Difference in entry level positions

A lot of companies have "tiers" of schools as well when determining starting salary, especially for new recruits out of school.

Do u have examples?

Tier 1: M7 schools
Tier 2: Top 20/30 schools
Tier 3: People who did part time while at work, other MBA programs outside of top 30, etc. Part time could be at a Top 10 school but since they are within the company the pay bump they get isn't very large compared to new recruits.

Within there, there are distinct pay ranges. I will say that at a lot of large companies there are "fluke" schools in those Tiers-- maybe the CEO's wife went to some random MBA program and now he sits on their board- that school might get ranked higher than it should be simply because of his affiliation, etc.

The biggest difference will be the positions people are hired into. A company may hire a top 5 MBA into one program while a top 30 could be hired by the same company but their function could be totally different...and may not be paid as well.

From what I know of health care, it's more of an issue if you can get a position in the first place. Companies recruit at some schools, but not at others (and it often has nothing to do with school ranking).

Once you get in, where you graduated has zero impact on starting pay or promotions.

RF

Thanks guys!

Here's an interesting link for Fidelity:

https://jobs.fidelity.com/findajob/stude ... lege.shtml

"Fidelity Consulting Group" is their research/investments group, and they hire from HBS, Tuck, Kellogg and a handful of other schools.

All of the other schools will feed into Fidelity, but those are back office support positions.

I was checking the emplyoment report for M7 schools yesterday, and looking at the higher end of the compensation ranges it struck me that while the share of applicants that go into PE/VC is in fact quite similar among schools (around 10% for H/S/W, around 5% for others), the compensation is totally different: Stanford gets incredible highs (250K base salary, 200K guaranteed bonus, 100K sign-on), Harvard trails (160K base), all the ohers including Wharton report compensation aligned with the higher end of IB.

Anyone has some rationale for this kind of placement in PE/VC? Agold?

My guess would be that Harvard and Stanford place more people into large-cap PE funds (KKR, Blackstone, Carlyle, TH Lee, and their peers), whereas Wharton/Chicago/Columbia/etc. tend to place more people into small-cap and mid-market PE funds where the assets under management, and therefore compensation is lower.

Large cap PE is really dominated by H/S. One side factor to consider is that the large cap funds will work you to the bone. 70-100 hour weeks are common at places like KKR and Blackstone - you're basically working banker hours. If you go to a smaller fund, depending on what their culture is like, you could be working 50-60 hours/week and maintain a good work-life balance while still making "banker money".

Thanks,

yet looking at the Kellogg employment report for class of 2007 one can observe how 3 people went into Carlyle and their base salary was basically 150K (you can infer it combining the detailed graphs they provide). They also placed one at Blackstone.

So I'm not sure, those two 250K Stanford hires are one in the West Coast and one in the North East, either it's KKR, Apax or TPG or it's some kind of outlier (a nice one though!).

Happy new year to everyone!

Its pretty easy to explain...not only is it the companies they are going to but what they did before school. People outside of H/S do go to the big companies but wont be paid nearly as high as someone who worked for Bain Capital, Blackstone, or Carlyle before school and is returning to them. These people have the ultimate pedigree, they went to the best undergrads, had amazing grades that got them into the most desirable jobs coming out of undergrad. So its almost 100% sure bet they are going to H/S. So if you have that background and are going back to your company chances are you are going to be paid far better than the newbies getting hired into them. You see this with consultants...everyone newly hired in gets the same offer but people returning can make more (who do you think are the highly paid people in that part of the report).

Basically if you were going to be one of those super highly paid people you probably would know it so dont worry about it.

Agreed...it's where they're coming from. I know a few people at Bain Capital, one guy worked there before and after his MBA, another started working there after his MBA. The individual who was there prior to the MBA started as a higher level employee post MBA and his salary was something like 125K/year more (who knows about the bonus). You see this kind of thing going on at Wharton, in particular with IB and IM...there are a few people that have starting salaries pushing 300K just out of school.

Over the past few years (namely 2006 and 2007), Pre-MBA Associates at KKR were signing contracts to get $1 in 2, or $1 million over the course of 2 years all-in, including bonuses. I would have to reasonably guess from this that a post-MBA vice president at KKR in 2006 or 2007 would have pulled in ~ $750K in his first year. I doubt we'll see anything like this anytime soon - so keep reliving the glory days folks

By the way, this thread is getting way off-topic, lol.

You are an endless pit of information! KUDOS.
I do not even know where you get this stuff.