I will quote managers not mba's which is a fair critique of the MBA, hope it helps
The trouble with ?management? education is that it is business education, and leaves a distorted impression of management. Management is a practice that has to blend a good deal of craft (experience) with a certain amount of art (insight) and some science (analysis). An education that overemphasizes the science encourages a style of managing I call ?calculating? or, if the graduates believe themselves to be artists, as increasing numbers now do, a related style I call ?heroic.? Enough of them, enough of that. We don?t need heroes in positions of influence any more than technocrats. We need balanced, dedicated people who practice a style of managing that can be called ?engaging.? Such people believe that their purpose is to leave behind stronger organizations, not just higher share prices. They do not display hubris in the name of leadership.
Every decade in the United States alone, almost one million people with a credential called the MBA descend on the economy, most with little firsthand knowledge of customers and workers, products and processes. There they expect to manage people who have that knowledge, which they gained in the only way possible?through intensive personal experience. But lacking that credential, such people are increasingly relegated to a ?slow track? where they are subjected to the ?leadership? of people who lack the legitimacy to lead.
Most MBA programs today, in the United States and around the world. With a few exceptions, the remaining ones (usually called EMBAs) take more experienced people on a part-time basis and then do much the same thing. In other words, they train the right people in the wrong ways with the wrong consequences. That is because they mostly fail to use the experience these people have.
Leadership is supposed to be something bigger, more important. I reject this distinction, simply because managers have to lead and leaders have to manage. Management without leadership is sterile; leadership without management is disconnected and encourages hubris. We should not be ceding management to leadership, in MBA programs or anywhere else.
Courtesy Henry Mintzberg
I will quote managers not mba's which is a fair critique of the MBA, hope it helps
The trouble with ?management? education is that it is business education, and leaves a distorted impression of management. Management is a practice that has to blend a good deal of craft (experience) with a certain amount of art (insight) and some science (analysis). An education that overemphasizes the science encourages a style of managing I call ?calculating? or, if the graduates believe themselves to be artists, as increasing numbers now do, a related style I call ?heroic.? Enough of them, enough of that. We don?t need heroes in positions of influence any more than technocrats. We need balanced, dedicated people who practice a style of managing that can be called ?engaging.? Such people believe that their purpose is to leave behind stronger organizations, not just higher share prices. They do not display hubris in the name of leadership.
Every decade in the United States alone, almost one million people with a credential called the MBA descend on the economy, most with little firsthand knowledge of customers and workers, products and processes. There they expect to manage people who have that knowledge, which they gained in the only way possible?through intensive personal experience. But lacking that credential, such people are increasingly relegated to a ?slow track? where they are subjected to the ?leadership? of people who lack the legitimacy to lead.
Most MBA programs today, in the United States and around the world. With a few exceptions, the remaining ones (usually called EMBAs) take more experienced people on a part-time basis and then do much the same thing. In other words, they train the right people in the wrong ways with the wrong consequences. That is because they mostly fail to use the experience these people have.
Leadership is supposed to be something bigger, more important. I reject this distinction, simply because managers have to lead and leaders have to manage. Management without leadership is sterile; leadership without management is disconnected and encourages hubris. We should not be ceding management to leadership, in MBA programs or anywhere else.
Courtesy Henry Mintzberg