选择一种人生，站在PHD路口，你将如何抉择？

westhorizon

以下是引用judydongxueni在2009-6-6 1:29:00的发言：
真可爱。就我的感觉，到了phd level的accounting和本科学的会计课程很不一样倒是很符合你希望影响他人的动机。

看看journal paper，如果读的下去，那，申请吧！

呵呵为什么很多都是重复了两遍呢？决心么？

加油！

judy以前是怎么决定的呢？

看过一些journal，觉得journal比较晦涩难懂，一开始的看的话也比较没有方向，问了我们系几个博士他们建议我先想好再看不迟...

因为据他们说acc phd是一个不需要太大智慧只要好好念坚持下念就能念好的科....

跟我对这个圣洁的学术的理解产生了很大的偏差啊...

gavin1911

以下是引用westhorizon在2009-6-7 16:31:00的发言：

这大概是在我脑子里面唱反调了好几个月让我畏畏惧惧的最大的理由了......

呃....你说的我更加畏惧了...

原来大家都把PHD比作比四大还**￥%&啊

那我岂不是应该彻底放弃了....

很早以前我已经很十分确定自己绝对不想去四大的....

问那现在这两个女生怎么样了呢？在原地苦苦挣扎？

还在熬 不过再袄1年多拿到CA/CPA证书以后她就准备不干了

四大很多人都是这样的, 我另外一个朋友从Deloitte退了到香港做Consulting了

本来还差3个月就够经验可以拿证书了实在郁闷不行了

lmz_0939

那版主说的经济数学基础是指哪些课程呢？

GMAT小飞侠

适不适合 想不想 完全不是一样的，读phd的最好不也就是当professor而已

 个人认为 Accounting和Actuarial Science一样 完全没有必要读PhD， 考过Professional Exam，拿到 Professional Title， 工作像big F (Pricewaterhouse, Ernst&Young, KPMG,还有一个不知道了）或者在大学当Lecturer（讲师）都是完全可以的。有的讲师two full-time jobs不也是这样过来的？

  应该选择适合早考CPA的那条路，不管怎样想，既然是学Acct的，就一定要考CPA的。

gavin1911

I would say I agree more with 19th floor, perhaps, because we are both non-PhDs. However, it depends how the PhD track is percieved individually. It matters how much acdemic achievement weights than industrial career to a person.In E&Y, none of the Key persons or CEOs in its history is PhD Acounting -- in fact,only one or two PhDs in total. Deloitte is pretty the same. This explains something. It is similar in the rule-setting bodies, society of CA/CPA/CMA etc.

To be specific to the field, I do not think PhD accounting would be neccesary. As whoever mentioned, ACC PhD is sometimes more on the corporate finance side -- I wonder the difference from what finance ppl do in similar field. Many other PhDs in science, as funding is always a key issue and corporates cannot afford research exp,  have to  stay in school for the equipments and cash from government support. ACC, to my widest imagination, requires only time, similar to eco/math -- that means, without a barrier, ppl, if they want, may do even better in field in the industry. That makes the oppotunity cost of being locked inside the school incrediblly high in ACC.

ESP, I could not think of any single desired attribute in ACC as creativity...while PhD gives no edge in industry, LZ should realli reconsider the options.

[此贴子已经被作者于2009-6-8 17:11:32编辑过]

gavin1911

以下是引用judydongxueni在2009-6-8 17:21:00的发言：

1. first of all, a phd in bschools can do more than professors, let alone bschool professors are very decent jobs. eg. a professor of iese was nominated as deputy financial minister of spain last month.

2. no phd in acc would take a big 4 job that serious. to most of them, that is their last choice. even you offer them the ceo position in big 4, a lot of bschool professors will not take. money is one thing, after a certain threshhold, it is not that imporant. the above mentioned professor took a year to accept the financial minister offer.

1. This is not a common case and looks more like a contigency plan of financial crisis -- industrial ppl are not as trusted as they were before. Above that, we are specific to ACC PhD. This guy is PhD in Economics, not ACC. I see no point it affects a decision of taking ACC in PhD. 

2. That is the preference I meant -- income, acdamic achievement, social status, contribution. It varies person to person, I do not mean to offense altho I must have a different view from majority of PhDs as I have dealt with a lof of PhDs in the last three years. However, even so, your statement is unsound -- if you dont mind, let me ask a quick question, else than staying inside campus (which may be objective to say better or worse than in industry), where kinda better option a typical ACC PhD can have, better than Big 4 and those setting bodies. And what is the edge of a ACC PhD title provides.

And some of my questions were not answered, like what excatly a ACC PhD studies. It is primarily personal curiosity. I thought corporate finance is in the field of management.

gavin1911

以下是引用judydongxueni在2009-6-8 17:28:00的发言：
i would say, undergrudates of acc learn those gaap standards, while the phds and pros help establish and refine the standards. those are very meaningful job and it is research oriented. do not worry, you are not of that field and i forgive you for misunderstanding hahahaha

As I said, please differentiate PhDs and Profs in b-school, as many profs have indsutrial experience. Key persons of Canadian CA program in my school as PT/FT professors have had worked for firms like Big 4 prior to b-school. Rule setting positions are not filled by PhDs -- PhD can study the foundamental of the rules while many junior accountants do not care, but you can find more ppl without a PhD title in setting those regulations and rules. 

And another flaw -- it's like two different jobs -- setting rules or using the rules. It is like saying a biogenetic acdemia in foundamental reserach is superior than a MD in field, I would enjoy it but it is not a fact. It does not make one superior than another but notice PhD have higher oppotunity cost in time and financial benefit.  

Anyways, styl, how you weight those components of self-fullfilment is the key in the choice, time, money, life style, contribution etc.

GMAT小飞侠

我只是说 , 无论是否读PhD， 都要考CPA.

只是个人感觉，undergrad的Accounting就已经很boring了，我是学精算的，Phd的Acct也不是必须的, 楼主要是不是那么喜欢Accounting Phd就不要读了。 毕竟能做到版主这么热爱acct的人还不是很多。

对于同是undergraduate的人来讲，如果想进Industry就一定不会读phD的，如果想当professor，acadamic field就必须去读phD.版主看到的多数phD已经走了这条路，是从高处看，当然还take什么big Four seriously啊,他们早在undergraduate毕业的时候就已经做出选择了。

gavin1911

以下是引用judydongxueni在2009-6-8 17:56:00的发言：

1.that is not the first deputy financial minister from iese professors. he is the second one. the first one was in 1990s. he is professor of finance and phd in harvard i think also finance. frankly, a acc phd or acc professor can not become financial minister.

2. wow a lot. the reason that acc phd is the most highly payed phd is because they can get a really high salary in industry say in counslting, research jobs in a lot of industrys. every company needs cost management right? say they can also become cfos, i dont know examples though.

i talked about the acc phd studies above in 24th floor. what i want to plus:

1. financial acc is more or less corporate finance however, more practical and use empirical instead models.

2. managerial acc is about cost management, standards setting, corporate evaluation.

i talked with a lot of mbas in the two years. most of them take m acc as the most important core courses in bschools.

btw, gavin, i thought you want to do a phd right?

Consulting is typically do not recruit ACC PhD, the exp recruitment gives perference to ppl from industries and senior level constants have 80% of his time talking -- that's an obvious disadvantage of PhD students. CFOs, in major firms, hold CPA/CA and CFA, it is like a current fashion. Locked in school for four years equals no working experience to gain those titles and previliges. They are all trade-offs.

Yea, I am considering my options and I will pick it up if my personal time can be guaranteed and another reason if my girlfriend will take a PhD in upenn so, if I can stay in Wharton, we can have some more time together.  And, yea, hD, altho not particular superior, looks better in business card and helps own business, as well as some charted programs. Back to the topic, I will consider something require more creativities, like in management or in entrepreneurship or whatever similar.

I understand what you said - but it still does not answer the core question, the difference. As CMA designation has everything, why a PhD is cool, given your best couples of years as a trade-off? I am asking and talking because I also wanna benefit from discussion for my own decision.

3.

GMAT小飞侠

唉！看到了吧~~ 学business继续学就都变成这种人了