It may seem obvious, but the accrediting group AACSB is studying whether biz-school research should be relevant to the corporate world — and how to make it so.
Roy Harris, CFO.com | US
March 25, 2008
Perhaps because I focused on Finance and Accounting, I received a heavier dose of relevance in MBA program than a Management or Marketing MBA would - although I remember those Marketing courses I took (but didn't make my specialty) pretty relevant, too. A lot of people have no idea what MBA's study (and seem to be the ones who dislike MBA's). Here it is, then, for those who haven't gone. Portfolio Theory and Quant Finance. Accounting, and lots of it. Economics, Law, Advanced Statistics, Operations, Marketing,Organizational Behavior (Business Psych), and Marketing. If anyone's unsure what those topics are, there are articles in Wiki and other sites that clearly explain them. (And if you need to do that, how, precisely, did you make your promotion?) Which one of those topics is irrelevant? Perhaps a small sole propretiorship doesn't need all of the above, but most mid to large sized businesses have a number of areas where MBA's could add value. (Even smaller medical groups are hiring MBA's now, and medical management can be a lucrative, rewarding field.) I'll agree a lot of academia is irrelevant - but much of it's quite useful. Perhaps if businesses invested more in training and development they'd need less from academia - or perhaps we could all just go to ITT Tech for an associates in bookeeping, stenography, and data entry.
Posted by Andrew Sellers | March 28, 2008 07:42 pm
Unfortunately, incomplete reading and lack of sufficient knowledge has been a problem at the existing level of research. Perhaps the lack of good papers contributes to lower quality of review. Our experience in both Accounting and Computer Science is disappointing.
Posted by Wesley Sampson | March 25, 2008 05:12 pm© CFO Publishing Corporation 2009. All rights reserved.