Haha, happy new year!
After reviewing data on Linkedin Premium, I can say I made an error in judgement. LinkedIn gives you the opinion of clicking on any school and seeing what exact company their graduates end up working for. Frankly , I was surprised to see graduates from top states schools end up at pretty much the same companies as Ivy grads. The only difference is the state school grads had a large range in quality of where they ended up. ( in terms to company quality, some good companies, some not so good companies) Therefore, it’s fair to say Man A needs to work harder at applying and networking in to getting in to a top company, because they would hire him. The reason Ivy grads make more money on average compared to non Ivy is the companies they work for after graduate tend to be higher in quality and therefore pay more. But if a non Ivy got that same job they would get that same salary. In other words, companies don’t pay more to Ivy grads hires vs a non Ivy hire. The jobs the Ivy grad gets tends to be from higher quality companies , which pay more.
“In other words, companies don’t pay more to Ivy grads hires vs a non Ivy hire. The jobs the Ivy grad gets tends to be from higher quality companies , which pay more.”
In my experience, it is actually a combination of both. Ivy grads do tend to get some level of pay premium vs. State school graduates. In addition, Ivy grads are also more likely to land a job at a higher quality company. It isn’t really an either / or type of issue.
In the world, all of these categories overlap to a very significant extent. A tippy top student at a good public business school is in a much better position than someone at the bottom of the class at Wharton, but you would probably rather be near the bottom of the class at Wharton than in the 50th percentile at any but a top-10 business school.
But recognize that “prestige” matters much more in some fields than others. It matters a lot for law schools, more than any other professional degree of which I know, but even there your prospects would be better as the best student at a second-tier school than as a mediocre student at a top school. It’s hard to know in advance where you will be, however, so my advice to a prospective law student would always be to beg, borrow, or steal to go to the highest-ranked school you can. (That is not the advice I give high school students looking at college – not even close.) But going to the highest ranked school doesn’t come close to guaranteeing that you will have a better career than someone who went to a much less prestigious school. What it means, effectively, is that you have greater margin for error.
I know someone going to Wharton for an MBA next year, and she is much more a “Man B” than a “Man A” – grades not as high as 3.7 at a LAC not generally regarded as academically strong, five years working in a role most top students turn their noses up at. The thing is, she’s done it brilliantly (and she’s making a heck of a lot more than $50K, especially in retrospect after her company’s public offering). She learned a long time ago how to maximize her strengths and minimize her weaknesses, and she’s become a star in a non-sexy role. She also calculated, correctly, that she would stand out more as a candidate at Wharton than at some other b-schools that focus on her area of strength or her industry more heavily . . . but then she plans to use Wharton to help her expand her competencies beyond her current role. THAT’s who Mr. B is at Wharton – a skilled, strategic, proven winner. Betting on her success is a good bet, and that’s how employers will see it, too.