Is it worth doing distance MBA from UK or regular MBA from India will be good?

Depends on your goals and what specific schools you are looking at. If you were looking at accredited in-class programs from schools like IIMA, ISB, IIMB, etc., then those would probably be better than doing an online MBA program.

But if you were looking at unaccredited MBA programs in India, then an accredited online program from a school like Warwick or Durham would be a better choice.

A degree from a "recognized" UK university would be a plus, in my opinion. ("Recognition" here has a similar meaning to "accreditation" for the US universities). If the global acceptance of the degree is important, I would go for a UK (or US) degree, with all other evaluation factors coming only second to this. This is due to the global perception, recognition, ranking, etc. of the UK universities, also in the developing world. This is, my point of view, of course.

Regards,

If both UK and India schools are unaccredited then?

If by "unaccredited" you mean "without AACSB/EQUIS/AMBA accreditation", I personally would prefer any UK university -of course a recognized, legit one- regardless of this. UK national accreditation i.e. HEFCE recognition and/or QAA quality stamp are fairly satisfactory signs of quality, in my opinion. Having AACSB/EQUIS/AMBA accreditation is of course a plus, however I would still prefer a recognized UK university without these over any non-US&UK alternative, including those with AACSB and the likes. This is again, my personal view.

Regards,

<blockquote>("Recognition" here has a similar meaning to "accreditation" for the US universities). </blockquote>
I'd argue that for business schools, this is simply not true. International business accreditation - from AACSB/AMBA/EQUIS - makes an MBA program inherently more valuable, especially for international students. That's regardless of whether the school is in the UK, India, or the US.

The statement is true. ?Accreditation? there stands for RA/NA for the US. As for the business accreditation, though I acknowledge the added value it brings to some degree, during my investigation on this I found that there are many employers of various scales, including some really big global ones, who have hardly even heard about those acronyms, let alone care about it. Even in the US, it seems to be relatively more important only if you want to teach at an AACSB accredited school. As far as I see from my readings and experience, in the developing countries for example, hardly anyone would prefer a domestic or non-US/UK degree over a US/UK degree, whatever business accreditation it holds.

Anyway, there are already detailed discussions about this on this forum, so this is my view, personally.

Regards,

You are being misleading through generalizations and otherwise unsubstantiated claims.

"Recognition" is vague, what do you even mean by that? Anybody can "recognize" a university. Accreditation through an international agency is concrete and has real, verifiable value:

http://www.find-mba.com/board/41224

No, "recognition" in the concept of my replies on this post is not vague. "Recognized bodies" is an official UK definition, which I give below: (Please note that I use it with quotation marks, beginning from my first reply).
"The UK authorities recognise those institutions which have been granted degree-awarding powers by either a Royal Charter, Act of Parliament or the Privy Council. These are known as ?recognised bodies?. All UK universities and some higher education colleges are recognised bodies." (https://www.gov.uk/recognised-uk-degrees).
That's why I said "recognition" for the UK universities is similar to what RA/NA is for the US universities. Of course the two countries have different higher education systems and that's why I say "similar" and not "the same".

Given this, my statements are neither vague nor unsubstantiated, in my opinion.

Regards,

Personally, I would't consider an MBA program without AACSB, AMBA, or EQUIS accreditation. It's a waste of money, in my opinion.

[quote]The statement is true. ?Accreditation? there stands for RA/NA for the US. As for the business accreditation, though I acknowledge the added value it brings to some degree, during my investigation on this I found that there are many employers of various scales, including some really big global ones, who have hardly even heard about those acronyms, let alone care about it. Even in the US, it seems to be relatively more important only if you want to teach at an AACSB accredited school. As far as I see from my readings and experience, in the developing countries for example, hardly anyone would prefer a domestic or non-US/UK degree over a US/UK degree, whatever business accreditation it holds.

Anyway, there are already detailed discussions about this on this forum, so this is my view, personally.

Regards,[/quote]

This is absolutely true for a developing country like us. Employers are not aware of programmatic accreditation and generally, a government recognized UK degree is much regarded.

Well that's going to be true of anywhere: employers aren't going to care about programmatic accreditation. For the most part they'll just be aware of brand name and whether or not they've recruited from a school in the past.

But awareness of MBA accreditation is not really the point. The point is that schools with international accreditation are more likely to have strong relationships with the employers who recruit MBA students.

Exactly. Schools are not successful because of accreditation as much as they win accreditation because they are successful.