Hi there,

Thanks for linking to my article on the topic and taking it for what it was. There's a lot of fundamental issues that need sorting out but I would agree with your statement on character.

If education can help with character development, that would be great and then a MBA education would then have been a worthy investment toward one's personal development.

Cheers,

So we shall.

Grow up? I'd like to think that we could disagree in a civil manner.

Honestly, I do not see any reason why anyone would be against a guideline code of ethics for any profession, except of course for the sake and love of argument.

In India, barbers have a code of ethics, as do people providing other services. Its a culture, its a way of life, it gives people of the same profession cause to connect and an ethic to strive towards.

Cara's opinion is skewed. To not sign a 'good' document because by virtue of signing it you are admitting to have been 'bad' just sounds like what a rebellious child would say to his mother.

Grow up you people.

As I think about the Oath, and what it represents, I think my disagreement lies in that I think the current crisis is a 'chicken and egg' problem. Yes, a lot of people in the finance industry have MBA degrees. But I don't believe that MBAs caused the crisis as much as the frameworks were setup where the only result could've been failure.

I'll stay away from an anti-government rant, but as I look at the financial crisis, it's clear that there needs to be more thought about unintended consequences of legislation. To me, it's pretty clear that the majority of the crisis began at two places: the removal of the Glass-Steagall Act and HUD requiring Fannie and Freddie to buy a certain minimum percentage of "affordable" mortgages (sub-prime).

Once you set those two ideas in motion, the repeal of Glass-Steagall setting the framework for creating new financial instruments and companies playing on several sides of transactions, and giving banks the ability to increase mortgage sales through Freddie and Fannie sub-prime purchase guarantees, a game of "hot potato" on passing the risk was inevitable.

I agree Rocky's assessment, it's probably a gimmick. But by the same logic we would be led to believe that any corrective action taken by the government in response to the crisis begins is also gimmick. Some good can come of crises, But it is obvious that deeper thought is needed to come to a conclusion on the topic.
The thing I like about the CC MBA program is that the primary motivation of our fellow students will not always be making money. The program appears to put a lot of stress on helping students understand cultural differences. This makes me want to believe that a lot of the people in the program are motivated by the need to explore and understand different cultures.

it is quite surprising (or maybe not) that this oath has only come up post the financial crisis. i consider it nothing more than a gimmick.

That's fair. But I suppose where I differ with the comparisons between Doctors, Professional Engineers, and MBAs is that the former two are specific positions that when performed incorrectly can kill. The latter, not so much.

While I agree with the quote about character at the end of your post I have to respectfully disagree with you and Cara. Certain professions have always had oaths, doctors take the Hippocratic Oath when they graduate, does that mean that all doctors enter the field with the intention to kill, maim and injure their patients? No, I don't think so, the oath is just a way of formalizing sentiments the founders of the profession thought were important. I don't think the MBA oath will make a difference in the end, someone intent on chicanery will not care about the oath, but I disagree with the reasons for not having one.