PhD after MBA

I think PhDs are aimed at academic types mainly. People who enjoy researching, teaching, writing papers, etc.

The MBA, on the other hand, is aimed at a broader audience: a few scholars may sneak in, but: business people, worker bees, entrepreneur wannabes, etc. are there as well.

Based on the above, I think a PhD does not usually make sense after an MBA, BUT I may be wrong.

Please someone who knows more than I do about PhDs enlighten me.

L.

This is an extremely difficult decision. I highly recommend going directly for a Ph.D if you are even considering it. Save up some money for this year and apply for fall 2008. Talk to the professors if you currently have an admit in some school.

On the other hand, Ph.D admissions are very very competitive. Individual departments within schools admit between 2-7 students each year. 7 is a very optimistic number. Sometimes, a school may not admit any students. So, if you do not have a great academic record so far, it makes a lot of sense to pursue an MBA. If you are not good at math coming into the program, life will be miserable for you in the program.

A Ph.D is training for research in an academic environment. Teaching is not the primary emphasis and it will hurt you if you indicate too much interest in teaching.

Please take the time to read through the posts in the Ph.D in Business forum.

lepium, you are right about Ph.D for academic types. However, a lot of academics make a lot of money from consulting with industry. It also forms the basis for research projects and research papers. Managerial relevance is a key factor for acceptance in many academic journals.

And thats why I have not pursued it. I'd be interested in it for the opportunity to teach - not for the opportunity to practice obscure applied mathematics. I've pretty much figured I could always come back in my 40's or 50's and get a teaching job at a local 3rd tier business school without one.

You made the right decision. Business Schools hire what are known as "Clinical" Professors to teach classes. You dont get tenure, but you do get to teach.

The consistent feedback I get from professors is that teaching gets boring and frustrating after a while. In the words of one prof, "Teaching MBA students is a *complain*". Research and interactions with Ph.D students is what keeps these profs young, challenged and motivated. Once you get past the first few years and learn the language of your field, it can be a very satisfying experience.

I think I will do a PhD when I retire from business. I don't see one as useful or necessary for what I am seeking to do, more an embelishment driven by personal interest (not business).

So, when I am done with other things, maybe a PhD. But it is a bit like a book - I need the idea. I often said that if I did a PhD I wanted to develop a model that would mean noone would have to learn ISLM in intermediate macroeconomics again. I hated that model, it was so bad (and I had to teach the thing for a while too).

I'm totally not a think-tank person. I work closely with people from a number of research institutions, and I appreciate what they do. They geek out on the data, which I then use to do my work, which in turn gives them more data to play with. I'm a do-er, man, not a dreamer. That's why I wanted an MBA. I know a number of folks with MPP or MPA and they often end up doing policy research.

The funny thing is that I do love learning and I love reaching the top of whatever it is I am working on. I feel like I should get a PhD just because it's there. But like Rhyme, while I love teaching, I recognize that all the work that goes into a PhD still won't get me where I want.

Aaudetat,

You have the right attitude. For anyone considering a PhD, do it because you want to be an expert in the field. Everything else (including teaching) should be just peripheral.

Teaching is definitely wonderful, but research can be a very satisfying experience. Right now, if you are look at journals, you will never be able to see how you can ever do this stuff. But its an acquired taste.
The Ph.D is training for research and it is a painful experience (and it should be), no matter how good you are.

While you are on the faculty to teach, publications and service to the academic community (among other things) is a significant part of the tenure decision. Like with most things, you get to do the fun stuff when you become really good at it. So, as a beginner assistant profesor, most of your research may be incremental because you are rushing to meet tenure. You will need some top journal papers for sure. Some times, you team up with well known professors in the field and that may result in some big research projects. You may get funding from the National Science Foundation or the like to pursue interesting problems.

Most profs have consulting firms (Smartops, truedemand are examples), but again, you will most likely be able to do this after you get tenure.

It is rare that I meet someone who says that they do not want to be a professor. Most of us can owe a little part of who we are to a class we took or interactions we had with faculty. I see this in the posts in this thread too. Professors like the freedom, the ability to set your own hours and the sabbaticals. Of course, the motivation of life time employment is hard to beat for a lot of folks too. Even if you know what you want with your Ph.D, it is impossible to know what you will fall in love with during your coursework and interactions with your professors. Some of you may have that same feeling as you pursue your MBA.