The last thing our world needs is more MBAs to optimize the soul (and every penny) out of every business that hires one in the name of broken metrics and short term profitability.
Arguably one reason we're in this current economic mess comes down to MBA style thinking - out entire economy is basically run with little in the way of reserve capacity, no doubt in part because MBA metrics don't measure for things like "responsibility" and "social good."
Every MBA program has a required ethics course, which would go into depth about social responsibility and balancing short and long term gains. If anything we need more of our "leaders" to have truly studied these areas instead of just sweeping under the rug as some lawyer/politician's job for another time.
Studying ethics doesn't make you ethical, and the very idea that it might is pretty clearly something invented and peddled by people with very poor ethics.
I personally don't think you are born with a great understanding of business ethics. Is CEO pay too high? Are drug prices fair? You think gut feeling is enough to answer but my suggestion is to do a little homework first.
Not everyone who understands the rationalizations buys them -- I'd argue quite the opposite.
I also understand that if your goal is to go far in the business world, it is very important for your sense of ethics to align in a manner that will encourage rather than inhibit your success. The rationalizations are both generally useful and effective for this purpose.
Are you really advocating that managers should 'not' study ethics as a university course? I just can't comprehend this position, given the history of management blunders and scandals I've seen or read about, all with varying degrees of social impact. I'm floored but also impressed by your rugged individualism :)
You're correct, but you misinterpret the motivation of these schools offering ethics classes in the first place.
For students who are already "ethical" (which we can assume is shorthand for pro-social in this context), the class helps them consider the consequences of their decisions. This makes their behavior more ethical, not their intentions.
For students who are not ethical, many of these classes also teach "enlightened self-interest": the idea that doing something that appears altruistic is often selfish. A good example would be creating a "sustainable, organic" product that is profitable, but only creating it for the profit.
There's also some evidence that seeing the consequences of unethical behavior can make someone's intentions more ethical.
I feel the same way about debt. Financial advisers, business and personal, often push you to take on higher levels of debt. It looks great on a spreadsheet, showing how you can make free money with clever financial instruments, but it washes the risk under the carpet.
I've been under pressure at various times in the past year or two to take on debt and increase burn rate in order to 'grow the company', and I'm overwhelmingly glad now that I did not. My empire is tiny but it's solvent and can stay so.
I hear you. I feel like the entire VC culture right now is built on bullshit. You simply cannot be honest about deadlines or realities with these people. It's a terrible culture and I think it's symptomatic of a greater sickness in America. We desperately need to return to a time where people with merit were recognized and respected. The way money is awarded
now really seems like it's optimizing for buzzwords and bullshit.
> You simply cannot be honest about deadlines or realities with these people.
This hits home.
PE: Our investment thesis says x, y, z. Why aren’t you achieving goals?
ME: That was a spreadsheet built 3 years ago, by you, 2 years before a CFO was hired. Do I really have to remind you of every false assumption you guys made when you built that model each month when I deliver financial results?
These jokers built a long range plan (complicated back of envelope), with no industry experience, made up growth rates, and expect reality to match up.
> explored why business executives and entrepreneurs should focus on the 50+ demographic.
if people want longevity they should start before 50. Cue stuff by david sinclar, aubrey degrey et al. People may debate their specific science, but they have the right philosophies like "Aging is damage accumulation" and "Consider aging a disease that kills 100% of the population" etc.
I was excited to read this because based on the title I was interested to see what an MBA take on "how to build an economy for Longevity", however that would've been defined.
Unfortunately it's a take on how to tune businesses to focus on the 50+ demo, and yeah I stopped reading.
16 comments
[ 2.2 ms ] story [ 39.6 ms ] threadArguably one reason we're in this current economic mess comes down to MBA style thinking - out entire economy is basically run with little in the way of reserve capacity, no doubt in part because MBA metrics don't measure for things like "responsibility" and "social good."
I also understand that if your goal is to go far in the business world, it is very important for your sense of ethics to align in a manner that will encourage rather than inhibit your success. The rationalizations are both generally useful and effective for this purpose.
Not very ethical, though.
You're correct, but you misinterpret the motivation of these schools offering ethics classes in the first place.
For students who are already "ethical" (which we can assume is shorthand for pro-social in this context), the class helps them consider the consequences of their decisions. This makes their behavior more ethical, not their intentions.
For students who are not ethical, many of these classes also teach "enlightened self-interest": the idea that doing something that appears altruistic is often selfish. A good example would be creating a "sustainable, organic" product that is profitable, but only creating it for the profit.
There's also some evidence that seeing the consequences of unethical behavior can make someone's intentions more ethical.
I've been under pressure at various times in the past year or two to take on debt and increase burn rate in order to 'grow the company', and I'm overwhelmingly glad now that I did not. My empire is tiny but it's solvent and can stay so.
This hits home.
PE: Our investment thesis says x, y, z. Why aren’t you achieving goals?
ME: That was a spreadsheet built 3 years ago, by you, 2 years before a CFO was hired. Do I really have to remind you of every false assumption you guys made when you built that model each month when I deliver financial results?
These jokers built a long range plan (complicated back of envelope), with no industry experience, made up growth rates, and expect reality to match up.
if people want longevity they should start before 50. Cue stuff by david sinclar, aubrey degrey et al. People may debate their specific science, but they have the right philosophies like "Aging is damage accumulation" and "Consider aging a disease that kills 100% of the population" etc.
Unfortunately it's a take on how to tune businesses to focus on the 50+ demo, and yeah I stopped reading.