Using MBA Rankings- for ultimate selection

Foster has done upgrades and improvements to the program but it definitely does not hurt to be in one of the hardest job markets in the country. If that’s because Foster so amazing or because they are in Seattle, does it really matter?

I know we had a 2nd year student on gmat club last year and she was pretty happy with the program. I am not sure we have anyone top of my head right now.

What parameters are you primarily comparing? What would you be open to hearing about? What would make you change your mind? Just don’t say recounting the votes

Posted from my mobile device

If that’s because Foster so amazing or because they are in Seattle, does it really matter?
Yes, a school should be popular regardless of its location. For example, if Stanford were in San Diego, we'd not see any change in its reputation. If a school is majorly dependent on location, it is a unilateral school with dominance in one region but a global school would be significantly better in terms of network when you're looking. (I know they attract talent from all around but let's get to that point in a bit)

The parameters that I am comparing are including but not limited to- Integrated program, diversity of industries (the actual diversity not the jobber jabber that happens for getting endowment- I know got a little carried away there ), placement statistics and industry distribution. Foster fails miserably in the balance. It places predominantly in tech, about 55-60% people only go TO tECH. Then the integrated program- agreed that not all programs are integrated but the B-school knowledge is mostly at the intersection of Engineering, Law, Liberal Arts, Public Policy, and many more other schools. Foster doesn't have an option to let people take courses from it's other beautifully set up schools in University of Washington (I literally asked them if they allow students to take courses in Real Estate school- Answer was a No). Tech placements make its network more narrowed down- more like a Tech MBA than a real general management MBA.

Class Size is another thing that irritates me the most about this school. In my personal opinion, HBS, has a class of 900+ and maintains a great balance, in terms of true diversity, GMAT, etc. Same goes for most schools in the top 10 (excl. Haas, Stanford). Now if you see the class size of Georgetown for instance (250+), they maintain a better balance and the GMAT but Foster fails to Foster that many with a class of 115. I think that this is just to draw figures up to maintain a few statistically important components in most rankings. If we factor in the class size in most rankings given that the larger more balanced alumni network is essential, most of these schools will fall in Rankings.

What would you be open to hearing about?
I think if they were integrated, more balanced, and had a much larger and global student network, they would benefit more than a localised network.
I come from India and I see people moving to Pune for tech jobs because it is a prominent place, trust me this will all fall apart once they won't be able to sustain such a surge of population. Mumbai is more like a literal trash places with the highest population density, so many issues. (Something similar happens when you have a very local network- you are closed to possibilities)


I think the University is beautiful, but lacks panache. Georgetown can literally hand it to them (and historically has) when it comes to more important things. Yet Foster sits on #20. Quite frankly, I see it as more of a top 30 school along with other localised schools as Scheller, ASU, Tepper, MSU etc.

Also, if all these schools can introduce true diversity (diversity of industries and backgrounds) then also they can create value but they need to revamp a lot. And I mean a lot.

Recounting the votes
You crack me up. Literally love the sass. Truth be told if I were your classmate we'd be best friends. Literally love arguing about stuff that has nothing to do with our individual self. bb

Oh I take the integrated thing back. Last year when I called them up they said they don't offer the credits for other schools.
Turns out now they do.

Other things still the same.

There is a number of perspectives. Some people go to business schools to get a job and they don’t really care so much about learning. Some people go to business school to learn and they seem to be completely oblivious about the ultimate goal of job searching. Things usually tend to work out for both groups but there is a balance.

It is very common for the first year students to be very eager and to be involved in everything. They join many clubs, they take many classes, and they bid for the best classes and do all these things to learn. Then recruiting comes and they realize that most employers really don’t care that they are taking an extra statistics class or a part of the women in business club.

Then the pendulum swings the other way and mini second year students, especially those who already have a job offer, are just killing time. Many are able to use it to their advantage but with their dream job already in the bag, what is the purpose of taking more statistics classes or killing yourself? They also realize that this will be the last time they will be able to travel and tend to take time off. Once you get the job after the business school, you have to start paying off the loans, you have a mortgage payment, family, all the responsibilities that will not end until a very long time.

The MBA program is only as good as the students it attracts.

Posted from my mobile device

That is true bb

So it is a No to Wharton then
Kiddin!

I think after a long long time I might send you a message for advice.

OHH......... I just started my second social venture.

I just felt like I should contribute to this discussion from my own perspective.
Brief background: I am from India and was working as a management consultant in a Big4 before my MBA.
While deciding to join a business school, especially this year, it all finally boiled down to the ROI and culture. It was a tough decision, but I am glad that I chose Foster. Let's assume that I had joined an XYZ Univ with 200+ students. I'm glad that I wouldn't be at a corporate social gathering 5 years from now looking at a person in shock when they say that they too are from XYZ Univ Class of 22, not being able to put a name to their face, as we met only on Zoom and they were off the video the entire time. Instead, I'd be the one introducing that person as my Foster colleague in that gathering as they definitely would have worked with me on a project/case (110 students, 20 teams, 2 years, teams change every quarter - do the math), and that makes me happy. About the inclination of post-MBA career records towards tech firms, well, I don't think that Foster is to blame that it's in the technologically-inclined West coast instead of a more finance-and-consulting-inclined East coast. I also won't blame Foster to construct a campus that happens to be next to the headquarters of tech giants which are renowned for attracting MBA talent and find it easier to hire them locally, especially for a lot of their non-tech leadership roles.
For me, a B-School that provides enough stability in making some stable career choices, stable learning, and stable connections, without disrupting my financial stability, is stable enough to join.
Since there are other colleges in the discussion which I didn't choose to apply to, I don't find myself suitable to comment on the comparison. However, by actually experiencing what Foster is all about so far, I would take full liberty to say that it does indeed deserve a high ranking. At the end of the day, an institution is made by its people, not by how individuals rank it according to their assumptions. At least that's what helped me in deciding to join Foster (interactions with first-year and second-year students, attending a Finance lecture, talking to the career management advisors).
So continuing the hypotheses, maybe the reason why Foster ranked high was that when the authority who ranks these universities interviewed Foster vs XYZ Univ, the Foster people were more humble in their choice of words.
Ending my contribution to this discussion by this (now) popular quote: An MBA program is only as good as the people it attracts.

I just read employment report of Stanford- Balanced placement despite tech heavy west coast

I do still think that Foster MBA is more like a Tech one and even very heavy tech focused. It is the school's network that makes it valuable in the end. I know that this knowing people thing is a great thing about a small class size, but just give these schools an incentive to admit more, they'll flood the seats.
As my family owns a group of colleges, I know full well, the motivations of people who are in the industry.

The beauty of not knowing someone- I remember I used to go to a coaching for IIT-JEE (Hardest engg entrance exam). I actually met the person who used to go theere too later but we became great friends and the common ground started from the coaching. Also, people who knew me back then had similar motivations and kind of were very cut throat when it came to competition. So they most likely lost my respect.

Your biggest nemesis will always be someone you know but truth be told HBS is damn good at maintaining the talent and class size, I will give them that. 900+ students all with a substantial profile and intellect.

There is also a theory of broader network. A linear network is said to be less productive than a branched one in Entrepreneurship. Business lies at the intersection of several industries and that is the beauty that made me apply to Business schools (Consulting again is very beautiful for the same reasons- the travel and the imbalance throws it off the charts though)

No offence to the Tech heavy schools like Tepper, Foster, etc. I just personally want a cross industry network. Again there is a selfish thing in that. People across the industries will rather collaborate than compete for a short term goal of club leadership. And the branching out opens up doors across the industries. And certainly that kind of a network has an advantage over the linear ones. (It is more of an Entrepreneur's opinion but I am open to other's perspective too) I know a Real Estate guy who had a profile good enough to get into Foster, but I know Foster has a smaller network hence shied away from admitting him. Funny though he got into McCombs, UNC, Cornell because all three have the Real Estate center network etc. So even during the selection there is this small thing of can we get them there? that can be removed if they branch out more.