My Ashford University Experience : ms

Interdisciplinary Degrees versus Vocationally Specific Degrees: What should your graduate major be?

Cajun — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 04:39:00 GMT

I sometimes get asked “what should I major in” to which my reply is universally “well, what do you want to do?” Usually a conversation follows where they are looking for a degree that has utility in their current profession but that will cross over to other careers, public and private if necessary. It’s very rare that I get someone who is firm in what they intend on doing for the next 20 to 40 years. So I decided that I would post on the differences between vocation specific degrees versus interdisciplinary degrees.

Firs a couple of definitions. By vocationally specific degree I mean those degrees that are specific to a career. A good example of this would be a Master of Science in Finance, which while excellent in working in finance would not necessarily be a good choice for someone who then wants to work in IT 5 years later.

By interdisciplinary degree I mean those degrees that can be transposed a little more seamlessly over a wide variety of career choices. A good example of this would be the MBA which as most people know is a business generalist degree. This would be handy to anyone working in finance, banking, IT or even criminal justice as the skills and competencies taught are those that are sought pretty much universally more or less.

To further break things down I consider the pros and cons to a vocational specific degree:

Pros to a vocationally specific degree are:

1.) It shows that you have committed to a career and are growing within that industry.

2.) You may become a subject matter expert in your career choice.

3.) It may allow for licensure, such as a Certified Public Accountant which generally requires a set amount of accounting credit hours before sitting for the exam. Often a specific credential is required as well. Another example is in practicing law, you will need a Juris Doctorate degree and pretty much little else will do.

4.) Often a vocationally specific degree will provide for the hard skills necessary to an industry. For example all the MBAs in the world mean nothing in IT if someone cannot fix and configure a computer. In which case an MSIT would be the better hire.

5.) When it comes to vocationally specific degree holders versus interdisciplinary degree holders for a job the vocationally specific degree will more often than not be the better or more logical choice. Unless the vocationally specific degree is in an unrelated discipline.

Cons to a vocationally specific degree:

1.) Little interchangeability. For example a MS in Accounting is not likely to transition smoothly into a career change into Information Systems for example.

2.) Some people may find that they get pigeon holed if found to be in possession of a certain credential. For example a friend of mine has a Master of Science in Accounting and she is a CPA, however every time she applies for a job they always try and sell her into coming on board as part of their accounting and finance team rather than her chosen profession of human resources. Her belief is that she has done accounting for years and she’s tired of it, she wants to do something else for a while and though she has spent the last 7 years working in human resources yet she gets about 2 calls a month from other personnel within her company and other companies asking her to come to the accounting and finance department or to their company as a CPA. Of course she doesn’t have to list her MS in Accounting or CPA on her resume, but then the years she spent in accounting and finance wouldn’t make too much sense. She feels she is pigeon holed and is constantly fighting pressure to take a job she does not want to do.

Pros of an interdisciplinary degree:

1.) Lots of flexibility. Or at least some, depending upon what degree you actually get.

2.) Some of these degrees command a great deal of respect in certain circles. Such as the MBA at the board room table or the MPA in the city manager’s office. Though these degrees are management and administrative degrees, make no mistake, they are not vocationally specific.

3.) You are less likely to be pigeon holed into a career you don’t want.

4.) Easily augmented or enhanced with hard skill or vocationally specific certificates, industry certifications or even a degree emphasis.

Cons of an interdisciplinary degree:

1.) Don’t count on being the “expert” in a hard skilled or vocationally specific area unless you extend your professional knowledge beyond your MBA/MPA/MSM, etc. education. As such you may not be the logical choice for many professions.

2.) Most of these degrees are management oriented. If you don’t want to work in management you may be out of luck unless majoring in Liberal Arts, Humanities, etc.

3.) These degrees often do not qualify one for licensure.

So as you can see there is some tradeoff no matter which way you go. Some examples of a vocationally specific degree would be a Master of Science or Master of Arts in, Accounting, Finance, Human Resources, Information Technology, Information Systems, Programming, Criminal Justice, Marketing, Engineering, etc.

Some examples of an interdisciplinary degree would be: MBA, MPA, Master of Science or Master of Arts in Management, Leadership, etc.

There are some hybrids that do not fit nicely into either category, such as the Master of Science or Master of Arts in Communications (communications may also be considered interdisciplinary) or Human Services. Even a Masters in Education can be something of a hybrid. The reason for this is that some of these degrees are industry specific but provide skills that are universally or at least commonly sought after across multiple types of jobs. For example a Masters in Education may be a great choice for a human resources department looking for an instructor.

By the way it is worth noting that many people who go on to get an interdisciplinary degree already have a vocationally specific undergraduate degree, but then many do not. The same rule applies for undergrad degrees. For example a BS in Accounting is a vocationally specific degree whereas a BS in Business Administration is more interdisciplinary.

Of course this blog post, as are all my blog posts, is strictly my opinion and may not be agreeable to one and all but I hope I could at least shed some light on the topic.

Add to:

The Evolution of the MBA: Is the MBA getting soft?

Cajun — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 22:48:00 GMT

It's hard to describe something like an MBA as soft. It's akin to describing a porcupine as cuddly but nonetheless I have noticed more and more reports in the media about how "soft skills" are becoming increasingly important in the workplace and thus in B-schools. I can see this in my own workplace as well. Especially as we begin to hire working professionals who were born in the mid to late 1980's to early 1990's.

Managing the new generation of employees is about more than spreadsheets, accounting data, market segments or strategy now as an effective manager needs to be able to empathize, communicate, actively listen, provide motivation, share a vision and in general be a leader among a largely catered to generation. No offense to those of you who may be younger out there but the whole notion of "because I said so" or "for the greater overall good" is no longer a relevant managerial attitude if one ever intends on getting the mission accomplished through a team.

So how does this affect the MBA?

Honestly I'm really not sure but I am seeing more and more MBA's or MBA programs talk or write about their emphasis on soft skills or at least the importance thereof. Which leads me to wonder how the MBA will look 10 to 15 years from now? I can say without reservation that the Ashford University MBA is about 1/3 scientific management, marketing, law and organizational psychology, et cetera, 1/3 hard quantitative skills and of course almost 1/3 of leadership or whatever specialization you take. I'm wondering then if reducing the quantitative requirements in favor of additional soft skills training would be desirable?

I know some schools have taken this tactic as it is somewhat feasible to drop statistics or quantitative analysis and combine finance and accounting at least on paper, but would you be sacrificing the quality of the program? It's hard to argue against the need for more soft skills oriented managers, but then if you cannot balance a budget, read a spreadsheet or understand survey margins, what good would you be as an executive leader if your company can't stay afloat?

Of course sacrificing additional coursework in marketing, organizational behavior, information systems, law, et cetera, would also be a horrendous mistake. So does the MBA need to grow from 30 to 36 credit hours to 36 to 41 credit hours or beyond? Is the MBA really the catch all management degree many schools and employers have made it out to be? I personally do not believe so.

I believe that the MBA needs to be seen as what it is, a management/administration degree which provides the tools managers need to be effective within their organizations from a strategic and organizational perspective. However additional training should be sought for those who wish to also be leaders within an organization from an employee or individual (personnel) perspective.

Either way it is an interesting topic, management vs. leadership and where the MBA fits into equipping tomorrow's managers to fill both voids in the workplace.

Anyone have an opinion?

Add to:

An Unexpected and Dangerous Byproduct of an Advanced Degree

Cajun — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 05:22:00 GMT

Okay, tonight’s blog post is going to sound a little arrogant or conceited at first glance but bear with me, I’m experiencing something of a personal crisis of faith while simultaneously wondering if perhaps I’m wrong. So if anyone has felt the way I feel right now and finally saw the light at the end of the tunnel or realized that they were wrong as perhaps I now am, please feel free to comment. I am starting to realize why fresh MBA grads have a bad reputation and it isn’t because they are wrong but instead lack tact.

Within our own managerial ranks we have set merit increases artificially low in order not to exceed our departmental budget because there will simply not be enough money to give all the raises that are due. The problem is that this causes supervisors to inflate and pad reviews in order to get the merit increase that they, the immediate supervisor, believes the employee should have or simply give less than an employee deserves. When challenged on this decision the department manager stated that he needed a years worth of historical data by which to base his decision for future merit ranges.

Here is the rub, I see from what I have been taught that the management team should have practiced the art of projection with a defined margin of error. It would have been a small task to have all supervisors rate what they feel that their employees would get over the course of the year as justified through historical performance reviews which we keep on file as well as projected performance. As people are often creatures of habit and substantial change is hard to come by these numbers would likely have been fairly accurate, management could then set a margin of error or deviation in order as to not exceed the budget. Of course this likely would have resulted in slightly lower than the maximum possible raise given to everyone but it would have raised the average raise given considerably. When arguing this point I was met with blank stares and the initial argument was restated as if I did not just offer an alternative. This lead me to some amount of personal frustration because I can plainly see how this would work and what is more I have performed an exercise as this myself in school and I did so at work in order to demonstrate my point.

The issue is that my argument seems lost on those who work with me. Their backgrounds are in criminal justice and words like “projection analysis” or “standard deviation” seem to be meaningless. The byproduct? Seeing the way something should be but instead having to enforce and work within a system that I full well know to be short sighted and narrow. Any thoughts anyone?

Add to:

We Need Leaders: Can you do the job? Part I

Cajun — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 04:42:00 GMT

Right now everywhere you turn we in America are in short supply of something vital to our country; we are in short supply of true leaders. Oh sure there are lots of people running about claiming to be leaders simply because they have been placed in leadership positions, but simply occupying a place of authority does not make a leader. If that were so the military could pick any first day recruit and make them a general with no ill effects. I am one of those people who believe that leaders are made and must be made from those who posses some basic personal characteristics.

If you feel that you have these characteristics and more I implore you to strongly consider becoming a leader and work your way into a position of responsibility.

1.) You have integrity. I mean you do more than tell the truth but you live your live according to your core values. You are transparent in your dealings. You don’t need to be sly or crafty simply because you are upfront and honest even when it is inconvenient. You have the kind of integrity that goes beyond show but is instead an integral part of who you are. You can see this in Martin Luther King Junior. Here was a man who faced hostile crowds, violent police and people who constantly urged him to fight back. He stuck to his core belief however of non-violence even in the face of violence, even when those who worked with him urged violence. Even when others of influence towards the same ends espoused and beget violence. Martin Luther King Junior stood stalwart and firm in his beliefs and eventually changed the world through how he lived. How he lived lent credence to what he publicly espoused and to what he called others to do.
2.) You serve people. Leaders, true leaders are servants and someone who cannot be a good servant cannot be a good leader. I cannot think of a clearer example than the image of Jesus Christ washing the feet of his disciples. Here is the Messiah, the Lion of Judah, the Son of God here washing the feet of these men who are supposed to be under him. Why is this? Simply because Jesus understood that to be a leader means that you serve those under you in order to realize the greater good. He realized it wasn’t about him, it wasn’t about them it was about what they were doing, it was about the end result. A leader places his or her people before themselves.
3.) A can see the big picture. Abraham Lincoln was faced with a terrible choice. Draft men and send many thousands to their deaths in order to maintain the Union or spare these men and see the nation torn apart. He made a tough choice but the only choice that could be made in order to preserve the Union that was the United States of America. The only way he could make this type of decision with any measure of conviction is to understand and keep the big picture in perspective at all times.
4.) A leader is stalwart and convicted but can admit when they are wrong even when not asked to do so and they do not do so just for the sake of their own image. Then they learn from their mistakes and carry on.
5.) A leader is compassionate and can empathize with people. They do not let emotions cloud their judgment but instead can understand the feelings of others and have compassion upon their situation.

Do you have these 5 traits? Do you have most of these traits and see value of all of them? The world needs more leaders and leaders are developed.

Education is a key component of a good leader. If you want to become a leader education is absolutely necessary whether you get it formally from a school or informally through the school of hard knocks and experience. It is my personal opinion that college is much quicker and easier than the school of hard knocks and there are a lot of leadership focused degrees available.

Check out:

Ashford University’s MBA with an emphasis in Organizational Leadership
The Leadership MBA from St. Joseph’s College of Maine
A Master of Science in Leadership from Southwestern College in Winfield, KS
The MBA at Fort Hays State University with an emphasis in Leadership
The Master of Science in Leadership from Nova Southeastern University
The Regis University Master of Science in Organizational Leadership
Etc.

Whatever you choose make sure that you not only acquire the skills and knowledge to be an effective leader but that you also work on those personal characteristics, those traits that make a truly good leader. The world needs you, trust me.

Add to:

10 Traps, Pitfalls and Shortcomings of Earning a Degree Online Part II (6-10)

Cajun — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 01:56:00 GMT

This is part II of a two part series. (Click to view part I.)

6.) Technology. Technology is an inevitable part of being an online student. Using new, unfamiliar software and mastering the art of using it skillfully will become essential. If you are still carrying a pager, use a rotary phone, are afraid of a fax machine and believe scientific calculators are still over $100.00 you may need to reassess your ability to adapt quickly enough to learning via an online format.

7.) Will power. Also called grit, guts, stamina or courage. You must have the ability to get knocked down and get back up. You have to be able to motivate yourself, likely nobody else will do it for you. If you get an “F” on an assignment you really worked hard on, it’ll knock the wind out of you. But you have to get tough, work harder, be objective and keep slugging away. Nobody is likely going to be cheering you on, nobody will beg you to do the work, nobody will care if you drop out or fail other than you and possibly close relatives. It’s up to you to get it done. You have to be able to accept failure and move on. You have to be able to overcome your shortcomings and keep growing. You have to accept the fact that you are nowhere near perfect and get over yourself enough to get better. You have to have will power. Campus based students will have to have some of this but they will also have the support of a peer group and the knowledge that their friends are sharing their experience. You on the other hand are going to go it very much alone by comparison.

8.) Self -discipline. Self-discipline is not will power, but it is a close cousin. The difference between will power and self discipline is that will power is what motivates you. Will power is the voice in your head that tells you go get up and keep going when you’ve been knocked down, the thing that keeps your feet moving underneath you when you don’t think you can run anymore. Self-discipline is the fore knowledge of what you need to do, making a plan and sticking to that plan no matter what. Self-discipline is the ability to delay pleasure in the knowledge that the sacrifice will pay in the long run. Will power is the drive where self-discipline is the map. One without the other is useless. You have to be self-disciplined. You will not have the peer support or pressure to show up to class every day like your campus-based peers will have. You will not be meeting friends in study groups at night motivating you to do so. Your success and reaching goals will depend 100% on your ability to envision what needs to happen and stick to the plan.

9.) Reading comprehension. You will have to read everything you learn likely. Where your peers can sit through lectures and hear the information, you will have to read it. Where your peers can reinforce the knowledge imparted to the class through discussions, you will have to read and write about what you are learning. It is likely that you will be required to have a higher level of reading comprehension than your campus based peers because it is the primary if not the only means of communication in online learning. You likely will not have auditory reinforcement of the information like sitting through a lecture. You will not likely have the visual of seeing the information being demonstrated on a chalkboard. With rare exception all the information relayed to you will be via text and graphics, nothing more. You will have to learn to comprehend what you read. This will include skillful note taking, learning your reading comprehension limits (we all have them) and develop a means of overcoming your shortcomings. For example, I find it hard to concentrate on a text for over 30 straight minutes without a break. Otherwise I am reading, but not comprehending the text. The more precise and dry the material, the shorter my attention span is. As such I take careful, easily referenced notes and take a break of 5 to 10 minutes at least once every half-hour without fail. That is what works for me, you will have to develop a plan that works for you.

10.) Communication through writing. This is a shortcoming for many, many people. I revise reports daily as part of my official duties in the workplace and I continually see people who struggle in the area of communicating effectively in written word. You would not be alone in this struggle. I too have spent and continue to spend minutes upon hours upon years developing my writing skills. It is an art form that few people if any, ever perfect, yet one that must be mastered to a high level of competence in online learning as this will be your primary if not only means of expressing your thoughts and engaging in the communication process. You may have a way with words and wit in person, but translating this onto the page is a struggle I believe most people, myself included engage in.

Well there you have it. I hope this post does not scare you off of attempting a degree online, but there are things you need to be aware of before committing your time and money to such a momentous undertaking as earning a degree online.

I welcome any comments, questions or suggestions you may have here or email if you prefer.

Add to: