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

His argument is simply trite. I can provide a bit more insight into what startups actually would look for (I work in a tech startup and often times work on projects in leading VC firms in the Bay Area)

Granted, bschools will not teach you technical skills (e.g. script writing and programming) relevant in the tech startup field. Unless bschools quickly adapt its curriculum, students going forward will just need to be dynamic and adapt to the demand of future employers. The founders at the company, a pretty successful "brand-name" startup, I am at still highly value a bschool education, since essentially it is a filtering process to source candidates who are eager to prove his/her mettle. A better argument would be that bschool students must stay ahead of curb and anticipate demand in skills, and not just assume 2 years at school is all that would be required to get that sweet high paying job.

Case in point: I came into my current with only a quant finance background, mainly from bulge m&a, and I realized that I would need to at least understand data and programming architecture in order to fully grasp the firm's business model. I took free online courses on postgresql, python, and C++ and, bam, I'm back in the game. Although I'll never be as skilled as CS majors, having a grasp of technical skills played a key role in my success at my current position.

Overall, this article is poorly written, cites irrelevant and wrong "facts," and takes far too many illogical assumptions.

Let's all assume his quant score far outweighed is verbal score...

Well, good thing he's a Wharton alum instead of an HBS alum (although he's likely a Wharton alum because he got rejected by HBS), otherwise he might be writing "If you can't get into HBS/Stanford don't even bother!"

Give it time. You will.

Here you go:

https://poetsandquants.com/2012/02/24/ha ... expansion/

They're looking at building a new $50 million building that would allow the program to expand to 300 FT students.

An AWA-6 quality analysis indeed.

I don't think this article shows the multiple advantages and disadvantages of an MBA.

First, whether or not someone needs the MBA depends greatly on the situation of the person. Are they making a career change? (you can't easily change functions without an MBA); did they go to an elite university? (part of the advantage of an MBA is the network - if someone doesn't have that from undergraduate they may need it from grad school); do they want to kick off their career in a job that does require an MBA? (e.g. finance, consulting, brand management?)

Second, let's talk about startups:
--1) Many of the jobs that don't "require" MBAs do require the skills that one gains from working at a top company that requires an MBA. If you look at a lot of successful startups you will find that there are many ex consultants and bankers. Many of the jobs - particularly those at the top - respect the learnings one gets at a place like McKinsey (which requires an MBA past the analyst level). Find a job description at a startup that sounds interesting to you and look at the profile requirements.
--2) Startups don't pay much - employees make money from the equity IF it pans out (and many don't) so having a good chunk of change in the bank is often a prerequisite to working at a startup- especially if one is supporting a family
--3) An MBA can often help someone kick-start their company. Many programs have programs to enable one to start their company during school with funding and support - which often increases the chance of success
--4) Personally I have never heard of people "hiding" the fact that they have an MBA. Yes - at anyplace (startup or corporate) some people will have a chip on their shoulder but they are the ones with the issue - not a good reason to skip the MBA. Also - nobody runs around "talking" about their MBA. You talk about it in the interview and that's it. I don't recommend bragging about anything - it doesn't make for good relationship building

Third, let's talk about the network
--1) One of the biggest advantages of the MBA is the network you build (within your class and by virtue of having gone to the school). I graduated in 2006 and most of my jobs since then have been acquired by talking to an alumnus (in my year or not). Almost anyone who went to CBS (not on his list) will pick up the phone for a quick conversation about a potential job. Want to start a company? Your biggest source of help and potentially funding comes from this network.

Fourth, let's talk about rankings:
1) While I do agree that the value of an MBA declines with the rank - I think it's a bit harsh to say there is no point unless you go to a top five school (I would also question his choice of top 5; I personally turned down Kellogg for Columbia as I thought the latter was a better fit for me). In fact the schools don't even define a top five - they refer to the "top" as the M7.
2) While I do agree that for some people it is better not to go unless they get into a top school (though I usually recommend top ten) it is situation dependent. There are many reasons for getting an MBA and many companies like MBAs from different schools (want to live in Texas? I would highly recommend a McCombs MBA - the network is amazing!).

In short, I think it is a bit short-sighted to state there is no need for an MBA - and that it is only worthwhile from five specific schools. I don't think the MBA is for everyone. I often discourage potential Clients from applying to safety schools - but like most things in life it is important to discuss in context.

If you are considering an MBA and don't know if it is right for you, I offer free consultations and am happy to discuss your specific situation. pamela@jaffeadvantage.com

+1. I was thinking the same thing. How can someone go to Wharton and cite one (horribly misconstrued) fact about Stanford's employment rate in an article making a sweeping statement about ALL MBA PROGRAMS EVER! Maybe this guy should go back to school.

If people like him are on the adcom, it's no wonder I've never had any interest in applying to Wharton. What a nice job he's done at showing the kind of people Wharton admits.

+1

Wharton was the top 10 school I discarded the earliest in my research process (mostly based on what some friends who did their undergrad there told me about the MBA students)

my brain hurts

Your V47 is well deserved .

very interesting article, thanks for sharing.

Since he's so focused on startups, I'm also curious why he seems to think 3 East Coast schools and a Chicagoland school would be the best choice. The vast majority of VC money is in the Bay Area. So, Stanford makes sense, but Haas isn't worth it?

To another point, if you want to get hired in the first round at a startup, business school might not be the best idea, no matter where you go. At that point, startups are usually looking for people who can put their product together, not provide business oversight. However, if you're looking to found a startup, a good business school is key. I don't know many other ways to get introduced to the VC industry and make connections with people at VC firms. They're not going to respond to an emailed pitch deck.

I'm sure Wharton is a fine school, but I've run in to more than enough of these kind of Wharton alums to know it isn't the place for me. This is probably why schools stress fit so much in the admissions process. I'd go postal if I had to deal with more than one of his type on a class project.

Mr Jay bhatti... Seriously?

I must thank you for at least including MIT/Kellog to the list. An egoistic, chauvinistic dud that you appear to be, you could have very well stopped at HSW.
But then again... seriously?

When I was reading this article I had a feeling that the author can not a graduate from Wharton. There are plenty of flaws in his argument. He might sound right in the sence that it is worth doing an MBA with a top business school, but when I saw his top 5 schools list (which by the way does not include Booth or Columbia in the US), I though he can't be serious. Moreover, if someone want's to work in Europe, it would be far better to go to top European business school, right? such as LBS or Insead.

I genuinely believe that the value of MBA is not limited to short-term outcomes, it has much more value in the long-term horizon.

At the HBS roadshow I met a local alum who said literally during his public speech - If you can't get into HBS you shouldn't go anywhere - quite arrogant but not a rare idea among alumni. Nevertheless, the point is that the top schools can give you resources which you can't get at lower ranking schools and probably at some point TOP 5, 10,20... (for every person this point is different) there is no reason to go to the business school at all and you better try other things saving your money, time and energy. At least I got that article in that way even though it has some flaws.

There's nothing you can get at Harvard that you can't get at Stanford. Yes, the worth of an MBA starts to drop rather significantly as you go down the rankings, but saying there are only 5 schools you should go to for all careers is beyond ridiculous. If you want to go in to IB, why leave off Booth? If you want to get in to tech, Kellogg and to a lesser extent Wharton and Harvard wouldn't really even be on my list. Haas certainly would be though.

There are a finite number of top schools that are "worth it" depending on what your goals are, but there certainly is not a list of 5 that everyone should go to.