Having a conversation, the topic of qualifications came up.
Someone said “I have a Masters,”
“Oh,” said I, “me too. What’s yours in?”
“Oh, it’s an MBA,” he replied. “Where did you get yours?”
“Ah,” I returned, “Manchester. Mine’s an MA (Econ) in Social Anthropology. Like, an academic qualification.”
“Is there a difference?” He asked. “The M in my MBA stands for Master, too.”
Is there a difference? Over to you…
I think there are differences in degrees which declare the holder to be a “master”. For example, I have an M.Math — Master of Mathematics — degree, which one is awarded after four years of continuous study and with no preceding bachelor degree, and I believe it is considered to be a lesser qualification than having an MSc in Mathematics.
[Here in China, my students delight in telling me that MBA stands for Married But Available.]
They are two different things. MBA is training. Master’s is research.
One is extremely goal-oriented, procedural, and a hell of a slog. It is of questionable worth as many people argue that it doesn’t replicate what good job candidates really need, which is real-life experience. It will nearly bankrupt many people who do it, but should pay itself back as having it on your CV should help you get a decent job.
The other is exactly the same.
Hmm, yes, I was going to say ‘…about £10000′
£10k? That’s a bargain!
It still astounds me the number of folk with an MBA who are under the age of 30 - I can see merit in going in after a range of experiences in different environments and comparing/contrasting with a degree of academic vigour. Otherwise it is just a non-specialist business education project.
I think that your MA (Econ) is far more likely to prove the degree of intellectual capacity you have. And certainly than my MA, which I’ve not got but could purchase for twenty notes.
At least I’ve stopped getting those e-mails offering me a masters for “life experience” from some crappy US correspondence course!
I have a MA in BS to do JackAll
I did my MBA out of boredom and it destroyed two years of my life, from a social perspective (never really recovered those lost years). What I would say though is that an MBA offers a broad reach of experience: you can be a 51%-er, and coast through it, letting it all wash over your head and still pass, with the same qualification as someone who might have really engaged with the more intellectually challenging subjects and got an enormous amount out of it.
I had to study some god awful garbage just to get the points, but I also earned myself a lifelong interest in globalisation and developing world economics, due to the fantastic lecturers. If I can ever free up any time to go back, I’ll be doing a part time economics degree, for no reason other than brain-work.
So. Yes, there can definitely be an “M” level available to you, in some areas, if you want to take it, but it is also frustrating, given that if your b-box gets turned on by something really joyous, argumentative and challenging, it’s a real wrench to have to then spend enormous amounts of time on stuff like, ugh, appallingly out of date Business IT courses.
But I guess it also depends where you go. some places must offer MBA’s which are basically tailored to 51%-ers, rather than ones that strive to be actually good.
So. to summarise: Hmmm, well, you know… It depends.
A further wrinkle is that an undergraduate degree from Oxford (or Cambridge, I think) gives you a ‘masters’ degree a few years after graduation, regardless of any further study. So, bizarrely, I have an MA but didn’t do any work to get it. Trying to explain this to an American head hunter lost me a job once. Look out for MA (Oxon.) as this is the same as a BA elsewhere. An MPhil from Oxford is the same as everyone else’s MA.