<p>I'm eventually planning to get into a Top 5 MBA school My major will most likely be Math and CS, with an Associates in Business, and more 300-400 level undergrad Finance classes</p>
<p>What are good jobs I can get after undergrad that Top MBA schools will like? I know its all about how I progress in a job and move up, but in general what kind of jobs will provide the greatest chance. </p>
<p>Assuming graduating year 2011. </p>
<p>I've heard Consulting is a really good one. How good is Actuary? How about a general engineering job? What are other good ones? Can you guys think of jobs that I would have a good shot in getting based on my majors? (Current GPA 3.7)</p>
<p>I don't go to the greatest university in the world, but its a Top 50 so its decent.</p>
<p>Your best bet is probably to work for a start up that will allow you to use both your business and CS skills and rapidly grow through the company.</p>
<p>What will impress top programs is being promoted often and taking on increasing responsibility during the 3-5 or so years you work.</p>
<p>That would be hard in a typical engineering job and management consulting jobs are hard to get if you're not at a target.</p>
<p>How about Actuary? Do they have the same kind of respect as consultants? I know they make a lot, but don't actuaries also make a lot? Also it is heavy on quant and related with business.</p>
<p>You shouldn't be thinking about getting an MBA now. Instead, focus on your interests and get a job that you find interesting, challenging and fulfilling. The MBA adcoms really don't care what job you have as long as you show passion and nice job progression.</p>
<p>The problem with a lot of applicants is that they make the MBA their primary goal -- they have more conviction for an MBA than they do for their career goals (and oftentimes, they don't really know what their goals are). Folks are more preoccupied with an MBA than their actual career goals. It's your goals that matter. The MBA isn't an end game</p>
<p>If you become an actuary you probably won't leave. The cost/benefit analysis in leaving an actuary job for an MBA usually won't support the MBA. Unless you want a total career switch through an MBA of course, but then why become an actuary is the first place?</p>
<p>hmom, I don't know too much about actuaries, but from your response, many questions popped up</p>
<p>What's the difference between in Actuary and an engineer let's say for MBA Admissions?</p>
<p>1. You said "Unless you want a total career switch through an MBA, but then why become an actuary in the first place"</p>
<p>Doesn't that same thing apply to an engineer job? It's a total career switch as well. So I don't know why you brought that up specifically with actuaries and not engineers. Is there a reason?</p>
<p>2.</p>
<p>I understand MBA admission officers like Consultants more than Actuaries (Assuming same position level), but what would you say is the reason. I heard they do like heavy quantitative analysis and actuaries do work with the business world. Isn't that favorable too?</p>
<p>3.</p>
<p>Compared to engineers, would you say its easier for an actuary to move up the latter (assuming same size firm)? Is it easier to leave an impression for an MBA admission officer for an actuary rather than an engineer.</p>
<p>I heard if you can get a job at a major consulting firm, you're set, so is that kind of why Consulting is preferred over both actuaries and engineers?</p>
<p>hmom was indicating that the cost/benefit analysis for actuary is not in favor of getting an MBA for actuary; i.e. you'll earn to much to waste 2 years getting an MBA. Actuaries have thier own highly desired career paths, and don't need an MBA to make it to the top. I think comparing an engineer to an actuary, in anway, is flattering as an engineer, but it's like comparing apples to potato chips. I thought about becoming an actuary and then saw what they had to go through and decided to get my MBA and maybe my PE instead. That's how rigourous their training is. It is not a profession you fall into. If you want to be an actuary than be one, and forget about the MBA.</p>
<p>Working for a start-up will really test your stuff. I've worked for some very large brand name companies and am now in a start-up, I don't think I've been tested so hard before. Not only do my engineering skills need to be up to snuff but so does everything else, if I or one of my three collegues doesn't do it then it doesn't get done.</p>
<p>Consulting is also a good line of work to get into an MBA program.</p>
<p>Becoming a full fledged actuary requires a series of exams that have tested some of the most brilliant quants I know. Others can tell you more specifically, nut you study for and take exam after exam while working. It looks killer to me. </p>
<p>When you pass and complete all of the exams, you make a very good living. So going through all of that if this is not a career path you want seems silly.</p>
<p>I don't remember any actuaries in my Wharton class, perhaps others can comment as I went to school in the dark ages.</p>
<p>Hmm interesting. Though I supposed if an actuary did want an MBA, they would have a good chance (based on job experience) just because the MBA admission officers would know how hard they work.</p>
<p>I'm still a sophmore. I'm curious to know how people end up working for "start ups"</p>
<p>I mean, am I supposed to search for companies that have started up recently or are about to start up and pitch myself? How would I find start-up companies in the 1st place? </p>
<p>How is this usually done? </p>
<p>Sorry if this question is obvious, I've never really seen start up companies come and recruit anywhere.</p>
<p>
[quote]
What's the difference between in Actuary and an engineer let's say for MBA Admissions?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
I understand MBA admission officers like Consultants more than Actuaries (Assuming same position level), but what would you say is the reason. I heard they do like heavy quantitative analysis and actuaries do work with the business world. Isn't that favorable too?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
Compared to engineers, would you say its easier for an actuary to move up the latter (assuming same size firm)? Is it easier to leave an impression for an MBA admission officer for an actuary rather than an engineer.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>NBAFan , are you looking for a job for yourself or for MBA Admissions? It's ridiculous.</p>
<p>My son's colleague used to be an actuary. He worked several years then went for his MBA. He's working in PE now making tons more money but the pressure is enormous.</p>
<p>NBAFan20. Personally, I think planning your job around MBA is a bad strategy. Just go for a job that defines you, that will make you happy. Nothing is worse than working a job that you dread. Getting in a top 5 MBA school is not only difficult but takes a considerable amount of luck. Top b-schools doesn't want superficial candidates, they can see through that. The money won't be that good for MBA for awhile. The traditional jobs that boosted MBA salary (i-banking, PE, hedge fund) are going bankrupt. If money is the only thing that drives you to MBA, you can find a job that pays better without the degree.</p>
<p>Just to clarify a couple of things, what do you mean by “tested” and “quants”?</p>
<p>I presume that you mean by quants the (former) profession of ppl like Emanuel Derman and Paul Wilmott? I’m not implying that the ones you mention are necessarily of the same caliber as these two most famous quants, but I am aware that quants are all quite intelligent.</p>
<p>By “tested” do you mean challenged? I ask because as a verb “test” can mean slightly different things. </p>
<p>I would think that actuarial fellows have gone through a more extensive and rigorous training than quants with masters only (MFE etc.) but surely phd quants are above the fellows in terms of the depth of their education and training?</p>