Re:Silicon Valley exodus: Bay Area tech companies leaving fo...
by rrrrrrrrrrrryan on Tuesday December 15, 2020 @01:23AM
(#25427579)
Growth at geriatric tech companies like IBM, HP, Oracle, etc. is largely inorganic, driven by well-negotiated acquisitions of smaller B2B software companies.
It takes MBAs to do this sort of work, and while it isn't for me, I don't think it's the worst business model out there.
Re:Silicon Valley exodus: Bay Area tech companies leaving fo...
by skinnymuch on Tuesday December 15, 2020 @10:36AM
(#25431202)
Why does it take an MBA to do that work?
Re:Silicon Valley exodus: Bay Area tech companies leaving fo...
by ativzzz on Tuesday December 15, 2020 @11:17AM
(#25431646)
You don't need an MBA for the financial/high level business knowledge requirements (though many people involved in this have one), but the people networks that MBA programs provide are very beneficial in getting connected to the right person at the right company.
Re:Silicon Valley exodus: Bay Area tech companies leaving fo...
by skinnymuch on Tuesday December 15, 2020 @03:35PM
(#25434892)
So MBA actually means MBA from top 10, maybe top 15 school? I can’t imagine the network being too useful for the 25th best MBA program.
My friends have only recently graduated from their MBAs. Will be interesting to see if their networks help.
Re:Silicon Valley exodus: Bay Area tech companies leaving fo...
by ativzzz on Tuesday December 15, 2020 @09:08PM
(#25438167)
The main value of an MBA is the network. I think lower tier schools can work well if they are tight knit and the graduates tend to stay local to the school. The top tier schools will just have people making more money at more "prestigious" companies.
Re:Silicon Valley exodus: Bay Area tech companies leaving fo...
by barnesto on Tuesday December 15, 2020 @10:12AM
(#25431001)
it doesn't take an MBA to do that work
Re:Silicon Valley exodus: Bay Area tech companies leaving fo...
by abfan1127 on Tuesday December 15, 2020 @10:50AM
(#25431337)
I've seen a lot of tech companies with CFOs as leaders and you're 100% right. They have a certain set of tools and fix those types of problems, which usually aren't the ways to lead tech companies.
I think every company should be lead by a person who has a strong background in the company's main role. I have seen finance background CEOs get replaced and the Company began to thrive again. Its not a bad investing idea!
Note: I have nothing against MBAs, I just don’t think it’s appropriate for them to have the loudest voice at a non-financial institution. They serve a critical role but it’s a supporting one and not suitable to leadership / company direction.