Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 30 Aug 2014, 14:26

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother!

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
VP
VP
User avatar
Status: Current Student
Joined: 24 Aug 2010
Posts: 1346
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 710 Q48 V40
WE: Sales (Consumer Products)
Followers: 97

Kudos [?]: 399 [0], given: 73

Premium Member
Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother! [#permalink] New post 19 Jan 2013, 19:28
CobraKai wrote:
Nice - I don't get the part about about MBAs competing with PT and Exec MBAs from the same school. PT/Exec guys are often company sponsored and returning to the same company, and if they're not, I've heard (sorry about the hearsay, I just haven't cared enough to verify it) that a lot of Part-time/Exec programs don't have access to the same career management center that the Full-time students do, and are definitely NOT competing for summer interships that can turn into full time offers, thus doing nothing to decrease the "value" of a full-time MBA.

It depends on the school. At Booth PT and Exec MBAs do not have access to internship recruiting. They can recruit for full-time roles though. However, the majority do stay with their employers through graduation. I have yet to hear any 2nd years in the FT program say they felt at any disadvantage because PT students were also in the recruiting pool.
_________________

The Brain Dump - From Low GPA to Top MBA (Updated September 1, 2013) - A Few of My Favorite Things--> http://cheetarah1980.blogspot.com
Image

Current Student
User avatar
Status: Too close for missiles, switching to guns.
Joined: 23 Oct 2012
Posts: 764
Location: United States
Schools: Johnson (Cornell) - Class of 2015
WE: Military Officer (Military & Defense)
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 308 [0], given: 166

Premium Member
Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother! [#permalink] New post 19 Jan 2013, 20:16
machichi wrote:
Let's pretend his thesis was this: "If you can't go to one of YOUR top 5 MBA choices. don't even bother." For me there were only about 7 business schools that I would choose to attend. Outside of those (of which only 1 or 2 is "top 5" by his standards), I probably would have decided not to get my MBA. I'm curious if others feel the same way.


Agree 100%. I had a clear pecking order and really didn't want to have to apply to my 5th and 6th choices in Round 2. And now since I'm not stressing about Round 2 interview invites, I can spend my weekends watching cartoons in a forever lazy onesie for adults if I choose to.




_________________

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fWvub_WBho

Current Student
avatar
Status: Now or never
Joined: 07 Aug 2010
Posts: 326
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
GPA: 3.5
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 129 [0], given: 26

GMAT Tests User Premium Member
Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother! [#permalink] New post 21 Jan 2013, 01:40
rhyme wrote:
I actually found this the most telling quip:

"The sad reality is that an MBA is not as valuable today as it was 30 years ago. Stanford University published data stating that from 2005 to 2008, over 94% of graduates had jobs by graduation. However, since then, only about 75% of graduates had jobs lined up at graduation. Stanford is a top MBA program, so you can imagine it being worse at other schools. "

There are a HUGE number of reasons one might postulate for this shift (that have nothing to due with decreased return)

* Stanford has grown in reputation as an excellent entrepreneurial school, perhaps a greater percentage of students are electing not to pursue a job right out of the program
* Perhaps a shift in the reporting methodology (i.e. perhaps its now defined as of the entire class, whereas it may have previously been defined as a % of those seeking employment - which is what most programs do)
* A change in the overall risk tolerance of students
* A change in the definition of "at graduation" (if you read the details of many employment reports you'll find its usually defined as within 3 months of graduation)
* A change in the % of students self-reporting
* The data range he chose seems cherry picked, why 2005 to 2008? Why not 2004 to 2009? Or 2000 to 2010? Or for that matter, compared a decade ago to the current decade? (Edit I now see Optimistic Applicant made this exact argument and actually bothered to look up data... kudos)

You could go on and on and on.... but the most peculiar claim is that since Stanford is "down", then the conclusion one should draw is that its "worse" at other schools. Common, thats just a basic fallacy. Show me aggregated data from the top 20 schools over a long period of time that shows a measured and controlled decrease, normalized against recessionary impacts, and I'll buy the argument. This is akin to the guy who says that school X placed 2 more people at Bain than school Y, thus, school X is better for recruiting.

And of course, the idea that the top 5 is all that matters seems pretty silly. The average staring salary at Booth this year for Chicago based job is $130,000. That hardly seems bad. Even so, why the elitism? For someone making $40K a year and going to $80K a year at a 2nd or 3rd tier school, the benefits are just as tangible.

My conclusion is that he's entire article is myopic, poorly researched platitude intended to garner discussion by putting forth an unpleasant and theoretically controversial view.



You have ripped the assumptions apart rhyme and for that sole reason this should be the top post of this month :). Having read the headlines of the articles on few occasions I was convinced that the article is bound to be hollow. I somehow felt that the author has an entrepreneurial bend and is having hard time using his Wharton credentials to enter the start up arena. I also believe that his batch mates at Wharton were disillusioned by "What a MBA prepares for" v.s " What one aspires to be" and hit the ground reality when switching jobs.
_________________

Please press KUDOS if you like my post

Moderator
Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 02 Jul 2012
Posts: 1226
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 64

Kudos [?]: 663 [0], given: 116

GMAT Tests User Premium Member
Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother! [#permalink] New post 21 Jan 2013, 02:11
rhyme wrote:
I actually found this the most telling quip:

"The sad reality is that an MBA is not as valuable today as it was 30 years ago. Stanford University published data stating that from 2005 to 2008, over 94% of graduates had jobs by graduation. However, since then, only about 75% of graduates had jobs lined up at graduation. Stanford is a top MBA program, so you can imagine it being worse at other schools. "

There are a HUGE number of reasons one might postulate for this shift (that have nothing to due with decreased return)

* Stanford has grown in reputation as an excellent entrepreneurial school, perhaps a greater percentage of students are electing not to pursue a job right out of the program
* Perhaps a shift in the reporting methodology (i.e. perhaps its now defined as of the entire class, whereas it may have previously been defined as a % of those seeking employment - which is what most programs do)
* A change in the overall risk tolerance of students
* A change in the definition of "at graduation" (if you read the details of many employment reports you'll find its usually defined as within 3 months of graduation)
* A change in the % of students self-reporting
* The data range he chose seems cherry picked, why 2005 to 2008? Why not 2004 to 2009? Or 2000 to 2010? Or for that matter, compared a decade ago to the current decade? (Edit I now see Optimistic Applicant made this exact argument and actually bothered to look up data... kudos)

You could go on and on and on.... but the most peculiar claim is that since Stanford is "down", then the conclusion one should draw is that its "worse" at other schools. Common, thats just a basic fallacy. Show me aggregated data from the top 20 schools over a long period of time that shows a measured and controlled decrease, normalized against recessionary impacts, and I'll buy the argument. This is akin to the guy who says that school X placed 2 more people at Bain than school Y, thus, school X is better for recruiting.

And of course, the idea that the top 5 is all that matters seems pretty silly. The average staring salary at Booth this year for Chicago based job is $130,000. That hardly seems bad. Even so, why the elitism? For someone making $40K a year and going to $80K a year at a 2nd or 3rd tier school, the benefits are just as tangible.

My conclusion is that he's entire article is myopic, poorly researched platitude intended to garner discussion by putting forth an unpleasant and theoretically controversial view.


This post should be moved to the AWA section... This is how you take apart a flawed argument..
_________________

Did you find this post helpful?... Please let me know through the Kudos button.

Thanks To The Almighty - My GMAT Debrief

GMAT Reading Comprehension: 7 Most Common Passage Types

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Aug 2012
Posts: 427
Location: United States (WA)
Concentration: International Business, Entrepreneurship
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 46 [0], given: 6

Premium Member
Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother! [#permalink] New post 21 Jan 2013, 07:59
rhyme wrote:
cheetarah1980 wrote:
I have yet to hear any 2nd years in the FT program say they felt at any disadvantage because PT students were also in the recruiting pool.


Give it time. You will.


And that's what kills me. There seems to be this idea that PT students are somehow inferior to FT students because they decided to keep their jobs while going to school. While looking at PT programs, I immediately knocked any program that treated PT students differently off the list.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 18 Oct 2012
Posts: 33
Location: United States (CA)
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 1

Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother! [#permalink] New post 21 Jan 2013, 08:46
rhyme wrote:
...entire article is myopic, poorly researched platitude intended to garner discussion by putting forth an unpleasant and theoretically controversial view.


True story.
Current Student
User avatar
Status: Too close for missiles, switching to guns.
Joined: 23 Oct 2012
Posts: 764
Location: United States
Schools: Johnson (Cornell) - Class of 2015
WE: Military Officer (Military & Defense)
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 308 [0], given: 166

Premium Member
Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother! [#permalink] New post 22 Jan 2013, 06:36
AbhiJ wrote:
Princeton is still highly regarded because it has not climbed up the MBA bandwagon. The closest thing it offer is Masters in Finance and the program has around 25 students every year.


Princeton is highly regarded because it's Princeton. Not climbing onto the MBA bandwagon is irrelevant. Harvard graduates 900+ MBAs a year and I think they're doing just fine.

Master of Finance is a much different degree than the MBA. Harvard has 9000+ applicants a year, Princeton's M.F. program has under 900.

http://www.princeton.edu/bcf/graduate/faq/index.xml#compareadmitted
http://www.princeton.edu/bcf/graduate/faq/index.xml#compcomparetomba
_________________

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fWvub_WBho


Last edited by CobraKai on 22 Jan 2013, 09:12, edited 1 time in total.
Current Student
User avatar
Joined: 26 May 2010
Posts: 694
Location: United States (MA)
Concentration: Strategy
Schools: MIT Sloan - Class of 2015
WE: Consulting (Mutual Funds and Brokerage)
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 192 [0], given: 627

GMAT Tests User Premium Member
Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother! [#permalink] New post 23 Jan 2013, 11:25
packet82 wrote:
AbhiJ wrote:
Part of the reason MBA brand is getting diluted is because of the several programs offered by 1 school. If they want to create PT MBA then they should decrease the number of FT enrollment. Imagine 2000 Booth MBAs graduating every year, won't that dilute the brand. Princeton is still highly regarded because it has not climbed up the MBA bandwagon. The closest thing it offer is Masters in Finance and the program has around 25 students every year.


The MBA as a whole is getting diluted because every two-bit former community college has one now and they accept anyone with a pulse, not because Booth graduates a lot of students. As long as the school allows only qualified students in to their program, it will remain highly regarded. Haas for example is working on an expansion to bring their full time class from 240 to around 300 students. I highly doubt they're going to drop in the ranking as a result.

As long as the students are qualified, a larger program can be an advantage since the network will be larger.

Not disputing any of your points, but do you have a source for Haas' plans to expand? I had heard Yale SOM was planning to expand, but hadn't heard the same of Haas.
Non-Human User
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 125
Followers: 19

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Premium Member
Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother! [#permalink] New post 27 Jan 2014, 06:30
Hello from the GMAT Club MBAbot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother!   [#permalink] 27 Jan 2014, 06:30
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 Experts publish their posts in the topic Should I even bother to consider the Top 10 schools? ninetwosix 2 28 Apr 2010, 20:50
Should I even bother? macandal 4 15 Dec 2009, 14:29
Should I even bother? jetblack1000 4 13 Jun 2009, 18:47
You dont even know what you are in for... riverripper 19 06 Sep 2008, 15:49
AND IF YOU DON'T GET IN WHAT WILL YOU DO OF YOUR LIFE? andrehaui 9 27 Apr 2007, 11:23
Display posts from previous: Sort by

If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother!

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   [ 49 posts ] 



GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.