[wenc]

I am a data scientist who spent my early career doing lots of BI work before moving on to my current role (years ago). I don't have an MBA, only a quantitative Ph.D.

BI is more related to analytics than DS (broadly defined, DS deals with predictive, while BI deals with descriptive), and typically falls under the purview of data analysts. It also isn't really a prerequisite for DS work. Also, BI is a skill that is easily acquired in industry rather than in school.

I don't know if an MBA is necessarily more useful than a MSCS if you want to become a data scientist. On the hiring end, quantitative training is strongly preferred for true DS positions over qualitative. Given a pool of people with quantitative degrees vs MBAs, it is very likely the former will have an advantage.

The only exception is if the position isn't truly a DS one; many people advertise data analyst under a DS title to get a broader pool of candidates. It's common practice these days.