The 4th Best Business School

Graduate School Business School - MBA
141

<p>

</p>

<p>cbreeze,</p>

<p>I already knew about the information you posted and like other intelligent people, I immediately disregarded it as a pathetic attempt at recognition (as if Penn needed it). You can keep going around saying Penn is second oldest US university. Maybe one day I can meet you in real life and laugh in your face.</p>

<p>My point is, no matter what “criteria” you are using, Penn is not the second oldest university as you have stated and exactly why you are misinformed. It is either the oldest university according you your Wikipedia source, or it is the the 6th oldest as agreed upon by many. You have no authority to suggest otherwise.</p>

142

<p>it really depends upon what the definition of “university” is. if it means (as it has come to mean over time) an institution of higher learning conferring post bachelor degrees (e.g. masters, PdDs, law, med, business degrees, etc.) – then, Penn certainly has a legitimate claim to be either the first or second UNIVERSITY in the US. </p>

<p>Penn already lays legitimate claim to establishing the first medical school, so really, its a matter of splitting hairs. Basically, like most of the Ivies, it’s old as dirt.</p>

143

<p>Since some continue to deny reality, here is some more evidence as to why Kellogg is not #4:</p>

<pre><code> Accepted Attend Pull
</code></pre>

<p>MIT 584 391 66.95%
Kellogg 1035 608 58.74%
Columbia 908 721 79.41%</p>

<p>Also, the Kellogg acceptance rate is about 20% (historically it’s even higher), while Sloan/Columbia are at about 15%</p>

<p>A lower percentage of applicants get into Sloan/Columbia and a higher percentage of those who are accepted choose to go there.<br>
Now it’s a stretch, but of course one could argue that the applicant pool is better at Kellogg so they can accept a higher percentage of the students, and also that more of these superior applicants get into - and therefore go to - H/S/W than do the MIT/Columbia applicants. This is “possible”, but highly unlikely in my opinion. The far more likely explanation is that MIT/Columbia are just a little harder to get into, and that students who are accepted at MIT/Columbia find them slightly more desirable when accepted than do those students accepted at Kellogg.</p>

144

<p>Yield rate is a good measure, but there’s a lot of noise in that data because it’s such a summary number.</p>

<p>In my view, the decisive factor here will probably be the high-value employers. At admitted students weekend at Stern two weeks ago, the dean made the qualitative point that the reaction to the recession has been that many employers are still hiring, but instead of recruiting at (say) 10 MBA programs they’re recruiting at 5. And then he insisted that because of Stern’s location, many of them were keeping Stern within that 5.</p>

<p>Whether or not his claim is really true in a broad sense across the top employers in the industries of finance, consulting, marketing, consumer products, technology, etc, I think his way of viewing that would help settle this question. </p>

<p>Let me propose a study, which I don’t have time to do right now but might interest some people on this board:</p>

<p>Each school’s recruiting website lists the “top employers” that hired MBAs last year, or even for several years running. The list of employers will share MANY names across the top 10 or so business schools. Let’s suppose that we run one of H/S/W as a baseline, and then compare Columbia, Kellogg, MIT, NYU, Tuck, Chicago, and Haas (I think we can accept those as the top 10 despite cries from Ann Arbor or New Haven).</p>

<p>First, get the lists of employers from each school, with # of accepted offers at each one, and set it up in a spreadsheet.</p>

<p>Second, subjectively classify employers to identify the really hot places. i.e. Google not Microsoft, Carlyle Group not Joe Schmoe Capital Partners, McKinsey not Accenture. Put some sort of weighting factor next to each one, maybe 1-5, representing how desirable an employer that is, where a Goldman Sachs or Kleiner Perkins might have a 5 and, say, Knight-Ridder would be closer to a 1.</p>

<p>Third, scale the class sizes at each place (to, say, a theoretical class size of 1000) so we’re comparing apples to apples.</p>

<p>Last, use the (desirability factor) * (# of offers) as a number of points, and add up the points at each school. That should give you a fairly simple conclusion to draw.</p>

<hr>

<p>This is not a perfect methodology - obviously many schools seek to admit very different mixes of backgrounds and career goals. It ignores entrepreneurs and family businesses. But varying prestige by industry, rather than on some sort of financed-centered (or salary-centered) target list, should help keep the noise down.</p>

145

<p>

</p>

<p>Formal consistent published rankings only began in 1988 but if you look at the archived class profiles that some have provided links for on here, you will see that Penn was the least selective Ivy until the last decade when it suddenly went from being ranked 12-20 to 5-8. I don’t see how where your grandfather went in 1918 and whether Penn is the second oldest or sixth oldest school or how well known Penn UG is known internationally (which was in no way the topic under discussion) has any relevance. Does the fact that Union was founded 18 years before Williams have any bearing on which is the better school today?</p>

146

<p>Yield rate is not always a good measure of quality and prestige. </p>

<p>I know a couple of Wharton admits who ended up at CMU-Tepper because they got a good scholarship packages from CMU-Tepper. A friend of mine chose Chicago over Stanford and Wharton for the same thing.</p>

147

<p>Other then law, Yale does not have a number one program. I’m still thinking why a self-confessed business/management guru would choose it over the more established business school.</p>

148

<p>

</p>

<p>Who said Yale SOM was no. 1? And are you claiming that Haas is no. 1? If not, then how does the “no. 1” benchmark have any relevance to what you are arguing?</p>

<p>No one here is saying that Yale SOM is better than HBS / Wharton / Stanford – or even for that matter Columbia / MIT Sloan / Kellogg / ChicagoBooth… plus Tuck and for international programs: INSEAD / LBS / IMD. Those are the “established” top tier b-schools.</p>

<p>But Haas? That’s never been an “established” top 10 b-school and in all likelihood never will be. I would have chosen Yale SOM over Haas a couple of years ago because I felt that Yale SOM was a strong riser and had undeniable tailwinds propelling it into the Top 10 –> and I was right. So, absolutely I would choose Yale over Haas in a heartbeat if I were choosing b-schools today and more importantly, tomorrow.</p>

<p>p.s. when did I ever call myself a business / management guru? lol…</p>

149

<p>^ Your claim for choosing Yale over Haas was because, according to your imagination, it has a very strong potential to break the top 3 business schools given its track record and background… and Berkeley does not have a chance to even land in the top 7, or was that, Berkeley isn’t top 7 program yet. Well, Haas is already number 7 now according to USNews and some league tables. It also is getting better year after year after year. 10 years ago, what was Berkeley’s ranking? It’s not even in the top 10. </p>

<p>So, then I asked, with the exemption of law, which other grad and professional school is Yale number one, or just even number 3? none! Here’s how Berkeley and Yale perform:</p>

<p>business
Berkeley -7 (already ahead of Dartmouth-Tuck, a b-school that you have very high respect)
Yale - 10 </p>

<p>Medicine
UCSF (UCB’s de facto med school) - 5
Yale - 6 </p>

<p>education
Berkeley - 7
Yale - not ranked??</p>

<p>And now for Engineering
Berkeley - 3
Yale - 40!! (that despite that Yale has already invested several millions of dollars to improve its engineering department) [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>In 2000, Yale made this public announcements: [At</a> Yale, a $500 Million Plan Reflects a New Age of Science - The New York Times](<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2000/01/19/nyregion/at-yale-a-500-million-plan-reflects-a-new-age-of-science.html]At”>http://www.nytimes.com/2000/01/19/nyregion/at-yale-a-500-million-plan-reflects-a-new-age-of-science.html) It’s the same propaganda you’re actually doing on here. Yet, almost 10 years have passed, Yale hasn’t improved like what it has envisioned it to be. Here’s how it has performed now vis-avis Berkeley’s: </p>

<p>Biological science
Berkeley - 2
Yale - 7</p>

<p>Chemistry
Berkeley - 1
Yale - 15</p>

<p>Computer Science
Berkeley - 1
Yale - 20</p>

<p>Earth Sciences
Berkeley - 4
Yale - 11</p>

<p>Mathematics
Berkeley - 2
Yale - 7</p>

<p>Physics
Berkeley - 3
Yale - 11</p>

<p>Again, on what basis would Yale be better than Berkeley when the record would show that, when it comes to developing top-notched programs, Berkeley has the much better record? Look, Yale have already invested half a billion dollars for their science and engineering programs, yet when you compare them to Berkeley’s Yale’s programs are still inferior? Don’t you think that you’re assuming too much here?</p>

150

<p>the Cal “engineering card”! of course! that solves everything!</p>

<p>In the bizarre world according to Cal fanatics there is an unfailing singular truth: anything and everything boils down to engineering. All simple or complex or unsolved phenomena (past, present and future) can and will be explained by engineering. This is why any argument on any topic ever made by a Cal fanatic will always come back to engineering. This is page 1, chapter 1 out of the official Cal Fanatic Playbook. This will, of course, be followed up by healthy doses of math and science rankings.</p>

<p>MBA programs? engineering. Nurture vs. nature? engineering. Boxers or briefs? engineering. What’s for dinner? engineering. Who to ask to the prom? engineering. What’s up with that smoky monster thing in Lost? engineering… oops that last one is computer science.</p>

151

<p>^
Haha! </p>

<p>[and the graduate program rankings…] :D</p>

152

<p>u like that one!</p>

153

<p>the_prestige, don’t change the subject. We’re looking at track record here since that was your very basis for thinking Yale very highly, and for looking down Berkeley like it’s some kind of an ordinary school.</p>

<p>I am also very aware that this thread is about business/management, or MBA in particular. But just because this is about business school we should avoid using other program fields as examples and bases, especially since the very heart of this topic that we are discussing here now is the school and its ability to progress basing on its track record.</p>

<p>I cited that article because it was what Yale has announced about a decade ago. I mean, please use common sense here. Why would I be using an example that is irrelevant to my point, or that Yale has not experienced before? It just so happened that engineering was one program that Yale wanted to improve on. So, I used it to inform you (as well as to awake you of the realities) that NOT all schools are cut for certain types of programs, no matter how hard they’ll try and no matter how much money they would invest in. Give that 500 million dollars to CMU and it would probably work. But Yale? I think you can see for yourself what the outcome of that over $500 million has done to their engineering school.</p>

<p>Now, I understand that the investment wasn’t only $500 million. It was way more than that, as the article says. The $500 million was just the minimum amount, as mentioned. And part of that investment went to their science programs. Please take note that science and engineering are two different types of programs, though they’re somehow related by discipline, they’re still not one and the same. For example, biological science is entirely different from mechanical engineering, though the two fields can support each other in application, but they’re not the same. But why is it that Yale is not the best when it comes to (physical) science? If what you’ve said is true that Yale is in a much better position than is Berkeley in when it comes to pushing programs to be the best and bastion of the field, then how come its science isn’t the best, despite the large amount of money infused in their science department?</p>

<p>Now, let’s avoid mentioning engineering (since you’re allergic to it) and just concentrate on the point that you’re trying to make. (And please take note that I only responded to what you’ve said.) What can Yale do that Berkeley cannot, in terms of boosting a program to become the best in the field?</p>

154

<p>

</p>

<p>It’s really painful to witness the deep seeded inferiority complex that Cal fanatics have particularly when it comes to the undisputed elite academic institutions like HYPSM… though I have to admit, its very fun toying with it – I can’t help myself.</p>

155

<p>the_prestige, I have not studied at Cal, though I admit I applied there for undergrad about a decade ago and was denied admissions. I went to Girton College in Cambridge, England, so I don’t know what’s that inferiority complex that you’re talking about. </p>

<p>There’s also NO such thing as HYPSM for MBA. Heck, Princeton does not offer graduate business program, MIT is only a gunner top 7 for MBA and Yale isn’t deserving for the top 10 spot. It isn’t superior to and more prestigious than Michigan-Ross, NYU-Stern or Duke-Fuqua. Maybe it’s about just as good as Duke but certainly not superior to Michigan-Ross. And, since Berkeley is slightly superior to Ross and Yale is (supposedly) inferior to Ross, Berkeley is substantially superior to Yale SOM. </p>

<p>Just accept it that this is one of those numerous fields where your beloved Yale is seen as an inferior school to Berkeley. </p>

<p>Again, except for law, Berkeley would smash Yale to the ground in academic competition, and all league tables would affirm that. Meanwhile, what you have is just your personal opinion.</p>

156

<p>RML, </p>

<p>First, I never attended Yale. Although I did use Yale locks quite a bit in junior high school.</p>

<p>Second, Haas is not and never will be an elite MBA program (beside the fact that the name sounds like a second rate psuedo luxury ice cream brand). Yale SOM, while not an elite program either, has been a strong riser in the rankings, and has every potential to become one.</p>

<p>Third, continuing to argue with you is insanity according to Albert Einstein… i.e. doing something 99 times and expecting a different result the 100th time:</p>

<p>1) Discussion regarding a topic (e.g. MBA programs)
2) Haas is mentioned
3) RML rushes in and jams engineering, math and science rankings down everyone’s throat
4) People run away</p>

157

<p>[Kellogg</a> serial, day one: Daianna Which MBA](<a href=“http://whichmba.■■■■■■■■■■■■■/2009/04/28/kellogg-serial/]Kellogg”>Kellogg serial, day one: Daianna | Which MBA)</p>

<p>Some blog about Kellogg. Mentions marketing class.</p>

<p>Then, a marketing class made all the difference. It made me think about my personal brand—the unique attributes that set me apart from the pack. Before business school, I spent years advising companies on environmental sustainability, a task that gave me enormous personal and professional satisfaction. I stepped back to reflect on what truly motivates me, as many other students are doing as the well-worn finance and consulting paths lose their lustre. I now see an opportunity to combine my existing skills with what I am learning at the world’s top marketing school to carve out a position in the emerging field of sustainable brand strategy. In many cases, I’m trying to sell companies on something they don’t yet know they need, and relying heavily on my professional network to unearth positions that will never appear on any business school’s job board.</p>

158

<p>

</p>

<p>Actually, I have to dispute this - I can’t agree that Haas could never become an elite MBA program. I think Haas has a lot of tools to work with - namely the ability to leverage the overall excellence of Berkeley’s graduate programs as a differentiating factor. I can see two paths that Haas could take have already been proven by elite B-schools that Yale would find extremely difficult to match.</p>

<p>*Technical management. Call this the “MIT way”. Berkeley could begin to offer an integrated MBA + MS engineering degree just like how MIT does right now. Berkeley is a top-ranked engineering school, and I suspect that many people would take advantage of the opportunity to simultaneously obtain both a Berkeley MBA and an engineering master’s in order to position themselves for prime careers in entrepreneurship, venture capital, or technology strategy. </p>

<p>One could couple this with Haas’s already-excellent Master’s in Financial Engineering program to allow students to pick and choose coursework and resources from all 3 programs (Haas, regular engineering, and financial engineering), and perhaps obtain 2, or in rare cases, all 3 degrees. One could also offer the possibility for Berkeley’s PhD engineering students to obtain Haas MBA’s as well, which would be a nearly unbeatable technology management combination. Again, MIT already offers a similar program, but only for its Chemical Engineering PhD students. {Don’t know why the other MIT engineering disciplines can’t integrate their PhD programs with Sloan.} In any case, Yale would find that matching such an offering would be quite difficult, consider its relatively weak engineering program. </p>

<p>*The ‘academic’ or ‘scientific’ approach, which I would also call the ‘Chicago’ approach. Chicago GSB positions its strength as one that is deeply integrated with its vaunted Sociology and especially Economics departments. I think Berkeley could do the same, but with its Sociology department, which is arguably the best in the world, and certainly better than Yale’s. I happen to think that intra-firm dynamics and firm performance are best explained through sociology rather than economics. {Note, behavior between firms as mediated by markets are explained through economics, but behavior within firms are explained through sociology, which means that sociology may hold the key to improving the performance of individual firms, which is what all managers want to know how to do.} For example, if Haas could begin to import some of the expertise from the sociology department to provide courses on how to motivate and manage teams, how to build corporate culture, or how to build the so-called ‘learning organizations’, that would be something that Yale would find extremely difficult to match. Again, considering Berkeley’s great strength in sociology, I don’t see why Haas couldn’t become the leading MBA students all of these topics that are crucial to modern management.</p>

<p>Now, that’s not to say that Haas will do that. But they could do it, and if they did, then they really could challenge for a clear slot amongst the elite. Hence, to say that Haas could never be an elite MBA program is too strong.</p>

159

<p>sakky,</p>

<p>there is a simple argument against the “technical approach”</p>

<p>1) as you already mentioned, what could Cal bring to the table that MIT and Stanford couldn’t? </p>

<p>2) i.e. for those placing a lot of value on the technical approach, your first choices are going to be MIT and Stanford – or put another way, if you had a choice of all three, you are not going to be choosing Haas – if for nothing other than the fact that Sloan and GSB are simply better known, better programs.</p>

<p>3) So, really, what is the real value proposition for a “me-too” program when you can find it at stronger institutions? The best that you can hope to become is MIT or Stanford b-school “lite”… and that is not elite IMO.</p>

160

<p>the_prestige, for grad and postgrad engineering, do MIT and Stanford always win in the cross-admit battles vs Berkeley? Is it safe to assume that when one is accept to Stanford’s postgrad engineering, the student would enroll in Staford despite having an acceptance from Berkeley postgrad engineering too? Same with MIT, does MIT always win against Berkeley for postgrad engineering? Well, the answer to that is a big, NO! And, for grad school, in general, the general prestige of the school isn’t always the driving force to attract top-quality students. Therefore, to assume that Berkeley would not win because in this race because of the presence of MIT and Stanford is, again, flat out wrong. And if you are an MBA grad, you fail right away. You fail in general management, marketing management and strategy. You lost in a battle even before you engage in the war. I wonder which business school have you attended. It seems your profs have failed to impart their knowledge to you. </p>

<p>Berkeley isn’t just strong for engineering. It is strong across all major academic fields. Like what sakky has said, it has the number one sociology program in the nation, and probably in the world. Berkeley is also number one for languages specifically English. And, of course, Berkeley has a resounding name in Asia and Europe. It can tap the huge Asian market by establishing linkages and partnership with top Asian universities. </p>

<p>Berkeley would probably have a hard time in becoming the best as the competition in business schools is extremely tight. But it can do it if it would really want to as proven by its tract record which houses a multitude of top-notched programs. And, if you think Berkeley can’t be number one, then I have no reason to believe that Yale can do it instead. In fact, like what I have been saying here all along which you’ve miserably failed to understand… Berkeley has better track record than Yale has when it comes to developing programs to become number one, as there are more departments at Berkeley that are rated number 1 than there are at Yale. In fact, there is only one program where Yale really excelled in, which is law, but other than that, there really is none anymore. Whereas Berkeley has many programs that are considered number one or one of the very best if not the best in the world. It has the best Chemistry program in the world, arguably the best chemical engineering program in the world, the best computer science and computer engineering (together with MIT and Stanford), the best English program in the world, the best sociology program in the world, the best Asian studies, the best civil engineering, etc, etc… You see, I can go on and on and on and I would just bore you to death, so I’d rather stop and hope that you analyze more carefully before posting back on here. </p>

<p>And, out of curiosity, which business school did you attend?</p>