<p>Where the Fortune 500 CEOs Went to College</p>
<p>The leaders of America's largest companies come from Ivy League and large public colleges.</p>
<p>By Brian Burnsed
Posted January 3, 2011</p>
<p>Link: Where</a> the Fortune 500 CEOs Went to College - US News and World Report</p>
<p>Not sure if any of you have posted this!? </p>
<p>Anyway, enjoy!~ :)</p>
<p>P.S. Dartmouth with 12 and Wisky (University of Wisconsin - Madison) tied with Harvard with 11 Undergrad alumni. Impressive!!</p>
<p>Ivy League combined: 48
Big 10 combined: 26</p>
<p>74 of the 500 CEOs earned their undergraduate degrees from Ivy League or Big 10 schools. What’s impressive is that the number of alums from 2 Ivies (Brown and Yale) and 7 Big 10 (Chicago, Iowa, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Penn State and UIUC) universities are not included on this list. I would estimate that another 30 or so attended the missing Ivy and Big 10 schools. When all is said and done, 20%+ of Fortune 500 CEOs received their undergraduate degrees from either Ivy League schools or Big 10 schools.</p>
<p>I am surprised that Yale and Chicago do not make the list.</p>
<p>Ivy League combined: 48
Big 10 combined: 26</p>
<p>74 of the 500 CEOs earned their undergraduate degrees from Ivy League or Big 10 schools. What’s impressive is that the number of alums from 2 Ivies (Brown and Yale) and 7 Big 10 (Chicago, Iowa, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Penn State and UIUC) universities is not included on this list. I would estimate that another 30 or so attended the missing schools. When all is said and done, 20%+ of Fortune 500 CEOs received their undergraduate degrees from either Ivy League schools or Big 10 schools.</p>
<p>Interesting findings. Most notably, Berkeley’s Haas, NYU Stern, and MIT Sloan are missing. </p>
<p>Berkeley is especially shocking considering the university’s population and the extremely positive showing of other lesser publics.</p>
<p>I am not surprised that Call/Haas do not make the list for the following reasons:</p>
<p>1) Cal/Haas are more likely to have alums go into smaller startup/tech firms in the West Coast than join large corporations.</p>
<p>2) Haas is a relatively small program. Booth (Chicago), Columbia Business School, HBS, Kellogg (Northwestern) and Wharton have MBA classes of 600-900 students. Haas has classes of 250.</p>
<p>What are you talking about? The Haas program is big, perhaps not as big as those of the Ivies, but there are certainly more than 250 pupils in a class.</p>
<p>[Haas</a> School of Business - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haas_School_of_Business]Haas”>Haas School of Business - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>Total Haas Students:
700 Undergrads
1564 Grads</p>
<p>Columbia and Kellogg actually have smaller classes. Stanford also does not suffer from the problem Haas has and it actually does have one of the smallest MBA programs around.</p>
<p>Not really sentiment. Cal has 490 full time MBA students. Others may be enrolled in part time programs, executive programs or distance learning, but the actual full time MBA program enrolls 490 students, which means 250 or so per class. Columbia and Kellogg have 1,200 full time MBA students, which means 600 per class. And if you choose to go by overall size of the graduate program, Haas has 1,500 students compared to 2,200 at Columbia and Kellogg a whopping 2,700.</p>
<p>What impresses is Dartmouth. It has the smallest undergraduate student body, yet has the highest number of Fortune 500 CEOs (from undergrad college) among the schools listed.</p>
<p>Fortune 100 firms are even more interesting (e.g., instead of the top 500 companies, the top 100 companies). On the undergraduate level, Harvard is first with 5 while Tufts, Dartmouth, and Upenn tie for second with 3 undergraduates. Yale, Notre Dame, and others tie for third place with 2 undergraduates:</p>
<p>[Where</a> CEOs at America’s Largest Companies Went to College - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2010/11/15/where-ceos-at-americas-largest-companies-went-to-college]Where”>http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2010/11/15/where-ceos-at-americas-largest-companies-went-to-college)</p>
<p>This needs to be adjusted for size of student body to get the real meaning. Wisco has about 30,000 undergrads, Dartmouth 4500.</p>
<p>My CEO went to LSU and he is the smartest, most ethical and most respected person in the industry.</p>
<p>Fortune 100 means more than Fortune 500? Ajusting for size? LOL! You guys are overanalyzing this. CEOs of Fortune 500 companies are one in a Million…literally. Let us not overarchitect this shall we?</p>
<p>Fortune <insert number=“”> means the rankings of the top companies based on gross revenues. Obviously the largest companies will be at the top because they generate more revenue (and also have more costs because they are bigger). There is also a relationship with market capitalization for that same reason (hence why Exxon and Walmart are almost always at the top).</insert></p>
<p>That being said, Fortune 100 is usually what’s cited as the elite corporations because they incorporate the best firms based on their gross revenues. Additionally, they are the first page on Forbes 500 list. Hence why Fortune 100 is more impressive and hence why USNWR also broke it down in that way. It’s way less ridiculous than the way people on CC break down colleges.</p>
<p>Oh, and the adjusting for size thing is silly. Fortune 100 isolates that. And I would also argue that just because a school has a lot of individuals, doesn’t necessitate that school has more CEO’s in business. If that were the case, the majority of Fortune 100 CEO’s would be from huge state schools. Obviously not true.</p>
<p>buzzers, how do you determine size? Revenues, profitability or Market Cap? Companies like Apple, Cisco, Coca Cola, Google, Intel, Oracle, Pepsi Cola, Pfizer, Philip Morris, Schlumberger etc… may not make the Fortune 100 for revenues, but their maket cap and profitability is certainly among the top 50. I don’t think looking at the Fortune 100 makes sense. All Fortune 1000 companies are important, and looking at the top 500 is more than sufficient.</p>
<p>While that’s true, revenues is still the biggest factor. My reason is because Market Cap is stock price X number of shares outstanding. Seeing how the stock price fluctuates with supply and demand, and that some companies don’t bother to have stock splits (cough Apple, cough Google), market cap can distort things. Hence why gross revenues is the focus. Fortune 500 has a lot of corporations that no one has ever heard of (but obviously ones that people have heard of).</p>
<p>Fortune 100 is used to gauge the cream of the crop. Both can show good measures, but people really focus on the corporations that are in the top 10, 50, etc. You don’t really go through and look at numbers 250-500. The idea is that some of the best companies are in the top 100 because they generate the highest revenue. Steve Forbes agrees.</p>
<p>I am not saying that Fortune 500 is bad or anything but Fortune 100 is utilized a lot of times. The point is if you accept the Fortune 500, you then would accept that the cream of the crop are contained in the Fortune 100. Thus, a representation of schools in Fortune 100 shows the cream of the crop (and hence why USNWR also listed the CEO’s for Fortune 100 as well).</p>
<p>But it’s arbitrary, isn’t it? Just like USNWR top 20,25,30,50,100, whatever. What’s funny is that transitive property doesn’t seem to apply here with people. It’s pretty trivial but interesting to some.</p>
<p>Where the Financial 100 CEOs went</p>
<p>[Notre</a> Dame No. 1 Producer of CEOs at Top Financial Firms // News // College of Arts and Letters // University of Notre Dame](<a href=“http://al.nd.edu/news/16316-notre-dame-is-no-1-producer-of-ceos-at-top-financial-firms/]Notre”>http://al.nd.edu/news/16316-notre-dame-is-no-1-producer-of-ceos-at-top-financial-firms/)</p>
<p>And until his fairly recent retirement the Exxon CEO was from Wisconsin.</p>
<p><a href=“Oil: Exxon Chairman's $400 Million Parachute - ABC News”>http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/PainAtThePump/story?id=1841989</a></p>
<p>I miss Lee Raymond.</p>
<p>“This needs to be adjusted for size of student body to get the real meaning. Wisco has about 30,000 undergrads, Dartmouth 4500.”</p>
<p>No need to adjust for size. The smaller school already wins the absolute number of undergraduate CEOs and they are almost dead even for total CEO graduates, so adjusting for size will just make it into a total rout for Dartmouth. You won’t get any new information by adjusting for size.</p>
<p>I heard of a college counselor who keeps a copy of Who’s Who on her desk. Whenever a family comes into her office obsessed with the Ivies, she asks them for names of people they most respect. Then she looks up where they went to college - which usually is not an Ivy.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As an Exxon shareholder, perhaps? Or as an example that an engineer can make it all the way to the top?</p>
<p>You would be hard pressed for anyone that did not have an interest in the financial return on Exxon stock to remotely like this fossil of an individual. His picture should be next to the cantankerous entry in the encyclopedia.</p>