Is doing a 3-2 MBA program a good or bad decision?

Rollins, right? that is a decent regional school BUT

The question you have to ask is: what would an MBA get me now that my undergrad alone won't get?

Why do you want it? for the extra degree - it would be better to try to get a technical masters in 1-2 years, and save the MBA

It might sound nice to have your MBA - but you could really be limiting yourself down the line..What if you want to make a somewhat drastic career change 4-5 years from now? Getting another MBA would be out of the question, and you will be fighting an uphill battle.

THe MBA is one of those degrees that is used more for when it is needed - and not just to learn about business principles - so my advice would be to save it for when you need it.

Yes, it is at Rollins College. The main reasons that make the program seem like a good decision are: saving money (I have a great scholarship at Rollins), fluid and easy transition from undergraduate to business school, and earning an MBA in 5 years and early in my life. However, I do appreciate your advice. Limiting myself down the line is one of my primary concerns about choosing to do the 3-2 program. I also appreciate when you said "The MBA is one of those degrees that is used more for when it is needed..." as this is something that I did not think about, but makes a whole lot of sense. Thanks for the helpful response.

You won't be treated as an MBA coming out of the program without any work experience - I would advise against it if you're considering banking/finance. If you're planning on going the corporate route then it may be a good idea.

To summarize: The reasons it appeals to you (getting done quicker, cheaper, earlier in life) are precisely the reasons that it's no more valuable to you than just an undergrad degree.

There are typically 3 groups of people that get MBA's, or rather, 3 typical scenarios under which an MBA makes sense:

1) People that are gunning for high finance or consulting at an early age, and are able to obtain the pedigree all along to get there (i.e. top undergrad institution -> 2/3 yrs at a prestigious place like Goldman -> top 7 MBA program -> dream gig).

2) People that are currently working at a company that values MBAs, would sponsor it (maybe), thus having it would allow you to rise higher in that company.

3) People that want to change directions entirely, new industry, new company, etc.

Now, arguably you aren't, and won't be in bucket #1 - that ship has sailed. Given your current situation, you aren't in #2 or #3 either. As someone else pointed out, you're better off getting a 1-2 year technical masters degree. That gives you a leg up on some of the mid-tier type corporate gigs that prefer a masters degree (not specifically an MBA), which could allow you to get promoted a bit more rapidly over, say, 5 years. After that, you'd be an ideal profile for a really solid MBA program (say top 25), and those programs (as opposed to your current school) combined with the work experience you gather prior, will open WAY more doors than if you simply get it right now.

You need to get away from the concept that an MBA is valuable, in and of itself. It's not. It is valuable only in the contexts outlined above, and that value is tightly coupled with your other experiences, and the reputation of the program you attend (like it or not).

Thanks for all the helpful responses everyone. I'm new to WSO and this definitely seems like a great resource to get legitimate feedback/advice.

@Accountingbyday - No, unfortunately Rollins does not offer a MAcc or MFA. So I basically just need to decide whether I want to get my undergraduate degree in economics and graduate in the standard 4 years or pursue the 3-2 program. To answer your other question, recruiting at Rollins seems to be somewhat localized. The vast majority of graduates tend to stay and work in FL. There also seems to be a fairly strong connection to NYC as many graduates find work there.

@djfiii - Definitely a helpful and experienced post. You are right. I am caught up in this notion that the MBA is valuable in of itself regardless of context (such as experiences or reputation/ranking of program as you pointed out). From what I gather, I may ultimately be selling myself short and putting too much stock into the short-term convenience (path of least resistance) of just getting my MBA and being done with it.

I don't have to make a decision until late-Fall so definitely keep the responses coming. I'm all ears and just trying to make the best decision possible for my future.

Put it this way - I had a couple people working for me that got off-brand MBA's later in life because they thought just having those letters would magically propel them up the corporate ranks. They were making about $60k as project managers. I also had a couple 25/26 year olds on my team - really smart, 3 years out of solid undergrad programs, both making $75k.

Maybe those older people on my team were making $40k somewhere else, so $60k was a step up for them, and maybe they think the MBA is what got them there. As their manager, I know it's not. They either had the ability to do the job, or not, and the MBA didn't factor into it. The younger guys were better equipped to succeed because of the type of educations they had, and they got hired in at a higher pay grade than the older people, for pretty much the same type of job.

The kicker is, you can't have 2 MBA's. If you waste that "degree slot", for lack of a better phrase, on a program nobody knows or cares about, then you can't decide later that you'd like an MBA from Harvard as well. You didn't specify your major, but assuming Accounting, Finance, maybe Econ, you should be able to start out of undergrad at around $45k-$50k, work up to maybe $85k 4-5 years out, apply to top 20 MBA programs, and come out making $110k or better. I can assure you nobody is going to pay you $110k coming out of Crummer Graduate Business School. If you keep that 3.9GPA, get a good GMAT score, and get really solid work experience, you would have the profile to get into Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, Sloan, Booth, Kellogg, etc.

One suggestion is to not limit yourself to staying in Florida. If you have family obligations or other reasons to stay, then fine, but acknowledge that you are potentially limiting your opportunities. Large cities tend to have higher pay and more opportunities, so take Accounting as an example - maybe you start off in a Big4 office nearby (Tampa? Miami?) Then transfer to a major city after 2 years, so like NYC, DC, Chicago, San Fran, LA. You'll get plugged in to clients in those cities, and learn the industries, meet the people, which eventually puts you in a much better position to apply to those top MBA programs (better narrative for apps, better contacts for letters of rec, etc)

i agree with what theo thers are saying, graduate with your undergrad in 3 and then crush a good job somewhere and translate into a solid b school. you may think youre saving money for a normal MBA but that year of spending is going to actually set you back more for no reason

@djfiii - To answer one of your questions, I am majoring in Economics. Additionally, I do not want to limit myself to FL as I am originally from the northeast. You also brought into light another excellent about not "wasting a degree slot" by obtaining an MBA from a regional institution and then severely limiting myself in the future (or fighting a tough uphill battle for a long time - especially if I decide that I definitely do not want to stay in FL). So from what I can tell based on your advice, the 3-2 program is attractive in terms of its convenience, but will likely work against me later on. As always, thank you for your input. It is much appreciated.

@shorttheworld - Yes, you directly address one of my main concerns by stating how in the long run, I may actually be setting myself back more than the money saved during that one year.

If anyone else has any advice, definitely post a comment. It seems like the consensus at this point is to not pursue the 3-2 program. However, it would be interesting if anyone strongly advises that I do indeed pursue it.

No one on this board will suggest that you do the 3-2. They won't even hint that it's near the realm of good ideas.

We're all name brand whores, and mostly with good reason. People with an MBA from Harvard, Stanford, or Wharton aren't better human beings that than you. They might not even be smarter than you. But they will have WAY more opportunities than you, and they will make far more money than you, on average. That's the reality we all get to deal with. You can work within the confines of reality, or you can buck the system because "some guy you know" went to Crummer and makes $3M a year now. There's always an exception, but in life, you play the odds that are in your favor. There are no data points anyone on the planet can dig up to convince you that you're better off getting an MBA from Crummer.