Click here to go to the NEW College Discussion Forum

Besides having superior grades, what can one do during one's undergrad years to help gain admittance to Harvard Business School? ie, what can I do to help me stand out from the pack?

By Shahab (Shahab) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 06:36 pm: Edit

first of all, realize that gpa, while it must be good, will take a back back seat to your work experience between college and your MBA. And by the way, that work experience on AVERAGE is about 5 years. Dont get below a 700 on the GMAT. Try to get a job at a procter and gamble/ goldman sachs/ top firm (or start your own). Excel at that job. That's all I can give you. Nothing in your undergrad is really going to help you stand out of the pack. It's all about what happens after.

By Shahab (Shahab) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 06:37 pm: Edit

btw the 5 year average is for harvard. you can get into average business schools right out of undergrad in many cases.

By Najy (Najy) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 07:41 pm: Edit

ok, that clears up a few things.

So as long as I get good (great) grades, have a great GMAT score, and work for about 5 years at a top firm, I should be fair game? Nice.

Here's a follow up question...

1. Getting a job at a top firm might be hard straight out of college. Does it make a difference where I go for undergrad (I applied to all business schools)?

Thanks for your comments.

By Itempest (Itempest) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 08:04 pm: Edit

Where you do your undergrad may very well make a difference in the job market. As undesirable as this is to someone who didn't attend an "elite school", if the job-application reviewer sees a Harvard or a Yale on your resume, you most likely will be one they keep an eye on.

Still, performance counts for a lot more, I would think.

By Najy (Najy) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 09:08 pm: Edit

hmmm interesting.

What I had planned on doing is after graduating college, head straight for the MBA instead of waiting.

But this apparently isn't advisable for elite business schools?

By Shahab (Shahab) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 09:17 pm: Edit

no it isnt. and yes it is harder. this is why im so fing pissed that i screwed up in high school. Now its that much harder for me. Im at a small private college, and when i developed my goal to work at a top firm freshman year, i realized id have to make a 4 point plan
1) do really well my first two years, and become a leader on campus
2) transfer my sophomore year to a good college near wall street (columbia, cornell, NYU)
3) leverage for an internship at a top firm (usually these three schools have really good reps on wall street and, while hard to get it, internship oppurtunities are more readily available on WS for these 3 colleges)
4) do well at the internship, and leverage that for a job.
5) get the mba after a few years, make the connections, and go back, make partner, and then do my own thing.

By Shahab (Shahab) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 09:18 pm: Edit

^ 5 point plan

By Najy (Najy) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 09:24 pm: Edit

I screwed up high school too. My motivation is very new-found (im a senior). So I plan on literally devoting myself to academics (not COMPLETELY, but, you know what I'm saying) in order to secure myself a spot in a good grad school.

Heres a question: Do grad schools like Wharton or Harvard Business have summer programs like some colleges have for high schoolers? To make connections, get my foot in the door?

By Massdad (Massdad) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 09:34 pm: Edit

Najy,

No summer programs at HBS or Wharton for high schoolers. Harvard does have executive education programs, but I suspect you may be a bit young. plus, they can cost $50,000 per course.

Itempest, regarding an "Ivy job advantage", you'd better hope the interviewer was not one of those who Harvard rejected. Or, worse, Harvard could have rejected their oldest kid! An elite degree cuts two ways.

By Najy (Najy) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 10:02 pm: Edit

Good pt. Massdad about the interviewer...

but my question was actually if there are any graduate schools that offer summer courses for undergrads interested in the field. thanks again..

By Najy (Najy) on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 04:39 pm: Edit

any other comments about harvard Business or any other elite business schools?

By Monekit (Monekit) on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 11:09 pm: Edit

Bain and Co. ( a financial consulting company ) seems to actively recruit college grads. If you visit this page, they have certain colleges and university profiles which they have seemed to recruit people from before (after undergrad education). I think if the school you're going to is listed there, you have a good chance to get teh job, and add on any more chance if the school is utterly prestigious. I was surprised it wasn't just very elite schools and that it didn't matter too much what major you were having. But then again you said you were probably not going to work after undergrad and do straight for MBA. Nevertheless, I thought it would be interesting for you to look at the people's profiles, because some of them went to good business schools after, and I think that this job very much helped them. So I think working is a big factor for MBA schools.

By Najy (Najy) on Thursday, March 11, 2004 - 07:01 pm: Edit

bump...any more info out there

By Monekit (Monekit) on Thursday, March 11, 2004 - 09:18 pm: Edit

I think I forgot the link.

http://bain.com/bainweb/Join_Bain/undergraduate.asp

By Najy (Najy) on Thursday, March 11, 2004 - 10:09 pm: Edit

Thanks!

By Troy (Troy) on Thursday, March 11, 2004 - 11:42 pm: Edit

I don't want to nitpick but Bain is a strategy/management consulting firm, not financial consulting. Keep in mind that Bain offices tends to hire from local school, hence the wide range of schools on their recruitment page.

So if you go to UT or SMU, Bain Dallas recruits there. Bain SF recruits at Cal and Stanford. Bain LA recruits at USC, UCLA, and Claremont. ETC.

Experience and leadership potential are the two biggest issues to MBA admissions IMO.

By Sakky (Sakky) on Friday, March 12, 2004 - 12:16 am: Edit

Najy, as mentioned before in this thread, it's extremely rare to get admitted to HBS (or any elite B-school for that matter) straight out of college. The only realistic cases I've ever known are with guys who started companies while going to school and therefore have built the requisite business experience.

The #1 thing you need to get into a top-flight business school is strong work experience. You don't necessarily need to go to a top-flight employer, although it helps. What is important is to show that you have management potential, or that ideally, that you are already a manager.

Look at things from HBS's standpoint. Does HBS need guys with high GMAT's and high GPA's to improve its numerical ranking in USNews? Not at all. HBS is already world-famous and it knows it. HBS wants to admit guys that it knows are on the fast-track to the top of the food chain in the business world. HBS's goal, and in fact, every business school's goal, is to get as many of its graduates into executive ranks of the most powerful and most important companies in the world. Obviously this is most easily done by picking guys who have shown that they can successfully climb the corporate ladder and, even better, if they've proven their management stripes.

And power and importance doesn't necessarily mean fame. Some of the most powerful and important companies are ones that nobody (or at least, no regular person) has ever heard of. Companies like KKR, KPCB, HMTF, and others. Most of these firms shun publicity and are therefore known only by insiders - but if you can land a job at one of those companies, kudos to you. But of course these firms are generally open to people who have an excellent background in finance.

Also, I see that some of you are talking about Bain. Bain and Co. is indeed a strategic management company. However, Bain Capital does boutique financial consulting, in addition to being one of the larger pe companies in the world.

As far as what you can do while you're an undergraduate, then apart from getting excellent grades (which has already been mentioned), the best thing for you to do is land yourself an internship/summer-job at a plum firm, even if it's unpaid (if you can afford that). You would also do well to join any clubs your school may have that deal with industries in which you are interested in working in, in order to maximize your chances upon graduation of landing a job with potential.

By Jamimom (Jamimom) on Friday, March 12, 2004 - 12:28 am: Edit

My brother and sister in law are Harvard MBA graduates. B was a mediocre student as an undergrad but went to graduate school where he excelled and had top notch work experience. S-I-L was an excellent student always but she too went to graduate school before getting a great job as an assistant to a CEO which was her stepping stone to a Harvard MBA. She did not have 5 years of work experience; just 2 but she did spend 2 years getting a masters at Tufts as well. Both had great GMAT scores. The essays portion of the application was much more exhausting than any undergrad app that I have seen and the rec forms are really thorough too. Unlike college recs, most employer who fill these out, actually fill in the form instead of writing one blanket statement to be attached to the form. My H hires a lot of kids out of college who apply to b-school and he spends a tremendous amount of time writing long, careful recs, a necessity if the candidate is to have a decent chance of getting into a top B-school.

By Najy (Najy) on Friday, March 12, 2004 - 07:03 am: Edit

Thank you very much sakky and jamimom, your advice is invaluable.

Clearly the key here is experience.

If I join/start clubs at a university (in addition to the grades), this looks good on a job résumé which increases my chance of being hired by a company upon graduation. Hold that job down for a few years and I've got a great (hopefully) recommendation for HBS or a comparable school.

Here's another Q:
The GMAT is important when applying to Grad school, but when I will apply to grad school, I would have taken the GMAT three or four years earlier. Are they interested in my scores from 3or 4 years ago or would I need to take it again?

Also, anyone have a percentage of applicants admitted to HBS by any chance?

Thanks for all of your advice...I was totally in the dark before this....

By Jamimom (Jamimom) on Friday, March 12, 2004 - 03:56 pm: Edit

I want to tell you that unless you are in engineering or other specialty skill field, it is not easy finding a job out of college. It has never been easy to find a substantial job with benefits and a career path, but the situation in the last several years has been the worst I have ever seen. I have many friends whose kids are working temp jobs and living at home, and these were top scholars, some from ivy league schools. There just are not enough "good" jobs to go around. And companies are reluctant to hire kids right out of college when there are so many experienced workers that need little training that are out of work and looking for a job. It can be harder than getting into Harvard to find a substancial job. That alone is a weed out for the elite business schools. You then have to leave the job for business school and get a fantastic reference from the employer you are leaving in order to leave. The GMATs will be the least of the issues; they are pretty straight forward and these days there are all kinds of prep courses to help one study. I do not know how long the GMAT score, holds, so you might want to research that yourself. MCATs are good for 3 years.

Once you have all of those pieces in place, you can then apply to a top business school to become one of the very few who get in. It is not an easy process.

By Sakky (Sakky) on Saturday, March 13, 2004 - 10:17 pm: Edit

Quick points

*GMAT's are good for up to 5 years.

*2004 USNews states that HBS admitted 9.7% of all applicants. Median age of the entering class is generally about 27-28. That median age is quite normal for all top-flight B-schools.

By Najy (Najy) on Saturday, March 13, 2004 - 11:52 pm: Edit

thanks sakky, thats good to know.

9.7%...geez!

Are you basically guarenteed a (very) high-paying job if you graduate from hbs?

By Haithman (Haithman) on Sunday, March 14, 2004 - 12:34 am: Edit

Are you basically guarenteed a (very) high-paying job if you graduate from hbs?

Most Likely...a diploma from HBS is no joke

By Sakky (Sakky) on Sunday, March 14, 2004 - 04:21 am: Edit

Najy, since you asked an honest question, I'll give you an honest answer. But you may be sorry you asked...

*Guaranteed a high paying job? Hardly. You're not even guaranteed to be employed.

I think anybody who is seriously considering getting their MBA should read these articles and ones just like it. They are piercingly sobering. Suffice it to say that there is a lot of soul-searching going on in the b-school community about exactly what value (if any) do they actually add.

http://compuserve.businessweek.com/magazine/content/02_42/b3804633.htm

http://money.cnn.com/2003/08/13/pf/millionaire/millionaires_interrupted/

http://cbet.uwaterloo.ca/MBA-reallyworth.html


*The golden-age of the MBA is probably over.

Having talked to many of my friends who are either in B-school or graduated from them, and having invested a lot of time reading the literature about the nature of the MBA, I think I can safely say that the glory days of the MBA are over. A decade or two ago, an MBA, especially one from an elite school, was a big differentiator, because not many people had them. Now, not so. The MBA has become plentiful and has therefore been commoditized. Even an elite-school MBA can no longer differentiate you the way it could in the old days. The days when a person could flash his MBA from Stanford or Wharton and automatically get a huge salary offer, those days are gone and are never coming back.

*Does that mean the MBA is no longer worth pursuing?

No, of course not. But it does mean that the MBA is no longer the automatic ticket that it was in the past. Getting the MBA can help, but it's not the end of your problems. You should immediately disabuse yourself of any flights of fancy. Getting the MBA should be seen as one rung on the long-ladder you need to climb to achieve career success.

*Having said that - what should you do? Maximize your return-on-investment.

The biggest problem of the traditional MBA is not just that it's expensive in terms of tuition (and people rarely get significant grant-aid for an elite MBA program, most of the aid wil consist of loans), but also that it requires that you quit your job, and therefore forgo your salary, for 2 years. This blows a gaping hole in your finances that is not easy to recover from. I therefore recommend the following steps:

a) Try to get a job in a state that has a public-university with a strong MBA program.

If possible, move to a state like California, Michigan, Virginia, Texas, or a few others a year before you apply, so that you can establish state-residency before you apply to the public-school MBA programs there. Not only will you become eligible for in-state tuition in those programs, but those programs give admissions preference to in-state applicants. Becoming a California resident, for example, could be a smart move because by doing so, you will be an in-state applicant to 2 elite public programs (Haas-Berkeley and Anderson-UCLA)

b)Consider part-time programs.

Another way to save money and maximize your ROI is to do your MBA part-time, for not only will you be able to keep your job while studying, but many employers also provide educational subsidies that any full-time employee can use.

Not all the top schools offer part-time programs, but some do. Off the top of my head, as far as elite programs go, I can think of Kellogg-Northwestern, Haas-Berkeley, Chicago, Anderson-UCLA, and Michigan. I'm sure there are many others.

Now, a word of caution here. It is invariably true that full-time programs are always better than part-time programs, not only because the academic selection is wider in the full-time program, but also the bonding and networking that is inherent to the full-time B-school experience is stronger. For example, there's simply no comparison between studying at Kellogg-Northwestern full-time and studying at Kellogg-Northwestern part-time. But, the latter is clearly going to be less financially burdensome. Also bear in mind that part-time MBA programs at public schools are usually not state-fund-supported, which means you are not eligible for an in-state tuition discount even though you're an in-state student, because there is no such discount.

c)Try to get a 2nd degree "for free" if possible.

Some schools allow you to pick up, along with the MBA, a second degree (usually another master's) at no extra cost provided you complete both degrees in the regular 2 years that you are allotted to complete your MBA. Some schools run special programs where a second degree program is fully integrated into the MBA program, and admission into those special programs means automatic admission into both degree-programs. Most prominent of all of them is probably the Leaders for Manufacturing Program at Sloan-MIT, and some others are the TMI program at Michigan and the Masters of Manufacturing and Management (MMM) program at Northwestern. All of these programs integrate an MBA with an MS or MSE in engineering. Wharton-Penn has the Lauder Program (integrated MBA + Master's in International Studies). I'm sure there are many other such programs out there. To complete these programs is to, in effect, receive another degree "for free" (well, not really for free, because you have to do a lot more work to get that 2nd degree, but at least it's free in the sense that you don't have to pay more money).

Note, the above is not to be confused with combined-degree programs that let you pursue an MBA along with another degree simultaneously, but at a cost of extra time. These programs are less appealing because you spend more years on campus, and therefore have to pay more tuition and spend more time out of work. Those programs might still be appealing depending on what kind of career you want to have, but you need to carefully weigh whether it's worth spending the extra time and money. Integrated programs are highly efficient because they require no extra time and money.

d)Pick up scholarships wherever you can.

Getting a hefty scholarship to a not-so-elite school may be better than paying full-fare at an elite school. And some elite programs also provide hefty scholarships, the most notable being, once again, the LFM program at Sloan-MIT. Every LFM student is given a scholarship, so basically you get 2 degrees from MIT for the price of zero. You can find other deals like this if you look hard.


*Finally, job difficulties right out of college.

I agree that it is definitely harder to find a job fresh out of college these days than it has been in awhile, especially if you studied a 'soft' major instead of a professional major like engineering.

Having said that, I will say that it is still far harder to win admission to an elite B-school fresh out of college than it is to land a job fresh out of college. So if you don't have the wherewithal to get a job, you can forget about getting into an elite B-school. B-school admissions is much like getting a job offer - you almost always undergo a professional interview about your career goals (and you better have very well-defined career goals if you want to survive the interview for an elite B-school), and you are always asked for your resume, for professional (not academic) recommendations, and for essay answers that demonstrate your management/leadership experience.

The most common career path to get into B-school is to get a position in high-finance, especially as an investment-banking analyst. Most people including myself think that I-banking analyst work is tedious, soul-draining drudgery (very highly paid tedious soul-draining drudgery, mind you) but it is absolutely true that an I-banking analyst position is a gateway to B-school. So if I absolutely knew I wanted to get into a top-flight B-school, I would look into any and all ways to wheedle and cajole my way into an I-bank.

By Najy (Najy) on Sunday, March 14, 2004 - 10:50 am: Edit

Great advice. Well, that's good, I suppose, I mean I didn't really expect to retire at age 35 or anything.

The Lauder Program at Wharton is really intriguing. International Business is what I was planning to major in as an undergrad.

I have no problem doing tedious highly paid grudge work after undergrad if it betters my chances to get into an elite business school; I'll do anything it takes.

Now since the best way to get into a good business school is to have held a job in high finance, how hard is it to land that job if I only went to a mediocre state school for undergrad? I assume everyone from my business school will be fighting for the same job.

I need to solidify my "dreams" so to speak so I have goals to focus on. At this point, it would be being the head of my own international business firm. Although honestly I have no idea what that entails, but thats why I'm going to business school, right?

That was great advice. Although an MBA from HBS or Wharton won't help as much any more, it definitely can't hurt. I'm sure there will probably be a few more doors open for me, assuming the profs there have all kinds of high-profile contacts etc.

Thanks again, it's becoming more and more obvious to me that more research is needed before I set my sights so high.

By Shahab (Shahab) on Sunday, March 14, 2004 - 11:56 am: Edit

Sakky you are overlooking the most obvious benefit of going to a top business school- Networking. There are a few hundred extremely talented individuals who by some stroke of luck, will be forced to sit and converse with you for 2 odd years. Very few people go to business school to actually *learn* something new- they are already probably set in their careers. They want to network. And dont underestimate the power of a Harvard network. Its an investment that may well be the 100 000 it will cost you to go.

By Sakky (Sakky) on Sunday, March 14, 2004 - 08:20 pm: Edit

There is absolutely no doubt that the #1 selling point of B-school for many people is the ability to develop a network of colleagues. I thought I had actually mentioned it here, but apparently I must have said that in some other forum that I also participate in. But suffice it to say that the lack of networking is the biggest reason why part-time programs will probably never be as good as full-time programs, simply because the ability to network in a part-time program is straitened because most of the students will not be around on campus much (because they're working).

The crucial question is how much value does this networking have, and how much should you be willing to pay to get it? That's a question with no easy answer. It is indeed true that getting admitted to a highly select B-school will mean that you will have access to a select group of highly capable individuals. But by the same token, I could argue that if you're good enough to get admitted to an elite B-school, then you should also be good enough to get a job at a supremely selective company where you will also get the opportunity to meet a select group of highly capable individuals, and get paid a salary and develop work experience too. For example, is the network you develop at HBS better than the one you might develop at the "KKR business school" or the "Carlyle business school"? That's an empirical question with no easy answer.

It is therefore true that you shouldn't underestimate the value of a network, but you shouldn't overestimate it either. Let's face it - B-school is very very expensive, both in terms of tuition and in terms of opportunity cost (forgoing a salary for 2 years). And let's face it - B-school is not "necessary" in the sense that medical-school is necessary to be a doctor and that law-school is necessary to be a lawyer. Plenty of businessmen do just fine without an MBA - Gates, Allen, Dell, Ellison, Sam Walton, etc. etc. This is why I think it is so vitally important that anybody considering B-school should carefully consider their return-on-investment and take steps to reduce the costs of attendance via scholarships or combined-degree programs. Going to business school is a business decision and deserves to be treated as such. To be a good businessman is to know where to invest your money where you will get the best return. If you don't apply this principle to your own personal life and personal choices, then how are you going to be a good businessman?

So I don't know what to tell you. Should you go, should you not go - there are no easy answers. In fact, I don't think you'll find anybody who's in b-school who will tell you that the decision to go was a slamdunk.

By Bern700 (Bern700) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 12:39 am: Edit

Actually if you go to wharton as an undergrad it is not hard (AT ALL) to find a job straight from college. I read in some article (I can't find it anymore...I think it was in BusinessWeek...) that said that the average wharton student has AT LEAST 3 JOB OFFERS 4 months BEFORE graduation...and I'm only talking undergrad here!

My father works with I-banks, Private Equity Funds (PEF), and Leverage Buyout Firms (LBF) on a daily basis. Most of the people at the I-banks he has talked to say that their company would rather go and hire straight from wharton -undergrad (rather than HPYSM) and then train them themselves. This is coming from recruiters from Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, UBS, FBR, CSFB, HBSC, Deutsche Bank, etc. They don't usually go for MBAs unless they have major experience (this is for I-banks not PEF or LBF).

The MBA does play a huge role in PEF and LBF hiring. These types of companies want to hire people who went to a good undergrad, then worked 3-5 years for an I-Bank, and THEN got their MBA. If you go this route and then get hired by a company like Blackstone Group, TPG, Berkshire, etc. then you'll be making the BIG $$$ (aka at least 7-8 figures).

By Najy (Najy) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 05:15 pm: Edit

bern- so you're saying that undergrad is really important?

I thought all that really mattered was grad.

By Haithman (Haithman) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 06:13 pm: Edit

Well usually if you do business you dont go straight to grad school. You graduate undergrad then work a couple of years to gain experience, then you go on for your MBA (after 3-5 years). So if you go to good undergrad you will be recruited by better companies which will help you get into top MBA programs.

By Najy (Najy) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 06:17 pm: Edit

Okay, I get it.

Too bad I'm probably not going to a top business school, unless I get into Cornell (unlikely).

How will attending a 2nd or 3rd tier undergrad b-school affect my chances of getting a good job?

I suppose I could always transfer...

By Jph1202 (Jph1202) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 06:18 pm: Edit

does anyone know the answer to the following: if you get into MIT undergrad, are you automatically in their business (Sloan) program?

By Jph1202 (Jph1202) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 06:26 pm: Edit

does anyone know the answer to the following: if you get into MIT undergrad, are you automatically in their business (Sloan) program?

By Sakky (Sakky) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 06:37 pm: Edit

Bern700, you wouldn't happen to be going to Wharton by any chance, would you? ;->

Seriously, though, while I don't deny that Wharton is a good school (for it's a very good school), don't believe all the hype. I'm sure you've heard the old say that if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

Specifically, let's examine the claim that the average Wharton student has at least 3 job offers before graduation. Well, there's no better authority about that then Wharton Career Services itself, and I provide the link after this paragraph. The most recent data is that for the graduating class of 2003. On page 4 or 5 of the study, they reveal the number of offers that each Wharton bachelor's degree graduating student has an average of 1.9 total job offers upon graduation. While this is pretty good, clearly it's not the same thing as "at least 3". Furthermore, as you can see on page 1 of the study, about 8.5% of the graduating class is still seeking employment when they graduate. Whether that's because they had no offers, or because the offers they did have were not good enough for them, I don't know, but the point is that there's still a non-trivial number of graduates who were not working after they graduated. If you don't believe it, go read the report yourself.

http://www.vpul.upenn.edu/careerservices/wharton/surveys/index.html

What you might have been thinking of was the class of 2000 where the data does indeed show that the average graduate had more than 3 offers upon graduation (3.27 in fact - you can read the study). But of course this was the acme of the super-boom, and we're probably never going to see a boom like that ever again in our lifetimes. To put those days in perspective, I know a couple of guys who dropped out of college and became millionaires (at least on paper) because of stock options from working at the 'right' dotcom. Of course, none of them are millionaires anymore, in fact, most of them never made a dime from their stock options.

And about the claim that the IB's would rather take Wharton undergrads rather than take MBA's unless those MBA's have major experience, I regret to say that it doesn't exactly pass the smell test. If that's really the case, then, well, why don't the IB's do just that? Specifically, if that claim was really true, then IB's shouldn't bother very much with recruiting at the MBA schools at all. Why bother wasting time in recruiting at the MBA schools across the country when apparently they think that Wharton undergrads are better? And specifically, how does that jive with the 8.2% unemployment rate for Wharton bachelor's degree graduates? If it was really true that I-banks think that Wharton undergrads are so great, then the number of unemployed graduates should be very close to zero (the only unemployed people left would be those people who really don't want to do I-banking and are looking for something they like but apparently can't find it).

I'll put it to you this way. You're an I-bank recruiter. You 'say' that you prefer Wharton undergrads over MBA grads unless they're very highly experienced. Yet the simple fact is, a great many MBA grads who go to I-banking after graduation do so with little experience (not all of them, but many of them). Makes sense too - a lot of people who did I-banking before B-school get sick of it (it is monkey work, after all), and made a decision not to go back. At the same time, a lot of people go to B-school to do a career change, including career changes into I-banking. Therefore, you're going to end up with quite a few guys who graduated from B-school who are being hired by I-banks with no experience.

But why? If it's really true that you think that Wharton undergrads are better than these inexperienced MBA's, then why are you hiring the latter at all? And more tellingly, why are those inexperienced MBA's getting paid higher compensation from the IB's than those Wharton bachelor's grads?

Case in point - I'm sure you would agree that a Wharton MBA graduate who goes to work for a particular I-bank, even if he has no experience in banking, will, on average, get a better job offer than a Wharton BS graduate from that same I-bank. But again, why? Why should the first guy get a better offer than the second guy, if the bank honestly thinks that the second guy is better? It can mean one of two things - either the IB is being stupid (because it is giving a better offer to the worse guy), or the Wharton BS graduate is being stupid (because he's willing to take less money even though he is the better candidate), or maybe they're both being stupid. I however have a serious problem in thinking that somebody's being stupid. It's just not rational for an IB to really think that that Wharton BS grads are better, but offer more money to MBA guys anyway. If you've studied economics, you should recognize that this is a market dis-equililbrium - MBA IB starting salaries should fall and Wharton BS IB starting salaries should rise. This is not happening. So it doesn't pass the smell-test.

A possible objection is that the IB recruiters are telling you that they prefer Wharton BS grads. Well, as I'm sure you've heard before, don't judge people on what they say they do, judge them on what they *actually* do. IB recruiters can say they prefer Wharton BS grads over MBA's all they want, but as long as they keep giving better offers to the MBA's, well...


Finally, about the salaries at companies like Blackstone. Getting 7-8 figures is indeed possible, but it's certainly not going to happen when you start and only happens to a tiny minority of people. This is not a message to you, bern700, because I think you know this, but rather to everybody else out there who might want to work for these kinds of companies. These companies are 'star-systems' just like I-banks - the really big shots make huge amounts of money, and the peons make peanuts. You don't start making serious serious money until you move up, and moving up is no walk in the park. Most people who enter those fields will wash out in a few years. It's an up-or-out system - either you're on the track to promotion, or it will be made known that you probably ought to leave the company.


Now, let me reiterate, in no way should any of this be construed to mean that I don't have the utmost respect for Wharton. I do. But I think some of the claims about Wharton that are being bandied around are a bit strong. It's a very good school, but it's not THAT good.

By Ceo1093 (Ceo1093) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 07:38 pm: Edit

I utterly agree with Sakky. Good post.

By Bern700 (Bern700) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 08:32 pm: Edit

I guess you saw my biased towards Wharton...

I agree with what you said, I guess I was just trying to emphasize the point of the importance of undergrad business.

By Sakky (Sakky) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 10:10 pm: Edit

Jph1212, the answer to your question is 'essentially yes'. You don't apply for separate admission to the undergraduate program at Sloan-MIT, you simply declare that you want to major in management science. Therefore, if you are going to MIT as an undergraduate and are maintaining satisfactory progress to the degree, you can choose to enter Sloan basically anytime you want.

So, *all* you have to do is get admitted to MIT. Of course we all know that that's easy as pie, right?

By Shahab (Shahab) on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 - 12:07 pm: Edit

a few points- 92 percent of Wharton grads are EMPLOYED? keep in mind that just as Wharton is self selecting with its students, that Wharton grads are self selecting with their jobs. They all apply for top jobs, high compensation, etc. And the fact that 92 percent are successful is a very high number.

also, there are exceptions in Ibanking about money- if you look at companies like Goldman Sachs they spread the wealth, and operate on a different value system than companies like Blackstone or even Merril Lynch.

On page 4 or 5 of the study, they reveal the number of offers that each Wharton bachelor's degree graduating student has an average of 1.9 total job offers upon graduation.

Given the current state of the economy and the unemployment rate, I think that Business school not only gives you an extended leave from the real world, but also endows you with practical skills to use when you step back in the real world. And if the rate is 1.9 per Wharton MBA, imagine what it must be for B.S.'s or lower caliber schools?

By Najy (Najy) on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 - 03:44 pm: Edit

Let me pose this question: How hard would it be to transfer to a undergrad school like wharton?

That's basically my only chance to save myself from a second-rate business school.

Hey, if a school is accredited (as the school I'm planning to go to is) does that make any difference when applying to grad school or for a job?

By Sakky (Sakky) on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 - 05:58 pm: Edit

Look, shahab, I never disputed that Wharton isn't a good B-school. Clearly it is a very good school. What I'm saying is that you shouldn't believe all the hype about it.

Is a 92% employment rate a good rate? I suppose that depends on your point of view. Keep in mind that while Americans across the board are complaining about the lack of jobs in this economy, the overall US unemployment rate is less than 6%, which means that over 94% of all Americans who want a job have one. Now do I agree that Wharton graduates are self-selecting with respect to the kinds of jobs they will take? Of course they are. Could the unemployment rate of Wharton graduates therefore be higher than normal because those graduates are so self-selective? Again, of course. But on the other hand, the increased unemployment due to higher self-selectivity is (or should be) counteracted by the fact that Wharton graduates are (or, at least are supposed to be) exceptional compared to the average. Which factor supercedes the other is difficult to say but the point I'm making is that a Wharton BS degree is not an automatic ticket to untold wealth and luxury. It's a useful tool, but by itself guarantees nothing.

Now I agree that some IB's have less income stratification than others. But the simple fact is, the entire financial community is star-based. An outsized share of pay at any bank is earned by a few stars. Just how large that outsized share is and how many stars will earn those shares obviously differ amongst the various banks, but I think we all agree that a star-system of some kind is in place at all banks. Maybe a less stratified star-system, but a star-system nonetheless.

Finally, I thought you said (and I concurred) that many if not most people see B-school not as a chance to pick up practical skills, but to network. The brutal reality, which I guess I'm not supposed to reveal on this forum (but I'll do it anyway) is that no matter whether you're talking about undergraduate b-school or an MBA program, a business education doesn't really provide you with a whole lot of practical knowledge. Maybe a few classes here and there are useful, but by and large, most of them are of little practical value. The fact is, most B-school profs are academics who have little connection to the real world. I'm sure you've heard the old saw "Those who can't do, teach", and I don't think it could be more true about anybody other than B-school profs. If B-school profs really really had a lot of practical business knowledge, then why aren't they the richest people in the world? Why are Bill Gates and Larry Ellison richer than those profs are, if they know so much about business?

Now, I understand that the above paragraph might be construed as negative and anti-intellectual, but I think if you talk to any former B-school student who has a lot of practical experience, they'll tell you that the actual B-school classes weren't worth a whole lot. What was valuable was the selectivity/sorting (being a graduate of Wharton means that you are an exceptional candidate), and the networking. But the actual education itself? Hmmm...

I would also point out that many people believe that stepping out of the real-world to get an MBA is a dangerous thing, especially if they already have a good job, for the simple fact is, people understand that not only is the MBA no longer the slam-dunk degree that it was in the past, but more poignantly, they fear that if they quit their jobs to go to school, they may not be able to get that job back.

Consider the following Businessweek article quotes.

"business school is suddenly less of a draw. Applications for the B-school Class of '05 -- the students who will hit the books this fall -- have fallen by as much as 30% at some top schools compared with last year. The University of Chicago's Graduate School of Business, for example, has received 27% fewer applications for the autumn term than it did in 2002.

Why the drop-off? For one thing, fewer would-be applicants can afford to forgo their salaries or pay annual tuition of $30,000-plus. And new visa restrictions are making it harder for foreigners to apply. But the big reason many twentysomethings may be hanging on to their jobs, however unrewarding, is that the once-coveted MBA no longer comes with the implicit guarantee of a big-bucks job offer on graduation. "When the downturn is this prolonged, the optimism fades," says Daphne Atkinson, vice-president of the Graduate Management Admission Council, which administers the GMAT entrance exam....Says a New York investment banker who had planned to go to B-school: "I want to hold on to my job.""

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_28/b3841053.htm
However, let me reiterate, none of what I'm saying should be taken to mean that you shouldn't go to B-school. However, it does mean that everybody who's thinking about it should do some soul-searching to determine exactly what goals he hopes to achieve by going, and whether those goals are realistic. Anybody who's ever studied decision-analysis will understand that it is very dangerous to make important decisions when you consider only the information that you want to hear or only that information that supports your position. You have to consider all the information at hand, including the information that doesn't support your decision. Then, and only then, can you make an informed choice. You guys would be terribly dis-served if you were never told any of the negatives about the B-school experience. If you have honestly carefully considered all the countervailing information and have determined that you still want to go, then you have made an informed and balanced choice. But if you make a decision based on only one set of facts without hearing the other side, then you're playing with fire.

By Sakky (Sakky) on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 - 06:26 pm: Edit

Najy, you ask how hard would it be to transfer to the BS program at Wharton? The answer - pretty darn hard. I don't think I'm telling you anything that you probably didn't already know. Transfer students not only have to get admitted into Penn, which is no picnic, but they also have to get admitted to Wharton as well. Transfer students are not allowed to apply to another college at Penn, get in, and then try to transfer again to Wharton. If you want to get into Wharton as a transfer, you have to apply directly to Wharton, and as I'm sure you would expect, the competition is fierce.

As far as the question on accreditation, I'm not convinced that when it comes to undergraduate business programs, that it really means much of anything at all. It's a necessary thing in order for a business school to award a proper bachelor's degree in business. But other than that, I don't know that it means much. A lot of universities, even ones with extremely famous business schools, like, oh I don't know, Harvard and Stanford, don't have accredited undergraduate business programs (their graduate programs are accredited, but they don't offer a bachelor's degree programs in business). But it's not like Harvard and Stanford undergraduates are exactly hurting when it comes to employment on Wall Street or in terms of getting admitted to an MBA program.

Keep in mind that the #1 undergraduate major of entering students at the elite B-schools is not usually business. It's usually engineering or sometimes economics. In fact, most bachelor's business degree programs (with important exceptions like Wharton, Sloan, Haas, Michigan, and some others) are not particularly highly regarded. In fact, I'm sure you probably know, the undergraduate business programs at many schools are really a "safety major" where all the football players and all the other guys who can't cut it in any other major tend to congregate. Just pick a school that has both an elite Division 1A football team and a bachelor's degree business administration program, and I will bet you that in most cases, a lot of the players will be majoring in business. That should tell you something about the rigor of those programs. Sure, those programs are accredited, but clearly it doesn't mean much.

By Chasgoose (Chasgoose) on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 - 06:45 pm: Edit

I don't think that an undergraduate business education is that important. My dad used to work on Wall Street in a good firm (that I don't want to mention for privacy sake) and he was involved for a few years in their analyst program. The analyst program involved hiring kids right out of undergrad with the intention of sending them off to business school (usually Harvard because one of the heads of the firm was a hugely powerful Harvard alum) in a couple years. Most of the people in the analyst program came from prestigious schools, but did not major in any form of undergraduate business or economics (they had taken a couple econ courses and that was about it). The point of the program was to give students some business experience before sending them out to get their MBA. Since they were going to train the analysts anyways, it didn't matter whether or not they majored in business for undergrad.

The other thing about the undergraduate business major is that, unless you go to Wharton, it is fairly hard to find an elite school that offers a business major. Most elites are more academically focused and they frown upon pre-professional majors.

By Najy (Najy) on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 - 08:03 pm: Edit

I like that, chasgoose, i hope it works out that way for me.

I hope that I can do some of that financial analysis for a few years before the MBA. You're dad was quite lucky to end up working for such a powerful alum.

By Shahab (Shahab) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 07:12 pm: Edit

It's a useful tool, but by itself guarantees nothing.

if you want to get that general, nothing by itself besides a winning lottery ticket guarantees anything, and even then, you better pray there isnt a strong wind when you go to cash it...

Now I agree that some IB's have less income stratification than others. But the simple fact is, the entire financial community is star-based.

yes, but you make the mistake of assuming that all MBAs went to business school to get into IB.

B-school profs really really had a lot of practical business knowledge, then why aren't they the richest people in the world? Why are Bill Gates and Larry Ellison richer than those profs are, if they know so much about business?

Because bill gates and larry ellison were engineers. And innovators. MBA's generally seek to capitalize off of others ingenuity, and therefore must logically take a smaller piece of the pie. Besides, many business profs are very very rich. Lawrence Summmers taught at Harvard business school (he was the Sec of Treasury), and a whole lot of multi millionaires/billionaires have too. In fact, most business people who are lucky to make it to the stratosphere in which money doesn't matter go into professorships at prestigous schools as a method of cementing their legacy, and assuaging their ego. Professorship, at least at the MBA level, is the place you go to after you have "been there and done that" in the business world, at least at top colleges.


Why the drop-off? For one thing, fewer would-be applicants can afford to forgo their salaries or pay annual tuition of $30,000-plus. And new visa restrictions are making it harder for foreigners to apply. But the big reason many twentysomethings may be hanging on to their jobs, however unrewarding, is that the once-coveted MBA no longer comes with the implicit guarantee of a big-bucks job offer on graduation

Im not going to argue with statistics, but frankly, this has no correlation as to how successful busines school graduates are. all it shows is that, because of the job market, and a lack of funds, many people who would otherwise go, cannot afford business school.

By Swilson001 (Swilson001) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 07:59 pm: Edit

I'm a junior looking at colleges to apply to, and I hopefully want to get a good Investment Banking job and then an MBA. Could you rank these schools for which would be best to obtain a job in investment banking?

UVA business school
Emory business school
Georgetown school of foreign service
Georgetown business school
NYU business school
Vanderbilt economics
Duke economics
Michigan business school

By Sakky (Sakky) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 10:44 pm: Edit

Shahab, you know what I'm talking about. There are plenty of people out there who have went to B-school who have regretted it. Obviously not all, but plenty. One of more interesting sub-topics of the B-school cottage industry if figuring out your ROI of attending B-school - basically, figuring out how much extra money, on average, a B-school graduate makes, and comparing it to the amount of money you lose by not only paying for school, but not working for 2 years. For many people, the ROI less than the return you could have made by simply not going, taking the money you would have earned by working during those 2 years, and investing it at a standard 5-7% interest rate (i.e. buying real-estate). In fact, for some people, and in particular, for highly paid engineers or consultants, the ROI sometimes turns out to be a negative number.

Surely I don't need to hold a seminar on the time-value of money. However, essentially, money that you earn early in your life is more valuable than money that you earn later, because 'early' money can be invested to earn even more money. By going to B-school, you are effectively trading 'early' money for 'later' money, which means that to combat the effect of the time-value of money, you have to really get a lot of 'later' money. Many times, you just don't get enough 'later' money. Again, use the ROI calculators available

Again, clearly that's not to say that the MBA never makes sense. But what it does mean is that it's simply not the slamdunk that it's sometimes made out to be. Shahab, you talk as if B-school is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and we both know that's not true.


Second of all, how exactly did I make the mistake that all MBA's want to go to IB? Every single major MBA field has stratification - consulting, entrepreneurship, general management, etc. Can you name one that doesn't? Right. Now obviously each field has varying amounts of stratification, but the simple fact is, having an MBA by itself is not going to guarantee that you are going to be a star. Neither do all stars have MBA's. Again, Bill Gates.

And let's talk about Lawrence Summers. Shahab, I think you need to do your research more carefully. First of all, Lawrence Summers never 'taught' at HBS, or otherwise had any formal affiliation with HBS. He was a professor of economics at the Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences, but not a professor at HBS. Prior to his professorship at Harvard, he was a prof at MIT. Again, not the MIT business school, but the MIT Department of Economics. Later, Summers took a string of public-policy jobs, culminating in, yes, the job of Sec. of the Treasury, and yes, now he is President of Harvard. Again, note, not President of HBS, but President of Harvard in general.

Therefore, note the 2 following facts. #1 - Summers never had a formal relationship with HBS. Might he have taught an econ class or two that included some HBS students? That's possible. But that's not exactly the same thing as saying that he "taught" at HBS, I'm sure you must agree. To go down this road is to say that any professor who has ever taught a single class that may have included even a single HBS student could therefore be said to have 'taught' at HBS, and clearly that's ridiculous. Second of all, how exactly is he rich? Clearly it is true that Summers is not hurting. But the fact is, Summers has never held a formal private-industry job a day in his life. All of his jobs have been either in academia or in the public-sector, and as we know, those roads aren't exactly paved with gold.

Again, is the guy well-off? Sure. But is he a successful businessman? How can you say that, when he has never worked in private business?

Let's also talk about b-school profs in general. It is obviously true that some b-school profs have had tremendous success in private business. But how many? Just pull up the CV's HBS faculty, or or the faculty of any elite B-school and you should note that the majority (well over 50%) of the profs have spent most of their lives in academia, and quite a few of them have never worked in private business. It is true that many of them probably serve as high-level consultants and are earning a lot of money that way. But let's think about what we're talking about. Supposedly, you are not going to b-school so that you can become a b-school professor yourself. You are going there because you want to learn how to manage companies. How are you supposed to learn that from people whose actual experience in managing companies is minimal? Or maybe you are going to b-school because you want to learn how to get ahead in the world of finance. How are you supposed to learn that from people who have spent little if any time actually working in the finance industry? As I'm sure we have all realized, there is a giant gulf between theory and practice.

And again, it's not just me saying this. Many an article has been written questioning the actual education provided by b-school profs, precisely because they are providing an education about how to run businesses when they themselves have never had to run a business. A famous study that came out of Stanford a few years ago essentially deeply questioned the value of the MBA education itself - not the value of the MBA experience as a whole, but the value of the actual MBA classroom material. And in fact, anecdotally speaking, time and time again, current and former MBA students have stated repeatedly that the classroom learning is not particularly valuable.

And I would also question where you get the notion that a lot of successful businesspeople later decide to become B-school profs. I don't deny that this happens to some people. But again, look at the CV's of the faculty of any high-end B-school. How many of them have a long track record of success in business, vs. how many of them climbed the ladder of academia to get to where they were? Clearly the latter is the majority. B-schools are run just like any other academic department, and advancement is secured by a record of scholarly research. For example, engineering professors don't get hired or promoted because they've done good work in industry. They get hired and promoted because they produce some killer research papers about some new aspect of engineering. The same is true of B-school.


And finally, about your last paragraph shahab, that's quite a red-herring you pulled out. The fact is, historically, few if any B-school students have ever been able to 'afford' B-school in the sense that there has hardly been a time when students had enough loose cash lying around that they could pay for B-school out of their own pocket. B-school was hot in, say, 1995. Could those students afford to pay out of their own pockets back then? B-school was also hot in, say, 1985. Again, did those students pay out of their own pocket? B-school students have always gone into debt, whether we're talking about now, or 10 years ago, or 20 years ago, or whenever. There is no such thing as "can't afford to go to B-school", there is only such a thing as "do you want to assume the debt in order to go".

Neither can you blame the job market itself. B-school actually had a miniboom in 2001. Why? Because so many dotcommers got laid off, thought that the economy was going to be bad only for a few years ago, and decided to ride out what they thought was going to be a short storm by going to b-school. The lack of good jobs actually encourages b-school enrollment. Think of it this way. You have the greatest job in the world, that pays you well, is fun, gives you all the power you want. Would you leave it to go to B-school? Maybe not, because you'd be afraid that you wouldn't be able to get that job back. On the other hand, if all the jobs are no-good, then you might decide to go. Article after article has been written in the news periodicals showing a strong boom in graduate school of all kinds right after the dotcom crash. People figured that they'd wait out a bad job market by sheltering themselves in school.

However, of course, all this presumes that people think the market is going to recover. By the same token, you are perfectly willing to go into huge amounts of debt to pay for school if you are convinced that the education will improve your future prospects. Future MD's, for example, don't flinch when they have to assume 6-figure debts, because they are rightly confident that a medical education will ultimately pay off. B-school students, who should understand the principles of debt leverage better than anybody, should also not flinch at the prospect of assuming debt to pay for their education, provided that they believe that their investment will pay off. But that's the key - will it pay off. As shown by the businessweek article above, many people are beginning to question that notion.

So again, the fact that there are fewer good jobs and that people have less money now cannot be connected to the drop in b-school apps, and doing so is a giant red herring. Personal wealth has never been a significant factor in determining the desirability of b-school, and fewer good jobs actually increases the desirability of b-school. It all hinges upon what people think the future is going to hold and whether b-school will help them in that future. The reality is that a lot of people no longer believe that B-school will help them - as the drop in b-school applications demonstrates.


Finally, let me reiterate, none of this is to say that you shouldn't go to B-school. Again, it's a personal choice that each one of us has to make. But it's not an easy choice. We need to consider all the factors and carefully weigh them. B-school may be right for you. But do the research before you take the plunge.

By Sakky (Sakky) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 10:46 pm: Edit

Swilson001, the answer is NYU.

That's because NYU is in New York, and the other ones aren't. Location, location, location.