<p>wow,washdad … How cynical …and how true :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’d assume we’re talking about national reputation vs regional reputation. But I kind of what you’re saying too…</p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
<p>Until recently the head of Exxon, Lee “Big Payday” Raymond was a UW grad. Other recent heads of major companies include John Mordgridge former CEO and COB of Cisco Systems. The current head of Halliburton is a UW grad. Those are some big companies. CEO of Intuit and COB and former CEO of Autodesk in the tech area.</p>
<p>While most kids want to go to a school with a good reputation, what really matters is what you make of the opportunites you are given. Go to the school that is a good fit for you, rise to meet challenges and work hard. There are many colleges out there that do a great job preparing students for careers and graduate school. Just because a school is known regionally much more than nationally does not mean much once you graduate and are working.</p>
<p>The answer is complicated. There is no cut off, prestige is a complicated thing and depending upon the region and field some degrees carry more of it than others, in ways the man or woman on the street would not expect. But prestige is of value. It’s true that within a company it matters little, but few people stay with a single company for their whole careers and headhunters are impressed by impressive acadmic credentials because they think employers will be. And sadly many employers are too.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Is there some general rule of the thumb when assessing prestige?</p>
<p>And reputations are very geo-centric as well. In many states the flagship university is very highly regarded. In iowa I suspect that a college like Grinnell(which is quite excellent) is as or more highly regarded than Williams/Swarthmore et al in most quarters.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>SGupta, perhaps you are trying for too much of a general answer. For example, in my field of public school teaching, it is easier to get hired initially if you attended the local state teachers college or flagship state university, because most others did similarly. Human nature plays a role; the interview committee feels a common bond because they also attended, recognize professor names, and so on. They can swap stories at the interview table. On the other hand, once hired there is no mobility, particularly, that depends on one’s prior education; it’s more about excellent job performance to gain tenure, then years served to gain seniority for perks within the school district (plum classes to teach, and so on). None of it would be helped by bringing in a shiny degree from an Ivy or top quality LAC. Simply irrelevant. </p>
<p>To teach private school in the same city, an elite private degree would be admired, as
a selling point to the parents to enrol their children with well-educated faculty. Either graduate could do a fine or terrible job as a teacher, depending on how they developed within their profession and learned on-the-job, AFTER graduating.</p>
<p>If you are interested in finance or business, where you need to make contacts across the state or around the country, then it might mean more to have a fancier degree, IMHO. Recruiters would come to your campus, for example, in i-banking, more likely at a prestigious LAC or university. They need to know that your Econ or Math course was very well taught. Department reputation is crucial in the hiring process. That’s what I hear anyway. </p>
<p>If you want to go to work for the Brookings Institute or some Policy Research & Development firm or “think tank,” clients would continuously want to know who around the table wsent to those “reputable” colleges and Ivies. It could add to your credibility having research findings accepted, because it would be assumed you had excellent skills in research and analysis of data. Your colleagues would know and envision where you attained your degree, even if it happened 25 years ago. </p>
<p>So the professional field makes a big difference. </p>
<p>My brother went to a second tier law school and has a very satisfying life practicing law in a New England state. The localness of his law school surely helped him get a fascinating first job as clerk to a state appeals judge before he went into private practice as a lawyer. That judge wanted to bring in someone state-trained and would have been less interested in a Harvard law school graduate, although Harvard was 50 miles away.</p>
<p>It really depends. </p>
<p>Maybe I want to ask you what is on your mind? Do you have a profession or field in mind?
That might focus your question a bit.</p>
<p>^^timed out</p>
<p>Your most recent question, I see from post 26, was
</p>
<p>This caused me to reflect on my 3 kids’ processes. My two older ones wanted to get a solid Liberal Arts Education. They wanted to learn to think critically, write effectively, and continue their love of learning. They looked at schools where there was a clear statement of priority in the teaching of undergraduates. It was irrelevant to them, as classroom students, whether or not they or their professors conducted research. They only looked at middle-to-top tier Liberal Arts Colleges and one also looked at Ivy universities.</p>
<p>They assessed prestige by looking at faculty credentials in the course catalogues to determine where the professors had attended college and graduate schools. When they saw many Ivies and top-tier LAC’s degrees (thinking USNWR) after many faculty names, they felt they were in the land of prestige. So it’s self-perpetuating, isn’t it.</p>
<p>My youngest has an entirely different path in mind. He feels he knows what he wants to do for a living, in which industry (screenwriting for film or tv).
He located himself as close as possible to where many jobs occur in that industry (sought colleges near NYC and LosAngeles, ended up near LosAngeles). He chose the best department for technical training in his major, and it mattered less to him about the prestige of the university that houses the major. He discovered that the university was good enough so that whenever he takes courses outside of his major, they too are interesting and well-taught. On that, he asks around to find out who teaches well. He cares not at all where professors outside his major attended college or university, but he wants the material taught well. </p>
<p>His major (declared before admission) is the driving force here. I think this could be compared to some students who choose a powerful department or technical focus in a humdrum university. In his major, he analyzed every professor according to which
films they participated in, whether or not they had written books used by other college faculty in courses around the country, what is written about them in the professional industry.</p>
<p>He wanted to know if his professors were respected academically and working actively in film. He’ll depend upon them for internships, contacts and connections. Department, not university prestige mattered most to him, unlike his older 2 siblings.</p>
<p>The more I read CC and reflect on the diversity of experiences, the less willing I am to speak of anyone outside my own family. By that, I mean I can only know my lived experience. Based on who I have met in my lifetime, knowing where they went to college and the kinds of conversations we can have, I feel that some went to schools that are underrated and should be better known. Others went to high prestige places and conduct brittle lives. Others went high prestige and conduct fascinating lives.</p>
<p>I have produced a list </p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/405031-168-noteworthy-colleges.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/405031-168-noteworthy-colleges.html</a> </p>
<p>based on a consensus of colleges mentioned in college guides of convenient size. A convenient feature of this list, because it is based on colleges mentioned in specified guidebooks, is that you can look up other features of the colleges to compare them according to features that are important to you.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Huh, I thought I mentioned this but I was looking into General Managment (nothing fancy like Investment Banking/Hedge Funds). Thanks for the insightful posts, they’re really helpful especially since I’m beginning to wade through the career/college search :)</p>
<p>Thanks for the list tokenadult! :)</p>
<p>SGupta, I sincerely apologize! You put “General Management” right in your Opening Post! My bad.</p>
<p>So for others with some KNOWLEDGE (not me) of that career path, his going question is what is the role of prestige, and how does one assess prestige, for a career in General Management? </p>
<p>(One or two posted above, earlier with that focus, but perhaps more who follow business careers can help this OP…)</p>
<p>Most GM types come up through one of the divisions like sales, finance, or design/production. So you have to start in a more technical area than just mgt.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Do you Management as a major or career? I’ll probably major in a technical thing and then attempt to move into management. But is a direct career jump to Management possible?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s okay, we all make mistakes :).</p>
<p>P.S. I thought your posts were extremely knowledgeable</p>
<p>There is simply no such thing as “general management.” You can’t just set a career goal of “management.” You have to actually know something to manage something. If you are an engineer, you start as an engineer and then you move to a job managing groups of engineers, organizing their work, coaching them to build their skills, running interference when they hit roadblocks, and politicking with other managers to trumpet your group’s successes. If you are a financial whiz, you start as an analyst. </p>
<p>Starting roles are known as “individual contributors” in today’s business jargon. A person can become a highly paid expert and still be an individual contributor. Managers start their careers as individual contributors; those who are identified as having potential to become executive managers are usually rotated through a series of line areas to build expertise: finance, operations, and sales are the key roles. </p>
<p>With today’s matrixed organizations and flat structures almost nobody just manages–usually your role is a combination of group manager and subject matter expert.</p>
<p>Mombot took my little nugget and gave you the entire picture. First you have to be a "star’ at some function and then you may get groomed for the upper levels of mgt.</p>