Where MPAs beat MBAs.

[Bastille]

One thing that has bothered me recently is the sense that many MPA candidates feel like second-rate MBA candidates when applying for private sector consulting or analytical positions. I also see a great deal of concern about the size of student debt versus the ability to find a high paying job.

An MPA curriculum at a solid program will allow the student to study a level of statistics and economic theory far beyond an MBA student. Consider this sequence at SIPA, for example, which is in addition to the core statistics and calculus-based economics analysis sequence:

http://sipa.columbia...curriculum.html

Similarly, Chicago’s standard core, which is more policy-focused but no-less quanty:

http://harrisschool....masters/mpp.asp

There are others. Michigan, Berkeley, and (to a lesser extent) Georgetown.

Certainly, some MPA programs require courses in things such as “ethics,” “leadership,” and “project management.” While these are important, I believe that they are best learned “on the job.” You shouldn’t be spending your money and your two years on things you can pick up in your spare time. (This, unfortunately, is why I have serious trouble considering Duke’s offer, despite my love of the school and the generous assistance offered.)

But what I am driving at here is that an MPA can be entirely “fluffless.” An MPA student is able to take advanced economic theory, econometrics, and statistics (applied and theory) at a level far beyond an MBA student. How?

Here, for you all to observe, is the first year curriculumat Harvard Business School:

http://www.hbs.edu/m...mics/term1.html, and http://www.hbs.edu/m...mics/term2.html

Fluff! “Marketing,” “leadership,” etc. comprise more than half of the education. No employer will hire you because of your marketing courses. You can learn this stuff casually without any problem. “Strategy” is nice, and perhaps a bit more useful, but still in the realm of “interesting, but I’ll pick it up on my own.” Unfortunately, no MBA program of which I am aware allows one to skip this stuff.

What I am driving at: an MBA student will pick up a number of useful skills. An MBA in Finance will have a formidable knowledge-base. But an MPA student can take approximately 50% more courses. With sufficient focus, the MPA will resemble a Masters in Applied Statistics, and a Masters in Economics. This sets the MPA student up for PhD applications (if desired), as well as being interesting.

And that’s the last key take-away here. An MPA student likely comes from a background of mature experience. Seeing poverty, desolation, and volunteering to help solve these problems.

I can tell you first hand, one of the biggest problems at investment banks (I worked at a bulge-bracket firm in London before policy work) is the utter lack of camaraderie across teams: lack of common purpose. MPA students are frequently constructively-minded, non fear-driven people. While MBA students are taking “leadership” classes and pretending to understand “synergies,” you have learned how impoverished residents of a third world country can come together to supply water and schooling to their children. Etc. And you've probably learned it by actually doing it. (Many MPA programs have super-easy access to short-term projects like this.) Who has the easier story to tell an employer about leadership?

Summary: stop whining about salaries versus cost of education. Go to the best school you can get into. Don’t take fluff courses. Be quanty. Be inspired by your incredibly interesting peers, and go out with them on a few volunteer missions to help people. And you’ll have an incredible experience that will pay huge dividends.

[aijoni]

One thing that has bothered me recently is the sense that many MPA candidates feel like second-rate MBA candidates when applying for private sector consulting or analytical positions. I also see a great deal of concern about the size of student debt versus the ability to find a high paying job.

An MPA curriculum at a solid program will allow the student to study a level of statistics and economic theory far beyond an MBA student. Consider this sequence at SIPA, for example, which is in addition to the core statistics and calculus-based economics analysis sequence:

http://sipa.columbia...curriculum.html

Similarly, Chicago’s standard core, which is more policy-focused but no-less quanty:

http://harrisschool....masters/mpp.asp

There are others. Michigan, Berkeley, and (to a lesser extent) Georgetown.

Certainly, some MPA programs require courses in things such as “ethics,” “leadership,” and “project management.” While these are important, I believe that they are best learned “on the job.” You shouldn’t be spending your money and your two years on things you can pick up in your spare time. (This, unfortunately, is why I have serious trouble considering Duke’s offer, despite my love of the school and the generous assistance offered.)

But what I am driving at here is that an MPA can be entirely “fluffless.” An MPA student is able to take advanced economic theory, econometrics, and statistics (applied and theory) at a level far beyond an MBA student. How?

Here, for you all to observe, is the first year curriculumat Harvard Business School:

http://www.hbs.edu/m...mics/term1.html, and http://www.hbs.edu/m...mics/term2.html

Fluff! “Marketing,” “leadership,” etc. comprise more than half of the education. No employer will hire you because of your marketing courses. You can learn this stuff casually without any problem. “Strategy” is nice, and perhaps a bit more useful, but still in the realm of “interesting, but I’ll pick it up on my own.” Unfortunately, no MBA program of which I am aware allows one to skip this stuff.

What I am driving at: an MBA student will pick up a number of useful skills. An MBA in Finance will have a formidable knowledge-base. But an MPA student can take approximately 50% more courses. With sufficient focus, the MPA will resemble a Masters in Applied Statistics, and a Masters in Economics. This sets the MPA student up for PhD applications (if desired), as well as being interesting.

And that’s the last key take-away here. An MPA student likely comes from a background of mature experience. Seeing poverty, desolation, and volunteering to help solve these problems.

I can tell you first hand, one of the biggest problems at investment banks (I worked at a bulge-bracket firm in London before policy work) is the utter lack of camaraderie across teams: lack of common purpose. MPA students are frequently constructively-minded, non fear-driven people. While MBA students are taking “leadership” classes and pretending to understand “synergies,” you have learned how impoverished residents of a third world country can come together to supply water and schooling to their children. Etc. And you've probably learned it by actually doing it. (Many MPA programs have super-easy access to short-term projects like this.) Who has the easier story to tell an employer about leadership?

Summary: stop whining about salaries versus cost of education. Go to the best school you can get into. Don’t take fluff courses. Be quanty. Be inspired by your incredibly interesting peers, and go out with them on a few volunteer missions to help people. And you’ll have an incredible experience that will pay huge dividends.

[aijoni]

Hi.Thank you for this informative post.Wanted to know your thoughts on Maxwell school vis a vis employment opportunity post the one year MPA program.

I am an international student with 4 years of work ex in an investment bank in India.

Thanks

[Batignolles]

Bastille - I agree with many parts of your post, notably the idea that an MPA and an MBA can both offer a rigorous, quantitative-heavy curriculum if you so choose. Similarly, within the confines of both programs you can fill your time with what your characterize as "fluffy" courses. (It's perhaps a separate discussion as to whether these "fluffy" skills are more of less valuable in the long run than analytical skills - some may serve you better as a junior analyst, others may serve you better as you ascend to leadership, motivational and oversight roles. But I don't want to digress too much here.)

However, I think that there are (at least) two big differences that you might be overlooking between an MBA and an MPA, outside of the curriculum.

First, most people heading into an MBA have two or more years experience working in business, and usually in a strong role for a good organization or company. For most good programs, this is a prerequisite for even being considered for admission. While many MPA programs require experience, not all do - and it's the average rather than the minimum that hovers at around two years. Importantly, for MPAs that prior experience is also usually not in business. Arguably, that's why you choose an MPA degree - because you're interested in things beyond the business sphere. But lacking prior business experience means you are de facto less well set-up for a subsequent business career, whatever the intervening educational materials: real life is different than case studies and homework assignments.

Second, as a consultant in private industry with many of my peers in business school, I can assure you that around 75% of people going to b-school aren't going for the curriculum. Many (if not most) business skills can be picked up on the job, and unless you're trying to switch careers (say, from academia into business, or from marketing into finance), it's the networks and connections to your classmates that you're after. That's why so many MBA programs offer unranked classes and don't release grades, or grade pass-fail. It's also why my company pays almost 50% more for an MBA than for someone without that degree doing a similar job - in a few years, their connections will literally be worth money. And let's not forget that connections are also what help you get not only your first job, but all subsequent jobs. So companies want MBAs more than MPAs, because most of your MPA classmates are going into the public sector (though some, of course, do go into the private sector) and won't be of much direct use to a business career. Even if they are still great, smart, driven people.

The above points are, I suppose, a way of saying that if an MBA and an MPA are competing for a job (as you imply in your post), then it really depends what the employer wants to get out of their employee - rather than who is more "quant-y" or has better stories to tell. I would argue that employers seeking MBAs and those seeking MPAs are fundamentally different, and looking for different skill sets and goals from their employees. I really doubt the two are genuinely in competition for that many roles - to each their own sphere, perhaps.

Given that private industry is in the business of making superior returns, it's probably not a stretch to say that an MBA offers much greater financial returns than an MPA. But all this isn't to say that an MPA isn't a great degree that sets you up well for some really meaningful (and usually decently-paying ) jobs - but it's not going to make you wealthy the way an MBA can. And that's basically because it's a different degree - and it reflects both a different background and a different choice as to where you want to head in the future. And as someone who has made a clear choice to pursue an MPA over an MBA, I really hope (and sincerely do believe) that my future classmates have made a similar choice for a reason - and not just because they couldn't get into b-school.

Edited to reply to Bastille rather than aijoni

Edited March 8, 2010 by Batignolles

[aijoni]

Aijoni - I agree with many parts of your post, notably the idea that an MPA and an MBA can both offer a rigorous, quantitative-heavy curriculum if you so choose. Similarly, within the confines of both programs you can fill your time with what your characterize as "fluffy" courses. (It's perhaps a separate discussion as to whether these "fluffy" skills are more of less valuable in the long run than analytical skills - some may serve you better as a junior analyst, others may serve you better as you ascend to leadership, motivational and oversight roles. But I don't want to digress too much here.)

However, I think that there are (at least) two big differences that you might be overlooking between an MBA and an MPA, outside of the curriculum.

First, most people heading into an MBA have two or more years experience working in business, and usually in a strong role for a good organization or company. For most good programs, this is a prerequisite for even being considered for admission. While many MPA programs require experience, not all do - and it's the average rather than the minimum that hovers at around two years. Importantly, for MPAs that prior experience is also usually not in business. Arguably, that's why you choose an MPA degree - because you're interested in things beyond the business sphere. But lacking prior business experience means you are de facto less well set-up for a subsequent business career, whatever the intervening educational materials: real life is different than case studies and homework assignments.

Second, as a consultant in private industry with many of my peers in business school, I can assure you that around 75% of people going to b-school aren't going for the curriculum. Many (if not most) business skills can be picked up on the job, and unless you're trying to switch careers (say, from academia into business, or from marketing into finance), it's the networks and connections to your classmates that you're after. That's why so many MBA programs offer unranked classes and don't release grades, or grade pass-fail. It's also why my company pays almost 50% more for an MBA than for someone without that degree doing a similar job - in a few years, their connections will literally be worth money. And let's not forget that connections are also what help you get not only your first job, but all subsequent jobs. So companies want MBAs more than MPAs, because most of your MPA classmates are going into the public sector (though some, of course, do go into the private sector) and won't be of much direct use to a business career. Even if they are still great, smart, driven people.

The above points are, I suppose, a way of saying that if an MBA and an MPA are competing for a job (as you imply in your post), then it really depends what the employer wants to get out of their employee - rather than who is more "quant-y" or has better stories to tell. I would argue that employers seeking MBAs and those seeking MPAs are fundamentally different, and looking for different skill sets and goals from their employees. I really doubt the two are genuinely in competition for that many roles - to each their own sphere, perhaps.

Given that private industry is in the business of making superior returns, it's probably not a stretch to say that an MBA offers much greater financial returns than an MPA. But all this isn't to say that an MPA isn't a great degree that sets you up well for some really meaningful (and usually decently-paying ) jobs - but it's not going to make you wealthy the way an MBA can. And that's basically because it's a different degree - and it reflects both a different background and a different choice as to where you want to head in the future. And as someone who has made a clear choice to pursue an MPA over an MBA, I really hope (and sincerely do believe) that my future classmates have made a similar choice for a reason - and not just because they couldn't get into b-school.

Ok , I don't know how that happened.But the above post was NOT by me.I just tried to reply to Bastille's original post.

[sushitooth]

MPAs/MPPs from good programs can work in consulting and get paid pretty well.

[stilesg57]

One thing to remember is that the actual course curriculum you put together - what you actually learn from your degree - doesn't matter nearly as much as the three letters of your degree, where it's from, and what the school's alumni/career center situation is. This is why many MBAs are all too often academic jokes; they're designed to be two-year networking programs, not to teach a ton of graduate-level knowledge. But the three letters are better known than "MPP" so they generally do better in the private-sector job market.

Sorry to be cynical but that's what I'm seeing. Virtually nobody has asked for my transcript, but they all see my resume and go "whoa, Duke eh? Nice." Depressing, but true