Duke Vs Darden

I'm not sure about the teaching methods at Duke, but I know Darden is famous for being 100% case with a very heavy workload, so that's something to consider as well.

duke

if you are looking to do finance, duke is heavily recruited

Depends upon what you want to do post-MBA. If Marketing is your focus, then Duke wins hands down.

I thought Darden wins for Finance?

Actually both Darden and Duke are good for Finance and GM (my focus). i also like duke because the health sector management program. I am not into marketing. Darden, in my opinion, is a little more regional for my taste. But I spoke with Dean Bruner and he is working hard to change that. Darden, as mentioned earlier, is also great for someone (read me) who like the case method.

I think they are pretty even for finance...the difference is marginal at best. Given the choice, I would choose mainly based on my impressions during campus visits. The other major factors to consider are location and the heavy case-based curriculum at Darden.

i can tell you that my firm (bulge ibank) strongly prefers duke... the assosiate class this year had 3x more duke MBAs than darden MBAs

(this is sales & trading... not IBD though)

after speaking to some of the associates... it seems that many great financial services leaders recruit at duke. i am sure darden is a great place, but i honestly think that duke has a stronger brand (maybe bc of very strong undergrad).

So you know for a fact that your firm picked Fuqua grads over Darden grads? That would be about the only thing that shows a strong preference.

I think pelihu posted on a similar topic last year, but I would personally be very surprised if, outside of marketing and healthcare, Duke opened any opportunities for new grads that Darden did not. Finance included.

This surprises me quite a lot.

Just got back from my Duke visit and I'll post more in that specific thread when I get some more time. However, Duke and Darden are on par for workload. Also, I don't think this is really out there because everyone thinks "Team Fuqua" when they think of Duke, but Fuqua is VERY HEAVY on the case method. Not 100%, but darn near close to HBS and Darden. So if one is saying to him/herself, "I'll choose Darden over Duke because I prefer case method" (or I hate case method, so I'll choose Duke), this should not be a deciding factor because the two schools are very similar in this regard.

OMG!! Now its my turn to be surprised........ I always had the perception (even after meeting the school representatives) that the workload is high but I thought that it was nowhere near Darden (maybe Darden goes a bit overboard about boasting about its workload)........
The heavy on case method part was also surprising......(Can't believe I ovrlooked this part in Duke)....... Maybe you can elaorate on that ry ???

Solaris, I can't tell you whether Darden MBAs were specifically dumped for Duke MBAs.

What I can tell you is that every bulge bracket bank has its own set of recruiting schools known as the core. About 95% of available seats get filled up by students from these schools. Duke is almost always part of this core (I've seen the recruiting process at several banks), while Darden isn't on every list that Duke is on.

Honestly, when it comes to recruiting in finance, it makes very little difference how good the classes are or the progress that the school has made. If you attend a school that has stronger relationships on Wall Street then many more doors are open for you.

Duke has been a strong name for years... Although Darden is highly regarded, it can't compete with the relationships that Duke has built over the years. After working in finance and going through the grueling recruiting process, I can tell you that putting Duke versus Darden is like putting H/S/W versus Ross.

My 80 or so person analyst class had 7-9 Duke grads while only 1-2 UVA grads. If this is the typical recruiting pattern that happens year after year then you can imagine the comparative magnitude of the network that Duke has built in finance over the years. Honestly, IMO, if you got in at Duke and Darden... I think you'd be crazy to go to Darden if you are trying to get into finance (all else equal).

Don't get me wrong, Darden is a great institution and it is tough to get into. I am not affiliated with Duke by any means, I just think Duke offers more opportunities in finance.

Good post +1

What does this have to do with associate recruiting? It is a completely different beast. I feel like you are mixing up associate and analyst recruiting a bit.

From what I know:

Analyst recruiting: Duke > UVA
Associate recruiting: Darden > Duke

Additionally, even for Analyst recruiting, UVA has an undergraduate business program. Duke does not. This makes it a difficult comparison.

Actually I did know that several classes at Duke used the case-method. but i dint know that it was closer HBS and Darden. This has been a good discussion. Glad that I started this thread. Now, waiting to be accepted by both the programs to start scratching my head to pick one of them.

Terp: one drives the other.

I understand that the analyst and associate recruiting are different beasts. But it is the same HR team/same school team that does recruiting for both analyst and associates (as an analyst I helped recruit associates).

My point was that stronger undergrad can have an impact on the MBA program's reach. If year by year Goldman recruited 10 more people from Duke than UVA out of undergrad, then over the years Goldman will be filled with many more Dukies. That means Goldman will have a ton more support for Duke.. Don't forget that the Duke undergrads who stay with the firm will drive recruiting and build the Duke brand name within the firm.

That is a good point. However, the caliber of kids at Fuqua is very different from the caliber of kids at Duke undergrad. The same thing can be said for many business schools and their respective students.