<p>The grades get you the interview? </p>
<p>What's the cut-off point? </p>
<p>3.5 GPA?</p>
<p>3.3 GPA?</p>
<p>3.0 GPA?</p>
<p>What if you're an engineer and can barely scramble a GPA in the low 3.0's (between a 3.0 and a 3.3) as opposed to all the stern /wharton econ. majors with a 3.9? Does that mean they will not call you for an interview? All this provided of course, that you go to a top engineering college (cornell/MIT/Cal-tech)</p>
<p>It's more accurate to say that the grades can HELP you to get an interview. </p>
<p>But there is no hard cutoff point. Like I said, I knew a guy from MIT whose grades were so poor that he was put on forced withdrawal for a year. This is MIT's version of 'academic probation'. He successfully petitioned to come back, but he still ended up barely graduating. Nevertheless, he's on Wall Street right now.</p>
<p>Now don't get me wrong. That doesn't mean that since he got put on probation and he ended up with a job, that means that it's OK for you to go on probation. I didn't say that. Obviously being put on probation is not good.</p>
<p>What I am saying is that hiring is not the mechanistic process that it is sometimes made out to be. Just because you have top grades doesn't mean that you will get the job and just because you have poor grades doesn't mean that you won't get the job. All it does is increase and decrease your chances but there are no cutoffs. </p>
<p>In the case of this guy, he was a bad student, but a great schmoozer. He knew how to work the system and get his resume noticed by the people that mattered. Ultimately, he may end up better off than the guys who studied hard to get top grades but didn't know how to schmooze their way into getting hired. In fact, you might say that he might have ended up as the 'truly' smart one because he figured out what was really important, which is how to get hired.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, however, according to Hoovers online, the companies you mentioned have executives who hold MBA's and degrees in economics or otherwise business related...thus, if you want to be one of the upper level players in an investment company, you probably need to understand business more than science. The science understanding will probably give you a good push to be a banker/broker, but there you may stay without the substantial knowledge of business.</p>
<p>Again thats not necessary. Example, James Simons has possibly the best investment record out there. He has a PhD in Mathematics and made the Chern-Simons theory (used in physics). He basically only hires people who have done good science. And he is in the hedge fund business. Way these funds figure it, they need people with substantial knowledge in technology, science, engineering such that they understand what they are investing in. As these guys are already smart its not hard to teach them some finance and business along the way. Take a look at most of the top VCs, HFs (the quant ones) and PEs. </p>
<p>I am not talking about being a banker or a broker. I am talking about being on the buy side not the sell side. People on the sell side (aka ibankers) want to switch over to the buy side (aka hedge funds, PEs, VCs).</p>
<p>People in business school don't learn anything significant that make them masters of the finance world. People get MBAs due to traditional career advancement and networking. There is no real academic value in going into business school.</p>
<p>Wow, thanks a lot mahras2. Your posts were very informative. It's definitely encouraging me to take the medical school route. I'd always felt confused as to whether i should take a gamble and go the MBA route or just drop the whole business thing and be a doctor. But you've explained very well that it's possible to use an M.D. as additional ceritification/expertise for management of HFs within the healthcare industry. Also, I appreciated your advice sakky as always (from reading previous posts). When you said "The point is, no matter how impressive your academic background is, nobody can presume that they are guaranteed a banking offer" I definitely got a clearer understanding of the unpredictability of getting hired by any ibank let alone a BB firm. I think I'll just go to medical school, maybe even go for a dual M.D./M.B.A degree and see where that takes me. Thanks again.</p>
<p>If I-banking doesnt work out isnt it an option to work at a smaller regional firm and perhaps work your way up? If you do get a regular corporate job doing something else you can apply again after having more experiance? One of the reasons im asking cause a lot of these firms are just targeting people who are just graduating. I know these options are possible, but are they probable options? Please enlighten me.</p>
<p>"There is no real academic value in going into business school."</p>
<p>I went to business school, and I found value to it, academic and otherwise. But then what do I know.</p>
<p>"People on the sell side (aka ibankers) want to switch over to the buy side (aka hedge funds, PEs, VCs)."</p>
<p>ALL of them????? </p>
<p>Many people don't have the skill sets to succeed in these very different areas. And that goes both ways, seems to me.</p>
<p>"I know these options are possible, but are they probable options?"</p>
<p>They are possible options. Assuming you can get these other jobs in the first place; they are also difficult to get. They are not "probable" options by any means. Once you're out there it's hard to predict, but at the upper levels a lot more people go out of the big firms than come into them.</p>
<p>While I wouldn't go so far as to say that there is no real academic value in going to an MBA program, I would say that the value is limited. The truth is, MBA programs are primarily structured to get students jobs and to help students network with each other. Many students see the academics as purely secondary, a situation exacerbated by the grade nondisclosure policies implemented by a number of top schools. Sometimes the nightly beerfests are more heavily and regularly attended than the actual classes. </p>
<p>Look, if what you really care about is academics, then maybe you should enter a doctoral program, like a PhD program in business or some other related discipline.</p>
<p>An MBA helps develop essential, analytical skills to help evaluate trends and patterns. However, a big chunk of business is the ability to convince and sell your items effectively to customers (Sales). If you ever watch Trump's Apprentice, you'll see Harvard (and other top biz. schools) MBA grads who are often times at loss in leading a team to convince the general public to buy items. They're great at number crunching but the sheer ability to market and sell things is at loss to them. </p>
<p>I remember in that show, the winner was often times a self-made millionaire (w/ only a high school degree) or even just a normal college grad (U. of Florida for the blonde girl who won).</p>
<p>^^ yes, there is a lot to be said for street smarts....it is an intelligence of its own.</p>
<p>Most of my working life has been in the general area of Finance.
I obtained the foundation of my training in finance in my MBA program.
I knew nothing about finance before I entered, and I feel I learned quite a bit about it there. It would not have been so easy to pick up all this material otherwise, IMO.</p>
<p>Friend to my son who works in IB :How do you like NY?
My son: Don't know, haven't seen it.</p>
<p>"I remember in that show, the winner was often times a self-made millionaire (w/ only a high school degree) or even just a normal college grad (U. of Florida for the blonde girl who won)."</p>
<p>What about the guy who got hired who went to went to Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar and had multiple graduate degrees from MIT, including an MBA from Sloan?</p>
<p>
[quote]
An MBA helps develop essential, analytical skills to help evaluate trends and patterns. However, a big chunk of business is the ability to convince and sell your items effectively to customers (Sales). If you ever watch Trump's Apprentice, you'll see Harvard (and other top biz. schools) MBA grads who are often times at loss in leading a team to convince the general public to buy items. They're great at number crunching but the sheer ability to market and sell things is at loss to them.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Harvard MBA's doing analysis and numbers crunching? I don't think so. That's generally a Wharton or Sloan specialty. Harvard MBA's are good at grand strategy and leadership, but not in the nitty-gritty of crunching numbers. </p>
<p>I also agree that they're not particularly good at sales either. Pure MBA's rarely are. In fact, that's why I think the Apprentice puts MBA's in a bad light. MBA programs aren't designed to teach you sales. They're designed to teach you management. So in the real world, you wouldn't try to make sales yourself, instead you would hire people to sell for you.</p>
<p>If IB doesn't work out, I think going to a really good grad school and trying again (at the same or higher level position compared to entry). For example, graduating from MIT/Cal-tech/Cornell with a 3.0 in EE or chemE may not be enough to secure an IB job but in many cases it is enough to get into a top grad. masters/p.h.d. program.</p>