kingfalcon wrote:
Alright, I've been holding off on replying to this until I had sufficient time. As you may know, I will be matriculating at Sloan and was invited to interview at Booth (and withdrew), so I feel like I have a decent grasp of some of the unique attributes of each school. Rather than list some pros and cons, I'll try to point out things that make the schools different so you can focus on the differentiators when you make your decision.
Curriculum: Booth has a truly flexible curriculum (no core) whereas Sloan has a very flexibly curriculum (one semester core). Which do you prefer? Personally, I like the idea of having an ocean (cohort/cluster) and core team to get to know some people very well right off the bat. That said, lots of Boothies feel having no core is a distinct advantage, as it allows them to fully form their own social circles rather than being forced to "bond" with only the students in your cohort/cluster.
Class Size: Booth's class size is roughly 550, whereas Sloan's is 400 (350 if you set aside LGO). Would you rather be part of a small program (likely a more close-knit community across the whole class) or a large program (more diversity in electives, students, and a larger alumni base in terms of absolute numbers)?
City: Would you rather live in Boston or Chicago for two years?
Brand: MIT is one of the best-known universities in the world. However, a lot of the name cachet comes from engineering and the sciences. Think about it this way: when you tell someone you went to MIT (or Booth), they will immediately assume some things about you. So, do you want to be associated with MIT (hard sciences, engineering, tech) or Chicago (brilliant finance minds)? Another thing to consider: what school are you more proud to tell people you got into?
Recruiting: PE is going to be very tough out of either school without pre-MBA PE experience. That said, Booth is more of a core finance school, so this is probably the biggest differentiation in favor of Booth. I'd reach out to folks pursuing PE from IB-only backgrounds at both schools and see what level of success they are having. You can get general management jobs from either school, so that's a wash.
Money: $40K is nothing to scoff at. I once read on here that money should be a tie-breaker, which I thought was really smart. If after doing more research into both schools, you feel like you'd be equally happy and would get the same job from either school, feel free to let the money enter into the equation.
As an aside, I'm not sure why you think the Sloan alumni presence in Asia is weak. I checked the last five employment reports for each school and here are the percentage of students going to Asia for both schools:
Sloan: 8.5% (c/o 2012), 9.9% (c/o 2011), 10.2% (c/o 2010), 5.7% (c/o 2009), 8.5% (c/o 2008)
Booth: 6.5% (c/o 2012), 7.2% (c/o 2011), 10.0% (c/o 2010), 9.6% (c/o 2009), 10.7% (c/o 2008)
I'd call the differences virtually statistically insignificant. More than that, I'd bet the percentage of students going to Asia is simply a function of the make-up of the class rather than the strength of either school's global reach.
kingfalcon, thank you very much for your thorough, insightful analysis.
I am slightly biased to MIT Sloan, because of the curriculum arrangement, diverse student body (different industries, high international student percentage act), and learning and living environment (most Sloan students can live in or near campus, whereas most Booth students need to live in downtown for the security issue), and the overall brand. But I also asked myself: would these factors be more valuable than $40,000? It is a tough decision.
Anyway, thanks a lot.
Updated on: 17 Apr 2013, 05:38
close
