<p>i couldn't agree more. People don't want to believe this but in most cases it is true. Your work ethic is mostly what matters. Picture this scenario: A person with a Harvard Degree and a person from a no name state school both have the same job for the same company. The no name state person produces a lot, makes the company a lot of money, and is generally a hard worker. The Harvard grad doesn't produce and just get's by. Now the company is going through some rough times and they have to cut some workers. Who do you think is going to get laid off?
Sure you can argue that the Harvard degree may help you get those really rare selective jobs but do you think your boss cares about what degree you have when it's weeding out time?</p>
<p>
[quote]
One reason more Ivy League alumni aren't CEOs may be that many have traditionally chosen careers in investment banks and at big law firms, where they could earn big sums quickly and wouldn't have to start in entry-level management jobs.</p>
<p>"A lot of people who earn degrees from tier-one universities and business schools aren't willing to start at the bottom of a huge company" and spend years scaling layers of management and hoping to reach the top, says Richard Tedlow, a business historian at Harvard Business School.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>pretty much sums up why you don't see more Ivy grads ending up in a corporate corner office...</p>
<p>It's been obvious for years.</p>
<p>But it's "cool" going to an Ivy, and they're pretty, plus the professors are good and the classes WILL be on average more challenging than at the state uni. If you've got the cash and stats, why not. But for those of us middle class folk with mere 4.0s sans curing cancer, the news has always been good.</p>
<p>Ivy Leagues are still overrepresented among CEOs (probably even more if you look at where the business degrees came from instead of just undergraduate degrees). Not all CEOs are going to hail from Ivy League schools simply because 99% of the students out there don't go to Ivy League schools. </p>
<p>Yes, once you're in a company, your personal attributes are more important. But your college name and your college GPA are very important in getting that critical first job or internship.</p>
<p>I heard that the majority of CEOs are NOT from Ivies.</p>
<p>So.</p>
<p>Interested where we both got our stats from.</p>
<p>In any case, the statistic is screwed - those that attend Ivies must be smart to get in, therefore they will get good jobs on the merit of their intellect, not the name on their degree.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I heard that the majority of CEOs are NOT from Ivies.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>norcalguy said that they are OVERREPRESENTED - which is far different than being a "majority" ... think about it - the Ivies make up only 8 schools out of a sea of universities / colleges out there.</p>
<p>^May have edited my post before you responded.</p>
<p>Point is, a smart kid graduating from a state school is probably going to have the same shot due to the fact that the reason Ivy grads are overrepresented is due to the intellect, ambition, or in some cases connections that got them into an Ivy, NOT the name on their degree.</p>
<p>My boss (UNC - CH) is the manager of a huge project at a Wall Street firm. I can see why they selected her, she outclasses her peers, even those with Ivy League degrees.</p>
<p>I love seeing articles such as the WSJ story.</p>
<p>UNC-CH is a top school dwincho. This thread is bogus, the fact that Ivies + can make up even 5-10% of fortune 500 CEOs is tremendous, given the fact that they are .005% of 4-yr schools. They are 1000 times overrepresented.</p>
<p>The reason to go Ivy (by Ivy I mean a top school) is:</p>
<p>1) It opens your mind. From your classmates to the speakers to the expectations, you realize that there are much bigger things out there</p>
<p>2) Access: Top companies only recruit at the Ivies+, and these jobs lead to very influential jobs down the line.</p>
<p>From a Stanford grad on another board</p>
<p>Subject: OK, so I've been out in the real world a while now, and</p>
<p>The interesting truth is that absolutely nobody cares about which college you went to. The main reason is that, except for a few I-Banks and other super-elite companies, graduates of elite colleges are pretty few and far between. Even at big law firms, there are lots of lawyers who went to relatively unknown undergrad schools. </p>
<p>Which makes sense. Out of 4 1/2 million people who are 22 years old this year, less than 1 1/2 million of them are getting college degrees from any college. And only around 40,000, or 1% of the total people age 22, are getting degrees from the top 20 universities or the top 20 liberal arts colleges. Even if you extend that to the top 50 universities and the top 50 liberal arts colleges, that's what, 2 1/2% of all people that are 22 years old? If you're in the top 2 1/2%, that's pretty elite. </p>
<p>The result is that in the vast majority of environments, people who went to colleges in the top 20 or top 40 or top 50 will tend to recognize each other as kindred spirits of a kind. </p>
<p>I'm not saying you should skip going to an elite college. Rather, I'm saying that ten years from now it won't matter which you chose, because at that point you'll likely see them as all being pretty much the same. </p>
<p>Just my experience. Comments?</p>
<p>In my experience working in a school with interns from the elite schools: let's just put it this way, they are very well prepared, delightful young folks. But so are the interns from a little less prestigious schools. They are all pretty fantastic! I am ready to retire. :)</p>
<p>The overall point is at the "elite" firms and in the elite jobs people are overwhelmingly from the top 10-15 schools. Even in industry, the name recognition from an elite makes it so you are given instant credibility, credibility that's your to lose. Of course, 15-20 years out you've already proven yourself so its irrelevant.</p>
<p>great article!</p>
<p>
[quote]
Ivy Leagues are still overrepresented among CEOs (probably even more if you look at where the business degrees came from instead of just undergraduate degrees). Not all CEOs are going to hail from Ivy League schools simply because 99% of the students out there don't go to Ivy League schools.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>My father didnt go to an Ivy league school. He had the grades to get into UPenn, but he couldnt afford the tuition. He paid for his college education by himself.</p>
<p>Most CEOs I believe are from University of Wisconsin and University of Texas-Austin.</p>
<p>You have to remember that UW and UT undergrad are 4 times the size of the average Ivy. Also, counting CEOs isn't the perfect way to measure business success. If you look at the elite firms, of which most Ivy grads go to (the top banks, venture capital/ private equity, consulting) they are 80% run by people from the top 15 schools. And these people make more than most CEOs.</p>
<p>Barrons,</p>
<p>Great post (post#12), I agree with you.... I'm also a Stanford grad, and now a physician. The top 1-2.5% of which you refer are my peers and colleagues. They were undergrads at UCLA, UC Berkeley, Univ Michigan, Pomona, Williams, Amherst, Grinell, Harvard, Rice, Yale, Northwestern, etc. Although not the norm, there are also some graduates of SDSU, University of Nevada, Arizona State, and other less "elite" colleges. The real "genuises" aren’t necessarily from HYPSM, just as those with the best “bedside manner” aren’t necessarily from the more mainstream colleges.</p>
<p>The demographics you describe also explain why the undergraduate elite admissions process is such a "crapshoot.” For each admissions cycle, there are only 40,000 places available at the top 20 LAC’s and top 20 universities. Yet, each year, the top 5 to 10% of high school students vie for these positions. Can adcoms really distinguish between applications that represent students in the top 1% versus the top 2.5%? On individual variables such as SAT scores, or class rank it’s easier, but once they are evaluating the whole student and what each whole student will bring to the institution, the calculus changes. No wonder factors such as athletic and music ability, legacy status, personal connections, and underrepresented groups enter into the equation. Once all these variables come into play, who is accepted and who is rejected often seems arbitrary. </p>
<p>Having watched the college admissions process for several years from the vantage point of our local students, I wish more colleges and universities, high schools and guidance counselors, provided the raw facts of the admissions process. Then students and families could make more thoughtful, educated choices regarding where students apply, For instance, the number of freshman students attending HYPSM this fall is approximately 6,676, or 0.15% of the 18 year olds living in the United States! From my perspective it makes more sense for students to passionately pursue a group of schools that represent a good fit between the student and institution, and aren’t such a long shot. After those apps are completed, if the student desires, she/he can then spend some time and money on the HYPSM “lotto ticket” admissions.</p>