How Can a Bourdieusian
Perspective Aid Analysis of
MBA Education?
EERO VAARA
Hanken School of Economics, Helsinki, and EMLYON Business School, France
ERIC FAŸ
EMLYON Business School
There is a lack of integrative conceptual models that would help to better understand the
underlying reasons for the alleged problems of MBA education. To address this challenge,
we draw on the work of Pierre Bourdieu to examine MBA education as an activity with its
own “economy of exchange” and “rules of the game.” We argue that application of
Bourdieu’s theoretical ideas elucidates three key issues in debate around MBA education:
the outcomes of MBA programs, the inculcation of potentially problematic values and
practices through the programs, and the potential of self-regulation, such as accreditation
and ranking for impeding development of MBA education. First, Bourdieu’s notions of
capital—intellectual, social, and symbolic—shed light on the “economy of exchange” in
MBA education. Critics of MBA programs have pointed out that the value of MBA degrees
lies not only in “learning.” Bourdieu’s framework allows further analysis of this issue by
distinguishing between intellectual (learning), social (social networks), and symbolic
capital (credentials and prestige). Second, the concept of “habitus” suggests how values
and practices are inculcated through MBA education. This process is often one students
acquire voluntarily, and students often regard problematic or ethically questionable
ideas as natural. Third, Bourdieu’s reflections on the “doxa” and its reproduction and
legitimation illuminate the role of accreditation and ranking in MBA education. This
perspective helps to understand how self-regulation may impede change in MBA
education.
........................................................................................................................................................................
Scholars have directed increasing attention to
problems associated with MBA programs. Promi-
nent researchers have argued that traditional MBA
programs concentrate excessively on theories in-
stead of providing practical skills (Leavitt, 1989;
Mintzberg, 2004; Bennis & O’Toole, 2005). Others
have concentrated on ethical issues and argued
that MBA programs are one reason for the serious
problems encountered in contemporary manage-
ment (French & Grey, 1996; Mintzberg, 2004; Gho-
shal, 2005; Khurana, 2007). Furthermore, others
have reflected on the role of rankings (DeNisi, 2008;
Glick, 2008; Zemsky, 2008) and accreditation (Julian
& Ofori-Dankwa, 2006; Romero, 2008; Zammuto,
2008) as potential impediments to change.
While extant studies have provided important
insights into the problems of MBA education, this
critique has been limited by a lack of integrative
conceptual models that would allow examination
of the underlying reasons for the above problems.
With this in mind, we drew from the work of the
French anthropologist and sociologist Pierre
Bourdieu (1930–2002) to better understand MBA ed-
ucation as an educational activity with its own
“economy of exchange” and “rules of the game.”
Researchers across the social sciences have been
inspired by Bourdieu’s work, and management
scholars have also used his theories in various
topic areas (Oakes, Townley, & Cooper, 1998;
Ramirez, 2001; Mutch, 2003; O¨zbilgin & Tatli, 2005;
Mutch, Delbridge, & Ventresca, 2006; Golsorki,
Leca, Lounsbury, & Ramirez, 2009). Strangely
enough, however, his ideas have not been system-
atically applied to discussion of MBA education.
An essential part of Bourdieu’s work has concen-
trated on higher education (Bourdieu, 1970, 1984/

Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2011, Vol. 10, No. 1, 27–39.
........................................................................................................................................................................
27
Copyright of the Academy of Management, all rights reserved. Contents may not be copied, emailed, posted to a listserv, or otherwise transmitted without the copyright holder’s
express written permission. Users may print, download or email articles for individual use only.

1988, 1989/1998; Bourdieu & Passeron, 1990). In these
and other pieces of work, he focused attention on
the characteristics of the educational field and its
relations to other fields in society, the central role
of pedagogical authority (the authority of educa-
tional institutions), various forms of “capital” that
are produced and exchanged in educational activ-
ities, the habitus (set of dispositions) that is incul-
cated in educational activities, and the doxa (fun-
damental beliefs of the field) that is reproduced
and at times transformed in education (Bourdieu,
1980/1990, 1996). Bourdieu’s work thus provides an
integrative conceptual framework that helps us to
understand some of the essential structural fea-
tures of MBA education that may be seen as the
cause of the alleged problems.
We argue here that Bourdieu’s theories can elu-
cidate three key issues in the ongoing debate
about MBA programs: the outcomes of MBA pro-
grams, inculcation of values and practices in the
process, and self-regulation in the form of accred-
itation and ranking as a potential impediment to
development of the programs. First, we argue that
Bourdieu’s notions of capital—intellectual, social,
and symbolic—can help to explain the “economy
of exchange” in MBA education. Critics of MBA
programs (Pfeffer & Fong, 2002; Khurana, 2007)
have pointed out that the value of MBA degrees
does not only lie in learning. Bourdieu’s framework
furthers analysis of this issue by distinguishing
between intellectual (learning), social (social net-
works), and symbolic capital (credentials and pres-
tige) as essential parts of the economy of ex-
change. Second, the concept of “habitus” helps us
to understand exactly how values and practices
are inculcated in the process of MBA education.
This process is often a “voluntary” one, where
problematic or ethically questionable ideas may
also be internalized and accepted as natural.
Third, in relation to the education system itself,
Bourdieu’s reflections on “doxa” and its reproduc-
tion and legitimation illuminate the role of accred-
itation (DeNisi, 2008; Glick, 2008; Zemsky, 2008) and
ranking systems in MBA education (Julian & Ofori-
Dankwa, 2006; Romero, 2008; Zammuto, 2008). An
analysis of such self-regulation explains in part
how the system may either impede or promote
change.
Our analysis—following Bourdieu’s example—is
deliberately critical and provocative. This does not
mean that we ignore the value of MBA programs or
attempts to improve them. On the contrary, we
wish to clarify the underlying issues and critical
debates precisely in order to develop MBA pro-
grams and education more generally. We focus on
classic MBA programs that follow the North Amer-
ican model. Although an essential part of the cri-
tique may be valid for management education in
general, it is important to appreciate the differ-
ences between various kinds of MBA programs and
other types of management education.
CRITIQUE OF MBA EDUCATION
Viewing business education or MBA programs
from a critical perspective is nothing new. For ex-
ample, the establishment of university-based busi-
ness schools—such as Harvard—was largely the
result of critical discussion about the need to pro-
fessionalize what the “men of business” were do-
ing (Cruikshank, 1987; Khurana, 2007). The creation
of the AACSB in 1961 can, in turn, be seen as an
attempt to deal with growing concerns about the
quality of management education in general and
of MBA education in particular (Khurana, 2007).
However, criticism of MBA programs intensified in
the 2000s alongside the emergence of more system-
atic and scholarly discussion of management ed-
ucation (Grey & French, 1996; Chia, 2005; Donald-
son, 2005; Khurana, 2007; Mintzberg, 2004; Pfeffer &
Fong, 2002; Pfeffer, 2005; Spender, 2005; Wensley,
2005). In particular, Mintzberg’s (2004) thoughts
have resulted in heated debate (Chia, 2005; Don-
aldson, 2005; Pfeffer, 2005; Wensley, 2005). Rather
than providing a full review of this discussion, we
will highlight three crucial issues: whether the
programs provide useful knowledge to students,
whether the education process leads students to
adopt ethically questionable values and practices,
and whether accreditation and rankings impede or
promote change in the programs.
First, a large part of the criticism has focused on
the outcome: the knowledge and learning provided
by MBA education. Leavitt (1989) already argued
that traditional MBA programs deliver highly stan-
dardized knowledge without a clear linkage to
practice. Mintzberg (2004) has accused MBA pro-
grams of “scientificity” and a lack of attention to
practical experience. For many, the fundamental
issue is the traditional way theory is taught and
spread in MBA courses (Linder, Smith, & Jeff, 1992;
Pinington, 2005; Starkey, Hatchuel, & Tempest,
2004). Critics have also pointed to a strong empha-
sis on specialization instead of on development of
cross-functional abilities (Gosling & Mintzberg,
2004; Latham, Latham, & Whyte, 2004). MBA pro-
grams have been referred to as “silos” without
sufficient integrative elements (Navarro, 2008). The
need to focus on “softer” areas, such as people
management, interpersonal interaction, and lead-
ership skills has also been discussed extensively
(Cheit, 1985; Mintzberg, 2004).
28 MarchAcademy of Management Learning & Education