<p>To add some grist to this discussion, I think the gist of what that author said is correct because the fact is, many if not most undergraduate business-administration programs really are not very good. By that, I'm obviously not talking about Wharton, Sloan, Haas, or any of the top ones, which are obviously very good. What I have observed is that there is a very large dropoff in quality from the top undergraduate bus-ad programs and the ones that are not top-ranked, and the latter tend to get very little respect. You can see it yourself in all the Division 1A football and basketball players that are majoring in business-administration, and I think we know the truth that the majority of them are doing that not because they are actually interested in bus-ad but because at many of those schools, bus-ad is a considered to be an easy major and hence allows those athletes to retain their athletic eligibility without having to study very hard. </p>
<p>In addition, I would caution one to believe some of the numbers thrown around here, especially the numbers regarding Wharton. Don't get me wrong, Wharton is an excellent undergraduate bus-ad program, arguably the best one out there. But the data does not seem to bear out that the Wharton undergrad program has the largest number of recruits at some of the schools listed. One has to separate the Wharton undergrad program from the Whartn MBA program, and you can't count the Wharton MBA's when you're talking about the Wharton undergrad program. </p>
<p>The easiest example to see is in management consulting. It has been claimed that the Wharton undergrad program has the largest number of recruits at McKinsey, BCG, and Bain. I very much doubt that. According to Wharton's own published figures, in 2004, only 7 Wharton undergrads took full-time offers at McKinsey, only 5 took full-time offers at BCG, only 4 at Bain. Those numbers are not very large at all. Look at the data yourself if you don't believe it. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.vpul.upenn.edu/careerservices/wharton/surveys/Wharton2004Report.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.vpul.upenn.edu/careerservices/wharton/surveys/Wharton2004Report.pdf</a></p>
<p>Even if you try to account for the fact that not all Wharton graduates filled the Wharton survey, you still end up with numbers that are quite modest. For example, sure, only 58.7% of Wharton graduates filled out the survey. So let's presume that those graduates who didn't fill out the survey landed jobs at McKinsey, Bain, and BCG at the same proportion as those who did fill out the survey. You are still only looking at about 13 who went to McKinsey, 9 to BCG, 7 to Bain. That's really not that many, when you think about it. And there is a strong reason to believe that the proportions would not be the same - in other words, that there is a strong selection bias. I would argue that those who get jobs at places like McKinsey, Bain, or BCG are more likely to fill the survey than those who ended up with mediocre jobs (or no jobs at all). But in any case, let's take the numbers of 13, 9, and 7. Those numbers are easily dwarfed by a place like Harvard. Anecdotally, I know of at least 15 Harvard undergraduates who are going to McKinsey this year, and I only know a small fraction of the entire Harvard graduating class. </p>
<p>The same can be said for even a place like Goldman. 19 Wharton graduates in 2004 report going to Goldman, so perhaps 36 or so students total Wharton students are going to Goldman. Is that a good number? Of course. Is that a dominant number? I wouldn't say so. </p>
<p>Again, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Wharton is a bad school. I have always said that it is arguably the best undergrad bus-ad program out there. The point is that you shouldn't go overboard. When you talk about the Wharton undergrad program and compare it to a place like Harvard, to be fair,you need to exclude all the Wharton MBA's. Either that, or you need to allow Harvard to include both undergrads and Harvard MBA's. Otherwise, you're not making a fair comparison.</p>