By their own metrics, are they successful? Do they accomplish their goals?

Yes, but not by "growing the pie"; MBAs increase profits in the sense that they reduce the share of profits going to workers (at least according to this paper; I'm not familiar with the rest of the literature on this subject).

From the abstract of the paper: "...Exploiting exogenous export demand shocks, we show that non-business managers share profits with their workers, whereas business managers do not. But consistent with our first set of results, these business managers show no greater ability to increase sales or profits in response to exporting opportunities..."

I would say a system which continues to exist, despite predictions it should fail, is more effective than the model which predicts it failing. You and I may think that growing the pie is better than turning the screws, but the system doesn't care. It just does what it does.

Maybe I'm wrong here, but I'm reading many of the comments as: "The goal should be X, managers do Y, so managers should stop" when the goal is not X.

yes on planet manager they do quite well. they get paid a lot more and they laugh a lot.

This is the way I see academia, which has been thoroughly institutionalized by the industrial era. I know that you only mentioned the technical aspect education (which has been impacted as well), but this is a existential problem with humanity. The system attempts to divorce human beings from true knowledge that is based on experience to create artificial and theoretical constraints on human value. This is done to create a power differential by separating people into classes. This is why studying for specific fields are largely theoretical and not experiential. When we allow ourselves to be removed from experiential knowledge, we become automatons that are easy to control.

(upvote) with caveat .. specialization among advanced training groups is divergent from "whole systems" approach yes, agree.. but careful with undiluted use of the 'control' keyword there.. Discipline among troops/specialists is not exactly the same as extended specialist knowledge, and the means to imbue/acquire specialist knowledge.

This post strikes a nerve here.. considering historical shifts of agrarian or nomadic people being conquered by militaries with advanced supply chains and technology, for example logistics, medicine, personal gear and weapons. Absolutely yes specialization empowered societies to conquer, but also civilian advancements. (the PRC mocks Tibetans as 'stone age people' for example, since they lack most of modern industrial products for transportation and medicine).

Intelligence may rebel against rote indoctrination (paths towards behavioral discipline) yet Intelligence seeks specialist knowledge like a kind of gravity. Lots of patience on this topic, please, its crucial !

> ...to create a power differential by separating people into classes

   Poets, priests, and politicians
   Have words to thank for their positions
   Words that scream for your submission
   And no one's jamming their transmission

   'Cause when their eloquence escapes you
   Their logic ties you up and rapes you

https://genius.com/The-police-de-do-do-do-de-da-da-da-lyrics

but are they making more money now?