<p>Hi i'm thinking about majoring in economics. Probably want to go to Rutgers University, transfer to an elite school, and then start on a Business Administration degree. But should I get my MBA first, or just start the Doctorate of Business Administration instead? I would like to think that if you have a Doctorate in Business Administration as opposed to an MBA, you would be more eligible for a C-Level executive position?</p>
<p>You can go ahead and think whatever you want, but you’d be incredibly wrong.
DBAs and PHDs in business administration are really only useful for those who plan on going into academia or research.</p>
<p>Spending 4-5 years doing either one will heavily reduce your chances of ever becoming a c-level executive.</p>
<p>But i heard that a Doctorate in Business Administration is more of “action” and applying it towards your future and a Ph.D is more for research and academics.</p>
<p>I agree with angryelf. If you want to be a C-level exec, the MBA will help. </p>
<p>a PhD is a doctorate…</p>
<p>I understand. I have researched this topic and on wikipedia.org and other sources, a Doctorate in Business Administration is NOT a Ph.D and that a Ph.D differs from a Doctorate because a doctorate is a philosophy degree, whereas when you have a DBA, or a MD (Doctors) you apply your learned knowledge to everyday life. I have heard this from others as well. This is the first time that a DBA has been associated to a Ph.D in my eyes.</p>
<p>Wikipedia should NOT be used as a credible source of information for…anything.</p>
<p>A DBA is still a doctorate degree. It leads to research and academia. DBAs, like PhDs, are considered over-qualified for many jobs outside of the university setting. It should not be compared to an MD because the programs focus on very different outcomes. I have looked hard at both PhD programs in social psychology and DBA programs in marketing/consumer behavior - and the general goals of the program, the type of research experience, and the job prospects were very similar. Now if I compared them to medical school, I would see a HUGE difference in expectations (and cost, since DBAs are often partially if not fully funded, just like the PhD). I am not talking about course topics, either. Aspiring doctors do internships and fellowships, and a whole lot of hands-on work that Doctors of Business Admin. and Doctors of Philosophy in [insert field] just don’t do. </p>
<p>Master-level degrees are typically more applied, and so would serve you better after a few years of professional work experience than a DBA would.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That comment made me smile, for it reminded me of what I used to believe. Oh, but for the naivete of youth. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well now, I wouldn’t go quite that far. Wikipedia is one of the most credible sources of knowledge in the world - frankly, far more credible than most other sources of knowledge, as we’ll see below. Sure, wikipedia has its problems, but, so does every other information source.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, directly from wikipedia: “The D.B.A. is usually identical to a Ph.D in Business Administration”. </p>
<p>Or take it from Harvard Business School, the granddaddy of the the DBA programs. </p>
<p>[Faqs</a> - Doctoral Programs - Harvard Business School](<a href=“Frequently Asked Questions - Doctoral - Harvard Business School”>Frequently Asked Questions - Doctoral - Harvard Business School)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, I wouldn’t quite say that it overqualifies you for such jobs, for overqualification implies that you’ve learned far more than you needed to know to qualify you for the job in question. </p>
<p>Rather, at least at the top schools (and the OP did mention that he wanted to attend an ‘elite’ undergrad program, and so I suspect that he would also be interested in attending an elite DBA/PhD program), the DBA simply doesn’t qualify you, period, for most management positions. Ironic as it may seem, the fact is DBA students (along with business PhD students) do not learn how to manage businesses. They do not learn how to lead teams. They do not learn how to give public speeches. They do not learn how to analyze systems and devise strategic recommendations. They do not learn how to compute profit/loss statements. </p>
<p>Instead, what they learn is how to publish research papers in obscure academic journals that nobody reads. They learn how to ‘place’ at faculty positions at business schools and from there how to then win promotion to tenure, mostly predicated upon their success in publication in those aforementioned journals. </p>
<p>{And yet those very people who never learned how to manage firms and devise strategies are themselves tasked with teaching MBA students how to manage firms and devise strategies. I already mentioned the deep irony embedded within the system, particularly as it relates to a professional school. After all, the majority of law school professors are not only former JD students, but are also licensed attorneys, and the majority of med-school professors are also practicing physicians. But the majority of business school professors do not hold MBA’s and have only minimal business experience. To paraphrase Woody Allen: those who can’t do, teach; those who can’t teach, teach gym; those who can’t even teach gym end up teaching at my high school; and apparently those who can’t really do anything at all may end up teaching at business schools.} </p>
<p>Now, granted, I agree that many DBA programs at lower-ranked schools may indeed be more “action-oriented” than is a business PhD, although that seems to be quibbling over which of the Transformers sequels was better (hint: they’re both terrible). Be that as it may, the bottom line is that neither the DBA nor the business PhD is an appropriate degree if you want an industry career. Consider them only if you want to pursue a career in business academia.</p>
<p>Your ability to rise to any executive level in a corporation will have far less to do with your education. Your career trajectory will have much more to do with your ability to perform the job, work ethic, leadership skills, performance, and your interpersonal relationships with those already in executive positions. </p>
<p>Education will only take you so far, eventually you have to actually work.</p>
<p>@sakky: what if the faculty was accredited by the Association of MBAs, requiring 3 years of post-Bac work in management or business?</p>
<p>XaviFM, I’m afraid that I don’t understand your question. Are you specifically talking about MBA programs? DBA? PhD?</p>
<p>Well, for a graduate program Ph.D, DBA or MBA, to be accredited by the Association of MBAs (Britain’s version of AACSB, for you non sakky people), they require that everyone affiliated has 3 years of post-Bac professional experience. So, would they have different outcomes?</p>
<p>I doubt it. Business schools are mostly about branding & networking anyway. Put another way, if Harvard Business School wasn’t accredited by the AACSB, do you think anybody would really care? The brand & alumni network would still continue to draw the top students and recruiters.</p>
<p>I suppose the question would then be whether it would behoove someone to spend their studies at a top university which had that requirement, such as in England.</p>
<p>The AACSB wouldn’t have any teeth if it did not include Haas, HBS, et cetera; however the focus of AACSB is on research, so it may go to further the aspect of graduate study which you discuss, that it is too focused on research.</p>
<p>Then let’s pursue your example further. The consensus opinion of the top business school is London Business School, which is as heavily research-oriented as any American business school. Akin to the HBS example above, if LBS was not accredited by the Association of MBA’s, honestly, would anybody really care? </p>
<p>The basic problem is that an excessive focus on research never really seems to damage a school’s prestige. If anything, it enhances the prestige, for students, recruiters, and (especially) organizations that publish business school rankings (i.e. USNews, Businessweek, FT) think that more research equates to a better school. And, as is true throughout society, as long as a large group of people think that something is valuable, then it is valuable. {Gold, for example, doesn’t really have much practical value beyond niche electronics and specialty chemical engineering, but is valuable because everybody in the world thinks it is valuable. Business school researchers could be analogized to gold-miners-for-hire.}</p>
<p>We’re in agreement on the concept, but I’m discussing the issue the OP raised in his second post about getting more applied focus.</p>
<p>Would the Association of MBAs 3 year work requirement boost the practicality of the application of said research’s output (output measured in the form of increased human capital of those who earned a degree).</p>
<p>I’m sure that it would. But so what? The sad truth is that there seems to be no market for practical application of business research. The academic journals of management (ironically) certainly don’t care, and by extension, neither do the B-school faculty hiring committees. I have never once heard of a business research academic paper dismissed because it “isn’t practical”.</p>
<p>If you look at the faculty of top schools, the DBA isn’t even that well represented. Faculty typically come from PhD’s in the social sciences. DBA … a worthless degree if there ever was one.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, the reason why the DBA isn’t well represented at the top schools is simply because the DBA is simply a rare degree period. The top schools tend to recruit from the top schools, and most top schools simply don’t offer the DBA - with one highly notable exception.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I would argue that that depends strongly on where you obtain the DBA. Sure, a DBA from a no-name school is not particularly valuable. But a PhD from a no-name school isn’t particularly valuable either. But [url=<a href=“http://www.hbs.edu/doctoral/pdf/2011_recent_placement_summary.pdf]one[/url”>Doctoral - Harvard Business School]one[/url</a>] particular DBA-granting school seems to do quite well for itself in terms of placement. </p>
<p>Now, whether top business schools should be staffed by DBA or Phd graduates from the top business schools or social science programs but who themselves (ironically) often times have little if any business experience is an entirely different question.</p>