The 4th Best Business School

Graduate School Business School - MBA
221

<p>

Yes. Though the difference between #4 (Kellogg) and # 5 (MIT) and that and number 6 and so on up to #9 (Columbia) is minuscule. </p>

<p>I stand by what I said that Yale is not superior to Ross. maybe in the long, long future it will be when Yale will significantly improve and Ross will cease to improve, Yale will be considered better than Ross. But at the moment, I think Yale was just playing on the methodology of the league table and therefore isn’t a convincing better school than is Ross.</p>

222

<p>Wildflower: Is that what you’ve learned from business school, trash-talking an opponent when you could no longer beat him in the debate? Isn’t that an act out of desperation and a sign of an early defeat? </p>

<p>

And what’s that supposed to mean? That the true value of the MBA degree is measured by its marketability in WS? Is that the only measure of the value of the MBA degree?
The last time I checked there are plenty of MBA grads from Stanford, Harvard, Wharton, MIT and Haas joining the tech industry in California …thriving on what they currently do and are not likely willing to exchange their present career with any IB or finance-related jobs in NY. Do you really think that there none lucrative opportunities for MBA grads in the West Coast, or in the South such us in the oil-rich, Texas, or in Florida where service industry is booming? Are there none opportunities outside of the US? So, I don’t think you’re really thinking. Or if you are, then your line of think is heavily one-sided and focused only in the finance industry. Well, people don’t study MBA just to work in the fiance sector. I know quite a number of people took MBA to continue the business empires of their parents and would not be attracted to a career that you think are the only worthy career for MBA grads.<br>
Some MBAs from big name business schools such as Stanford, Harvard, Wharton, Haas, etc have returned to their home countries and pursued a different career tract from the usual, finance. There are loads and loads of MBA grads in India, China, Japan, S.Korea, Singapore, HK, Manila, KL, Sydney, etc who are making much, much more than what those NY-based MBA grads are making. I’m not even sure if you’re making as much as I currently do, yet I don’t even have an MBA. </p>

<p>

Probably. But that’s not my point. My point was, Yale has failed to develop a program despite its huge investment. Therefore, another investment for another area is not a sure shot to success, though I’m not denying that Yale has a very strong potential. My only claim here is that, the Yale name does not command a full guaranteed success like what you’re insisting. Again, here the proof to that – [Yale</a> Bulletin and Calendar - News](<a href=“http://www.yale.edu/opa/arc-ybc/v28.n18/story1.html]Yale”>http://www.yale.edu/opa/arc-ybc/v28.n18/story1.html) </p>

<p>

I’ll tell what’s idiotic here. What’s idiotic here is that, despite making some bold statements, you can’t substantiate it not even one of the many idiotic claims you’ve made on this thread. I think that’s very idiotic. Another idiotic thing here is that, despite providing you with solid evidences, you keep on ignoring them. I think that’s idiotic. And, of course, it’s also idiotic when you misunderstood my previous job at the Asian Development Bank, and what the company does, or when you think what the guys do at ADB are “not at the core of business schools or business culture.” I think that was pretty idiotic.</p>

223

<p>SDTB,</p>

<p>

Oxford would fit in quite well with your description. In fact, I would argue that Oxford has a better name than Yale has and would have a much better record than Yale has in terms of producing leaders. </p>

<p>About 15 years ago, Oxford launched a business school. Yet 15 years have passed, Oxford’s MBA is just as prestigious now as it was 10 years ago. The best MBA candidates still prefer LBS and INSEAD than Oxford. In fact, IMD and HEC’s MBA are more respected business schools in most parts of Europe than an Oxford MBA. </p>

<p>Many people around the world have heard of Oxford and know that it is a great school where the future leaders are manufactured. (Probably the most prestigious school in the world after Harvard.) Yet only a few of them know that Oxford has a legit MBA program. What’s your excuse this time? </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Well, if we would base this on your argument, probably. Probably IF Yale knows HOW to do it. But given its tract record, I suspect that it can do it. Okay, let’s agree that Yale has potential, but it’s dubious that can utilize it to the fullest. In other words, that’s easier said than done, given its tract record. </p>

<p>

Well, you do realise that that was one of the topics that I was arguing against?</p>

<p>SDTB,
I understand what you’re trying to say. Please don’t doubt it that I do. However, what you’re saying on here is just your personal opinion, exactly what I am also doing. But the different between mine and yours (and your camp’s) is that, I always back up my assertions with facts, hence I presented league tables (to prove that Berkeley and Yale don’t differ much in prestige), quoted statements of reliable people (such as those of past Stanford and Yale’s presidents) and posted articles of actual events (such as Yale’s failure to develop a program.) While I somehow appreciate your move, which is to keep on trying to demolish the facts I presented, your cohorts simply ignored them and instead of acting like MBA grads, they continue to bank on their baseless, out-of-this-world opinions. What’s worse is that, they attack posters rather than attack posts and present facts. That’s what I was expecting from people who claimed they have MBA. </p>

<p>I also am not amenable to the claim that those schools with the best undergrad reputation or with prominent alumni has a sure shot for success in terms of developing a business school. (I already gave several school names that fit into the descriptions.) Though I agree that Yale has intrinsic advantages here, its past records would show that, it does NOT have a sure shot to success when it comes to developing a program. Because the truth is, when you develop a graduate program, whether MBA, Law, Engineering, Education or Medicine, you can’t rely on having a strong undergrad program or a strong alumni network. Like I said, a number of very prestigious institutions (LBS, INSEAD, IMD, HEC, CEIBS, AIM, ISB, to name a few) are purely graduate business schools. Some world-class universities with highly regarded undergrad have also proven my claim that having a strong undergrad education is still not a sure shot for success. Oxford, Cambridge and MIT don’t have top-ranked business schools. Yet a school – WHARTON – that has not as much undergrad and law prestige and a relatively poorer performance in terms of producing presidents, plus situated in a less attractive location, etc… has successfully developed its graduate business school. That simply goes to show, that developing a graduate business school are not entirely dependent on having top-notched undergrad/law programs or having the best alumni roster. Developing a graduate business school can be entirely separable from all the rest of the programs that school offers. Therefore, Berkeley (or any top 20 school for that matter) does have as much potential as any school outside of the great triumvirate of HSW in developing a truly world-class business school. That thing is NOT exclusive to HYPSM. Wharton is not HYPSM. LBS, INSEAD and IMD don’t have undergrad programs. They don’t have the great alumni roster that Yale has.</p>

224

<p>

I did not “hijack” this thread. Read back on page 1; I was right on topic.
On the contrary, you’re the one who made groundless statements and you’re mad because you cannot substantiate your claims. It doesn’t sound and MBA-like attitude.</p>

225

<p>

</p>

<p>RML, I am not trash-talking you. I am hoping to help you understand 1) that you do not know what you are talking about and 2) that, therefore, your opinion (and bogus “evidence”) does not amount to much!</p>

<p>I don’t need to “beat” you in debate, you are your own demise! Don’t you get it? By spouting so much non-sense, you do “beat” yourself. There is no debate here, just a (free) show.</p>

<p>The one point most of us have tried to make here, which you inexplicably ignore is that 1) Yale (‘Yale’ by itself, without qualification) is a much stronger brand than any other university name, perhaps except Harvard and, maybe, Stanford–but certainly stronger than Berkeley (perhaps except in Asia, and that is due to CA’s proximity to Asia); and 2) that Yale SOM (much like Cambridge and Oxford, which I expect to be on the rise for the next few years as they ‘bank’ on their universities’ established brand as well) being a new school a) has not fully capitalized on the ‘Yale’ brand yet and b) is bound to do so over the next decade. (Other schools such as Haas and Ross have already capitalized, hit a plateau, and some have even moved down in the rankings after doing so.) Yes, Yale SOM isn’t more prestigious than some established schools such as, say, Kellogg right now. But it’s getting very close to that level. And I suspect it’s bound to surpass it in the future. Being in the top-10 this year, if repeated (or improved) next year, is evidence to that. I’d say that, starting this year, Yale SOM becomes a clear threat to the other top-10 schools, except the trinity (HSW).</p>

<p>If you, RML, can refute what I have said above sensibly, I welcome it. If you, on the other hand, are simply going to continue with your non-sense, please simply ignore this post. </p>

<p>And, I just find it quite amusing that you rely on arguments about technology and people working on the west coast… I work in venture capital… if you don’t get what that means, well, I am just sorry for you…</p>

<p>But again (just in case), I don’t have to disprove you, simply, because you have not proven anything. Can you not get that? I don’t have to engage your bogus arguments, frankly, because it is obvious–to anyone who knows anything about business–that you do not know what you are talking about. I am not trash-talking. I am simply (re)stating the obvious (which frankly does not need to be even stated in the first place…)</p>

<p>So, no, “trash-talking” is not what I learned at Harvard. Ignoring people who simply don’t know/don’t get/clearly cannot contribute is something I figured out on my own both on wall street and on the west coast in the venture capital industry–and which I am about to apply in your case, if your response is anything less than sensible. </p>

<p>Thanks.</p>

226

<p>I mean, c’mon, most know that the U.S. News rankings are very biased against public universities.</p>

227

<p>

</p>

<p>I think you are going to need to become more articulate in English before anyone is going to take you seriously. Every one of these sentences has a major problem with it.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I highly doubt this and certainly didn’t see it with my MBA class. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Bush, Clinton, Bush? No school on Earth has produced more influential leaders in the last 20 years.</p>

228

<p>^and don’t forget the other Clinton. </p>

<p>So… Bush, Hilary, Bush, Bill. :)</p>

229

<p>You people, especially you, wildflower, are the ones who made a claim that Yale’s name will carry its MBA program to the top 3 in the future. Therefore, the burden of proof is on you. Prove it instead of posting nonsense, out of topic expressions of your delusions. Yale’s past record in developing two of its departments was a flap. Prove it that it wouldn’t happen to its business school. Prove it that Yale SOM has better brand name than Berkeley-Haas, Chicago, Northwestern-Kellogg or Michigan-Ross at the moment or in the future. You’re the ones who made such nonsense claims, not me. So, again, the burden of proof is on you. </p>

<p>gellino, your post is rubbish. It did not help your argument. You were also not presenting facts. I suggest you stop posting messages that are irrelevant and nonsense. </p>

<p>And, dude. I know you’re going to doubt my statement. That’s expected from you. I don’t want to spend time remove your doubts. Instead, I’ll give assignments. Check the resumes of the higher ranked officials of the biggest companies in countries that I have mentioned. You would be surprised many of them have MBAs from US and European schools.</p>

230

<p>

</p>

<p>Technically that could be another Bush also…</p>

231

<p>Well, technically, we could also say: Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Clinton…</p>

232

<p>

</p>

<p>So, when it contradicts your premise, you don’t consider them facts? You claiming that Oxford produces more leaders than Yale when the leader of the free world for the last 20 years has come from Yale - how is that a fact? You claiming that loads of MBAs going to China, India are making much, much more money than those with MBAs in NYC when observations from my MBA class refute that. How is that a fact?</p>

233

<p>gellino,</p>

<p>Your post is still irrelevant. It does NOT support to your claim that having a strong undergrad and impressive alumni would be a sure shot to having a top-notched graduate business school. That’s the argument here. Don’t change the topic.</p>

234

<p>

</p>

<p>Well, Bill also attended Oxford.</p>

<p>Furthermore, the greatest Clinton of them all and future United States dictator, Chelsea Clinton, attended Stanford, Oxford, and Columbia…no yale :-(</p>

235

<p>RML,</p>

<p>You are completely oversimplifying my extensive posts as to why I believe that Yale SOM has been and will continue to be a strong riser.</p>

<p>You know they do have an excellent b-school – its not like their b-school is crap and the only reason it has been rising in the rankings is because of their name.</p>

<p>Their student body, faculty, curriculum, alumni, strong corporate recruiting, great location, great visibility in the media (via active professors getting strong coverage in elite business media outlets – WSJ, FT, CNBC, Bloomberg etc.) –> these are all top notch now (if it wasn’t across the board in the past, it certainly is now – and that is all that really matters). These are the reasons that SOM has been a strong riser in the rankings. NOW, on top of all of that, they have that juggernaut Yale name in their back pockets to back them up which is always a nice thing.</p>

236

<p>

</p>

<p>Nah, I can’t agree with that. The last one is the easiest: for let’s face it, nobody outside of academia or the tech/geek world has heard of Caltech. Heck, my brother went to Caltech, and he freely admits that practically nobody has ever heard of his school and that Berkeley is more prestigious. </p>

<p>Furthermore, I would argue that nobody has ever really heard of the lower Ivies either. Like I said, the University of Pennsylvania has one of the worst and misleading brand names of any of the top schools (rivaled only by the University of Chicago), being perennially confused with a regular state school and/or Penn State. To this day, I encounter people who incredulously can’t believe that an institution called the “University of Pennsylvania” can actually be an Ivy League School. The ingenious brand strategy of Wharton was to quarantine themselves from the UPenn brand name, which is analogous to the brilliant strategy, if unwittingly so, strategy of Berkeley to separate itself from the “University of California” prefix. {It’s actually debatable as to which is larger: the number of people who actually think Berkeley is not a state school vs. the number of people who think the University of Pennsylvania is a state school.} </p>

<p>Cornell isn’t exactly the most prestigious of schools either. In fact, it is the one Ivy for which I think you could make a serious case that you may be better off turning down for undergrad and going to Berkeley instead. Heck, even in the state of New York (especially in NYC), many people have never heard of Cornell. </p>

<p>And since this was supposed to be a discussion of MBA programs, Berkeley-Haas may not be improving as fast as Yale SOM, but it least it is still improving. That’s more than Cornell Johnson can say. I personally would prefer to get my MBA from Berkeley Haas or Yale SOM than from Cornell (sorry Alexandre, if you’re reading).</p>

237

<p>Cornell is arguably the weakest Ivy name (and Johnson certainly has seen better days – I’d submit that Haas is better than Johnson).</p>

<p>Overall, however, Cornell still remains an Ivy and I’d argue that its a stronger name than Cal. We can agree to disagree on this point.</p>

238

<p>Vector, your argument is this: </p>

<p>Yale will break the top 3 best business schools soon because of it’s prestigious name and strong alumni. </p>

<p>Prove that.</p>

239

<p>

</p>

<p>I didn’t disagree with you when you claimed that Yale SOM was rising. League tables have shown that your claim was correct. What I was disagreeing with is when you said that Yale, having its intrinsic advantages, is the only school that can really rival HSW. How is that possible when it’s not even top 8 yet and doubt that it would be even top 4 ten years from now. </p>

<p>Another thing that I am not amenable to is the claim that Yale is the only school that can really rival HSW in the future just because it has a strong undergrad and alumni. </p>

<p>I cited many, many evidences that:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>A Yale name isn’t the only prestigious school on earth (I cited several league tables where Yale wasn’t ranked number 1 or wasn’t even in the top 8, and Berkeley has outranked it in almost all of those tables)</p></li>
<li><p>A Yale name isn’t a sure shot for success. (I cited it’s flap science and eng’g programs)</p></li>
<li><p>Having a strong undergrad program does not guarantee a top graduate business school (e.g. LBS, INSEAD, IMD, HEC, CEIBS, ISB – all of which do not even have an undergrad program, and UPenn undergrad isn’t even a top 6 in the US yet Wharton is one of the best)</p></li>
<li><p>Having a strong alumni does not guarantee a top graduate business school (Oxford, Cambridge have educated leaders for more than 800 years now yet their business schools aren’t the best.) </p></li>
</ol>

<p>yet despite the evidences that I’ve shown, you still don’t listen. It only goes to show that you’re biased and extremely one-sided. I said, I’m willing to be corrected. But you have to prove it to me that I’m wrong. Until then, your claims are all baseless and only run in your imagination.</p>

240

<p>^^^ all of your gibberish and weak cherry-picking of examples does not change two simple facts:</p>

<p>1) Yale is way more prestigious than Cal and will always be.
2) Math, science and engineering rankings have nothing to do with business schools.</p>