Top 5 B-schools for Real Estate

I would agree that H/S/W might be able to provide some opportunities that Kellogg/Chicago can't, but would argue that those have less to do with school quality than with proximity to Wall Street and/or Silicon Valley.

To illustrate, I've met with many firms in my internship recruiting process this year that didn't recruit at Stanford, but did recruit at Kellogg, GSB, Wharton and Harvard. Now, I would have to assume that this has little or nothing to do with the quality of the program than with the proximity of Stanford to the locations of these firms' open positions.

Repeatedly, the executives I have interviewed with have been alums of HBS or Chicago (top two), followed by Wharton and Kellogg. I have not had interaction with many (or any) Stanford alums throughout my search process. That clearly has to do with location and not quality of program. I don't think you can say the same for Haas, Duke, Stern, etc. Recruiters do not target those schools to the same extent as they do at the four or five I just mentioned.

Good debate...I'm glad to see that we're throwing in some real-life examples and anecdotes to support our positions here. Hopefully, the readers and forum members will get something out of this.

I think we're pretty much in agreement. A lot of the research I'm doing now is in PE and honestly H/S/W are clear front runners with Columbia and Chicago pulling up the rear. Anywhere else your going to have to do all the legwork yourself.

Stern and Duke are borderline top 10 so I really wasn't concerned with them as much. I just personally feel that Haas' national brand is as strong as Chicago or Kellogg (outside of specialties).

I was curious if there were any other gmatclubers looking into real estate who are applying in the fall for next year. I'd liked to get a good thread to share resources as the field has less info compared to the traditional finance, consulting, etc.

I primarily looked at the east and west coast. It seems that after going to NY or Cali you can pretty much go anywhere but going from the Midwest to the coasts may be more difficult. Wisconsin is the main real player and less than 1% at Chicago and only 2% at Kellogg go into real estate.

I have also looked at a few MS in Real Estate Programs. The Top ones seem to be MIT, Columbia and USC depending on where you want to live. The classes provide a more in depth look at the industry but the degree is obviously less versatile. The degree is fairly new however and is gaining popularity. It seems to be geared more toward professionals already working in that field.

MBA East Coast:
1. HBS
1. Wharton
2. Columbia
3. NYU

I tied HBS and Wharton because I need to do more research at HBS. Wharton really impressed me. Real Estate is different from other industries in that most companies don’t come to recruit on campus they way traditional banks and consulting firms do. Wharton was the first school that I have found that has a substantial real estate recruiting presence on campus. Most people are looking to go into acquisitions, development or PE. Harvard seemed to have less real estate classes and focus overall but borrowed heavily from it’s reputation to get people where they wanted to go, especially if your looking to go to the PE side. Columbia has a great real estate program primarily due to their MSRED program. They have great ties to the real estate industry in NY and have people from the school who hold great positions at the ULI. NYU is just behind them and has a MSRE program as well but does not have the same prestige and connections as Columbia.

MBA West Coast:
1. Stanford
2. Haas
3. USC
4. UCLA

Stanford like HBS borrows heavily from the prestige of the school to open a lot of doors however in a similar fashion offers less in terms of academics. Haas has a real estate specialization and even grants students an addition certificate provided they complete all required real estate classes. USC although ranked well below UCLA has an outstanding real estate program and even allows you to apply for a joint degree to combine the two. Real Estate is to USC what Finance is to NYU. It’s the only reason I would recommend going to USC over UCLA. UCLA has a great real estate program but should probably only be considered if you want to stay in LA or you want to focus more on the finance aspects.

First off, you're absolutely correct that the RE recruitment process is different than traditional areas. Aside from some of the biggest firms (CB/Trammell, JLL, maybe one or two others), RE firms typically recruit on a lagging schedule or on an as-needed basis. In addition, RE has some of the biggest barriers to entry. Personal relationships in the field are extremely helpful...almost essential.

I hope you don't think I'm picking on you, but let me set you straight on this one. First off, some context to establish a little credibility. I've worked in RE previously and I have been active in real estate through clubs, national and regional organizations, as well as through alumni connections at some schools.

With that said, Wharton should be at the top of your list and Harvard shouldn't even be on it. I understand that you're likely to break into PE with an HBS background, but in many of those situations you are a PE analyst/associate who just happens to be working on RE transactions. HBS has a great name and you may be able to get into a real estate firm based on that alone (I know many who have), but don't confuse that with HBS actually having an infrastructure in place for students interested in real estate.

In fact, East of the Mississippi River, there are really only three schools that ever come up in the Real Estate - MBA conversation, and one of those schools (Kellogg) has recently lost a lot of ground to Chicago for some specific reasons. The other two are Wharton and Wisconsin.

I would be happy to contribute to a thread on the real estate market, recruiting process, etc., if you have specific questions.

I've looked in to various real estate strong MBA programs, as well as the primary Masters in Real Estate programs around the country. Ultimately, I decided on Cornell. My decision now remains whether to pursue both the MBA and MRE over 3 years, or pursue only the MRE in 2 years. artshep, perhaps you'll have some insight into this debate since it sounds like you are already in school and have a first hand perspective.

When I was researching the top Masters in Real Estate programs, I found an interesting chart through USC's FAQ page:

https://www.usc.edu/schools/sppd/private ... arison.pdf

For me, ultimately, the depth of the Cornell program was a deciding factor. The people in the program are great, the alumni network is strong, and I think many times graduates of the various programs wind up in similar positions or actually working together.

Like you said gixxer, the degree is relatively new. My impression is that as real estate firms discover MRE candidates, many are tending to stick with them rather than returning to recruiting MBAs. I assume that schools especially strong in real estate, such as Wharton, Wisconsin, and UNC maintain their own strong recruiting base, but ultimately I've opted for the MRE program rather than UNC's MBA program.

Insight and comments welcome.

Artshep, I'm not sure what your point is, other than trying to slam other Elite MBA colleges. And BTW, MIT has always been a more respected school than BOTH Chicago schools, if you want to talk about general perceptions. I'm surprised your "top 5" does not include them.

Personally, I DON'T CARE what the brand reputation difference between the UE/Elite schools are, just the areas I'm interested in. Otherwise, I would not have chosen to NOT to apply to Chicago, MIT, and HBS. I'm currently debating Kellogg vs Haas only because from all my research with recruiters, alums (from both schools), students, sitting in on classes, etc..., I can NOT see a difference between the two schools in terms of what I want to do. Kellogg is better for Midwest and East Coast placements, and for traditional industries of finance and consulting, while Haas is much better at West Coast placements (what I care about) and tech/entrepreneurship industries. All the top recruiters recruit at both Kellogg and Haas in the traditional industries, so there is almost zero differences there. I don't know much about Chicago other than my initial research last year, but if you put Chicago in the same bin as Kellogg, then I will stand by my statement that Haas is a comparable school to any of the top 5 in terms of the work I want to do, and the quality of the faculty and students are pretty much on par (considering I met almost 10 students who are deciding between Haas and Kellogg this weekend, and many are leaning Haas but will decide after Kellogg's admit weekend next week).

I'm also actually quite disturbed that you're comparing Haas and Duke to schools like DePaul. Just based on your arguments alone I almost suspect that you may be "rankingsgod" in disguise, trying to cause some trouble here. Those types of "dramatics" are not welcomed here.

I also have no interest in arguing with someone regarding which is a "better school", because the fit and culture is more important than any discussions on rankings and strength. Chicago was ranked below Haas a few times on US News, generally a good indicator of "general reputatin" only 5-6 years ago. It may have bumped up because of its strong efforts to improve many programs and the great facility, but that does not mean it's solidly in this "Top 5" that you speak of. People obsessed with believing that the "Top 5" (which is subjective to begin with) is "leagues above and beyond" any other Elite school will only miss out on the complete picture when it comes to school selection.

I also honestly do not believe that Chicago and Kellogg are any more above the Haas/Tuck schools than HBS/Stanford is above the Chicago schools. Just like you, I've been talking to recruiters and alums at companies in the tech industry for general management, strategy, and product management type jobs, and they pretty much said that they don't really see any difference between Haas and any of the UE schools, especially the Chicago ones. The only time they mentioned a difference is with the top level strategy jobs in some bigger companies, they prefer Harvard and Stanford, over ANY other schools. That is why I have mentioned the comments I mentioned.

In the PE field, my MBA friends who are trying to get into those have definitely said the brand name of HBS/Stanford makes it easier to get into than any other school, UE or not. And after attending Haas' admit weekend this weekend, I honestly believe the quality of education and the level of professors at ANY of the top 10 schools, yes, ANY of the TOP 10, are pretty much the same. You won't get a "better" education at Stanford than at Haas, or at Wharton than at Chicago, etc... In the end it's all about the students and the field you want to get into.

Finally, I do not consider this a "healthy debate" when you claim that people who disagree with you are crazy or uninformed. Using phrases I've bolded above ("way off mark", "badly misjudged", and "let's not get ridiculous") do not lead to a friendly discussion, especially when the differences between the top schools are so razor thin. We've all done our homework here, and our views can be colored slightly by whom we talk to, but to imply that your research is definitive compared to others is simply arrogant and irresponsible.

Listen, you've failed to make any competent, accurate, or interesting statements in your needlessly long post, so where do I begin? How about with the observation that you seem ill-equipped to handle the pressures of business school and beyond, considering you can't even critically and faithfully examine the argument of someone on an internet board. I think one ranking we can all be sure of is that your ability to exaggerate and misread are world class

I can just see HBS, Chicago, and MIT bemoaning the fact that "kryzak" didn't give them the time of day

I'll stop there, as far as dressing you down, although I could go on...it just seems too easy.

Seriously though...underneath that panicked, anxious response of yours, I sensed someone who is reaching out for guidance. I certainly hope you get it.

was that sort of sarcasm really necessary?

Take this as you will, but that was absolutely not sarcastic (I assume you meant my last line)...that was genuine.

Good, then your lack of respect is even worse than I thought.

Posts like this always sadden me - especially when they come from a GSB student. There was really no reason to make this personal, and in all honesty, odds are all you've likely achieved is propagating the myth that the GSB is antisocial.

Bweek is filled with arguments like this, and that is why I spend my time here instead of there.

Artshep, lose the personal attacks. Kryzak has contributed immensely to this forum, I think questioning his research or knowledge is a lost cause. The quality of discussion on this forum as opposed to others is what we all enjoy, let's please keep it that way.

Just my two cents.

~Sam

Rhyme you probably shouldnt have pointed out he is a classmate of yours.

riverripper, rhyme, or kryzak, I believe that with all the other discussion taking place on this thread, the usefulness of this link may get overlooked:

https://www.usc.edu/schools/sppd/private ... arison.pdf

I think something like this may have a place in the knowledge vault, or another relevant place that it could be bookmarked. As a prospective MBA student interested in real estate, I found the breakdown of top real estate programs as a great resource after researching, applying, and doing all my due diligence on top MBA programs.

If I were starting the application process all over again, I would probably have applied to these 4 programs rather than 5 traditional MBA programs and the one real estate focused program that I did apply to.

When I first started visiting this board, I connected with several people who were interested in real estate, but no one knew of or mentioned the real estate specific programs. I think providing this link to future MBA applicants interested in real estate could be a great resource for those people. This thread will most likely eventually get buried and then next year's applicants will have to start the search all over again.

Since I have been accepted at both the Johnson School and the Program in Real Estate at Cornell, I have had a number of conversations with current students and faculty in both programs. The clear consensus is that the best industry connections come from the real estate specific programs, and that there is also a growing preference among employers to recruit from the real estate specific programs because of the preference and loyalty it shows to the industry.

If any of you can look it over and tell me if you think it's worthy of being added to the collective knowledge, I'd appreciate it. I know it would have saved me a lot of time.

Hi Paul, thank you for the link. I will put your post and the link in the Knowledge Vault, as I think it will be VERY useful for future applicants interested in Real Estate. If people want to brave the thread, they can do so at their own risk.

Kind of wish there was a comprehensive comparison with other schools too (instead of just USC, Columbia, MIT, and Cornell, all great schools in themselves)

Kudos to you!

I do post here and Bweek as well and can definitely tell the difference. I don't mind a healthy argument because it usually helps me to strengthen my position or see the errors in my logic. I do however think we should only attack each others argument and not the person behind them. I don't agree with all of artshep's views but understand that there are many other with his view so I try to understand why they have them.

Paulk,

Thanks for the link and steering the discussion back on course. I'm really looking for detailed information pertaining to real estate and I don't want to derail the thread as there aren't many places to find this information.

You mentioned that if you could do it over that you would apply to the MRED programs instead of the MBA programs. Would the same hold true for some of the MBA programs that have a respected following in real estate. For example I agree that Cornell's real estate program would be better than say an MBA from Yale, but do you think it's better than an MBA from Wharton. Or looking at Columbia's MRED program, it is only one year. If you go to their MBA program you'll be able to take advantage of most of the opportunites the MRED program has (classes, forums, etc.) as well as all the resources of the MBA program. So in my view their MBA program would allow you access to network with two MRED classes (which are smaller). I get the feeling that the their MRED program is more for people with more experience in the real estate field. For example Cornell recommends the joint degree program stating it is "Ideal for students with less real estate work experience". Cornell is also the only school on that list whose program is two years. Do you think one year will be enough time for a career switcher to effectively make that transition?

artshep,

I'm confused that you say HBS shouldn't be on my list but then say you know many people who get great positions from HBS. My understanding is that while the education can provide you a foundation to build upon, most of it is theory and you learn more industry specific means and methods on the job. So the education is more a vehicle to get me to the position. Are you telling me if I liked and were accepted to HBS and Columbia I should bypass HBS because they have less of a real estate infrastructure? Looking at the management team of many of my prosepective companies reveals a decent amount of HBS grads.

What companies do you know specifically recruit at what schools. Outside of Wharton and Columbia I can't really seem to find any of this information.

I'm currently reaseaching companies like JLL, Tishman Speyer, Hines, Blackstone and Trammell. What other key companies should I be taking a look at? I like that most of these programs have some sort of structured program to recruit and develop MBA's.

Paulk,
Have you found specific companies that are continually recruiting and have development plans for MRED's.

Examples:

Tishman Speyer
Tishman Speyer has a unique program for MBAs. The Leadership Development Program is designed to identify and train future leaders for the company. Through intense, interdisciplinary training, associates are given the experience and skills to understand the fundamental issues across the different aspects of the business.

Full-time associates gain this experience through a series of assignments within our various functions and regions, increasing in responsibility and scope as the rotations progress. After approximately 12-18 months based in New York or London, we expect that associates will be ready to focus on a specific aspect of our business. It is our hope that at least some of these final placements are outside of New York and London as we look to grow our business geographically.

Trammell
We offer two positions to qualified MBA candidates:

As Development Project Associate you will coordinate new and existing projects from initial planning stages to procurement of construction, reviewing bids and contract negotiation, or

Oversee all aspects of financial modeling/underwriting of prospective investments while working with the Development Manager on projects as a Development Business Associate.

I just don't seem to find lanquage like these from these companies that address MRED programs which leads me to believe the programs are less structured and rely heavily on personal contacts to get you where you want to go.

Well, you're talking to some great companies. Some of them are development-focused (Tishman, Hines) while others are full-service (JLL) or PE-focused (Blackstone). I would investigate what specific area of real estate you would like to be in and clarify that for yourself first. Now, with that said, definitely keep your options open. RE is very tough to break into, so even though you might want to work only in development, don't limit your interviews to just those companies. Make it a volume game as much as you can.

My objection to putting HBS on your list is just that it is not known for having any sort of real estate infrastructure in place (as opposed to, say, Wharton). Of course, many folks leverage the HBS brand to get great positions in the RE industry. So there is a distinction between schools that will give you a chance to get a job in RE based on their overall quality and reputation, and schools that actually have a program and infrastructure focused on landing students in the industry. HBS is of the former group.

I'm not as focused on RE as I once was, but hopefully that's helpful.