Had our first OB class last night. Prof is high-energy (Lisa Barron) and should make the class fun. As I read the material (about 110 pages) in prep for last night's class, I realize how cynical I am about the actual implementation of these ideas. The theory is interesting to read and the case studies are instructive. But it's been my experience that companies apply these concepts and practices without having a specific problem that they plan to fix. This results in lack of commitment and, eventually, abandonment. HR departments, attempting to stay current and relevant, find the "next new thing", convince the CEO to go along with it, drag the employees through the exercise or the policy change, only to find the same lack of commitment and eventual abandonment. I had files full of MBO's, 360 degree assessment profiles, Myers-Briggs test results, etc. - and I don't recall having the organizations doing a thing with this information and we never really understood exactly what the company was trying to change or improve.
I get that organizations need to align the company structure with the company objectives and I acknowledge that implementing these OB ideas can be effective. But I've observed these programs applied without an overlying strategy and my hunch is that this is a common mistake and leads to the cynicism from which I currently suffer. Anyone else have a different experience, I'd love to hear about it.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
1st DAY OF FIRST CLASS - MICROECONOMICS
First day in class last night and it felt good to be in the classroom. Have a high-energy professor named Kirsten Daniel (from Germany with a doctorate in economics) and the students are very engaged (but it's early; and it's econ). It's clear that she's passionate about the subject and from the first minute she proclaimed the most important thing that we will learn in this class: "MARGINAL BENEFIT EQUALS MARGINAL COST".
I did run across something in the reading that bothered me ... it's about how the public sector views investments. Our text - Managerial Economics by Samuelson & Marks - states "The objective in a public-sector decision ... is broader than the private-sector profit standard ... [a task] may be worth doing even it it fails to generate a profit for the government authority." Why shouldn't government be held to exactly the same cost-benefit standard as is the private sector. Now, I'm not an advocate of Ayn Rand (where's God in her world?), but the government does have shareholders (taxpayers) that are expecting a return (benefit) on their investment (taxes). Government delivers services because we are willing to pay for them - for us, the marginal benefit of receiving the service is equal to the marginal cost of what we are giving up to pay for these governmental services.
It's unclear to me what standard other than economic benefit can be used in evaluating a governmental expenditure. Providing social programs, while a compassionate response to a problem, is an economic decision and is evaluated on its economic merits. Unemployment benefits, head start programs, the VA and every other service provide a benefit at a cost that someone (taxpayers) is willing to pay and it is done because we've decided that the marginal benefit equals the marginal cost. Government's delivery of law enforcement services (or maintaining the military, for that matter) is based on the fact that the marginal benefit of providing this service is at least equal to its marginal cost and this benefit exceeds the opportunity cost of not delivering the service (the cost of lawlessness). The decision to build infrastructure is (or should be) made solely on its ability to deliver a marginal benefit that equals marginal cost. Even programs to preserve the environment are delivered because they reduce the long-term cost of maintaining our inventory (land, water, food supply, etc). We don't spend more combating global warming precisely because of a lack of evidence that those expenditures would produce a marginal benefit equal to the marginal cost.
I am at a loss to think of a single public sector good or service that should have anything other than an economic analysis at the heart of the "yes/no" decision. If anyone has an example, please let me know.
I did run across something in the reading that bothered me ... it's about how the public sector views investments. Our text - Managerial Economics by Samuelson & Marks - states "The objective in a public-sector decision ... is broader than the private-sector profit standard ... [a task] may be worth doing even it it fails to generate a profit for the government authority." Why shouldn't government be held to exactly the same cost-benefit standard as is the private sector. Now, I'm not an advocate of Ayn Rand (where's God in her world?), but the government does have shareholders (taxpayers) that are expecting a return (benefit) on their investment (taxes). Government delivers services because we are willing to pay for them - for us, the marginal benefit of receiving the service is equal to the marginal cost of what we are giving up to pay for these governmental services.
It's unclear to me what standard other than economic benefit can be used in evaluating a governmental expenditure. Providing social programs, while a compassionate response to a problem, is an economic decision and is evaluated on its economic merits. Unemployment benefits, head start programs, the VA and every other service provide a benefit at a cost that someone (taxpayers) is willing to pay and it is done because we've decided that the marginal benefit equals the marginal cost. Government's delivery of law enforcement services (or maintaining the military, for that matter) is based on the fact that the marginal benefit of providing this service is at least equal to its marginal cost and this benefit exceeds the opportunity cost of not delivering the service (the cost of lawlessness). The decision to build infrastructure is (or should be) made solely on its ability to deliver a marginal benefit that equals marginal cost. Even programs to preserve the environment are delivered because they reduce the long-term cost of maintaining our inventory (land, water, food supply, etc). We don't spend more combating global warming precisely because of a lack of evidence that those expenditures would produce a marginal benefit equal to the marginal cost.
I am at a loss to think of a single public sector good or service that should have anything other than an economic analysis at the heart of the "yes/no" decision. If anyone has an example, please let me know.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Opening Residential
UCI's MBA program contains three residential programs where the students are taken offsite for an intensive period of study - the Opening Residential; the International Residential; and the Leadership Residential. We just got back yesterday from the Opening Residential where we were sequestered at the Irvine Hyatt for four nights. They squeezed two classes (6 units) into 30 hours of formal instruction and about 15 hours of work on group projects/papers. The two classes were Organizational Behavior and Strategic Planning. It was a good indoctrination into the work level that will be required for class and it was a good bonding experience for the students.
They also assigned us our small groups. For our core classes (the first year or so), we'll all be taking the same curriculum and much of the work will be assigned to our groups of 4-6 people. We'll work with the same small group throughout our time at UCI so I'm glad that my group seems to be serious and hard-working and we don't seem to have any personality conflicts as yet.
We got one nice surprise on the last day of the Residential. We were told by staff that US News just released its rankings for part-time MBA programs and UCI moved up to #21 in the country (from 24th in the previous ranking)! The trajectory of this program over the last few years has been amazing. Great validation of my decision to come to UCI.
Our first regular classes don't start until March 28th and once they start I'll be in class two nights per week.
They also assigned us our small groups. For our core classes (the first year or so), we'll all be taking the same curriculum and much of the work will be assigned to our groups of 4-6 people. We'll work with the same small group throughout our time at UCI so I'm glad that my group seems to be serious and hard-working and we don't seem to have any personality conflicts as yet.
We got one nice surprise on the last day of the Residential. We were told by staff that US News just released its rankings for part-time MBA programs and UCI moved up to #21 in the country (from 24th in the previous ranking)! The trajectory of this program over the last few years has been amazing. Great validation of my decision to come to UCI.
Our first regular classes don't start until March 28th and once they start I'll be in class two nights per week.
ORIENTATION
UCI has done a great job getting us all ready for school as the date approaches. I get regular emails about upcoming events, the student loan process, about the new computer that we all need, etc. On March 5th, 2011, we had our orientation where we met all of our classmates (65 of us), officially met the staff, got a sense for what the classes will be like, met some existing and past students, and generally were given everything we'd need to be prepared to start school. They fed us well during the all-day event (I think they could have done this in something less than a full day) and it was fairly painless. Many students are concerned about the workload given their other commitments at work, home, etc.
SELECTING A SCHOOL
I did my undergrad in business at USC so applying there was automatic. The other school I considered was UCLA. It wasn't until fairly late in the process that I wondered about UCI. Wasn't even sure that they had a B-School and, if they did, I knew nothing about it. Found out that UCI's school had a lot going for it: offered a spring quarter start date which 'SC and UCLA didn't provide; the program would finish in 27 months allowing me to graduate by a full year earlier than the other schools; it is measurably less expensive than the other 2 schools; and much more highly touted than I had expected. I decided to apply to UCI as well.
One thing I noticed right away at UCI is its customer orientation. The staff treats potential students as if they are important customers. They make the application process very easy and they do great follow-up. I was impressed with the staff I met during the interview process and began thinking that I'd be excited about going to UCI and might even pick the school over USC.
I was informed by UCI over the Christmas holidays that I'd been accepted for admittance in the spring 2011 program. Since the USC start date isn't until Fall 2011, I won't be notified of my acceptance until after the UCI program starts (when I applied, they told me I would find out in time, but that didn't turn out to be the case). So, my choice was easy. I'm going to UCI!
One thing I noticed right away at UCI is its customer orientation. The staff treats potential students as if they are important customers. They make the application process very easy and they do great follow-up. I was impressed with the staff I met during the interview process and began thinking that I'd be excited about going to UCI and might even pick the school over USC.
I was informed by UCI over the Christmas holidays that I'd been accepted for admittance in the spring 2011 program. Since the USC start date isn't until Fall 2011, I won't be notified of my acceptance until after the UCI program starts (when I applied, they told me I would find out in time, but that didn't turn out to be the case). So, my choice was easy. I'm going to UCI!
Taking the GMAT
I hadn't taken a test in about 25 years, so I was very rusty about how to prepare for the GMAT. I bought the GMAT Review Book (published by GMAC) and I registered on mba.com to get access to online exams. I found out later that just about everything in the book ($50) is available on mba.com for free - except you do get more sample test questions in the book. I didn't really think about taking the prep course although I heard later from others that it was really helpful, particularly for the math portion.
I knew that I'd do fine on the english and writing sections, but wasn't confident about the math so that's where I focused. Amazing how much algebra and geometry I have forgotten. I spent about 2 months studying for the test (3x/week for about an hour or so a day). I felt that I was prepared. Made my appointment at the testing center - several weeks in advance - and spent half a Saturday taking the test. As I thought, I did well on the english and writing sections but fell down hard on the math. Still did well enough overall to get a pretty good score.
I knew that I'd do fine on the english and writing sections, but wasn't confident about the math so that's where I focused. Amazing how much algebra and geometry I have forgotten. I spent about 2 months studying for the test (3x/week for about an hour or so a day). I felt that I was prepared. Made my appointment at the testing center - several weeks in advance - and spent half a Saturday taking the test. As I thought, I did well on the english and writing sections but fell down hard on the math. Still did well enough overall to get a pretty good score.
Why B-School?
I am based in Newport Beach, California and I have my own real estate development consulting practice. In early 2008, my clients started pulling back significantly from the market and by early 2009, work had slowed to a crawl. In addition to seeking out new clients, I started looking at taking a full-time position again back in corporate real estate. Problem: very few real estate companies were looking to develop new product (I do land acquisitions, government entitlements, financial analysis and some construction management). So, I began talking with non-real estate companies to see if my project management skill sets would translate into other industries. However, with so many talented people in the job market employers have had the ability to be very picky about candidates having the exact job qualifications that they need without taking a risk on someone trying to transition into a new industry.
While having lunch with a friend who is a senior exec at Disney, he pointed out that I probably have as many work years in front of me as I do behind me so why didn't I consider going back to get my MBA. He said that Disney still puts a high premium on MBA's and, in some divisions, won't even look at you unless you have one. With that perspective - and the belief that the real estate industry is in for years of difficult times going forward - I decided to get serious about going back to school to make myself more marketable.
While having lunch with a friend who is a senior exec at Disney, he pointed out that I probably have as many work years in front of me as I do behind me so why didn't I consider going back to get my MBA. He said that Disney still puts a high premium on MBA's and, in some divisions, won't even look at you unless you have one. With that perspective - and the belief that the real estate industry is in for years of difficult times going forward - I decided to get serious about going back to school to make myself more marketable.
Blog Purpose
My name is Kris Wilhelm and I was recently accepted into UC-Irvine's Paul Merage Business School MBA program (fully-employed or FEMBA program) starting in the spring of 2011. I am writing this blog because I've been asked by many of my friends and colleagues about the process of applying to school, what it's been like to take the GMAT, what it feels like to go back to school at my age, and what I expect to get out of the degree. So, I thought I'd blog about the 27-month experience to give others some insight into the journey to an MBA. I also welcome comments and will do my best to respond to any questions that surface.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)