<p>ive always wondered:</p>
<p>how does the difficulty of getting each degree compare with one another? </p>
<p>and how much easier is it for an MBA student who majored in business as an undergrad compared to someone who didnt?</p>
<p>JD is harder to get.</p>
<p>An MBA often times isn't even a 'real' degree as it is a 2-year social networking club. You're not going to flunk out, grades don't really matter because only a few employers even bother to look at your MBA grades, and a lot of B-schools practice grade nondisclosure anyway, where not only will the school refuse to provide transcripts to employers, but students are actually barred (on pain of being prohibited from using the career office) from actually talking about their grades during their interviews. </p>
<p>Hence, the competition for B-school grades at most schools is far less intense than it is in law school. At law school, your class ranking actually matters significantly for the purposes of what kind of job or clerkship you will get. At B-schools, only a few consulting firms and banks will care. And for the rare people who want to continue on to get their business doctorates, grades will matter. But for the vast majority of students, grades don't matter. That's why B-school students are so infamous for drinking and carousing. I have heard it said that if HBS and MITSloan were to disappear, half of the bars in town would go bankrupt.</p>
<p>I concur, a JD is much harder and the academic reigor of law school is second only to medical school. Furthermore, law profs love to play "hide the ball" and there are a large percentage of attorneys who regret ever going into law. Most MBA's are very happy with their decision. This is a result of the amount of effort and the immediate benefit that comes from an MBA as opposed to the amount of effort and the speed of the benefits from a JD. If in doubt, most schools have a JD/MBA program wherein the MBA program is drastically shortened.</p>
<p>An MBA is a fantastic degree and all the colleges starting from #20 and up are open to anyone who is willing to study to get a good enough GMAT score and who has some decent work experience.</p>
<p>In contrast, JD's are notoriously competitive and if your GPA isn't there, kiss the top 50 goodbye.</p>
<p>
[quote]
B-schools practice grade nondisclosure anyway
[/quote]
do ucla, ucb, uci, ucd practice this?</p>
<p>
[quote]
a JD is much harder and the academic reigor of law school is second only to medical school
........
there are a large percentage of attorneys who regret ever going into law.
.......
Most MBA's are very happy with their decision.
..............
An MBA is a fantastic degree and
[/quote]
</p>
<p>your saying in terms of rigor med>law>business school</p>
<p>your saying the payoff for MBA degrees exceeds JDs</p>
<p>then why is it that when i look at the index of this forum, the business school forum has fewer posts than the med/grad/law school forums? If mba programs are relatively easy and have high payoffs, why are people less interested in talking about them?</p>
<p>and why is the med school forum so popular if MD degrees are so tough to get?</p>
<p>I think your criteria for judging forum popularity is reversed and you failed to demonstrate critical thinking on this issue (watch out for that GMAT AWA). </p>
<p>In terms of academic rigor, if you are only considering Med School, Law School, and MBA's, then yes it would be in that order. From a larger perspective that includes other academic programs (such as Psychology Masters, Sociology Masters, Engineering Masters, MBT and what have you) the MBA would still rank fairly low. Overall, it is an average or slightly easier than average degree to obtain. </p>
<p>I am saying that the INITIAL payoff for the MBA exceeds that of the JD. MBA's are either two year programs or they even allow you to work full time, such as the USC and Pepperdine programs that I have applied for. The JD is a hellacious degree and once you have finished the hard work, you go on to put in 60 hour (recorded) work weeks and spend years paying your dues before you finally get to really start acting like a lawyer. In contrast, with an MBA, you are immediately eligable to start moving upwards and many MBA's see immediate results from their MBA degrees. It is not uncommon for companies to even promote people during the MBA (for the fully employed programs) process for fear of losing them. </p>
<p>I myself an considering a J/D from Pepperdine or Loyola Marymount (I got a 171 on the LSAT which compensates for my aweful GPA of 3.23) so I am intimately familiar with the differences between the programs. </p>
<p>The average lawyers makes more than the average MBA, but both degrees earn you a hell of a salary. In contrast, Lawyers work much more than the average MBA so unless you love the law I would consider doing something else to make money. I think most people in and out of law school will concur. </p>
<p>The reason why the MBA forum has fewer posts than the med/grad/law school forums is because THEY ARE EASIER PROGRAMS. Your implication that eaier programs would garner more discussion is the exactly the opposite of what is going on here. People come onto this site ti overcome challenges and figure out their chances of getting in. MBA's are less competative than other degrees and consequently there's just less to talk about. Law school and Med school are nightmares from start to finish. Furthermore, most people pursuing an MBA are older, say about 30. I think that many of these people have significantly more confidence than the 22 year old that just finished undergrad and aren't going to go on some web forum for help. I simply posted because I wanted to get an objective response to my application from some people while I sit here and worry about it. Now, I am trying to help others while I check my topic. </p>
<p>So, why is the med school forum so popular if MD degrees are so tough to get?</p>
<p>BECAUSE MD DEGREES ARE SO TOUGH TO GET!</p>
<p>Actually,I would disagree and say that the payoff of the JD is probably higher than the MBA. Keep in mind that most respectable MBA programs will only admit you if you have some decent work experience, which means that you are already making a respectable salary. Contrast that with law schools that are happy to admit you with zero work experience. The contrast between the bump in salary of an MBA (the delta of the pre and post MBA salary) is smaller than the bump in salary of a JD grad simply because most JD grads entered law school with no work experience and thus could have probably gotten only a low-paying entry-level job. </p>
<p>Hence, while MBA's may make good money when they graduate, perhap better than the JD grads make, they would have been making pretty decent money had they not gone to MBA school at all. </p>
<p>I do agree that a big reason why the MBA forum is not as popular as the other forums is that it tends to be easier to get an MBA. However, I think the other reason is that CC tends to cater to high school seniors or current college students. Because you generally need to get work experience to get into a top MBA program, this means that the MBA is far off in the future for most people here on CC. Law school is a 'closer' goal and therefore a more popular topic of discussion.</p>
<p>Remember that to practice law you must also pass the bar exam in at least one state. There is no state licensure for MBA's. Law is a field that you can go to a top school right out of college, and most MBA programs (top programs) select students that have been working for at least a year or so.</p>
<p>Sakky, great comments as always.</p>
<p>Further to what Sakky has said, the demographics on this forum tends to fall into two camps (students and parents) vs. the B-school applicant crowd which tends to be further down the road than your typical aspiring college / grad (i.e. non-MBA graduate school) student - hence it isn't surprising that the MBA threads are less active.</p>
<p>A better board for gauging activity in business, management, MBA, etc. would be something like Vault.com</p>
<p>I concur that the salary jump isn't that big of a deal, but most top MBA programs are also full time programs. They want people 3 - 6 years out of school and those people aren't going to be making huge incomes. The Pre-law with a bachelors could be making 40 easily, and the pre-mba is usually making 60. They are on the same playing field, the MBA just works longer and so gets that promotion and pay raise. </p>
<p>Long Term ...</p>
<p>I think lawyers with 20 years work experience AVERAGE about 150k - 200k and MBA's average about 125k - 175k, but again, the MBA does a LOT LESS WORK (typically).</p>
<p>A partner at a firm would make about 400k - 500k yearly, but an MBA CEO would make about that much as well. </p>
<p>Really, both are stellar degrees. However, the JD commands more respect and presitge.</p>
<p>i don't disagree with most of the comments above, however, those (Partner/ CEO) salary estimates are way low (unless you are talking about a very small / niche market).</p>
<p>a partner at a major law firm in a major market will (including year end bonuses) pull in something closer to the $750-$950 ball park.</p>
<p>a CEO of even a small / medium company (publicly listed) will pull in something well into the 7 figure range (including stock options, bonuses, etc.) - and if you are talking about a Fortune 500 company - that jumps comfortable into the 8 digit area code: (i.e. 10 million+).</p>
<p>the major CAVEAT?</p>
<p>like Darwin said: its dog eat dog. </p>
<p>very few aspiring law school / b-school students will ever successfully wade through the shark infested waters while climbing the topsy turvy corporate ladder and actually make it to the rarified air of Partner at a major law firm or CEO of a Fortune 500 company.</p>
<p>I was talking about the AVERAGE lawyer/MBA.</p>
<p>The AVERAGE MBA does not work at Fortune 500. </p>
<p>The AVERAGE lawyer is not a partner. </p>
<p>Hence, the AVERAGE lawyer is making about 150 - 200 as a lawyer with experience that is not a partner. </p>
<p>The AVERAGE CEO is making about 125 - 175 as CEO of some small company you have never heard of.</p>
<p>I didn't include stock options and bonuses etc. because that makes it too hard to quantify. </p>
<p>If you are talking about the VERY TOP of the market then the CEO has the lawyer beat hands down.</p>
<p>Let's not get sidetracked on semantics.</p>
<p>First, I did not make issue of your figures for an AVERAGE lawyer (Associate)</p>
<p>I merely pointed out the figure you quoted of 400-500K for a partner - is LOW (not to mention that even an average CEO would make far above such a figure). </p>
<p>That's all. Take it easy.</p>
<p>Get both and become GC of a fortune 500 company and make 2mil+</p>
<p>Let me chime in for a min. and say that I'm finishing my 1st year at U-Florida (top 50 MBA) Professional MBA and about 60-70% of my cohorts are from an engineering, math or hard science background. Just about EVERYONE I've spoken (myself included) went into this program expecting it to be "EASY" and are now really surprised at how hard the classes actually are. Remember, most did not come from academically easy backgrounds. I asked my accounting prof. about the rigor of the program and he said that some schools operate by letting students skate, but not all of tem. He said the only people who tend to fail out are people who come in expecting to buy their degree. By the way, the prof. (Schafer) earned his PhD from Michigan and taught at Stanford prior to UF, so he is qualified to talk on the subject.</p>
<p>I do think it is fair to say that MBA classes can seem harder for students who have never taken bus or eco classes in the past.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Hence, the AVERAGE lawyer is making about 150 - 200 as a lawyer with experience that is not a partner
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Nah, not even close:</p>
<p>"In May 2004, the median annual earnings of all lawyers were $94,930. "</p>
<p><a href="http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos053.htm#earnings%5B/url%5D">http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos053.htm#earnings</a></p>
<p>Granted, this figure includes newly minted lawyers who obviously don't make that much. But it also includes those high-powered partners who make boatloads. Hence, the median lawyer is still a pretty good metric to use. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Let me chime in for a min. and say that I'm finishing my 1st year at U-Florida (top 50 MBA) Professional MBA and about 60-70% of my cohorts are from an engineering, math or hard science background. Just about EVERYONE I've spoken (myself included) went into this program expecting it to be "EASY" and are now really surprised at how hard the classes actually are. Remember, most did not come from academically easy backgrounds. I asked my accounting prof. about the rigor of the program and he said that some schools operate by letting students skate, but not all of tem. He said the only people who tend to fail out are people who come in expecting to buy their degree. By the way, the prof. (Schafer) earned his PhD from Michigan and taught at Stanford prior to UF, so he is qualified to talk on the subject.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The real question is, are those MBA classes as hard as those engineering classes that those former engineers took? I doubt that they would concur. </p>
<p>And why not? I think it's because of something that you said - that the only people who fail out of MBA programs are those people who don't want to do the work and just come in expecting to buy their degree. Contrast that with engineering, where you can do all the work and STILL flunk out.</p>
<p>I have a masters degree in chemistry and am not making the statement that the MBA classes are just as hard, just that the MBA classes are fairly hard and deff. harder than I expected. For instance, if you don't know how to do basic calculus, forget about passing microeconomics. Heck, 1 guy in my program is a pharmacist, another I talk to is vet and both of them are surprised at the level of work we're doing. I think, especially with an MBA, you need to chose your schoool wisely.</p>
<p>There's also a significant difference in value between TOP MBA programs and the average one - and the variance is much higher than that between the top JD programs and an average one. The value of a top-10 MBA in terms of career earnings beats that of a top-10 JD over the long run, but a JD from schools below that tend to be higher returns on average than an MBA. There are a lot of junk MBA programs out there, whereas an ABA-accredited law school will pretty much ensure you decently-paid work for a long time.</p>
<p>Some evidence to back up my assertions:
<a href="http://www.hbs.edu/mba/recruiting/data/alldata.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.hbs.edu/mba/recruiting/data/alldata.html</a></p>
<p>For the average college kid with decent-to-good grades and a lot of ambition, a law degree is a great investment, which pays off immediately and ensures a good financial future. The same is not true for the average MBA-seeker. The difference is at the top.</p>
<p>So to answer a question posed in the thread, there are many fewer posts on this forum because there are fewer people who find they need a leg up or questions answered to get into a top MBA program. Things are much more structured and and prescribed for a JD or MD, and as such there is a wider range of people who can pursue them (and more useful advice to be given). Here, the most common post is "no, you need some work experience". By the time people have the work experience for an MBA, they either have abandoned the idea, or if they are still pursuing it, have quite a clear picture of why they want one and don't really need anyone's help (nor would it make much difference). To put it crassly and perhaps rudely, a top MBA is for leaders, and leaders don't generally come begging the internet for advice.</p>
<p>My two cents.
D</p>
<p>
[quote]
I have a masters degree in chemistry and am not making the statement that the MBA classes are just as hard, just that the MBA classes are fairly hard and deff. harder than I expected. For instance, if you don't know how to do basic calculus, forget about passing microeconomics.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't know about that. Seems to me that you are undergoing an anomalous experience.</p>
<p>Let me give you an example. I know people who had never taken calculus in their lives, and yet still managed to pass their required micro-econ class to get their MBA at MIT. This is not some scrub school here - this is MIT we are talking about here. The MIT Sloan School, while obviously admitting a lot of former engineers and scientists, also admits some people with humanities backgrounds. Heck, I know one girl who majored in Classics as an undergrad (at Harvard), then got a master's degree in Classics at Oxford, then worked for a few years as a consultant, then went to MIT to get her MBA, and get an A+ in micro-econ despite never in her life having taken any calculus. </p>
<p>MIT teaches the required micro-econ class presuming that nobody knows any calculus. In fact, many students complained that the concepts they were being taught would have been better explained through calculus - but the problem is that not everybody knew calculus and so they had to teach the class presuming that you didn't know it. </p>
<p>Now, granted, others who didn't take calculus didn't get A+'s like that one girl did. But they all still graduated, which means that they all managed to pass. Maybe they passed with a low grade (I didn't ask), but they still passed. After all, you are required to take and pass this course in order to graduate. And they all graduated, so they must have passed. </p>
<p>Just look at it this way. When was the last time you ever heard of anybody actually flunking out of an MBA program. I know that at the top programs (i.e., the M7 programs), practically nobody actually flunks out. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Heck, 1 guy in my program is a pharmacist, another I talk to is vet and both of them are surprised at the level of work we're doing. I think, especially with an MBA, you need to chose your schoool wisely.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>But it's all 'voluntary' work. After all, again, practically nobody actually flunks out, at least out of the top schools. You might end up with a low pass, but honestly, so what? As long as you do the bare minimum, you are going to pass. </p>
<p>The real issue is the social issue. You do a lot of work in teams, and you don't want to let your team down, because these are people who are going to be part of your network for use later in your career. So you don't want to embarrass yourself by being lazy in front of them. So THAT's why people may work really hard.</p>
<p>But the point is, you don't really have to. If you are just satisfied with barely passing and doing the bare minimum, you can get by with doing very little work at all. And in fact, that is precisely what many 2nd-year MBA students do, especially once they've gotten the job offer they've wanted. I know PLENTY of 2nd-years who had basically 'checked out' mentally. Yeah, they'll do the assigned work in order to avoid embarrassing themselves in front of the team. But that's all they will do. </p>
<p>Again, contrast that with undergrad, especially in engineering, where you might not even graduate at all. Forget about laziness causing social embarrassment. In undergrad, laziness can actually result in expulsion.</p>
<p>Well, it seems to me that you are making the assumption that your friend didn't teach herself basic calculus in order to pass economics. Also, it seems to me based on other posts of yours that Ive read that you are contradicting yourself. Let me explain- you are a big defender of the argument that grade inflation is justified at elite schools because even though the work load is just as hard as or harder than at lower ranked schools, the students are brighter. Therefore, because the schools pre screen then the student body, the brighter students perform the harder work better then students at the lower ranked schools. AS such, the higher grades at the elite schools are not indicative if an easy curriculum, but rather of a brighter, harder working student body. Why do you not apply this logic to elite MBA programs? Also, for what it is worth, I'd be happy to mail you some copies of my Eco notes, exam and homework (non group) assignments. Feel free to show them to anyone who hasn't had calculus and see if they even recognize the derivative and partial derivative symbols. No, I have never taken a class at MIT, but I can assure you that at Florida, if you don't know general calculus principles, you MUST teach them to yourself in order to pass. The same goes with accounting, where they assign intro to accounting as a text to finish BEFORE enrolling, then they cram financial and managerial into 1 course. I haven't even hit my basic finance courses yet, which I hear are harder. I KNOW that people in my cohort are surprised at the level of rigor in the program, and I also know that the intellectual capacity of my classmates is pretty darned close to second to none. I will not attempt to speak for MIT, Harvard, NYU or another program in which I have no experience with.</p>