CEOs With Top College Degrees No Better Than Ones Without

The Economic Times:

A new study has revealed that whether or not a company's CEO holds a college degree from a top school has no bearing on the firm's long-term performance.

The research conducted by University of New Hampshire also showed that when it comes to getting canned for poor performance, CEOs with degrees from the nation's most prestigious schools are no safer than the average CEO.

Read the whole story: The Economic Times

Comments

[MJVs Common Sense]

02:45 PM on 09/20/2010

I love the oh so tiny slip in the title. "those with top degrees are no better than those without" Surely, huffpo meant "those without such prestigious degrees". That is what the article says at least. But of course huffpo neglected to add those extra words, which leaves me wondering why.

There are plenty of possible explanations, but, based on previous articles on this site, It's reasonable to assume that huffpo was resorting to a little sensationalism. Huffpo wanted to suggest ever so slightly that you don't even need a degree to be successful, thus placating those panic prone individuals, who search this site devouring evidence that higher education is no longer relevant (despite mountains of evidence to the contrary).

The article DOES NOT, in fact, suggest that a college degree is not necessary it simply states that what college you attend is not necessarily indicative of your prospects for success. This statement is one that has long been held by just about everyone, and is nothing new. Even those who attend the most prestigious schools will admit that the ivy league schools open many doors, but it is still up to the individual to choose the door, walk through it, and work hard to be successful. Other schools open fewer doors, but assuming the individuals is properly motivated, they can still be just as successful through hard work.

Nothing new here. HuffPo, cut the sensationalism and just report on what's actually being said in the story.

[Siebenstein]

02:49 PM on 09/19/2010

Never thought it to be different. Its all marketing--Ivy League, Schmivy League, its all the same.

[Skeptical Patriot]

06:38 PM on 09/18/2010

The more fascinating statistic around their degrees. Of the S&P 500, CEO degrees:
#1 Engineering - 22%
#2 Economics - 16%
#3 Business Admin - 13%
#4 Accounting - 9%
#5 Liberal Arts - 6%

Those liberals arts schools are simply not putting out leaders.

[hypnotoad72]

11:34 PM on 09/18/2010

Including this person?  "Bachelor of arts degree in English Literature".  

In short, it's a Liberal Arts degree.

But, you and I both know an even simpler fact:  It's not what one knows but who one knows.

[MJVs Common Sense]

02:33 PM on 09/20/2010

You mean they are not putting out leaders in the field of business, right?
Because business is one of at least 200 distinct areas of study, and one of tens of thousands of possible career choices. Are you really going to say that your statistic is representative of all of the leaders in all of those fields? if you did you would certainly be incorrect.

And you do understand that more of those Engineers, Business, and accounting people (Econ is usually housed in the college or letters, arts and sciences, which is the liberal arts school) actually attended liberal arts schools, and took a liberal arts curriculum, but majored in something outside of liberal arts. Almost every college and university in the country follows a liberal arts curriculum, but allows majoring in one of the professional sciences.

In short, I would say 99% of those people had a liberal arts training while majoring in a professional field.

Also, are you refering to their undergraduate degrees or their professional degrees (M.B.A., M.Acc., M.A. econ, M.S. Engr, etc.) There is a difference.

In short, your conclusion is not even remotely supported by the evidence provided. Perhaps you should do a little research and try again.

[SF TKF]

04:05 PM on 09/17/2010

Can we all just admit that an MBA is a totally bogus degree?

[Siebenstein]

02:50 PM on 09/19/2010

You got me on board.

[MamaBird62]

03:52 PM on 09/17/2010

By the time a person is under consideration for a post like CEO of a major company, their work experience, industry knowledge, and performance should be far more relevant than where they went to school. Too many companies fell into the "prestigious MBA" trap and ended up with management who could drive the stock price short term but lacked the vision, skill and ethics to build sustainable growth.
We need to return to our entrepreneurial American middle class roots, and to respect for the worker. That has always been the primary source of the innovation and energy that made America the greatest capitalist engine the world has ever known.

[supportamerica]

04:30 PM on 09/17/2010

Case in fact, Tony Hayward of BP.

[Voting citizen]

12:24 AM on 09/18/2010

I totally agree with you Mamabird. But with all that experience one would think they would learn something as the years went by. Like Things Break. When businesses went over the line into greed you would think these overpaid CEO's with all their experience and knowledge would have figured out that the greed needs to stop or the very base of people they depend on to sustain their business will fail. Guess what...we are failing at a huge pace. So no matter what education, experience and knowledge they have ...combined...it hasn't taught the most important thing. Things break..instead of implementing an economy based in greed...they should have been thinking of sustainable economy like you describe. I don't have a degree, or experience or knowledge like theirs and I can see its broke...and they broke it. So looks like they will have to give up something to get back our entrepreneurial America.. we are the backbone of the land. And they are proving they can survive without us. Everyone knows a big house can stand on sinking sand for all that long.