<p>
</p>
<p>And there it is again. Nobody, not least the article, has ever once claimed that “no one” cares about MIT or Brown. </p>
<p>What the article said is that recruiters in the target industry care less about MIT or Brown than about the other mentioned schools. </p>
<p>On the other hand, if your plan is to become a billionaire womanizing comic book superhero, or a one-night-stand of said hero, then you might care very much about MIT or Brown.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Uh, yes, I think it’s well understood that one of the most valuable takeaways from any top MBA program is access to the network. What use is that network if a significant chunk of the students don’t use it to obtain desired jobs?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And there it is again. I think that nobody will seriously support the contention that a HBS grad can’t land any job at all. They can surely land some job, just not perhaps the job that they wanted. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And by the same token, plenty of students attend college only to wind up with jobs that, frankly, don’t pay all that much than they could have earned right out of high school. I can think of a number of new college graduates who bitterly lamented that their post-college jobs did not pay much more than what they could have earned if they had just become full-time waitresses right out of high school, or heck, even having dropped out of high school.</p>
<p>I’ll say it before and I’ll say it again: the average college graduate makes a frankly rather unimpressive starting salary. And he spent 4 years in school to make that unimpressive salary. Whatever you may think about the Harvard MBA, surely we can all agree that it represents a better ROI than does the average bachelor’s degree, yet how many people are seriously advocating that people should no longer attend college? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Then let me put it to you this way. Why does the finance industry continue to hire undergrads with no finance training, but who happen to have degrees from top schools? A Harvard humanities undergrad is far more likely to land a finance position than will a finance undergrad from Idaho State University, even with extensive finance internship experience. </p>
<p>What you seem to be neglecting is the sheer elitism - whether we like it or not - of the finance recruiting process. I can think of quite a few people right off the top of my head who obtained finance positions right after their MBA with precisely zero finance experience…as long as their MBA’s were from Harvard or other top programs. Where I would agree with you is that it has become difficult to switch to the finance industry via an MBA from a no-name school. But we’re not talking about no-name MBA’s. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Is it? Like I said, the average undergrad program requires 4 years, compared to an MBA program requiring only 2. Even that 2 years is not completely lost as, presumably, one should be obtaining a relatively well-paid summer internship between the two years. {In contrast, let’s face it, most undergrads will not obtain high-paying summer work.} </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wrong. That undergrad could cheaply and quickly learn some software or IT skills. Or wait tables - a surprisingly well-paid job for the level of education required (that is to say, none). </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I hardly find that to be a convincing narrative. Surely we’ve all heard our parents say that if our friends jumped off a building, we shouldn’t do the same. Just because college may be a cultural norm within the country doesn’t mean that you should necessarily conform to that norm. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Which would only seem to make the payoff and desirability of the program even stronger. As you alluded to, there are plenty of undergrads who are not motivated and don’t even really understand why they’re even going to college at all. Through simple social osmosis, their attitude inevitably causes yours to degenerate, as when you see other unmotivated students, you tend to become unmotivated yourself. But MBA students actually want to be there. That is the type of network that you want to build to maximize your career success. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But we’re not talking about that. We’re talking about all undergrad programs, public or private. After all, I could have just as easily invoked the notion of cheap state MBA programs, especially ones in which you could study part-time and hence remain working (in which case the opportunity cost would be zero). </p>
<p>But that wouldn’t be a fair comparison, now would it? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But you know what’s even better than making $40-45k? Making a 6-figure packet coming out of HBS.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If 99% of your friends, relatives, etc attend a college and expect you to do the same, it is hard not to. I can’t think of a single person out of my high school who didn’t attend a college. There is a very negative social stigma attached to being that guy that ‘never attended a college’. Attending a college has become almost natural and expected for someone as say, attending a high school. But, MBA isn’t.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My central argument is: how much better off are these HBS grads, compared to pre-MBA? First, if you are a hot-shot banker or consultant, you probably don’t even need to attend MBA in the first place. You’d be better off just working, building job-related skills, networking on the job, etc. Yet, it seems like many people who land top jobs out of a top MBA program are those who were doing well for themselves pre-MBA anyway. (former bankers, consultants, etc) And, around a quarter of Harvard MBA’s didn’t land ONE JOB OFFER at the time of graduation. If you are of HBS caliber, chances are you are doing quite well for yourself at your work. You need to be making stellar impressions from your boss, have leadership potential acknowledged at work, and considered to be a strong member of your work in order to get into HBS. Like I said before, 5 years into workforce after college and leaving it for MBA is a risky proposition. That person could be learning job-related skills at work or on a track for a promotion. I am not suggesting that attending a top MBA is a losing proposition for all, but it may be so for quite a few. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What you seem not to consider is the fact that virtually no undergrad student has any finance experience, let alone a corporate experience. Therefore, these undergrads aren’t competing against other undergrads, who have that Goldman Sachs IBD analyst title on their resume. Large banks recruit undergrads for entry analysts positions, and all undergrad candidates are newbies. </p>
<p>A top MBA program… there are decent numbers of former IBankers, traders, consultants, etc. So, if a person is coming to Harvard MBA from a non-finance corporate background, he is fighting to make it to that BB FO Associate position against other handful former banking analysts at Harvard, who have obviously a leg up in recruiting process. In this economy, if you don’t have a strong finance background pre-MBA yet decide to attend a top MBA for the specific intent of landing a top banking position, well good luck with that. It probably is easier to break into finance out of Harvard undergrad than it is out of Harvard MBA, assuming that the person doesn’t have finance background.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What you are saying is true. However, not everyone attends a college with the specific intent of landing a top corporate job. I can think of numerous students, while deciding where to go to college, they were considering schools that were rated ‘best party school’, ‘best sports school’, ‘school with warm weather’, ‘school with hot girls’, etc. In America, there is a college for everyone. Even if you get 1.0 GPA and get below 1000 SAT, you can find a college that works for you.</p>
<p>For a top MBA, virtually everyone attends with the specific intent of significantly furthering their job prospects. And, chances are, if they attended a top MBA, they would expect to get a very high rate of return for their investments. They had good career going, five years into workforce after college, and were probably doing decently well. Giving those things up and investing 6 figure into school tuition and giving up two years of income at this point sound like a lot of things to lose for them. I bet those 25% of Harvard MBAs who failed to land a single job offer feel bitter about their choices to attend MBA. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think the MBA career statistics are misleading in that they may lead people to believe that attending a top MBA guarantees people an automatic 6-figure salary. People who land those jobs out of top MBA, foremost, had at least 5 years of corporate job experience. And, if you are a top MBA caliber, chances are you were a star at your work. You were probably doing quite well for yourself pre-MBA anyway. And, those who truly land top jobs, even out of top MBA, tend to be those who had top pre-MBA jobs to begin with. How much of an added value a MBA gives to anyone, I think, is very questionable.</p>
<p>Last semester, there was an event at my school in which numerous alums of my school came to talk to students about their careers in finance. There were people from Goldman, MS, JP, CS. I remember one guy (now a MD at BB) saying that a MBA, even a top one, is probably not worth it especially if you work in finance. You could be learning job-related skills, on a track to promotion, building networks in industry, etc. He said only way you may consider attending MBA is if your company pays all of tuition and living expenses. Even then, he said it was a toss up. Something to think about.</p>
<p>@sakky:
</p>
<p>Also, has anyone ever told you that you’re the worst buzz kill ever?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But that’s not what the article said as a whole, but rather what one interviewee said, which was clearly a matter of hyperbole. In fact, the article explicitly explained that recruiters do care about those schools, just perhaps not as much as the preferred ones. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And your invocation of social incentives also works both ways. Keep in mind, we’re not talking about any MBA program. We’re talking specifically about the Harvard MBA. Let’s be perfectly and bluntly honest: plenty (arguably most) people who attend Harvard Business School - or any other program at Harvard for that matter - do so at least partially for the social benefits, namely for the lifelong social prestige of saying that you went to Harvard. However irrational and short-sighted you may think that is, it doesn’t seem any worse than attending college just because your entire peer group does as well, yet we agree that that happens routinely. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And my counterargument to that has always been: how much better off is the typical college graduate, compared to how he was before college? Again, the typical college graduate doesn’t really get paid that well. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Uh, no, actually the opposite is (mostly) true. The vast majority of banking and consulting analyst jobs available right after college are understood to be active for only a few years at most, upon which you are expected to leave the firm to (usually) attend an MBA program. Now, granted, I agree, that a small percentage of such analysts will indeed be invited to stay and be promoted directly to the associate ranks and for that, I might agree that they could forgo the MBA entirely if you wish to remain in that industry (which many don’t). But the vast majority of consulting and banking analysts, including most of the better ones, will be forced to leave the firm. What are they supposed to do? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Again wrong. They didn’t land one job offer that they actually wanted. </p>
<p>After all, think about what you’re really saying. Are you truly contending that HBS MBA graduates right now are truly suffering from a 25% unemployment rate, when, for all of the current economic woes, the nationwide unemployment rate is still only 9-10%? In other words, having a Harvard MBA actually makes you more than twice as unemployable as a regular American? Really? Are you sure about that? If that’s what you truly believe, you’re probably all by yourself. </p>
<p>What seems to be far more logical is that those graduates didn’t find a job that they actually wanted, so they are going to continue looking. Obviously they could always get some job, as even 90% of the US labor force can find some job. The question is whether they can get a job that they actually want. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And again, I would argue that it’s probably more of a winning proposition than is a regular college degree. The same arguments you use regarding the Harvard MBA - that some students might be better off forgoing the program in favor of developing job-related skills and following a standard career ladder - is just as applicable to plenty of college students, in fact, probably more so. Like I said, many (probably most) college students will graduate with a low-paying humanities or soc science degree. They probably would have been better off learning plumbing or auto repair. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, I’m not sure about that. Like I alluded to above, I can think of plenty of people who would happily pay for the Harvard MBA even if they truly could obtain no job at all, just for the lifetime prestige of saying that they have a Harvard MBA. I don’t find that to be any more irrational than choosing a college because it has ‘the hottest girls’. </p>
<p>Let me give you a clear example. I happen to know a Harvard MBA graduate who leverages it as a way to meet women by casually dropping hints about his educational background. I believe the technical term for it is “Dropping the H-Bomb”. Whatever the merits - or ethics - of that dating strategy, I can’t deny that every weekend, he always seems to have a date with some of the most gorgeous women I’ve ever seen (and he’s short, overweight, and balding). If he ever feels bitter about his Harvard MBA, at least he can commiserate in the arms of women who would otherwise never give him the time of day. </p>
<p>For those readers who may find that behavior to be Machiavellian, I frankly don’t see that as being any more manipulative than guys driving luxury cars to attract women, yet that happens routinely and seems to work. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Are they really any more misleading than college salaries? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s hardly the case. I can think of quite a few Harvard MBA’s who took jobs at BB IB’s who had * 2 years or less* of pre-MBA experience. {Heck, one of them had precisely zero work experience, having been admitted right out of undergrad.} </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And, like I said, those “top pre-MBA jobs” were ones they were likely destined to lose. Consulting and IB’s typically hire analysts for only a few years, after which only a tiny percentage will be asked to stay. What should the rest of them do? It is understood that if they want to continue to remain in the industry, they will have to take a 2-year detour through an MBA program. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What you should have asked them is how is that advice applicable to the vast majority of analysts who are not invited to stay once their analyst tenure has expired? What exactly are they supposed to do? What you should have also asked them is exactly how are the vast majority of people who didn’t obtain a finance offer right after undergrad ever supposed to break into the field? In particular, what of those people who “misguidedly” chose to work as consultants right after undergrad but now want to become bankers - exactly how are they supposed to get in if not through an MBA program? </p>
<p>It seems to me that your panel of alumni speakers did not actually provide useful answers to the vast majority of interested parties, perhaps deliberately so. Sure, I agree that it’s nice to speculate about what you should do if you happen to be one of the tiny percentage of people who is sure they want a finance job, can land one right after undergrad, and is then invited to stay once their analyst position has expired. But what about the vast majority of people who don’t have that?</p>
<p>Holy crap you honestly deserve the award for longest posts on any forum I have ever seen.</p>
<p>All that Harvard education lol</p>
<p>^Sakky’s a beast.</p>
<p>yeah but I think Lazykid is attempting to take the crown from him. Rooting for Sakky though seems he has a more impressive record of long posts than lazykid</p>
<p>It’s a shame I actually had to go to college to realize how ridiculously shallow all of this bickering is about what the pecking order among colleges is from the perspective of employers.</p>
<p>Even if these claims had substantiation (that only candidates from the top ## colleges are even “worthwhile” candidates) - which I think that in reality they lack - they’re so far detached from the reality of the supermajority of college graduates and employment-seekers that it’s sickening.</p>