Undergradaute Reputations?

Graduate School
21

<p>There are a handful of Harvard students that are enrolled in PhD programs at KSG. The vast, vast, vast majority are in MPA, MAID, ect. And yes, the vast majority are wildly in debt and have little or no clue what their future holds, which is why alot of them do end up in consulting. Did the KSG degree help them get into consulting? Yes, it did, but there is really no point blowing 100K at KSG if you want tog et an entry elvel MC job.</p>

<p>Presitge is important, if you are looking SPECIFICALLY for jobs like management consulting, I-Banking, law, or if you are in academia. if youre not, prestige of a school is vastly overrated when it comes to career and earnings. As UCLAri said, if you doubt this, there are literally hundreds of studies available to prove this point.</p>

<p>Also, the OP was asking about UG prestige, which, I think we can all agree, is perhaps as unimportant as where you did your high school (alright, maybe not), especially if you plan on doing grad work after.</p>

22

<p>sakky,</p>

<p>Your weakest assumption is that most people are able to get into a PhD program. It's not like you snap your fingers and the PhD bus comes and picks you up. For many, it's MA or the highway.</p>

23

<p>UCLAri,</p>

<p>The PhD bus actually picked me up once, but I didn't have enough change to pay the fare so they kicked me off just east of "Professional Diploma Heights."</p>

24

<p>
[quote]
Yes, it did, but there is really no point blowing 100K at KSG if you want tog et an entry elvel MC job.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Uh, they're not getting entry-level positions. At least, not all of them (or even most of them). Most of them are getting associate level positions - the same sort of positions that the HBS MBA's get. It's gotten to the point that people are tagging KSG as "HBS-lite", as for those people who just weren't good enough to get into the HBS MBA program, but will still be able to enjoy many of the same recruiting opportunities anyway. Those KSG grads who landed associate positions at consulting firms "blew" no less money than those HBS grads who also landed associate positions at consulting firms. </p>

<p>
[quote]
As UCLAri said, if you doubt this, there are literally hundreds of studies available to prove this point.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I do doubt this, and I doubt all of the studies that purport to "prove" this. Specifically, the main problem with all of these studies is that they are all observational. Self-selection is a perennial problem. A truly bulletproof study would be able to take those people who got into both Harvard and some less prestigious school and then randomly assign them to one of the schools. This is obviously impossible to do. Yet the fact remains that nobody turns down Harvard randomly - those who do so are doing it for a reason. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Also, the OP was asking about UG prestige, which, I think we can all agree, is perhaps as unimportant as where you did your high school (alright, maybe not), especially if you plan on doing grad work after

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Ah, but again, this all presumes that you actually will do grad work. Will you? I remember plenty of people who came into undergrad absolutely sure that they would go onto grad school...but never did. Many of them changed majors because they found something else they were more interested in. Some of them got mediocre grades and therefore couldn't get into any decent grad school. Some of them got married and had kids and then found out that their families were far more worthy of their time than is grad school. Lots of reasons exist for why some people who think they will go to grad school never actually do so. </p>

<p>And again, this gets back to my central point. You just don't know what the future will hold. People change all the time. I can tell you that, 2 or 3 years ago, the way I used to envision my career is far different from how I envision it now. And in a couple more years, things may change yet again. You just don't know. That's why it is important to maintain flexibility. Again I ask - what if you sign up for a highly specialized educational program, only to find out later that you don't actually want the corresponding career? </p>

<p>
[quote]
Your weakest assumption is that most people are able to get into a PhD program. It's not like you snap your fingers and the PhD bus comes and picks you up. For many, it's MA or the highway.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Uh, no, I am making no such assumptions. In fact, that's the point - that we shouldn't be making any assumptions. For example, we shouldn't assume that somebody wants a job in a specific field, because, again, how does anybody really know that? How do you know that somebody won't change his mind later? Similarly, we shouldn't assume that KSG is going to be expensive for everybody and UCSD will be cheap for everybody, because that assumes a number of things to be true (i.e. state residency status, lack of scholarships, no PhD funding, etc. etc.)</p>

25

<p>sakky,</p>

<p>You ARE making assumptions: that a person cares about having a high-powered career, that a person can get into a PhD program and do your PhD/drop out for a pity MA plan, and that prices and opportunity costs stay the same across the board. </p>

<p>This does not hold true in most cases.</p>

<p>And do you know why so many KSG grads go private in the long run? According to KSG itself, the reason is cost. So many people come out with huge debt loads that they need to go into the private sector instead of doing what they wanted to do.</p>

26

<p>I dont mean to constantly agree with UCLAri and constantly disagree with sakky, because sakky often makes good points, but once again, I think UCLAri hits the nail on the head. KSG sends so many of its students to private sector jobs because there is simply no way most of their (unfunded) students can hold a job in the public sector with the amount of debt they have.
KSG, however, is really an outlying case when it comes to public admin programs. I dont even consider KSG a real public admin or ID program at all, but rather a pseudo business school/diploma mill for mid career professionals. I get the feeling this view of KSG is gaining some credibility, which is why I would never apply or go there.
UCLAri also makes a good point in saying that not everyone wants to work for McKinsey or Bain. Some do, but the pressure of working for big firms can be physically and mentally draining. Just like not everyone in law wants to work for Cravath or Watchtell, I doubt everyone in the world wants to leverage their degree into a job with BCG or McKinsey.
I sincerley think it is a huge mistake to blow big money on a name brand degree in order to "leave your options open." In reality, all this does is cause you to forfeit many, many options due to debt. What happens if someone goes to SAIS or SIPA to "leave their options open" then want to work in non profit or international development? Can you realisitcally do this with 100K in debt?</p>

27

<p>So, if i go to private schools like KSG, SAIS, SIPA, i would have 100k in debt.
but if i go to UCSD, i would save lots of money even it i'm not a californian resident.
right?</p>

28

<p>lol. choeandrew. PhD programs usually fund you private or public.</p>

<p>Uh.. sakky wrote a lot of words as usual with A LOT of assumptions, so if anyone out there is actually reading this post for advice such as OP, please take it with a grain of salt.</p>

<p>I am in engineering so I don't know where the art and humanities PhDs work after grad school. But trust me. The majority of PhDs in the sciences/engineering work in their own respective fields after they finish their dissertation. When most of my colleages undergo the challenge of a PhD program, they don't treat it as a "stepping stone" to investment banking, financial firms etc. They know, I mean most of them, REALLY KNOW that what they accomplish in their research as a PhD student will shape their future careers. If they wanted to work in finance, they would have gotten an MFA not a PhD. </p>

<p>For example, a PhD is difficult compared to say a BS or MS in the sense that it stamps you as one with expertise in your respective area... for life. With a MS or BS in engineering, you can easily move to the business side of operations, but with a PhD in engineering you are EXPECTED to do research due to your highly extensive training in the area. I personally believe a PhD is a waste of time if fundamental research and innovation as a career is not your ultimate goal.</p>

<p>It is not the first time Sakky went about inflating the PhDs who go onto private consulting and investment banking (?).. So, just to make this clear for future posts: Let me tell you where the majority of investment bankers and corporate managers come from: business and economic schools.</p>

29

<p>choeandrew,</p>

<p>You CAN save money at UCSD, but you won't be a resident until your second year.</p>

30

<p>
[quote]
I am quite certain that every single KSG PhD student is funded.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Just a point here. Harvard as a general rule is known for turning itself into a money making MA granting machine. It's PhD students may all get funded, but not necessarily many of its MA students do. That is something a lot more likely to happen at the Woody Wo School at Princeton. Finally, I had a colleague apply to get his PhD at Harvard, Yale, Michigan, Stanford, Berkeley. Berk. and Stanford rejected him. H and Y let him in without funding. He chose H. over M with funding; though he wasn't funded his first year, he banked on doing well and getting funding following his first year, a strategy that worked out for him. But I would not assume that H. funds all its PhD students, though it seems unlikely that unfunded candidates would choose what my colleague did anyway.</p>

31

<p>I think your colleague took a stupid risk, but Im glad it paid off for him. Harvard is notorious for having programs that are simply piggy banks, such as the mid career MPA at KSG for isntance. However, most top schools do this, such as the LSE and Chicago, so they arent alone.
To be fair to harvard, funding at the MA level is quite rare, which explains the higher exceptance rates at top school such as KSG or SIPA as opposed to WWS where students are fully funded.</p>

32

<p>
[quote]
I think your colleague took a stupid risk, but Im glad it paid off for him.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Agreed. I think he took an incredibly stupid risk. Funded at Michigan and not at Harvard and he chooses Harvard. I didn't want to pry, but I think a) he actually came from a wealthy family b) he had gone to Michigan undergrad and just wanted something different. In the field he had chosen, Michigan and Harvard are fairly evenly matched....</p>

33

<p>
[quote]
Uh, they're not getting entry-level positions. At least, not all of them (or even most of them). Most of them are getting associate level positions - the same sort of positions that the HBS MBA's get. It's gotten to the point that people are tagging KSG as "HBS-lite", as for those people who just weren't good enough to get into the HBS MBA program, but will still be able to enjoy many of the same recruiting opportunities anyway. Those KSG grads who landed associate positions at consulting firms "blew" no less money than those HBS grads who also landed associate positions at consulting firms.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Associate level is entry level for folks with an MA or an MBA. If you are shooting for consulting or think there's a good chance that's what you'll want to do, you would be a fool to go to KSG. Unless you specifically want to do public sector focused consulting. Gotta agree with UCLAri pretty much down the line on this thread; though I often violently disagree with Sakky's underlying assumptions, he does make good points sometimes. However, if one's goal is to maximize earning capacity in the private sector, an investment in a degree from KSG vs. probably any top-15 MBA program is a bad idea. Corroborating what UCLAri pointed out, I have known several people who graduated from KSG and ended up taking pretty much whatever came along in the private sector because they hadn't thought through what they wanted to do or the fact that they were going to be in heavy debt when they got out. One friend for instance took an IT job -- basically a systems planner and administrator -- at a big financial house. It's not at all what he had shot for when he went to KSG, but he kind of felt backed into the corner relative to what his salary expectations/aspirations were. And IT was where his overall background led him....</p>

<p>The one exception here may be if one is from a country other than the US. I had a friend who decided that an MA from KSG would be nearly as marketable in his country if not more so than a PhD from a top 20 economics program from a non-name state school. This is much like the Turkish guy that Sakky talked about. The brand name of Harvard can help in such situations although it's important to note this is based on bad information.</p>

34

<p>Having a Harvard degree in many foreign countries will shock and awe the locals, but how necessary is it for advancement in your career? It certainly helps, as evidenced by the amount of government officials who get executive MPA's at Harvard, but this seems to apply only for the very top level jobs such as Prime Minister. I doubt there are many jobs you will be less coveted for in Bangladesh with a MA from Michigan as opposed to one from Harvard...</p>

<p>Also, in many countries, such as Japan for instance, they put egregious amounts of emphasis on degree prestige, but even if you are a Harvard grad, you still wont get hired by most Japanese businesses because you arent Japanese, plain and simple. Just because the locals are impressed doesnt mean they will hire you.</p>

35

<p>
[quote]
You ARE making assumptions: that a person cares about having a high-powered career, that a person can get into a PhD program and do your PhD/drop out for a pity MA plan, and that prices and opportunity costs stay the same across the board.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, I am NOT making that assumption. I am simply drawing that as a possibility. Some people can in fact pull off exactly what I described. Not all can (and I never said that all can). But some can.</p>

<p>To assume that somebody can't do that - now that * is an assumption. And that is precisely what has happened in this thread - people have assumed that everybody *cannot do what I have described. For example, it was recommended that people always choose UCSD over Harvard. That analysis rests on the assumption that you cannot pull off the strategy that I described. </p>

<p>The real answer is contingency-based. Sometimes * you should choose UCSD over Harvard, and sometimes vice versa, and the way to distinguish between the 2 is based on a number of factors. *That is my point. I have never stated that everybody should choose Harvard over UCSD. But others have stated that everybody should choose UCSD over Harvard. I am making a far less strict (and therefore far more defensible) claim than others are.</p>

<p>
[quote]
sincerley think it is a huge mistake to blow big money on a name brand degree in order to "leave your options open."

[/quote]
</p>

<p>See, there it is again. You are assuming that somebody is in fact "blowing big money" to get that name brand degree. That is an assumption. Maybe you would be blowing big money. But then again, maybe you wouldn't be. Again, maybe he can be one of those guys who gets PhD funding and then turns it into a professional KSG master's. {And of course even if he did 'blow big money', perhaps the person in question is so rich that he doesn't care anyway. To assume that the person is not rich is also an assumption.} </p>

<p>Guys, these are all assumptions. I make no assumptions. I don't assume that a person will find KSG to be cheaper. On the other hand, I don't assume that a person won't find KSG to be cheaper.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Uh.. sakky wrote a lot of words as usual with A LOT of assumptions,

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You guys make all these assumptions, and then presume that I am the one making the assumptions. </p>

<p>Let's just enumerate just a few of the assumptions that you guys have made:</p>

<p>*You have assumed that the person in question won't get PhD funding
*You have assumed that the person in question isn't rich.
*You have assumed that the person in question actually wants a job that is consonant with the UCSD program, or even with a public administration job in general, and isn't in fact trying to get into consulting or banking.<br>
*You have assumed that the person in question, if he wants such a job consonant with public administration will actually be able to get it</p>

<p>I, on the other hand, make no such assumption. I am simply laying out examples of people who would probably be better served going to KSG than to UCSD. Now, are these examples representative? No, and I never claimed that they were. What I am simply saying is that we need to take things on a case-by-case basis. Some people are indeed better off taking UCSD over KSG. But others are not. That's my central point.</p>

36

<p>
[quote]
If you are shooting for consulting or think there's a good chance that's what you'll want to do, you would be a fool to go to KSG.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>However, if one's goal is to maximize earning capacity in the private sector, an investment in a degree from KSG vs. probably any top-15 MBA program is a bad idea.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Uh, why? Seems like a pretty good choice to me. </p>

<p>Now, is it as good for getting into consulting as just getting your MBA from HBS, or some other elite MBA program? No, probably not. That's probably the most straightforward way of getting into management consulting. But let's face it. Not everybody can get into a top MBA program. It's not like you can just wake up one fine day and simply decide to go to an elite MBA program. I know a lot of people who couldn't get into top MBA programs but really really wanted to get into consulting, and they did get into KSG, which they decided to use as a consulting 'backdoor'. Honestly, how else were they going to get access to consulting? What else are they going to do? </p>

<p>
[quote]
One friend for instance took an IT job -- basically a systems planner and administrator -- at a big financial house. It's not at all what he had shot for when he went to KSG, but he kind of felt backed into the corner relative to what his salary expectations/aspirations were. And IT was where his overall background led him....

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And how exactly is that different from choosing UCSD over KSG and also not getting the job that you want? Let's face it. Not everybody from that UCSD program will get the job that they want. No program will guarantee that you will get the job that you want upon graduation. Every program has some graduates who don't end up with jobs that they want. </p>

<p>Look, KSG doesn't guarantee the job that you want. Neither will any other program. But at least KSG will give you access to the Harvard brand name and the Harvard network. Now, I agree that UCSD will give you better access to certain specific jobs (i.e. that job in Pacific affairs for the government). But no guarantees. Hence, the tradeoff is between the Harvard brand name (and, in many - but not all- cases, more debt), vs. a better (but not guaranteed) chance of getting certain specific jobs. </p>

<p>
[quote]
The one exception here may be if one is from a country other than the US

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I really don't think that's the only exception. See below.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Having a Harvard degree in many foreign countries will shock and awe the locals

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Harvard a Harvard degree in this country will also shock and awe the locals. Let's be perfectly honest. The vast majority of Americans do not know the rankings. And I'm not just talking about uneducated Americans. I am talking about even many of the most educated Americans. Let's face it. You can get a PhD in science and know absolutely nothing about the rankings in, say, the humanities. I would venture to say that most scientists don't know much about the rankings in anything except the sciences. But if you just tell people you are a Harvard graduate, that will shock and awe most Americans, who can't be bothered to dig any deeper.</p>

37

<p>
[quote]
Now, is it as good for getting into consulting as just getting your MBA from HBS, or some other elite MBA program? No, probably not. That's probably the most straightforward way of getting into management consulting. But let's face it. Not everybody can get into a top MBA program. It's not like you can just wake up one fine day and simply decide to go to an elite MBA program. I know a lot of people who couldn't get into top MBA programs but really really wanted to get into consulting, and they did get into KSG, which they decided to use as a consulting 'backdoor'. Honestly, how else were they going to get access to consulting? What else are they going to do?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>First of all, I said private sector as a whole, not just consulting. Your prescription is pitched to a fairly narrow subset of people that really want to get into consulting but can't get into a top 15 MBA program and yet can get into KSG.</p>

<p>And by the way, consulting is a very broad field. I doubt very much a KSG grad is getting opportunities to jump right into the exact management consulting opportunities at a place like McKinsey that let's say a Yale or Michigan MBA grad gets.</p>

<p>
[quote]
nd how exactly is that different from choosing UCSD over KSG and also not getting the job that you want?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I wasn't talking about KSG vs. UCSD's IRPS. I was talking about it vs. top 15 MBA programs as a launch into the private sector.</p>

<p>And KSG folks will probably do fine head-to-head against MBAs getting certain consulting jobs <strong><em>particularly if they already had good experience beforehand</em></strong> begging the question of your first assumption that you're talking about a subset of folks who could get into KSG but not a top 15 MBA program.</p>

<p>Anyway, the KSG folks will not have nearly as good a footing to get jobs in marketing, operations, finance, etc. as folks from a top 15 MBA program. So, repeating what I said, if you want to maximize opportunities in the private sector, you'd be a fool to go to KSG.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Harvard a Harvard degree in this country will also shock and awe the locals. Let's be perfectly honest. The vast majority of Americans do not know the rankings. And I'm not just talking about uneducated Americans. I am talking about even many of the most educated Americans. Let's face it. You can get a PhD in science and know absolutely nothing about the rankings in, say, the humanities. I would venture to say that most scientists don't know much about the rankings in anything except the sciences. But if you just tell people you are a Harvard graduate, that will shock and awe most Americans, who can't be bothered to dig any deeper.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, certainly it does that for you. I am quite a bit more jaded. I am neither shocked nor awed by someone who went to Harvard, but I have met a whole lot of them. And a degree from KSG tells me nothing other than that the person is likely to be fairly well educated. It's a completely mixed bag in my experience between folks who achieve quite well and others who struggle to make their degree work for them and still others who did precisely what you are suggesting -- i.e. chose Harvard because they are prestige whores or otherwise place a premium on what they think the Harvard brand name will do for them. It doesn't always work out that way, that the KSG brand name opens doors. You can ask one of my better friends who graduates from K-School recently and 6 months later is still temping and looking for a job.</p>

38

<p>
[quote]
First of all, I said private sector as a whole, not just consulting. Your prescription is pitched to a fairly narrow subset of people that really want to get into consulting but can't get into a top 15 MBA program and yet can get into KSG.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>To your specific point regarding a top 15 MBA, I think your net is cast a bit too widely. The #15 MBA school is probably Cornell. It is rather debateable to me whether a Cornell MBA can really offer you as many opportunities in the private sector as a KSG MPA or MPP would. That seems like a toss-up to me. Again, whether we like it or not, Harvard is Harvard. That brand name and the alumni network are powerful portals of access. </p>

<p>Now, if you were talking M7, or perhaps top 10, I could probably get on-board. But top 15? I think that's pushing it. </p>

<p>
[quote]
And by the way, consulting is a very broad field. I doubt very much a KSG grad is getting opportunities to jump right into the exact management consulting opportunities at a place like McKinsey that let's say a Yale or Michigan MBA grad gets.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Uh, why not? Speaking specifically about McKinsey, that is a firm that hires people from a wide range of disciplines and puts them in the same job as those with MBA's. I know people who have gotten master's degrees in technology & policy at MIT who have gotten the same associate jobs at McKinsey that the MBA's from both MIT and HBS have obtained. </p>

<p>But you don't have to take my word for it. You mentioned the Yale SOM, so let's compare that to KSG. About 15% of Yale MBA's enter consulting. That's highly comparable to the percentage of KSG master's students who enter consulting (public + private), averaged over all of the KSG master's programs, with figures ranging from a low of 5.5% for the KSG MPA/MC program to a whopping 30% (private + public consulting) from the KSG MPA2 program. Furthermore, the consulting salary figures for KSG are highly comparable to the consulting salary figures obtained by the Yale MBA's, which at first pass strongly indicates to me that these are comparable jobs with comparable responsibilities. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/career/pdf/CS_placement06_FINAL.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/career/pdf/CS_placement06_FINAL.pdf&lt;/a>
<a href="http://mba.yale.edu/careers/employment/pdf/careerreport.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://mba.yale.edu/careers/employment/pdf/careerreport.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]
And KSG folks will probably do fine head-to-head against MBAs getting certain consulting jobs <strong><em>particularly if they already had good experience beforehand</em></strong> begging the question of your first assumption that you're talking about a subset of folks who could get into KSG but not a top 15 MBA program.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>There are indeed many people who can get into KSG but can't get into a top MBA program. Let's face it. MBA admissions are unpredictable and many people get rejected for arbitrary reasons. They are also somewhat uncorrelated (for example, I know people who got into HBS, Stanford GSB and the elite MIT LFM MBA+Master's in engineering program, but didn't get into Yale). Granted, KSG admissions are unpredictable also. But that's the point. Since the admissions to all of these programs are unpredictable, you will find people who will get into one but not the others. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Anyway, the KSG folks will not have nearly as good a footing to get jobs in marketing, operations, finance, etc. as folks from a top 15 MBA program. So, repeating what I said, if you want to maximize opportunities in the private sector, you'd be a fool to go to KSG.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Again, while I disagree regarding your top 15 cutoff, nobody is disagreeing that a top MBA program will be more useful to get private sector jobs than would a KSG degree. But my point is, not everybody is going to get into a top MBA program. What should such a person do? Kill himself? If he can't get into a top MBA program but can get into KSG, that may be the best choice available to him. Honestly, what else is he going to do? </p>

<p>
[quote]
Well, certainly it does that for you. I am quite a bit more jaded. I am neither shocked nor awed by someone who went to Harvard, but I have met a whole lot of them.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Oh, believe me, I am not talking about myself. Trust me when I say that I have far more reason to be jaded about Harvard than almost anybody else here. I won't get into why.</p>

<p>But that's not the point. The point is that the Harvard brand name does work. Maybe it shouldn't work. Heck, I often times think that it shouldn't work. But * it does work*, whether we like it or not. It is a brand name that will undoubtedly shock and awe the vast majority of people, whether they are Americans or foreigners. Like it or not, that is the truth. It does work. Harvard has a brand name that no other school can match. </p>

<p>But I think that, from a long-term perspective, what is even more valuable than the brand name are the alumni connections. Harvard, hands down, has the best connections of any school in the world. The fact is, many (probably most) good jobs in the world are obtained through social networks. </p>

<p>Besides, using your same argument, we shouldn't be impressed by anybody with a top MBA either, as after all, such a degree also doesn't tell us anything other than the person is fairly well educated, but may also be a prestige whore or be somebody who places a premium on what they think an MBA can do for them. The same logic applies. What's the difference? </p>

<p>
[quote]
It doesn't always work out that way, that the KSG brand name opens doors. You can ask one of my better friends who graduates from K-School recently and 6 months later is still temping and looking for a job.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That's a completely unfair assessment. Nobody ever said that KSG/Harvard guarantees anything. After all, by that same argument, one could say that you shouldn't go to a top MBA program either, because there are some grads from those programs who can't find good jobs. For example, during the dotcom bust, there were a lot of newly minted Stanford MBA's who experienced great difficulty finding work. So does that mean that people would be "fools" to consider Stanford?</p>

<p>Look, there are no guarantees in life. All we can talk about are relative boosts to your success.</p>