such requirement by the government for an MBA! This only show one truth of the whole truth - commerialisation of MBAs.

Thus, my advice is to sharpen one's leadership attributes, interpersonal skill, positive mindset and language skills before any MBA programme. To spend that amount of money, I rather take up ICSA or join the Toastmasters or other leadership training courses and earn interest in a bank while doing so.

A professional programme on the other hand is to prepare a person for and on the job. In 80% of the time, you need a job first before you can get to be a boss. In this competitive world, it takes 80% of qualification to get a job but only 20% of qualification to be a boss.

That is fortunately true in more than 80% of the time. Thank god! Or else, good and hardworking people would never become successful bosses anymore!

If this society is a pyramid (see my article on A Pyramidal Society) only 20% of the employer would need an MBA and in 80% of the time, the employer (who might already be an MBA himself - what an irony!) would need a specialist to get certain specific things done. Although many people aspire to be CEOs, there are only 5% (or less) of the job opportunity there. The whole truth is that what carries a person to the top is 80% of the time not related to qualification!

The answer is not an MBA or any postgraduate degree. It is Substance over Form - leadership, interpersonal skill, attitude, language skills and a good mix of relevant knowledge. When one has the above, knowledge is everywhere and anywhere. You need not have to spend RM30K-100K to be there.