BusinessWeek's MBA rankings are out tonight

Graduate School Business School - MBA
21

<p>^That ranking looks much more accurate to me, although would maybe swap UC Berkeley and UChicago.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Having met dozens of students at Kellogg, Wharton, Chicago, NYU, Columbia, etc and sat in on several classes at each, I feel comfortable in saying there is no effing world in which Chicago is a better place to get an MBA than Wharton or Kellogg. In fact, I'm considering not even applying to Chicago because I was sufficiently unimpressed with the quality of students.</p>

<p>Are there any details released on the mechanics and formulae behind these rankings?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yeah, I would generally agree that the people I've known going to UChicago were a little more rough around the edges and had been rejected at Harvard, Wharton, Kellogg, Tuck, MIT. I don't think BW takes student profile, selectivity into accounty, or at least muck less so than USNWR.</p>

22

<p>
[quote]
Also, that website allows you to sort on various criteria. I did so based on salary alone. This is also far from perfect, but overall looks to be a better indication of how the schools should rank from a student's perspective:

[/quote]

You caveated that ranking by salary is far from perfect -- and you're right in the sense that certain schools tend to feed into certain industries and locations, which can skew the salaries somewhat. For example, Kellogg tends to send more grads into brand management positions, which are typically located in the Midwest. The combination of these two factors will drag down the average salaries. On the other hand, a school like Haas, which tends to send more grads into tech on the West Coast, will have a salary average skewed higher.</p>

23

<p>"The only people I have known who went to UMichigan B-school were rejected by MIT, Columbia, Dartmouth."</p>

<p>Gelino, I have known very few Ross MBAs who applied to Tuck. Tuck is definitely a niche program. Those who apply to it, really have it high on their list. Ross vs Columbia is tricky. Most people would pick Columbia over Ross for the location. In those two cases, I would not be surprised if you claim were true. However, the reasons for their choice is not based on quality of program, and I am fairly certain that Ross applicants do not typically apply to Columbia or Tuck. They are more likely to apply to Chicago and Kellogg. But to assume that the 100+ Ross MBA students entering the program each year with 750+ GMA scores and 3.8+ undergraduate were rejected by Columbia, Sloan and Tuck is riduculous. I personally never asked Ross MBAs what other programs they were admitted to, so I cannot honnestly say, but the admissions standards at most top 10 MBA programs are roughly the same.</p>

<p>"By what possible objective criteria are you basing this on?"</p>

<p>There is no objective criteria to prove this. Every ranking of MBA specialities I have seen has ranked the GM program at Ross among the top 3 or 4 in the country.</p>

<p>"Stanford, Harvard, Wharton have been regarded as the top three MBA schools for decades. BW putting Wharton at #4 and especially Stanford as #6 and Tuck at #12 destroys their credibility to me."</p>

<p>I hear you. I feel the same way about a ranking that places Ross at #11 in the country.</p>

<p>Finally, VectorWega, starting salaries are not an absolute measure of quality. You must take georgraphic and industry distribution into consideration. Clearly, Midwestern school are going to lag East and West coast programs because cost of living in the coasts is higher than in the midwest.</p>

24

<p>
[quote]
"By what possible objective criteria are you basing this on?"</p>

<p>There is no objective criteria to prove this. Every ranking of MBA specialities I have seen has ranked the GM program at Ross among the top 3 or 4 in the country.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, the real question is, how much does that really matter? Seriously. Even Rakesh Khurana of HBS has said that while HBS prides itself on its general management strength - HBS having been ranked #1 in GM for years now - the truth is, the vast vast majority of HBS students do not really want general management jobs. Instead, they want business service jobs such as consulting, Ibanking, VC/PE, and the like. Remember, this is at the #1 GM school in the country; even there, most students don't really want to do it. Just imagine how students at other schools feel.</p>

25

<p>That's a very good point Sakky. And if we were in a booming Economic climate, I would say go for it. But as it stands, careers in Consulting and IBanking aren't looking great...and that's coming from somebody who works for one of the major Consulting firms. I would say that for the next 2-3 years, most MBAs will have to settle for management jobs.</p>

26

<p>
[quote]
That's a very good point Sakky. And if we were in a booming Economic climate, I would say go for it. But as it stands, careers in Consulting and IBanking aren't looking great...and that's coming from somebody who works for one of the major Consulting firms. I would say that for the next 2-3 years, most MBAs will have to settle for management jobs.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That's precisely the operational word: settle. Many HBS (and presumably Michigan) MBA grads who took GM positions do so only because they couldn't get the consulting/finance job that they really wanted. And when the economy recovers, surely, consulting and finance will flourish again, in which case GM will become less important. </p>

<p>Besides, since you're talking about economic conditions, I would say that one major 'minus' of Ross is that the Michigan economy in general and the domestic auto industry in particular is a hellhole. Now, certainly, the major national firms will continue to recruit at Ross. But what students will lose is the ability to do local networking for jobs. For example, one major advantage for HBS and Sloan students is that the Boston area is both a major business/financial center and an extensive VC/entrepreneurship center (2nd only to Silicon Valley). It's quite easy for MBA students to hop onto the subway and meet local employers for contacts, internships, or even part-time jobs. (For example, I know several MBA students who worked part-time at VC firms during the regular semester). </p>

<p>It's harder to do that at Ross, with the auto industry laying people off left and right, Pfizer shutting down the old WL research site, and other major economic turmoil. 2-3 years may be enough for consulting/banking to take off again, but is almost certainly not enough time for the auto industry. Heck, in 2-3 years, the Big 3 may all be bankrupt. </p>

<p>Don't get me wrong, Alexandre. I like UM. My father went to UM. I almost went to UM. But the fact of the matter is, so much of business networking is a function of simple location. You just have to be where the action is, and like my father recently said, given the state of the economy, who really wants to be in Michigan right now?</p>

27

<p>Well, sakky, as a current Michigan resident, I have faith the economy will turn around in this state. It will definitely take years. I don't know what will happen to the Big 3, but this state will not fall into the toilet permanently. (Let's be for real, while Michigan might not be California or New York state, it still has a lot of money and influence. GM alone affects ~5 million employees nationwide. Let's not even talk about the retirees.) Yes, the constant layoffs in the Midwest region are scary enough. Maybe the Obama administration will turn things around. </p>

<p>I also wanted to say that Univ of Michigan remains competitive at the graduate level with its numerous offerings of dual degree programs (something many of the other top peer schools don't offer), variety of top-notch programs/institutes, strong emphasis on sustainibility and flexibility (lower standard of living, huge alumni base, recruiters come to campus or invite you). Ann Arbor is still able to thrive despite so much economic instability.</p>

28

<p>


</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>gellino,
Just exactly how do you know? You mean you run around to ask people where they went and where they were rejected? People don't think you are weird and "rough around the edges" (what you said about Chicago grads) when you do that?</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>That would be what I expect from a tactful and normal person (Alexandre).</p>

29

<p>But Alex, even if most MBAs are settling for these "management" jobs instead of the ultra competitive i-banking / consulting positions -- don't you think that Stanford / HBS / Wharton MBA grads are still best positioned to grab these positions over their counterparts whose management programs might be deemed "better" by some meaningless poll?</p>

<p>I'm not a recruiter, but if I had to fill a position for a corporate gig and I had highly qualified HBS, Stanford or Wharton grads (who normally don't give me a second look) now clamoring for an interview -- hell yeah, I'm gonna at least take a look at them. And chances are, they'd be pretty impressive and would be a good bet at landing the position.</p>

<p>In other words, the shrinking employment pool for newly minted MBAs as a result of the economic contraction in conjunction with the financial crisis (i.e. lack of Wall Street jobs) means that the watering holes which were largely ignored by the elite crop of MBAs are now going to get very crowded by those looking to get a taste -- if anything that bodes ill for those MBA grads not coming from the top tier. It's gonna be dog eat dog in the marketplace for the next few years and IMO the disparity between the top ranked schools vs. the lower ranked schools will become more acute than ever.</p>

<p>As a recruiter, if I'm normally getting the most looks from Betty and Jane, but then all of the sudden Gisele and Adriana are giving me the time of day, it's all good from my perspective, and not so good from Betty and Jane's perspective.</p>

30

<p>
[quote]
I also wanted to say that Univ of Michigan remains competitive at the graduate level with its numerous offerings of dual degree programs (something many of the other top peer schools don't offer), variety of top-notch programs/institutes, strong emphasis on sustainibility and flexibility (lower standard of living, huge alumni base, recruiters come to campus or invite you). Ann Arbor is still able to thrive despite so much economic instability.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>There is clearly no doubt that UM is far far better than average. Furthermore, I would rather live in Ann Arbor than in most other places in the country. {I happen to like college towns, and Ann Arbor is one of the best.}</p>

<p>But the real question is not how UM compares to the average school, for the average school is mediocre. The real question is how UM compares to the very best schools. In other words, comparing the quality of the MBA programs between UM and SE Missouri State University, I think the answer of who is better is trivially obvious. It's when you compare UM to the very best MBA programs is when UM has problems. Let's be perfectly honest. Not too many people who get into the MBA programs at Harvard or Stanford will turn it down to go to UM instead. One major reason is the location: Boston and the SF Bay Area are seen - and rightfully so - as far more economically vibrant areas than is the state of Michigan. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Well, sakky, as a current Michigan resident, I have faith the economy will turn around in this state. It will definitely take years. I don't know what will happen to the Big 3, but this state will not fall into the toilet permanently. (Let's be for real, while Michigan might not be California or New York state, it still has a lot of money and influence. GM alone affects ~5 million employees nationwide. Let's not even talk about the retirees.) Yes, the constant layoffs in the Midwest region are scary enough. Maybe the Obama administration will turn things around.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Sheer size/influence alone are not what really matter. What really matters for MBA students of top schools is opportunity. Obviously Michigan has plenty of companies and a hefty GDP. But if few new net jobs are being created, if the dominant companies are within the process of laying off thousands upon thousands of people and shutting down entire plants, and if the existing jobs are all being fought over viciously by existing people, then that probably means not a lot of good opportunity for new MBA's. </p>

<p>Perhaps the main problem of the domestic auto industry (the Big 3 + suppliers), from an MBA student perspective, is that management job opportunities tend to be assigned based not on merit, but rather on seniority and office politics. You can be a star young manager with excellent potential and still not be given opportunities just because somebody else who has been in the firm longer than you have will get dibs. This is what I have been told from numerous former employees of the Big 3, and these guys clearly had some potential (good enough to get admitted into top MBA programs). This may also be why the Big 3 have such problems in coming out with better products.</p>

31

<p>I guess this isn't about MBA per se. But, as a Mechanical Engineering major in college, I really couldn't figure out why so many people wanted to work for the auto companies. I knew several students who had gotten offers from consulting companies, but somehow chose to work for Ford, GM or Toyota. I don't get what these engineers see in the auto companies, maybe they grew up in Michigan, and have this fascination with them, but I couldn't figure out why so many wanted to work for them, when there's layoff news all the time, and seems highly bureaucratic.</p>

32

<p>
[quote]
That's a very good point Sakky. And if we were in a booming Economic climate, I would say go for it. But as it stands, careers in Consulting and IBanking aren't looking great...and that's coming from somebody who works for one of the major Consulting firms. I would say that for the next 2-3 years, most MBAs will have to settle for management jobs.

[/quote]

Alexandre, which firm do you work for? At the corporate strategy practice in my consulting firm, revenues are up 15% y-o-y. And FY09 is looking pretty good from a pipeline perspective.</p>

<p>ibanking may take several years to recover, chiefly due to Lehman and Bear, but it has always been a boom-and-bust industry. I find strategy consulting far more stable, and there are few signs of a slowdown ahead that I can see.</p>

<p>Now if you'll excuse me, I have to get back to Lehman's office on 50th and 7th, since my firm is helping Barclays price, sell and transfer the ex-Lehman assets. And working us and my team like dogs to do so :)</p>

33

<p>I work for MMC (Mercer). </p>

<p>At any rate, Sakky and the_prestige, I don't see how the location of the University of Michigan will hurt Ross. Ann Arbor is widely recognized as one of best college towns in the country. The quality of life in Ann Arbor is hard to beat and most city ratings rank Ann Arbor among the top places to live. As a university, given its size and its excellence across all academic disciplines, the vast majority of major companies from all over the country recruit heavily at Michigan (and Ross). In fact, the main recruiters at Ross for the last several years have been Management Consulting firms, Investment Banks, pharmaceuticals and high tech companies. I do not recall seeing a Michigan-based firm making the top 10 list of recruiters either at Ross or at the college of Engineering. The university has not depended on the state for funds or for on-campus recruitment for several years now. </p>

<p>At any rate, I do not see the point of this debate. Every ranking is going to questionable elements. There is no reason to be insulted just because Ross was ranked in the top 5.</p>

34

<p>Alexandre - I am sure Sakky's comment was intended to discuss the quality of Ross's location and career opportunities relative to its peers, not to make a statement that it lacked *any *location appeal or opportunities in highly competitive careers. Consulting firms, investment banks, pharma and tech firms all recruit at nearly all the top-20 places; in fact, last year my particular practice group recruited more people from Carnegie Mellon-Tepper than from any other business school. None of that speaks to the quality of the students at Tepper vs any other top school (say, Stanford). But if you look more closely at the particular job opportunities open to Tepper and Stanford students, not to mention the pre-MBA qualifications of the students themselves, you'd see a marked difference. The same would go, I would imagine, if you polled a pool of applicants to top MBA programs and asked, education-independent, whether they would rather live in Ann Arbor vs the Bay Area, Boston, or NYC - would you really claim that there would be a sizeable number who would opt for Ann Arbor?</p>

<p>I agree that all rankings are questionable, highly subjective, and nobody needs to get in a tizzy because Ross was ranked #5. But surely we can make a strong argument that ranking Ross above Stanford or (say) Sloan involves some very tortured logic, and most unbiased observers would make the opposite judgment - fair?</p>

35

<p>Denzera, my point was simply that global companies will recruit at all top universities, regardless of location. Detroit is a 45 minute flight from Chicago and a 90 minute flight from NYC. It is a virtual puddle jump getting from those two cities to Ann Arbor. And with literally tens of thousands of alums living in Chicago and NYC, it is not difficult to find recruiters willing to travel to Ann Arbor to recruit. </p>

<p>I have said above that ranking Ross above SBS is possibly debatable. But Ross and Sloan are pretty even, albeit very different.</p>

36

<p>Who is insulted?</p>

37

<p>Insulted was too strong a word, I must admit. But it seems like some find it hard to believe that Ross can be ranked near the top 5 MBA programs. I can understand objections to Ross being ranked between 1 and 4 in the nation. But objecting to Ross being ranked 5 in the nation would suggest one of two things:</p>

<p>1) There is a significant difference between #5 and #10 </p>

<p>2) There isn't a significant difference between 5 and 10 and as such, Ross does not belong in the top 10 altogether.</p>

38

<p>
[quote]
At any rate, Sakky and the_prestige, I don't see how the location of the University of Michigan will hurt Ross. Ann Arbor is widely recognized as one of best college towns in the country. The quality of life in Ann Arbor is hard to beat and most city ratings rank Ann Arbor among the top places to live. As a university, given its size and its excellence across all academic disciplines, the vast majority of major companies from all over the country recruit heavily at Michigan (and Ross). In fact, the main recruiters at Ross for the last several years have been Management Consulting firms, Investment Banks, pharmaceuticals and high tech companies. I do not recall seeing a Michigan-based firm making the top 10 list of recruiters either at Ross or at the college of Engineering. The university has not depended on the state for funds or for on-campus recruitment for several years now.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think Denzera captured what I am saying. But to repeat, the issue is what opportunities are available in the surrounding location. Sure, I had already agreed that the large firms will recruit on-campus at all of the top B-schools, of which Michigan is obviously one. </p>

<p>But not every MBA student is interested in the jobs available via on-campus recruiting. Startup firms are probably the most obvious case. Startups don't recruit, because they simply don't have the resources. Seriously, when you're just a handful of guys in a garage somewhere, you're obviously not going to be doing any nationwide recruiting, or heck, any real recruiting at all. You can't. You don't have the money. If you want to get into these kinds of companies, you have to already be there, hanging around in that location, for if you're not there, they're not going to find you. </p>

<p>The truth is, most successful tech entrepreneurship happens in only a few locales in the country. Paul Graham wrote that there are really only 3 places in which he would launch a startup. Notice how Ann Arbor is not one of them.</p>

<p>If I were going to start a startup today, there are only three places I'd consider doing it: on the Red Line near Central, Harvard, or Davis Squares (Kendall is too sterile); in Palo Alto on University or California Aves; and in Berkeley immediately north or south of campus. These are the only places I know that have the right kind of vibe.</p>

<p>How</a> to Start a Startup</p>

<p>To press the point further, I think nobody would seriously consider Ann Arbor to be of the same class as the SF Bay Area or the Boston/Cambridge area when it comes to entrepreneurship. Let's be honest - how many successful tech startups have come out of Ann Arbor? Now compare that to Silicon Valley. Is there even a comparison to be made? </p>

<p>Note, to be clear, obviously Ann Arbor is still far far more entrepreneurially vibrant than the vast vast majority of the country. But we're not comparing it to the vast vast majority of the country. We're talking about comparing Ann Arbor to the very best of the entrepreneurship locales. That's where the problem is. </p>

<p>Along with tech entrepreneurship is its rich but secretive counterpart, VC. The two always go hand in hand - where there are lots of successful tech entrepreneurs, there are lots of venture capitalists, and vice versa. They need each other, because they are dancing partners. I strongly suspect that there is more VC funds controlled within just a 2 mile stretch of Sand Hill Road or Winter Street than there is in the entire state of Michigan. {Which is not a shocking statistic when you consider that, according to Metrick 2006, there is nearly as much VC capital deployed within the SF Bay Area and Boston area than in the entire rest of the US combined.} Or, put another way, of the top VC firms as measured by size and ROI, how many of them even have offices in Michigan? That's not even talking about having their headquarters in Michigan - I am just talking about having a branch office in Michigan. Kleiner, Benchmark, Sequoia, Accel, CRV, Matrix, DFJ, Summit, Battery, Greylock - they don't even have offices in Michigan. Heck, I don't even think those firms even have offices anywhere in the Midwest. </p>

<p>But again, VC is an industry that doesn't really recruit, and certainly not on any nationwide scale. Sequoia and Kleiner, for example, will present at only a handful of schools (and UM isn't one of them). Many VC firms won't even present at all. You get a job in VC usually through networking. But that means you have to be there. That's not that hard to do if you're at, say, Stanford where the greatest concentration of VC firms in the world are literally within jogging distance and when many of the GP's are members of the Stanford University Golf Course, which as a student, you have the right to use. </p>

<p>However, VC's are absolutely notorious for their dislike of moving around, which is why so many of them choose to stay concentrated in certain places in the country. Hence, whether you want to become a VC, or whether you're a tech entrepreneur who wants to be funded by VC, you basically have to move to where the VC's are, because they're not going to come to you. </p>

<p>But anyway, my point simply is that location does matter. An MBA program is basically a 2-year job search, and, all other things equal, you want to be in a location that has a vibrant economy that offers many opportunities that you want, if, for no other reason, it's easier to find opportunities if they are local to you. Again, I certainly agree that all of the major national firms will recruit at UM. But, like I said, not all of the best opportunities are at these firms. Location matters, and sadly, the Michigan economy sucks, and will for years to come.</p>

39

<p>Cornell's description in the slideshow: Challenging program with strong alumni network, but location is a drawback for some.</p>

<p>Dartmouth's description: Close-knit community, accessible faculty, and rural locale make Tuck special.</p>

<p>WHTHEE?! So both are in rural locations, but Dartmouth's is "unique" and "special" while Ithaca is a turnoff?? gg lolz</p>

40

<p>^^^
what are you saying, that a media publication is biased?</p>

<p>say it ain't so.</p>