Leadership tracks are almost exclusively reserved for MBAs or “elite institute” pedigrees.
These same organizations will quietly ignore a combination of a Bachelor’s degree, 20+ years of battle-tested delivery experience, and globally recognized credentials like the PMP for senior leadership roles.
Meanwhile, HR emails and town-hall decks proudly celebrate: “Our Charimen /CXO just completed an degree at age 54—a great example of continuous learning!”
But when professionals follow that exact example through rigorous certifications like the PMP and decades of execution, the glass ceiling holds firm. The path stops at Tech Lead or Delivery Manager. For true leadership roles, the filter suddenly reverts to: “Must have a Master’s from a top B-school.”
This is a glaring contradiction in how “learning” and “pedigree” are valued.
Continuous learning is celebrated at the top, but reduced to a mere checkbox at the middle and bottom.
My open question to the leadership community:
In your organizations, do you see a real equivalence between an MBA and a strong track record + PMP when it comes to leadership opportunities?
How do you personally balance “pedigree” versus demonstrated delivery, ethics, and stakeholder management when hiring or promoting leaders?
I would love to hear what you are seeing on the ground—especially from hiring managers and HR leaders who work closely with project professionals.
Program Manager| HARPER SRLSanto Domingo / Distrito Nacional, Dominican Republic
Hello Venkatta Pidikiti I’m not from India and I’m not deeply familiar with the market dynamics there, but from my perspective leadership potential should not be defined only by academic pedigree.
Degrees, certifications like the PMP, and experience all play different roles. An MBA may provide strategic or business frameworks, but a strong delivery track record, ethical judgment, and stakeholder leadership are equally critical indicators of someone’s ability to lead complex initiatives. In practice, the most effective leaders I’ve seen combine learning with proven execution.
...
1 reply by Venkatta Pidikiti
Mar 16, 2026 3:35 PM
Venkatta Pidikiti
...
Thank you for sharing this perspective — it really resonates.
I completely agree that leadership potential cannot be reduced to academic pedigree alone, and that degrees, certifications, and experience each bring something different to the table.
What I’m observing in parts of Indian IT, though, is not a healthy balance but a structural bias:
MBA/elite institute = ‘leadership track by default’
PMP + long delivery track record = ‘execution track, maybe people manager, but rarely true leadership roles’
In other words, the frameworks and strategic thinking are formally valued, but the professionals who have been proving ethical judgment and stakeholder leadership in real delivery for 15–20 years are still not treated as equivalent leadership material.
I’m very interested in how organisations in other regions have managed to break this pattern.
Have you seen specific practices (e.g., competency-based leadership pipelines, sponsorship for non-MBA leaders, using PMP + performance as a formal criterion) that helped move beyond pedigree and make leadership opportunities more merit-based?
Project Manager| AWR Development (BD) Ltd. Cox's Bazer , Bangladesh
Interesting perspective. In many organizations, leadership selection often blends education, experience, and demonstrated impact. While degrees may open doors, long-term credibility usually comes from consistent delivery, stakeholder trust, and the ability to lead teams through complex challenges.
...
1 reply by Venkatta Pidikiti
Mar 16, 2026 3:42 PM
Venkatta Pidikiti
...
Interesting perspective . In many organizations, leadership selection often blends education, experience, and demonstrated impact. While degrees may open doors, long-term credibility usually comes from consistent delivery, stakeholder trust, and the ability to lead teams through complex challenges. In fact, in quite a few organisations, even the job postings themselves hard‑filter for specific degrees or institutes, which means many proven PMP‑certified leaders are screened out before their track record is even seen.
Hello Venkatta Pidikiti I’m not from India and I’m not deeply familiar with the market dynamics there, but from my perspective leadership potential should not be defined only by academic pedigree.
Degrees, certifications like the PMP, and experience all play different roles. An MBA may provide strategic or business frameworks, but a strong delivery track record, ethical judgment, and stakeholder leadership are equally critical indicators of someone’s ability to lead complex initiatives. In practice, the most effective leaders I’ve seen combine learning with proven execution.
Thank you for sharing this perspective — it really resonates.
I completely agree that leadership potential cannot be reduced to academic pedigree alone, and that degrees, certifications, and experience each bring something different to the table.
What I’m observing in parts of Indian IT, though, is not a healthy balance but a structural bias:
MBA/elite institute = ‘leadership track by default’
PMP + long delivery track record = ‘execution track, maybe people manager, but rarely true leadership roles’
In other words, the frameworks and strategic thinking are formally valued, but the professionals who have been proving ethical judgment and stakeholder leadership in real delivery for 15–20 years are still not treated as equivalent leadership material.
I’m very interested in how organisations in other regions have managed to break this pattern.
Have you seen specific practices (e.g., competency-based leadership pipelines, sponsorship for non-MBA leaders, using PMP + performance as a formal criterion) that helped move beyond pedigree and make leadership opportunities more merit-based?
Interesting perspective. In many organizations, leadership selection often blends education, experience, and demonstrated impact. While degrees may open doors, long-term credibility usually comes from consistent delivery, stakeholder trust, and the ability to lead teams through complex challenges.
Interesting perspective . In many organizations, leadership selection often blends education, experience, and demonstrated impact. While degrees may open doors, long-term credibility usually comes from consistent delivery, stakeholder trust, and the ability to lead teams through complex challenges. In fact, in quite a few organisations, even the job postings themselves hard‑filter for specific degrees or institutes, which means many proven PMP‑certified leaders are screened out before their track record is even seen. Saving Changes...
In Indian IT, there are some genuine legends who built companies and created jobs for generations. Yet in many of those same organisations, the values on the wall and the values in practice barely meet. On one side, leadership tracks are informally reserved for MBAs and ‘elite institute’ pedigrees, while bachelor’s degree holders with 20+ years of delivery and credentials like PMP are kept in a narrow band of roles. On the other side, when layoffs happen, almost nobody asks the harder governance questions. Were all options exhausted first — redeployment, reskilling, honest pipeline conversations, transparent shifts to contract roles? Or was headcount reduction simply the fastest way to close the quarter and quietly erase the forecasting mistakes, hiring miscalculations, and planning failures that created the crisis in the first place? The trap is that these are framed as “tough decisions for business health,” while there is very little audit of the decisions and incentives that made layoffs look inevitable. A second layer makes this worse: managers who were on the ground during the layoffs often move out, and when an ex‑employee raises a grievance, the diplomatic answer becomes, “Your manager at that time is no longer with the organisation. We don’t know the full context. Case closed.” For me, this raises two uncomfortable questions for our profession:
If elite degrees and pedigrees are the primary filter for leadership, what is the accountability expectation attached to that privilege when it comes to people decisions and layoffs?
And in project‑driven organisations, why don’t we treat transparent governance, fair options before layoffs, and robust grievance handling as core leadership KPIs — on par with revenue, margin, and NPS?
I would be very interested to hear from PMI leaders and HR professionals on how they are trying to close this gap between “pedigree-based leadership” and “accountable leadership” in their own organisations Saving Changes...
PM Consultant| CLOUD SAFE CO., LTD.New Taipei City, NWT, Taiwan
I believe this is not only an issue seen in India — it is also quite common in many organizations elsewhere. What matters more is whether the talent selection and leadership criteria truly help the company move toward its shared vision and goals. Organizations should focus less on labels alone, and more on which capabilities, judgment, and leadership behaviors actually create long-term value. When people see that opportunities are aligned with real contribution, it also strengthens trust and sense of belonging. Saving Changes...
uVenkatta Pidikiti/u The issue is not tied to a specific country—it is a structural challenge within many organizations. The real problem is not who gets selected, but how selection criteria are defined:
Are they based on capability and value creation?
Or on titles and internal dynamics?
When organizations focus on real capabilities and leadership behaviors, they don’t just improve performance—they build trust. And when opportunities are clearly linked to actual contribution, a sense of belonging develops naturally. Saving Changes...
Community Champion
