MBAs Are "A Menace to Society." George Bush and Katherine Weymouth Are MBAs - Charlie Warner - MediaBizBlogger - Charlie Warner - MediaBizBloggers.com

Published: July 8, 2009 at 03:16 AM GMT
Last Updated: July 8, 2009 at 03:16 AM GMT

Bush was the first U.S. president with an MBA. He lied to the American public about WMD in Iraq in order to promote a personal vendetta against Saddam Hussein. As the entitled son of a privileged, powerful family, he had a pattern of believing he never did anything wrong (see Justin Frank's Bush on the Couch).

Weymouth is the first publisher of the Washington Post who has an MBA. According to the New York Times:

"[For] a fee of $25,000 for one, or $250,000 for an entire series for an exclusive 'Washington Post salon' at Ms. Weymouth's home in which officials from Congress and the administration, lobbyists and, yes, the paper's own reporters could have a quiet, off-the-record dinner, discussions to be led by Marcus Brauchli, the newspaper's editor. Theoretically, you can't buy Washington Post reporters, but you can rent them."

As an entitled daughter of a privileged, powerful family, Weymouth, like Bush, did not earn her job on merit, but got it because she is a member of the Lucky Sperm Club – she is the granddaughter of Katherine Graham, whose family controls the Washington Post.

Is it a random occurrence that both Bush and Weymouth come from privileged backgrounds, didn't really earn their jobs on their own merits, and have MBAs from the Harvard Business School? I don't think so.

Mintzberg writes that "MBA programs by their very nature attract many of the wrong people – too impatient, too analytical, and too much need to control." He also writes that most MBA programs teach about analyzing numbers, not managing people, and that by concentrating on the numbers and on the concept of maximizing shareholder value, graduates arrogantly believe they can manage any business. (Jim Collins, in his new book How the Mighty Fall, refers to short-term investors as "shareflippers," a term I like for the current breed of greedy Wall Street types.)

Weymouth worked at the Post for 12 years before she became publisher. But during that time she either didn't fully understand the importance of the separation between church and state for a newspaper or didn't know that the marketing department was sending out a flier promoting a deal that had only been considered but not approved. In ether case she should have known better before she damaged her paper's reputation and had to publish an apology to readers.

It almost seems that Weymouth, like Bush, arrogantly believed she could do no wrong, which likely comes from a sense of entitlement after getting a job she didn't earn and, of more concern, from what she learned in her MBA program – think of your own needs first (to demonstrate how successful and smart you are), not about the core values of your organization (journalism ethics), and not about customers (readers).

It's probably not fair to blame the Harvard MBA program for the moral and ethical lapses of Bush, Weymouth, and greedy Wall Street bankers who are graduates, but it seems to me to be fair to ask the question, "what values are MBA programs like Harvard's teaching?"

And, to its credit, the Harvard Business School is asking itself that question. Several months ago it hosted an open conversation on the subject on its website. We can only hope that Harvard and other MBA programs take a look at themselves and see what they can do to stop turning out graduates who, like Henry Mintzberg said, "are quite simply a menace to society."

Until he retired in 2002, Charlie Warner was Vice President of AOL's Interactive Marketing division. Before joining AOL, he was the Goldenson Endowed Professor at the Missouri Journalism School where he taught media management and sales, and he created and ran the annual Management Seminar for News Executives. Charlie can be contacted at charleshwarner@gmail.com.

To communicate with or to be contacted by the executives and/or companies mentioned in this column, link to JackMyers Connection Hotline.

Charlie, the issue with Bush and Weymouth is that neither had to earn their position based on talent. Harvard Business School can be faulted for letting them in (likely under duress) but my experience has been that these students don't try to learn the material. We have that issue in spades across our educational system where students are admitted based on criteria other than academic capability

The world is turning out a lot of leaders now who are deep in a limited number of areas and clueless in others. For example, Obama appears to have no inerest in or knowledge of economics (based on a failed stimulus program and unemployment that has soared above his claim ha i wouldn't exceed 8 percent)

It also is obvious from looking at the publishing industry where many/most of the managers come up through editorial or publishing and don't understand basic economics and business. Isn't the biggest issue at the Post that they have failed to migrate their business model which has now forced them to do crazy things like these dinners? Meanwhile, instead of offering solutions, the journalists stand on the sidelines bemoaning the world like a Greek choir.

Posted at 10:46 AM on Jul 8, 2009 by kyle

Charlie....you know as well as any of us that the MBA is neither helpful not detrimental by itself. It's not about the institution. What drives the manager's ability is the quality of the manager as a thinker, a person, and a leader. Some MBAs are amazing and some aren't. As someone who has the degree, I can tell you it did NOT help me in my media career - it's a credential, but not necessarily relevant. Media is based on relationships and experience. That said, I'm not throwing my expensive piece of paper in the trash anytime soon...might as well keep it.

Posted at 05:46 PM on Jul 8, 2009 by gethelp

The only reliable safeguards to prevent the sorts of behavior that Charlie so rightfully decries is oversight and deterrence. It was up to the American public to either not have voted W. into office in the first place, or to have replaced him after one term. Similarly, with corporate executives, whether Weymouth or others, who do not understand the basic underpinnings of their business, such as church vs. state, it is the responsibility of the board, the shareholders, and yes, the much-derided media, to expose these sorts of misbegotten ideas. If those in positions of authority know that they will be held accountable, hopefully they will choose their actions with greater care. Barring that, there must be ways to sanction or remove them from those positions. Unfortunately, teaching moral and ethical values to 25-year-olds, whether MBA students or any one else, is a hopeless endeavor that's about 24 years too late.

Posted at 11:59 AM on Jul 9, 2009 by Victor

Interesting point about lawyers and law degrees. However, law is a profession, which means it has a certification exam (the bar exam) and a code of standards and ethics. Lawyers who do not follow those standards can be disbarred and can no longer practice. Professions have self-policing mechanisms to deal with miscreants. Management is not a profession and has no code of ethics agreed to by all who practice it. Maybe it should.

Posted at 12:41 PM on Jul 9, 2009 by Charlie Warner

Excellent points about entitled students not learning the material they don't want to learn about.

I think Obama does understand economics. He had a job on Wall Street before he went to law school.

You're absolutely right about the publishing industry -- it's toast, as brilliantly discussed by Chris Anderson in his new book, Free, and by Clay Shirky on his blog.

Posted at 12:58 PM on Jul 9, 2009 by Charlie Warner

Gethelp -- Your MBA was probably helpful in getting your first job; it's sort of like buying a ticket to get into a movie. An MA in Journalism helped me get my first teaching job, and I'm not throwing it away either. You're right -- it isn't the degree or the institution that gives the degree that is at fault for mistakes that graduates make, but one of the points that I was trying to make is that Harvard, along with other graduate business schools, are looking at their programs to see if perhaps they have not been teaching enough of the right values.

Posted at 01:04 PM on Jul 9, 2009 by Charlie Warner

Well unfortunately what I have experienced is MBA's are getting the scarce jobs that are out there. I lost final interview job offers based solely on not having and MBA. I had more experience and measurable success in my career history but not a silly piece of paper that HR and Hiring Executives use as an easy button because they don’t want to expend the time or energy in picking the right candidate. I am not going to lie it makes me sick and so if I want to move my career forward I might have to drink the MBAid. I dislike it as much as the Obamaid

Posted at 06:12 AM on Jul 10, 2009 by

The company that hired an MBA instead of you, the more qualified candidate, got what it deserved. HR departments typically include qualifications for a jpb that have no bearing whatsoever on b eing successful in a job -- five years of experience, MBA degree, etc. The reason HR people include these silly qualifications is to cover their collective ass so if someone doesn't work out, they can say, "It wasn't our fault, we hired someone with an MBA like top management said it wanted." HR and many companies play the game not to lose and are very conservative and risk avoidant. They will ultimately lose to companies that hire the best people regardless of experience or degrees.

Posted at 02:36 PM on Jul 10, 2009 by Charlie Warner

I was mildly flippant about lawyers, and I hope I didn't offend any, but my point was a serious one. I think blaming a degree is far too great a generalization, as it would be if someone wrote a similar article about how much damage lawyers do in society.

Of course, many people hold the plausible belief that many lawyers, including politicians and Presidents, do substantial damage to society that is INHERENT to their profession as opposed to incidental.

That's a terrible generalization, but one that could easily be leveled if the same care were applied as was applied in this article.

On the other hand, the business code of ethics is an interesting idea. I certainly live my life by an informal code of ethics which says that a manager of a business is a steward of the future of that business.

I am suspicious of how effective it could be because, as I said, I'm not impressed that lawyers, for example, as a profession with such a code, do any better than MBAs.

Posted at 10:49 AM on Jul 14, 2009 by Jim