rhyme wrote:
Setting aside whether they are a waste of your time (ie you learn nothing useful), I'd bias towards easier classes and higher grades. that doesnt mean you should take underwater basket weaving, but perhaps stats instead of regressions. Be sure to take what actually interests you though... you'll do poorly if you hate the material even if the class isn't that hard.
On the other hand, it's also true that the more rigorous courses you take, the easier it will be for you to get a good job post-graduation, and that obviously plays a part into how business school admissions committees see you.
I work in a highly analytical department for a Fortune 500 company, and I've done a lot of interviewing/hiring during my time here. I've seen a lot of candidates who had a 3.5+ undergrad GPA in economics or finance; I've seen very few candidates who have taken a course on econometrics or differential equations. Everything else being equal, I'd prefer the 2nd candidate over the 1st, because 1) my team frequently performs intense analytics that aren't covered by your standard calculus I/II, economics, or finance courses, and 2) taking and getting through tough courses shows that you like and can handle a challenge.
That said, I'd expect MBA admissions committees to weight undergrad GPA more than the 'quality' of your work experience. Just don't bias yourself
too far toward easy courses.