I have a question that has been stressing me a lot. The basic question is: at what point does a Stern part-time MBA outrank a full-time MBA, in terms of being a better option. For example, I do believe that going below the top 20 full-time b-schools I will be better off with Stern part-time (living in NY that is). Now, I know there are a lot of factors in this question, but I am wondering if everyone could review the ones that I lay out and let me know of their perspective. Since this forum has a lot of knowledgeable members who are also very encouraging (which is rare to find in business school)
. Also, what is the general opinion on this matter?
My major predicament is, if it’s worth it for me to pursue applying for a full-time MBA where my chances are slim in getting into top ten schools, and still not guaranteed for the top 15. So do I draw the line and say, if I don’t think I can get into say Cornell/Duke, then I might as well do Stern Part-time where I have a good chance of getting in. I would prefer not to waste a year applying, find out I don’t get into the schools that I like, and then decide to apply for Stern part-time the next semester. Or does Full-Time MBA always trump anything part-time. I mean there has to be a point at the full-time rankings where the #1 part-time school outranks it.
Below is a list of factors that I am taking into account for this decision:
1) The first question would be, what schools am I considering applying to:
Target SchoolsPreferred:NYU
Columbia
Safeties or better word Mid-Range:Cornell
Duke
What other safeties do I add? Ross, CMU, University of Virginia
Stretch (for fun)MIT
Northwestern
2) Credentials: The next question is why I think I can’t get into my preferred or top mid-range schools. Well here is my bio:
I am 25 years old (American-born/Indian Nationality), and been working at a large financial services firm/IB (i.e. Morgan Stanley, Citi, JP Morgan, Merrill) for 3 years as a Business Systems Analyst in technology division. After working for 2 years I was promoted to associate. I have coordinated a cross-functional team for a system conversion with a market value of $14 billion. I was then asked to join a top-notch global project, a huge initiative by the CIO of my division, which will greatly improve investment systems.
My GMAT score is a 700, but the first time I took it I got a 590. I have seen from many places that only your higher score counts.
My GPA is a low 2.9, but for a degree in Computer Science from Polytechnic University (Brooklyn, NY). I have also heard that schools take into account the difficulty of your school and major when looking at GPAs. So obviously, a CS degree from a difficult engineering school weighs more than a liberal arts degree from a general school.
However, I believe due to my competitive demographic (Indian), location (NY) and a tough 2009 admissions year; I don’t have a great chance.
The next list of factors, are general questions I need to ask when considering full-time versus part-time.
3) Career Placement/Transition
This is probably the biggest advantage of a full-time MBA. The ability to take an internship from a large company and then get a full-time position. Now, I am doing technology work in a big financial services firm. So If I do want to pursue a career transition, it will greatly beneficial to pursue full-time. However, I am not sure if I would like to change my career or not. I prefer to start school and see how I like finance and then make my decision. Also, I think the full-time advantage (correct me if I’m wrong) is only worth wile for students who get that big I-banking, sales trading or consulting job. However, I am not sure if I will even be able to score that, (I think I would only prefer sales/trading). So, what happens to the rest of the students, with the non top-notch jobs? Do those jobs/companies really require the full-time placement? Or for those jobs, can you do a mild-transition from a top part-time program.
4) Financials:
Now my company will only sponsor a very small amount, so it’s not like it’s a free ride for me. However, obviously, I will get to keep my job and that salary will be very helpful. My salary going in will be much higher than the average pre-MBA salary (this year it’s 80K, my 2009 when I would start a full-time MBA it should be like 88K), and in fact, just based on base salary, my salary should be the same in 2 years as the average starting salary of a top 15 school. Bonuses will not be as close, (only around 15-25K). This is obviously assuming my rate goes up as has done in the past. However, being in technology, my salary is expected to top off at a certain point. While with financial roles, salaries are expected to grow a lot faster, and to a much higher amount. The other financial conditions aren’t a major concern for me; at this point I don’t have a mortgage or huge bills to pay. But I am planning on getting married within 1-2 years, and don’t know If I should risk giving up such a good job. I have to consider what type of job I will get graduating from a mid-range school.
5) Experience:
The experience of a full-time MBA is the one factor that cannot be replaced by part-time. Students at part-time, rush to their classes after work, and then rush home after class. (at least that’s what I have heard about Stern’s part-time) They go to some networking events, but miss most of the seminars and speeches that are during the day. However, as a full-time student, your entire day is dedicated to school. You also get to spend a lot more time with your peers and build stronger networks. This is a once in a life-time experience, after that its work for the rest of your life
. However, are those two years (noting that it might be from a non top school ) worth more than giving up your salary, leaving the girlfriend, friends, and family?
6) Location
I am a complete New Yorker, and would love to stay here. I don’t mind going away to school for 2 years, but will come back to work here anyway. So being that is it safer to go to a Stern part-time which is in the heart of NY or take my chances in a different state, come back and get a job in NY.
7) Timing
If I pursue full-time, I would not start until the September 2009 semester. If I go for part-time I want to start September 2008 (applications are due may 15). So from both routes, I should finish by 2011, maybe a little bit later for part-time. However, if I don’t get into a decent full-time school, I will have to apply to stern part-time, for the semester after (Jan 2010) and take at least 3 years from that point.
The options boil down to:
1) Just go ahead and apply to full-time.
a. Best case I get into NYU/Columbia full-time, in which there is no question of part versus full, and I would probably curse myself for even wasting all this time worrying about what I should have done.
b. Or I get into schools like Cornell/Duke/Ross, and depending on the schools I have to make a decision at that point if I still want to do full-time. I mean in a year from now, I will have a better perspective of: do I want to change careers, how the schools I got into are with those careers, can I take 2 years off, etc.
i. But, if I decide to do part-time then, does it look bad to Stern that I already applied to the full-time program and am now
applying to part-time? I also wasted a year!
2) Go ahead and apply part-time, probably get in, see if I like Finance, and if I do, try to shift careers during my MBA.
My biggest fear is making the wrong decision and regretting it for the rest of my life. I appreciate everyone’s time reading this and I hope it wasn’t too boring and repetitive.
close
Updated on: 09 Feb 2008, 17:09
