MBA for physicians

[drstuart]

I am thinking of joining either executive healthcare MBA or online MBA and mostly focussing on Duke, Umass Amherst program and George washington. Is it possible for anyone to help me compare these programs? I do understand that online MBAs lack networking component. But since I am a practising physician, I basically want robust knowledge of bussiness so that I can get into management side of Hospital where I work or start something on my own.

I guess rysa4 and few others have done MBA at Umass Amherst; I would like to know the total cost of the program. Also, I want to know whether I should finish coursework with ACPE before entering the program or just join MBA directly?

Moreover, if southerndoc has any updated information, please share with us

Thanks in advance.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[FutureCTDoc]

The only decent one is Duke. An MBA isn't like an MD, it's go big or go home.

 

[bronx43]

The only decent one is Duke. An MBA isn't like an MD, it's go big or go home.

This is true if you don't want to practice medicine and go into business, but if you only want to learn some basic business principles, any of those programs listed would suffice. But, honestly, you could probably save some money just by reading some books and keeping up with business news. There isn't much an online MBA can offer you that you can't get in some other way.

 

[drstuart]

I do want to practice medicine all my life; but I would like to do part time management work too. I know that Duke would be best choice, but I am somewhat worried about total cost. I am also wondering whether I should take HSM or executive track with few HSM electives.

 

[bronx43]

I do want to practice medicine all my life; but I would like to do part time management work too. I know that Duke would be best choice, but I am somewhat worried about total cost. I am also wondering whether I should take HSM or executive track with few HSM electives.

Look at the exact courses offered for the two tracks.

If cost is of concern to you, just pick the cheaper program. The difference between a top MBA program and a lower tier one is networking opportunities and quality of recruiters. Since you don't care about either, there's no point to spend more money.

 

[drstuart]

Thanks for your input.
Do you think there will be difference in quality of education at Duke and other MBA programs?

 

[bronx43]

Thanks for your input.
Do you think there will be difference in quality of education at Duke and other MBA programs?

I would say no, if you pick the same courses. Even if there are some slight differences, it's more or less negligible and hardly worth the money.

 

[rysa4]

The only decent one is Duke. An MBA isn't like an MD, it's go big or go home.

Many of my classmates at UMass are highly successful in their careers; both the docs and the non-docs. In addition, I employ MBA students from several area programs of some note here in Texas - they seem to all move on to all kinds of very successful careers and their MBAs serve them well. I seem to be doing OK.

 

[rysa4]

I do want to practice medicine all my life; but I would like to do part time management work too. I know that Duke would be best choice, but I am somewhat worried about total cost. I am also wondering whether I should take HSM or executive track with few HSM electives.

For me, I wanted a well rounded MBA general education with excellent instruction, so I picked Umass. So did the ACPE by the way ( The American College of Physician Executives have a partnership program with UMass). I've picked up all kinds of skills in management and use a lot of them pretty much everyday.

The executive programs seem too short to me--but in the end, learning is learning and I am sure there is something for everyone in each of the programs you list.

The UMass cost is listed on the website - I think its $740 a credit hour and you need 37 hours to graduate. This doesn't include textbooks, HBS and HBR cases and a few other expenses.

I enjoy the learning with the rest of my highly diverse classmates but it will be strange when I am finished to be sure. Definitely my last graduation.

 

[rysa4]

This is true if you don't want to practice medicine and go into business, but if you only want to learn some basic business principles, any of those programs listed would suffice. But, honestly, you could probably save some money just by reading some books and keeping up with business news. There isn't much an online MBA can offer you that you can't get in some other way.

In academic circles the data points to online learning as being superior to in class learning. That is certainly my experience. Part of it relates to the multimedia integration, partly due to the threads and discussions being reviewable and added to over a longer period of time than a single class room class. Some of it is really individual though. Sitting in class passively listening or engaging in some brief discussions is a far cry from what my experience has been.

Of course, how well an instructor can integrate the goals of the class with the student body at hand has a bit of an impact as well. I would have never gotten the financial analysis skills I have now by reading books and business news ( I've been doing that for a very long time anyway).

 

[rysa4]

Look at the exact courses offered for the two tracks.

If cost is of concern to you, just pick the cheaper program. The difference between a top MBA program and a lower tier one is networking opportunities and quality of recruiters. Since you don't care about either, there's no point to spend more money.

yes, especially the networking part. But the need for docs with business credentials really is going up; lots of opportunity.

 

[bronx43]

yes, especially the networking part. But the need for docs with business credentials really is going up; lots of opportunity.

What opportunities are you referring to? The only thing I can think of for a MD with a non-top-tier MBA is some kind of administration - maybe corporate. You're honestly better off in medicine than either of those two.

 

[rysa4]

What opportunities are you referring to? The only thing I can think of for a MD with a non-top-tier MBA is some kind of administration - maybe corporate. You're honestly better off in medicine than either of those two.

I dunno. A lot of docs are not in agreement with you in the least from all MBA programs, regardless of tier. I am not sure what you mean by better off though. Perhaps that's the source of confusion.

You can do a lot with an MD degree alone outside of the practice of medicine, but as time has moved forward the benefits of a business education have really multiplied.

Its far more about the knowledge and, frankly, politics and who you know and how you get along with folks, than it is about a "tier label." I guess it depends upon your goals and what 'better off" means, which varies from doc to doc. What may be better off for you may not mean the same thing as better off to another doctor.

I think the members of the ACPE feel better off by and large than they did in their purely clinical doctor realm, or else most would have stayed put. Which of course is fine.

 

[rysa4]

Many of my classmates at UMass are highly successful in their careers; both the docs and the non-docs. In addition, I employ MBA students from several area programs of some note here in Texas - they seem to all move on to all kinds of very successful careers and their MBAs serve them well. I seem to be doing OK.

One of the graduates from my MBA program is: "Anshu Jain Head of Global Markets, Joint Head of the Corporate and Investment Bank, and a member of Deutsche Bank's Management Board."

Obviously I pasted this from the net, but he did get his MBA from the Isenberg School of Management, which is the business school that houses the UMass Amherst MBA Program, and runs my program.

The point here is that success comes from many places and from many people. The exact program one attended is only one piece of a career person's puzzle. The really is a lot of exciting opportunity out there.

 

[FutureCTDoc]

MBAs are go M7 or home. MBAs won't teach you how to run a hospital, an MHSA will be a better choice. The value of MBAs outside of M7 territory is questionable. You can read the books these programs use and teach yourself.

 

[maller63]

hi

 

[Taurus]

Through my interactions with my physician colleagues, it seems many of them are pretty clueless about business issues, especially the ones still in medical school or residency. I blame it on medical schools that spend inordinate amounts of time talking about "helping the underserved" or doing research. My school didn't even spend 1 minute talking about how to run a practice or the political and business issues facing medicine. It's no wonder we have physicians have been run around in circles by politicians, lawyers, and even the freaking nurses. I think getting an MBA is a good idea especially if you don't have a strong business background. I would agree that it's best to not spend very much for the MBA since you probably won't get a good return on your investment if you go to a top tier or very expensive program. Get your MBA for free by getting your employer to pay for it.

 

[bronx43]

I dunno. A lot of docs are not in agreement with you in the least from all MBA programs, regardless of tier. I am not sure what you mean by better off though. Perhaps that's the source of confusion.

You can do a lot with an MD degree alone outside of the practice of medicine, but as time has moved forward the benefits of a business education have really multiplied.

Its far more about the knowledge and, frankly, politics and who you know and how you get along with folks, than it is about a "tier label." I guess it depends upon your goals and what 'better off" means, which varies from doc to doc. What may be better off for you may not mean the same thing as better off to another doctor.

I think the members of the ACPE feel better off by and large than they did in their purely clinical doctor realm, or else most would have stayed put. Which of course is fine.

Well, obviously it's all about knowledge, politics, and networking. The worth of an MBA is two-fold for the vast majority of people who aren't looking to go back to the same employer - networking and recruiting. And for those two purposes, top tier schools offer vastly more opportunities than lower tier ones, and this is especially true for Wharton, HBS, and Stanford. The other top tiers like Kellogg, Booth, Columbia, etc provide excellent opportunities also, but lack the elite recruiters W/H/S provides.
So, again, it really depends what you want to do with your MBA. For many end goals, better MBAs will matter. For others, they won't.

 

[rysa4]

Well, obviously it's all about knowledge, politics, and networking. The worth of an MBA is two-fold for the vast majority of people who aren't looking to go back to the same employer - networking and recruiting. And for those two purposes, top tier schools offer vastly more opportunities than lower tier ones, and this is especially true for Wharton, HBS, and Stanford. The other top tiers like Kellogg, Booth, Columbia, etc provide excellent opportunities also, but lack the elite recruiters W/H/S provides.
So, again, it really depends what you want to do with your MBA. For many end goals, better MBAs will matter. For others, they won't.

Not really. The worth of an MBA relies largely on how the student approaches the information, and applies it, and the resultant quality isn't at all based on the program, past a certain point of quality which is offered well beyond "top" schools. Also, different folks learn differently; many of the programs require sitting a classroom on a weekend for instance, or traveling to take exams. That's not conducive to learning for me, and I do much better being able to learn round the clock on a weekly set of objectives and to review the multimedia stuff a number of times etc.

The other issue is content; for me organizational behavior and human resource management were critical areas of expertise for me to develop (and I am still learning). Duke's program that I looked at didn't even require these areas, and instead chose to pay visits to capitol hill and speak with congressman and the like ( which is very cool and an opportunity - but doesn't cover basic skill sets that I needed in my opinion).

You can look at top corporations and financial service giants around the world and see where their leaders got their various MBAs; you do see some top American schools mentioned, but to say that there is some sort of magic or unique capability conferred by these schools that others can't give you is quite egocentric. The top business leaders come from a variety of MBA programs from around the world, and each reputable school has their success stories.

By the way, 30% of the "top tier" MBA programs graduates leave the country these days. That number is growing.

 

[bronx43]

Not really. The worth of an MBA relies largely on how the student approaches the information, and applies it, and the resultant quality isn't at all based on the program, past a certain point of quality which is offered well beyond "top" schools. Also, different folks learn differently; many of the programs require sitting a classroom on a weekend for instance, or traveling to take exams. That's not conducive to learning for me, and I do much better being able to learn round the clock on a weekly set of objectives and to review the multimedia stuff a number of times etc.

The other issue is content; for me organizational behavior and human resource management were critical areas of expertise for me to develop (and I am still learning). Duke's program that I looked at didn't even require these areas, and instead chose to pay visits to capitol hill and speak with congressman and the like ( which is very cool and an opportunity - but doesn't cover basic skill sets that I needed in my opinion).

You can look at top corporations and financial service giants around the world and see where their leaders got their various MBAs; you do see some top American schools mentioned, but to say that there is some sort of magic or unique capability conferred by these schools that others can't give you is quite egocentric. The top business leaders come from a variety of MBA programs from around the world, and each reputable school has their success stories.

By the way, 30% of the "top tier" MBA programs graduates leave the country these days. That number is growing.

Obviously CEOs and other elite players in the global economy are going to come from a myriad of backgrounds. However, graduates of top MBA programs are disproportionately represented in these elite - and this is especially true for various sides of high finance, top consulting firms, investment management, trading, etc.
I've said this multiple times, but it depends on what you want to do. The bottom line is that KKR, Blackstone, TPG, Bain Capital don't recruit outside of W/S/H. McKinsey takes 95% of their associates from top 10 programs. Ditto for investment banks. What this means is that no matter how well you learn the fluff that is the MBA curriculum, you'll have an incredibly hard time breaking into those industries without a big name school. I mean, just do a search on google for hedge funds or buyout firms with funds greater than a billion, and see what percentage of their investment team came from H/S/W.
But, if you don't want to enter those high paying industries, then where you do your MBA probably doesn't matter as much. And this is especially true for physicians who want to add basic business strategies to their arsenal. Therefore, my ultimate point is that as a physician, you probably won't care too much about recruiting. And that evens out the field alot when selecting MBA programs. I personally would still pick a top program due to better networking opportunities.

 

[rysa4]

Obviously CEOs and other elite players in the global economy are going to come from a myriad of backgrounds. However, graduates of top MBA programs are disproportionately represented in these elite - and this is especially true for various sides of high finance, top consulting firms, investment management, trading, etc.
I've said this multiple times, but it depends on what you want to do. The bottom line is that KKR, Blackstone, TPG, Bain Capital don't recruit outside of W/S/H. McKinsey takes 95% of their associates from top 10 programs. Ditto for investment banks. What this means is that no matter how well you learn the fluff that is the MBA curriculum, you'll have an incredibly hard time breaking into those industries without a big name school. I mean, just do a search on google for hedge funds or buyout firms with funds greater than a billion, and see what percentage of their investment team came from H/S/W.
But, if you don't want to enter those high paying industries, then where you do your MBA probably doesn't matter as much. And this is especially true for physicians who want to add basic business strategies to their arsenal. Therefore, my ultimate point is that as a physician, you probably won't care too much about recruiting. And that evens out the field a lot when selecting MBA programs. I personally would still pick a top program due to better networking opportunities.

Not really. There are top paid CEOs, CIOs,and CFOs with MBAs from numerous programs in every industry, and there really isn't any correlation to the very top salaries and MBA origin, although starting averages are higher at the programs you sight. Docs with MBAs start at higher levels than ALL cited first year MBA averages from all programs as an FYI.

Most importantly, there are excellent MBA programs around the world well beyond our shores, and in this age of globalization, trying to say that there are only 7 MBA programs that lead somewhere that others don't really is kinda laughable and certainly egocentric for an American to try and defend, and would also preclude success of the type you are inferring right off of the bat.

It really is different than medicine, like our specialty of PMR, where there are true have and have not programs that impact exiting skill sets. I don't disagree on networking differences between MBA programs however. That's certainly true.

From a physician perspective, I'd say that the practice of medicine is a full time occupation that takes a certain edge, but at some point, if a doc is looking for a change to the administrative and business management side of the equation, a fully accredited MBA program is a great path to choose. IMMV.

By the way - If Bain Capital doesn't recruit outside of the programs you mention - who is this guy?

Anand More
Managing Director

Experience:

Mr. More joined Bain Capital in 2001 and is Managing Director of Brookside Capital. Prior to joining Bain Capital, he was a Managing Director at Citigroup Asset Management and a buy side analyst with Sanford C. Bernstein with a focus on industrial companies. Earlier in his career, Mr. More spent several years at Booz, Allen & Hamilton where he consulted to companies in the automotive, aerospace, building products and consumer products industries.
Education:

Mr. More received an MBA from the University of Chicago and a BA from Harvard University.

 

[bronx43]

Not really. There are top paid CEOs, CIOs,and CFOs with MBAs from numerous programs in every industry, and there really isn't any correlation to the very top salaries and MBA origin, although starting averages are higher at the programs you sight. Docs with MBAs start at higher levels than ALL cited first year MBA averages from all programs as an FYI.

Most importantly, there are excellent MBA programs around the world well beyond our shores, and in this age of globalization, trying to say that there are only 7 MBA programs that lead somewhere that others don't really is kinda laughable and certainly egocentric for an American to try and defend, and would also preclude success of the type you are inferring right off of the bat.

It really is different than medicine, like our specialty of PMR, where there are true have and have not programs that impact exiting skill sets. I don't disagree on networking differences between MBA programs however. That's certainly true.

From a physician perspective, I'd say that the practice of medicine is a full time occupation that takes a certain edge, but at some point, if a doc is looking for a change to the administrative and business management side of the equation, a fully accredited MBA program is a great path to choose. IMMV.

By the way - If Bain Capital doesn't recruit outside of the programs you mention - who is this guy?

Anand More
Managing Director

Experience:

Mr. More joined Bain Capital in 2001 and is Managing Director of Brookside Capital. Prior to joining Bain Capital, he was a Managing Director at Citigroup Asset Management and a buy side analyst with Sanford C. Bernstein with a focus on industrial companies. Earlier in his career, Mr. More spent several years at Booz, Allen & Hamilton where he consulted to companies in the automotive, aerospace, building products and consumer products industries.
Education:

Mr. More received an MBA from the University of Chicago and a BA from Harvard University.

Dude, no offense, but you obviously know nothing about high finance jobs. This guy was a MD at an asset management firm. Once you get to those positions, then there is far more lateral mobility, as the mechanism of hiring isn't through headhunting or recruiting. It's more by networking and simple word of mouth. From what his CV says, it's far more likely that he landed his Booz job after his Booth degree, then was lucky enough to get a job in Asset management with his consulting connections. Either that or he was at Booz after undergrad, then landed his asset management position after Booth. Either way, I'm fairly certain he wasn't recruited by Bain Capital out of Booth. The chances of him choosing to go to Booth after landing a job in asset management is slim to none.
It's pretty much widely accepted in finance that large PE firms get most of their associates directly from investment banks. And nowadays, the few that aren't are recruited out of W/H/S. Just call the firms up and ask candidates from which schools have gotten offers.
And the reason why starting salaries (and most likely mid-career salaries) are higher at the top schools, while CEOs' MBA origins are more spread out is that graduates of top MBA programs aren't looking for a career in corporate. Look at where they are going post-MBA - mostly finance, consulting, start-ups, trading, etc. Corporate is relegated to the students without many other options, or simply has a singular goal in staying with his company.

 

[bronx43]

Most importantly, there are excellent MBA programs around the world well beyond our shores, and in this age of globalization, trying to say that there are only 7 MBA programs that lead somewhere that others don't really is kinda laughable and certainly egocentric for an American to try and defend, and would also preclude success of the type you are inferring right off of the bat.

I never said this, and I specifically made a point to argue that MBA choices should be made depending on your own career goals. Anyone with any amount of awareness of how the world works knows that the possession or lack of a certain degree from a certain institution doesn't guarantee or prohibit eventual success. I mean, it's the same idea with going to the best undergrad you can get into. Obviously, not every rich guy is from Harvard, but the bigger difference between schools, the bigger the difference between future opportunities.

 

[rysa4]

Dude, no offense, but you obviously know nothing about high finance jobs. This guy was a MD at an asset management firm. Once you get to those positions, then there is far more lateral mobility, as the mechanism of hiring isn't through headhunting or recruiting. It's more by networking and simple word of mouth. From what his CV says, it's far more likely that he landed his Booz job after his Booth degree, then was lucky enough to get a job in Asset management with his consulting connections. Either that or he was at Booz after undergrad, then landed his asset management position after Booth. Either way, I'm fairly certain he wasn't recruited by Bain Capital out of Booth. The chances of him choosing to go to Booth after landing a job in asset management is slim to none.
It's pretty much widely accepted in finance that large PE firms get most of their associates directly from investment banks. And nowadays, the few that aren't are recruited out of W/H/S. Just call the firms up and ask candidates from which schools have gotten offers.
And the reason why starting salaries (and most likely mid-career salaries) are higher at the top schools, while CEOs' MBA origins are more spread out is that graduates of top MBA programs aren't looking for a career in corporate. Look at where they are going post-MBA - mostly finance, consulting, start-ups, trading, etc. Corporate is relegated to the students without many other options, or simply has a singular goal in staying with his company.

Not really. You have stated that unless you attend certain MBA programs you can't get to certain places in a career and have designated alternative programs as fluff that can be picked up from reading a book. Those are your words!!

And I have merely pointed out a couple of heavy hitter folks that don't fit into what you are saying. Essentially showing by fact that what you are peddling here isn't factually truthful. The issue is not one of knowledge about "high finance." Its about clarity and truth regarding the value of an MBA and what a number of excellent institutions have to offer, and many examples of success.

We live in a global world, and the old East Coast mentalities regarding dogmatic proclamations of its only place X or MBA program Y isn't optimal in today's business world nor factual. Like I said, its different than medical residency programs in certain fields.

Have a good one.

 

[rysa4]

The worth of an MBA is two-fold for the vast majority of people who aren't looking to go back to the same employer - networking and recruiting. And for those two purposes, top tier schools offer vastly more opportunities than lower tier ones, and this is especially true for Wharton, HBS, and Stanford. The other top tiers like Kellogg, Booth, Columbia, etc provide excellent opportunities also, but lack the elite recruiters W/H/S provides.
So, again, it really depends what you want to do with your MBA. For many end goals, better MBAs will matter. For others, they won't.

Here is one of several posts that I think is pretty problematic. I can tell you that many MBA programs offer networking opportunities and opportunities for job changes. The opportunities are simply different. I also don't agree with the comment about "better MBAs." Its a longer discussion. But thought I'd point it out.

 

[bronx43]

Not really. You have stated that unless you attend certain MBA programs you can't get to certain places in a career and have designated alternative programs as fluff that can be picked up from reading a book. Those are your words!!

And I have merely pointed out a couple of heavy hitter folks that don't fit into what you are saying. Essentially showing by fact that what you are peddling here isn't factually truthful. The issue is not one of knowledge about "high finance." Its about clarity and truth regarding the value of an MBA and what a number of excellent institutions have to offer, and many examples of success.

We live in a global world, and the old East Coast mentalities regarding dogmatic proclamations of its only place X or MBA program Y isn't optimal in today's business world nor factual. Like I said, its different than medical residency programs in certain fields.

Have a good one.

Dude, you're completely putting words into my mouth. You're making obvious trends into statements of absolutes, which are not my intention at all. Obviously, in today's world where networking and other special circumstances can play huge roles in one's career, any statement about getting jobs or positions is going to be a generalization, as opposed to a black/white certainty.
Would you advise someone to stay in college or drop out? Which provides the better opportunities in most cases? I mean, I can easily show you multi-millionaires or billionaires who have dropped out or never even went to college, but that's besides the point. It's all a continuum between opportunities and successes. If you attended Harvard undergrad, you will get many opportunities others will not have. Does that necessitate that you are successful? No. If you go to a community college, does that necessitate that you will be a failure? Not really. However, to use these data points to say that someone is just as well off at a community college and Harvard is just ******ed.
And that's my entire input in this discussion. If you have the opportunity to get into a top 7 MBA program, then do it, unless there are substantial financial considerations at play. Going to a better MBA won't guarantee you anything, but given their superior talent and better recruiting events, it will provide you with a better opportunity at achieving your goals. If this wasn't true, then why would anyone even want to go to Harvard, Columbia, Kellogg, Booth, etc?