Friday, November 04, 2005

Why should one do an MBA?

Note: This also contains musings on Part-time Vs Full-Time

UNIX developers generally have an arrogance that the world revolves around them. Developing operating systems, writing drivers, dealing with C-assembly interaction is as geeky as it gets. It is probably one of the most challenging jobs in software programming industry and pretty prestigious one too. At first I thought I was lucky to be part of this breed but then later I became more ambivalent about the whole thing.

We had a new IIM graduate in our office and after about 2 months he made some suggestions of how we should do our jobs. So this is how I observed the conversation between a couple of engineers and the MBA guy after he made his suggestions...

Engineer1: What did you do before MBA?
MBA: I did engineering in REC.
Engineer1: Do you know anything about Linux?
MBA: No
Engineer2: Do you know what a vi editor is?
MBA: No I dont know what it is. Never used it.
Engineer1: So all you do is draw diagrams in power point. Thats your skill set?
MBA: No I collect information before I put it in the power point.
Engineer2: But you dont add code to mainline product development. We can still develop the product without you... right?
MBA: I think you can.
Engineer1: Then what the *%%**# do we need you for?

Looking at the conversation, I thought how I would have reacted couple of years before and how I felt then. Two years before I would have sided with the engineers. But at the time I was witnessing the conversation exchange, I felt sympathy for the ignorant engineers. They were infact pretty pathetic. As a new engineer your whole world is just surrounded by other engineers. You have product deadlines, bug list, everybody is looking at the engineering team and concerned if xyz would come out well etc. So it is fair if you thought engineering was the center of the world. But as years went by and I began to think about how a company is started and what needs to happen for a business to run, my opinions began to change.

Most companies run their business because, to put it simply, they solve a problem. Even if the problem does not exist they try and provide a solution that would make lives comfortable and create a situation, where without that solution, life would be a problem. Tech companies are mostly IP (Intellectual Property) based. So lets say you are a business man wanting to start a business. What do you do?

1) Research a market and its needs (market research)
2) Decide what solution would solve that needs (market research)
3) Pick an IP thats relevant or invest in developing an IP that is relevant (innovation)
4) Find out how much revenues can be gained out of the market by selling the solution.
5) Need to convert raw IP to a software solution. So set up team to do that (engineering)
6) Sell the solution (sales)

Items 1 through 4 is marketing and innovation -- The asset part of any company. 5 and 6 are costs. They reduce profits. The less the amount expended into 5 & 6, the better for the company. While 0.1% of engineers fall in #3 the other 99.99% of them fall in item #5. So the more engineers, I employ to develop my solution, the more my profitability decreases.

This was a significant realization for me. This cut down to size my perception of the value of engineers to a company. I began to view them as liabilities. I began to see marketing(and innovation) as the key sources of profitability of any company and everything else just costs. To put it simply no matter how complex the engineering work you do, if it ain't selling anywhere and ain't got no market, then you are just doing bullshit.

So I stopped saying "he is an MBA guy who doesnt dont shit about the technology. What use is he in this company". You know what? For an MBA, intricate knowledge of technology is irrelevant. As crazy as it sounds. Its completely irrelevant when you are out to determine if a solution will sell or not. You don't need to know shit about the intricate details of a technology, if you can tell me how to package it and where to sell it? Thats more important than anything else. In fact knowing technology is a burden. You get hung up on irrelevant details, which don't matter at all.

This led to a realization about where the meat of a company lies. It lies in finding the right direction for a company. It lies in aligning the company in directions where the costs (the ones you spend on engineers) can be recovered quickly. It lies in market research, it lies in betting on the right things to innovate. Words like courage, leadership, which until then meant dissecting a memory core dump to analyze a crash, began to take new meaning. Doing work to develop something in a closed system is not that hard. Doing work in an open environment where there aren't strict definitions on do's and donts is more difficult.

Management decisions are like angles of rocket re-entry into the earth. A few wrong nano-centimeters here and there and you could find yourself in Africa instead of the pacific. Strategy and marketing are things that rule how a company behaves. It probably constitutes 95% of the intellectual work done in the company. To put it simply an MBA moves you from a decrease-profitability section to an increase-profitability section.

Part Time MBA Vs Full-Time MBA:

A lot of people have asked me on my thoughts about Part-Time MBA. I conciously chose not to do it. So I can't lie that its the best thing and so you should do it. It is certainly considered by some I spoke to as - 1 step lower than a full-time MBA. I partially agree with that opinion. Most top schools don't allow career-services/recruiting access for part-time students. Full-time students in Business Week forums believe that since Full-Time students have higher stakes and have taken greater risks - it is unfair to allow low-risk takers an equal share of the career services facility.

The full-time MBA experience is a separate beast. Some top companies clearly know if you are a part-time MBA (it shows in the resume) and might not even consider you a real MBA. 99% of the recruiters are ex Full-Time MBAs and they carry strong opinions about different MBA streams with them. In the US, an MBA is less about courses than it is about the experience, the clubs and the activities that go on outside classrooms. As a part-time MBA you cannot get this experience. This does not mean that part-time MBAs don't get jobs that full-time MBAs get. But it is more difficult and rare. Moreover, you may have some obligation to stay with the same company after you do an MBA because they sponsored your part-time MBA. So once you complete an MBA, you won't have an instant job promotion and salary impact. While full-timers get instant rewards (because they have given up 2 years of salary), part-timers have to depend on their organic career progression or other opportunities within the company to get up, which is usually slow and very restrictive.

My general suggestion is - if you can do a full-time, do it. When you have no choice (marriage, kids are not sufficient reason for not doing full-time) then do a part-time. But know that this may not be the best option out there.

35 comments:

Priya said...

Nice article, made a nice read...

Btw..I don't agree with u on one point...
"probably one of the most challenging jobs in software programming industry and pretty prestigious one too"
Now I'd like to know how many different software programming jobs/experience u've had to assume that unix developers r the most geeky and have one of the most challenging jobs?? I wud say that ur view is parochial and even biased based on the fact that u've probably been exposed to that software sector only...
I think that whether you pursue your MBA part-time or full-time should be dependant on a number of factors. If you are getting your MBA but plan to stay in your current industry, and especially if you plan to stay in your current position after graduation, I think that part-time is best. You will not have to forsake your income - which is a huge perk.
On the other hand, if you are interested in changing industries/careers, going full-time is the best. In addition to the necessary networking that you will need to pursue new career opportunities, I agree with you that one will also benefit from the corporate recruiters that work with the University: they tend to pursue full-time candidates.

I began taking classes part-time in January of this year. At the moment, I am still working full-time. However, I intend to go full-time in a year. If you are having trouble deciding one way or the other, I would recommend beginning part-time and seeing how things progress.

Hawkeye said...

2 things

1) "one of the most" means there could be more than one and this is also part of the set

2)" I wud say that ur view is parochial and even biased based on the fact that u've probably been exposed to that software sector only..."

This is an incorrect assumption. I did stuff in Java, QA stuff, some application programming, even some GUI development. Thought all these jobs sucked and were quite inferior to Unix dev.

There some jobs that are clearly better. UNIX/Linux dev is clearly ONE of them

With all due respect, and there has been a lot of discussion on this in BW forums - I also think moving part-time to full-time midway is a backdoor entry. It is a nice idea provided the administration allows that to happen consistently. Full time students constantly revolt against that. Kellogg is facing so much pressure to stop that. Right now its working but at least in my school I know that a few of them are planning to take it up and stop it.

Hema said...

Hi,

Nice post. Made strategy consultants like me feel good especially after being constantly made fun off for being "Outside the scientific block". Years back PWC had this hot discussion on management versus engineering, however my view is it goes hand in hand. As much as engineers belong to cost centers in organizations, there has been a clear transistion from pure product development to providing customised solutions to fit clients needs driven by us consultants. Without them we would end up committing the earth to our clients without having an iota of knowledge of the difficulties involved in our product development.

A small correction though; Market research is just the beginning of providing marketing strategies.
I would possibly conclude strategic consulting is what moves the company from "Non profit unit" to profitablity. Sadly, most MBA's these days focus more of their actitivities into more and more analysis without having a clear strategic perpective in providing recommendations and action plan. This could be a major reason why many novel start up firms suffer even after investing quite a bit on market research. As much as analysis and data helps, what that means to the organization is something only a very few of us consultants really think (this is my experience in working for top 8 world's leading consulting firms including Anderson consulting, KPMG, Frost & Sullivan, Mckinsey, CSFB information services). Sorry digressing into a totally different point.

Good luck with your MBA and hope to see some good strategists in future.

Anonymous said...

Hawkeye,

I think it is your view and those of who you have spoken to, that part time is one step lower than full time. It almost feels like full time MBA candidates are reassuring themselves that they made the right decision to spend the time and money to do a full time MBA.

Courses are courses. How one utilizes them is up to the student and the individual talent. As you know based on your classes that there are varied individuals and what suits one may not be suitable for the other.

As Priya says, not everyone wants a change in career and not everyone can afford a full time MBA. But innovation and marketing, the two points that you hit upon cannot be taught in a class.

I have seen atleast 2 of my direct reports that I sent to a part time MBA that have totally outperformed full time MBAs that we hired from very reputed schools. Part timers do have a unique sense of smartness that I have not seen in Full time MBAs. For one, they learn how to manage their time very efficiently in running between work and classes.

In summary, I dislike the stereotyping that a full time MBA is superior to Part time MBA.

Anonymous said...

I forgot to mention that I went to a full time MBA program.

Hawkeye said...

/*I think it is your view and those of who you have spoken to, that part time is one step lower than full time.*/

it is very difficult for me to express something that is (a) not my view and (b) not derived from people I have spoken to.

So I am not sure what you are saying here. I see that you have expressed your view and that of people whom you have hired. so why am I incorrect here.

/* Part timers do have a unique sense of smartness that I have not seen in Full time MBAs. */

I have to state that you are comparing part-time Vs full time smartness wise. I just compared it MBA experience wise. So you completely got me wrong on that account. As far as the MBA experience goes part-time is 1 step lower than full-time.

And I disagree with the above quoted line. There is nothing that I see in part-time MBA selection process that would make them more smart. In fact the chances are that full-time MBAs by virtue of going through a much more rigorous selection process could be much smarter than part-timers who have distinct advantage of being in a college because they happened to be nearby.

c'mon the "unique smartness" is really corny. What is so unique about part-time MBA. They have worked and do an MBA. Most people who do fulltime mBA have worked extensively too.

/*It almost feels like full time MBA candidates are reassuring themselves that they made the right decision to spend the time and money to do a full time MBA. */

never for a moment did I believe you were a ex-full-time MBA. I directly made a statement about *MBA experience* part-time Vs full-time. I didnt say anythings pecial. I just stated the obvious. You took it a level up and talked about smartness. I would say you were completely defensive about your part-time MBA choice.

I dont see any risks or smartness in doing a part-time MBA. In fact there is nothing special about it to even spend time arguing.

/*In summary, I dislike the stereotyping that a full time MBA is superior to Part time MBA. */

after the "unique smartness" comment I have to say - sure you do dislike stereo typing.

bottomline: you take 2 courses a semester, spend time in school while working. seriously - how much time are you gonna spend? If you feel that is a lot.. imagine people who are spending 10 times that in a full-time MBA. MBA experience-wise -- full time certainly better than part-time. period. its not as if all full-time MBAs wanted to do a part-time but lacked the guts to do it or did not have the merit to do it.. seriously.. i cant say the same thing about all part-time MBAs.

Anonymous said...

Hawkeye,

I came back to see a good response but did not get it. To be fully just to you, if I were entering my full time MBA class, having gotten through some tough interviews and those dreadful essays, I would write along the same lines. But perhaps it was a little premature and untimely for me to raise my point at this forum. Believe what you want to, but not all full time MBAs need to think like you or those who you have been exposed to.

Ram said...

Bharath,

C'mon man... engineering aa edho kooli worker range-kku yerakkittayey daa drogi! ;-))

Linux vs Windows... hmm.. we never finished that argument.. I will always stand for Windows and my idol, Bill Gates!

Good discussion and an apt backdrop to the importance of MBA. I wish I had the time to do a full time MBA. I guess I will not get around to it.

Anonymous,

Ha ha ha!! I am amazed at how you rate your direct reports! If I were you, I would try to look only at their performance and the value they add to the organization!

--Ram

Ram said...

Anonymous,

Just happenned to read your latest comment. What 'good' response did you expect to your incorrect assumptions? Hope you come back again to respond to my response as well :-)) Let me make sure you will ;-))

That second comment to state that you were a Full time MBA, indicates to me that you were not. This is further confirmed by your latest rebuttal. Don't take it so personally. A Part Time MBA is good too, just not as good as the full time. That's why Harvard and Stanford do not offer it!

--Ram

Ram said...

Bharath,

Just to make sure... you are not the "anonymous" right???

What makes me suspicious is that I have never seen you make such an affirmative statement that anonymous is defending his part time MBA. The last time I had this type of a hunch, you gave me the time zone as a reason why you were not playing anonymous to stir an argument... although it could be equally a reason this time (2am EST), I'd like to reconfirm!

--Ram

Gordy said...

Your points about engineers not being marketers is valid. But, many companies have failed due to not enough engineers on staff to facilitate changes to products to meet market demands. Your statements that engineers are liabilities are only half truths. Engineers assist in making products faster and more cheaply to meet the ever changing market. Communication between marketing and engineering is key for any company to succeed in today's business climate.

I am a Professional Engineer with extensive work experience in a variety of industries. I am considering an MBA but the subject matter is not as complicated or challenging as engineering. This is what I am struggling with...

Hawkeye said...

gordy,

my emphasis was more on the differences between "driving" somebody and "being driven" by somebody else. marketing drives stuff.. engineering is driven by marketing.

Hawkeye said...

ram,

long time no see.. good to see u back. maybe u should update your blogs more often.

i am certainly not "anonymous". I dont have the time or the inclination for giving voice-behind-voice a'la adutha veetu penn.

anu started a deliberate rumor when she claimed some time b4 that I was anonymous. It was not true then also and it is not true now also :-)

please believe me :-)

Anonymous said...

I dont think Anu started the rumour. It was someone else. I believe, it was Ram last time around too.

-Prabhu

Anupadmaja said...

Hey Bharath,
If i remember correctly, i did not start the rumor. I only played along. The reason i played along was because i thought it was a funny/smart idea. I did not believe/disbelieve that you were the anonymous.

Anonymous said...

Anyways.. Ram, Just out of curiosity, do you post comments as anonymous? Coz you bring up this point pretty often :)

(I know it defeats the purpose of posting as anonymous:) )

-Prabhu

Ram said...

Anupadmaja and Bharath,

Prabhu is right.. I was the one that started the suspicion that Bharath was anonymous in the other discussion too. I thought I mentioned this in my comment itself when I said "the last time I had this hunch"....

Prabhu,

Ha ha ha.... you never know do you? But then if I were anonymous, why would I contradict myself instantly. I would beef up my stand by saying something along the lines of "I agree totally with anonymous and doing a full time MBA is joblessness" ;-))

I can't wait for the response of the real "anonymous" and have been checking for it very eagerly!

Vikram said...

Bharath,
I'm considering doing a FT mba and i've the following questions...please clarify..There is definetley a preception that FT MBA's can shift industries easily. but from what i've been reading and talking with ppl, it seems that recruiters are increasingly prefering ppl who have had their pre-mba experience in the same industry. you tell me, for example, why shud someone prefer a s/w engineer like u rather than a fellow FT mba student with finance/mktng/i-bnkng expereince for a job in the above mentioned functions..especially with the current not-so-hot economy.

also, i'm wondering...most FT mba's take 6/7 courses a sem, attend club meetings, company presentations, and not to mention the time consuming internship/FT job search. i'm wondering with so much activities happening simultaneously..does a FT mba student get enough time to get an indepth grasp of the mba subjects...?

also, another major factor that i'm considering is the ease of getting a job. if u are a studying in one of the top 5 or for that matter even top 10 mgmnt institutes in india, the only thing that u have to worry about is studying. because, companies come to campuses themselves and all u have to do is do well on the interviews and traditionally the placement rate has been 100%. but.. this is not the case in u.s. business schools unless u r in H/S/W. i've known many students in top 10 schools in u.s. other than h/s/w who had to go in search of companies themselves (during school semester) and try to get an interview chance since most top schools in u.s., other than h/s/w ,can boast of only about 80% placement and the most preferred companies generally take only a handful of students from top 10 schools other than H/S/W.

the worst part is that i read recently that only 20% of mba students in u.s. are pursuing the degree FT and others are doing it PT. so, when these existing employees (those who are working in mktng, finance etc and doing PT mba) after pursuing their mba's "grow into" these mgmt positions, aren't these PT guys taking up the positions that would've traditionally been available for FT students, say 5 yrs ago... so, i'm debating about doing a FT mba.....

i also have an opportunity to transfer into a finance role in my company and (considering the above mentioned factors) i'm thinking about pursuing my mba PT if i can transfer into the finanace role.
please let me know ur thoughts.

also, please tell a little bit about how the recruiting scene is at UMich for internship/FT jobs?

sri said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
sri said...

bharath..

perfect one.
100% agreed with u on this.
felt like u wrote my mind about MBA as it is.

for the visitors of this site , who are interested in ISB, here is a link about the infosessions.

http://www.isb.edu/pgp/visit/admissions_important_india.asp

-kavoori.

Anonymous said...

---First of all , if 0.1% of engineers fall in #3 the other 99.99% of them fall in item #5 then doesn’t it make them more than 100%!!?..I definitely agree that an MBA is more important to a company than any other type of a employee, but the way you have shamelessly advocated engineers to be stupid and MBA’s to be the sole hero’s of this world is quite demeaning. If as you claim as MBAs do instill all the qualities needed for a Company to be profitable then why aren’t all the companies on this earth making a profit. Quite to the contrary we observe that it is not just the ‘Degree’ of the MBA that counts but rather then what makes up the person who holds that qualification. Many of the business people we see around us are born MBAs. They makes mountains of money in their area of strength without ever stepping foot into any MBA institute. And don’t mind if I say this but MBAs too are nothing but Employees Hired to do a job. Most of the MNCs that we see around us have been started by ‘non-MBAs’ but now require people with the MBA qualification to run it. In my opinion, just being a MBA doesn’t at all make you more precious to the company as when you are able to demonstrate your vision and leadership even being a ‘non-MBA’. A person has to be like a compass giving direction rather than like a clock which is rigid and inflexible. The real test of a MBA would be to start a company from scratch and build it up as good as any in its own area. I idolize my father and have learnt most of the business lessons from him. He has had only a diploma to his name but in last 25 years he has single handedly built a company which now employs IITians and MBAs alike, which more than emphasizes my point that just being a MBA is not enough. You have to have the true entrepreneur spirit to really succeed as a MBA. My own ambition is to not just be an MBA but a person who steers the enterprise into a new domain. I hope I have been able to get my point across and maybe even convince you in the process..:D---

Anonymous said...

ooops..forgot to put my name...


- Gautam

Anonymous said...

Agree with almost everything but this ...."marriage, kids are not sufficient reason for not doing full-time..".

May be you are saying it because you are a man..its easier for them since they have wives to look after family and kids..but for woman ...managing family and kids and full time MBA. I cannot even imagine that. :)

- Vrinda

Hawkeye said...

gautham,

there are a number of ways in which i can respond to u ..but i choose this

/* First of all , if 0.1% of engineers fall in #3 the other 99.99% of them fall in item #5 then doesn’t it make them more than 100%!!?..*/

this is not even a critisism let alone constructive. u just made fun of a typo.

/*but the way you have shamelessly advocated engineers to be stupid and MBA’s to be the sole hero’s of this world is quite demeaning. */

I did not say anything like this in my blog.


/* If as you claim as MBAs do instill all the qualities needed for a Company to be profitable then why aren’t all the companies on this earth making a profit. */

goes back to the "all squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares" .

to put it simply "I did not say anything like this in my blog"

/* Quite to the contrary we observe that it is not just the ‘Degree’ of the MBA that counts but rather then what makes up the person who holds that qualification. Many of the business people we see around us are born MBAs. They makes mountains of money in their area of strength without ever stepping foot into any MBA institute. And don’t mind if I say this but MBAs too are nothing but Employees Hired to do a job. Most of the MNCs that we see around us have been started by ‘non-MBAs’ but now require people with the MBA qualification to run it. In my opinion, just being a MBA doesn’t at all make you more precious to the company as when you are able to demonstrate your vision and leadership even being a ‘non-MBA’. A person has to be like a compass giving direction rather than like a clock which is rigid and inflexible. The real test of a MBA would be to start a company from scratch and build it up as good as any in its own area. I idolize my father and have learnt most of the business lessons from him. He has had only a diploma to his name but in last 25 years he has single handedly built a company which now employs IITians and MBAs alike, which more than emphasizes my point that just being a MBA is not enough. You have to have the true entrepreneur spirit to really succeed as a MBA. My own ambition is to not just be an MBA but a person who steers the enterprise into a new domain. I hope I have been able to get my point across and maybe even convince you in the process..:D--- */

all truths and some probably good truths..but completely unconnected to this blog.

basically i got a feeling u did not read my post at all. and generally threw out responses to what u assumed i should have said (but which I never said).

Hawkeye said...

vrindha,

among the women i know in my year - 1 from madras has 2 children , lives 1 hr away and seems to be doing very well. the other from AP is again mother of 2 children and still participates like crazy in club activities.

the best example is this woman i know who moved to california with her kid to finish a masters. she stayed in a place different from that of her husband and doggedly finished her degree.

bottomline: if u want it badly. u will do it.

Hawkeye said...

vikram,
u bring a lot of good pooints.. need to answer it with a blog and not a commment.

Vikram said...

Hawkeye,
Looking forward to your response as a blog. Hope you can do it soon. Thanks much.

John Doe said...

Hi Hawkeye,
I did an engg from a state college. I had spent 2 years looking for jobs and doin nothing. Then I got into a lower rung MBA, say even sub-spjain, but with 100% placment tracks and some student with 7-8 lakhs package. Got a Job as a Mgt Trainee in an MNC. Avg package, led a team . I had Bad Acads. never demonstrated leadership skills.

But
1) I can get a good GMAT score
2) I am very presentable and talk well
3) I have 1.5 years of exp now.
I can wait for 2 more years before i try for a second MBA. I know my chances are dim in good colleges, but I have two years and I want to give it a try. U see I have come a long way sionce my engg. at least by my standards. I need another quantum jump and I have decided to do whatever it takes. I have posted as anonymous but I will be checking out ur response. What r your suggestions? The two yrs that I lost earlier, must I use a fake experience that many people do to get a job? I am not cheating for a job, but if it will give me a good education is it worth it. My conscience say do it. I have much at stake. I don't want to end up as the mediocre I started out as.

I liked ur analysis, so I thought you would give a very detailed response.

John doe

John Doe said...

also, since I started working, My ex boss and a big boss of director level thought I was one of the best resources and have immense potential and that i could do anything. I had excellent rapport with them both and have a few certificates of achievement as well, the parent company is fortune 50.
I just want to increase my chance of an admit 2-3 years down the line. I know I don't have the credentials now. i am just trying to opne a discussion

Hawkeye said...

John Doe,

i think you have a good chance of getting into a good university. as i said before there are ex-IIMs and ex-XLRIs, ex-Symbiosis in my university. It is not uncommon for people to do MBA in india and come to US for the second MBA.

listen! your essays are very important ..make sure u did well for ur company in terms of increasing their revenue. make sure u have good leadership, teamwork stories and make sure u have good extra currics. since u have low acads u have to get a GMAT score above 750. work on these things in the next 2 years and even Kellogg Wharton, Chicago may not be a distant dream

Anonymous said...

Hey look I don't mean to be rude to you...but your blogs really lack any substance. It looks like you write just to show to the world that you can be a blogger too, however mediocre. I really didn't find any value addition in reading through these...and am not going to waste any more time on this page....but again...didn't mean to be rude to you..but just wanted you experience working for some years in US and interact MORE with your American colleagues, so that you can learn that its the substance that counts, and nobody's interested in your choice of words or listening to your angrezi.

Manish Bodani said...

very average post with regards to points in argument..

I will be back!
Manish Bodani

Anonymous said...

tell me why do people generally take up a second mba...

i have a years work ex, i got a cal from scmhrd n m jus charting out a career path for myself n wondering if it's a good idea to take up a second mba frm s/w/h...

pls suggest!!

Regards

Vaishali

Anonymous said...

Hey Hawkeye,

Nice Blog you have got here.
About FT vs PT etc i am thinking of applying this year and would prefer doing an FT MBA.

But then not sure if i can manage it (i mean manage to get admitted to one of the top schools) with my current weaknesses.

Anyway would like to discuss this over email and if possible in person. I might be in chennai next week.

drop me a line on
inmysecretgarden@gmail.com

SG said...

I also wrote a similar article, but more focused on engineers who are considering doing a MBA as a way to change careers into product marketing.


You can read it here:
http://www.4bearsonline.com/sumitg/myEssays/ShouldIDoAMBA.shtml