I think this is an excellent idea. I am a bit surprised at the reactions against this concept. The key statement to zero in on is that doctors feel they do not have sufficient training to provide advice. The operative words being "sufficient training" and "advice."
Providing a few classes in basic nutrition/cooking to doctors can go a long way in their ability to treat and prevent diseases. Tulane is not suggesting that doctors spend 4 years in France working their way up from a garde manger.
Food can and should be viewed by doctors as a form of medicine. This perspective aligns with the basic definition of medicine and the role of a doctor.
Hear, hear. Agreed on point 2. I believe we are seeing this stigma evolve right before our eyes.
College has been improperly marketed. I've mentioned this on other threads, but my view is that college should be used as a forum to learn, not a means to get a job. The reality though is the opposite.
The pressure against this reality is mounting. I feel we're nearing the point where one is better off going straight into the workforce to receive on-the-job training instead of pursuing a college degree. In other words, the market forces are starting to take effect.
But do we need to fast track this shift in mentality? If so, how? How much do we leave up to the invisible hand to flesh this issue out and how much should the onus lie on third parties (e.g. the end of federal government loan subsidies, corporations, etc)?
Has me thinking about how language in the workplace influences emotion. What workplace emotions have you all experienced? "Looks like somebody has a case of the Mondays..."
Would defining workplace emotions be a good thing? Does it lead to more productivity? How could this affect engagement?
Understanding the fundamental concepts of, for instance, CAPM and free cash flow have been useful in my career. You also pick up some useful personal investing lessons.
In general, this class gives you insights into the decisions a CFO (and supporting team) is faced with -- e.g. is it better to invest in tech A or tech B or neither?
In my own personal career, I've had to make a case to Finance in order to build out a program and being able to talk-the-talk was helpful.
Most entrepreneurs need to spend a significant amount of time thinking about non-tech related objectives (e.g. sales, pricing, marketing, etc). Sure -- there are tons of publications out there teaching a technical entrepreneur the fundamentals of marketing and sales, but it is always specific to the author's/interviewee's own experience which happens to be unlike all others. Or, and perhaps more commonly, these publications tend to gloss over a really important fact (or facts): the author/interviewee had insane connections or a very rich uncle that allowed her to achieve success as an entrepreneur/businessperson without an MBA.
For those would-be entrepreneurs without insane connections, deep pockets, or a future unicorn in the making, the MBA provides an opportunity to build skills and knowledge important to getting a business off the ground and, more generally, teaches one how to operate in a world that revolves around money, not tech. Personally, my MBA gave way to a great new career path, higher salary, great connections, and -- most importantly -- a much more holistic view of the world.
In the end, I do believe that an MBA is not required for success. However, I disagree with Thiel and Sandberg drawing such a hard line in the sand. People looking to learn is never a useless act.
For context -- I picked up an EE degree in undergrad and eventually went on to grab an MBA.
Working for the federal government has some solid perks including great pension plans. Having grown up in DC, my parents really hoped I would go work for the government. Instead they got an entrepreneur!
As for post-astro careers: my understanding is that a number of astronauts have gone on to academia.
For 4 (Your college degree is probably worthless): is the purpose of college to get a job or to learn? The traditional college curriculum is structured in a way that suggests it's the latter, yet we live in a society that expects the prior.
I'd argue that college is doing exactly what it always intended to do -- to create an environment of learning. The disconnect occurs because of how it markets itself. The focus on "job placement statistics" and "post college salaries" sends the wrong message to its customers.
Interesting article. Scientific theories are often proven to be obsolete -- business should be no different.
To me, this article also underscores the ever present friction between theory and practice. I recently was speaking to an advisor (in academia) and, while his input was incredibly valuable, much of it contradicted what we know to be true based on interactions with our customers.
How have you all managed this balancing act? Is there a place for academic theory in product development?
I think it is a result of the five star rating system -- a vast majority of the businesses fall between a 4 and a 4.5 star rating. Perhaps a binary rating system is a better forcing mechanism to determine quality?
But since we're stuck with the five star system...here is how I leverage Yelp review data when it comes to selecting a small business to patronize:
1. Normalize for the true Yelp rating scale of 4 - 4.5 stars. Filter out anything below a 4 star rating. If a small business is unable achieve 4 stars on Yelp, then something must be really wrong.
2. Quantity of reviews is important. For starters, you need a significant sample size of review data for the star rating to be meaningful. Further on the review quantity front: massive review numbers relative to other similar businesses in that given city is a good signal of popularity (though not necessarily quality).
3. You need to supplement your Yelp findings from points 1 and 2 with other sources, ideally critical reviews (e.g. Eater, Serious Eats, Time Out, NY Times, Chicago Mag, etc).
4. The content of individual Yelp reviews should be taken with a grain of salt. Your individual priorities and tastes might be radically different so there is limited value in an individual's rating. I've come across some truly great restaurants with 1-star reviews because the reviewer tried to dine at the restaurant on a Monday...when it was closed.
Providing a few classes in basic nutrition/cooking to doctors can go a long way in their ability to treat and prevent diseases. Tulane is not suggesting that doctors spend 4 years in France working their way up from a garde manger.
Food can and should be viewed by doctors as a form of medicine. This perspective aligns with the basic definition of medicine and the role of a doctor.