B School is a means to an end not a goal in and of itself
Has anyone else noticed how many people have b school as an explicit goal? It's kind of odd to see people asking things like "Which job will best position me for b school?".
Perhaps I'm just cynical, but the value proposition of B school is the network and the ability to switch jobs. Learning in most programs seems nominal, the network argument seems mixed, especially because you can develop your own and can leverage undergraduate alumni. For a lot of people here the value add of an MBA even out of Harvard seems suspect. First off there is the tremendous cost associated with the degree, 200k in tuition alone plus opportunity cost that can easily exceed a quarter of a million dollars. The outcomes don't appear to be that wonderful either, Poets and Quants said the average career earnings for HBS grads over a 20 year period was $3.64MM, just a smudge over 180k a year, decent money, but nowhere near the stratospheric pay people seem to expect.
In short I do think b school may make sense in some cases e.g. a PE associate whose firm expects, career switchers and people who need the network or to rebrand. But it should be viewed as a means to an end nothing more.
It's pretty common to feel this way for those who are early in their careers (i.e. just about anyone in their 20s, especially those under 26).
When you've been in school most of your waking life (basically anyone in their 20s, and for those in undergrad who are especially obsessed with the MBA, school life is all they know), it's understandable why they would see the MBA as some terminal point. School is all (or most of) what they know, and the summer internships or 2-3 years of post-college experience provides limited context for their own adulthood. Anything beyond that in terms of the adult experience - whether it's owning a home, getting married, settling down to raise a family, and being an adult with a lot of responsibility both at work and at home is purely intellectual. Simply put, they haven't gone through much of it yet, and the peers they're surrounded with haven't either. But b-school: that is something they know. It's school, something they've been through most of their lives. You try to get into the best school, because that's what was done in high school when applying for college. In b-school, you study, you do on-campus recruiting, you make friends with your classmates. From the outside, it's a wholly familiar experience, and in many ways, what many young people see as the terminus to their young life - because frankly anything beyond that is either an abstract idea or fantasy that is rooted in speculation and not in much "adult" experience they've had - yet.
So I can understand why some may feel it to be an end itself (even if they intellectually know it's just a means to an end).
Also, there's a conscious or unconscious thing going on where one assumes that "if only I got XYZ... I'll be set!" - that false assumption about getting that thing that would magically transform you overnight so that the rest of your life is smooth sailing. Few will ever admit that to others let alone themselves, but it's there.
And for younger folk, that MBA is that "thing." And then it becomes "if I only made partner..." or "if I only have XYZ in the bank..." or "once my kids have reached X years, I can..." and so forth. It's a mentality thing.
Keep in mind that finance hires a particular type of person, a person who has largely followed a well manicured path to conventional success. From their youth they've been guided on how to check all the right boxes—a talent for conformity is a must—they’ve followed a thorough application process for getting into top schools, and later checked all the right boxes in order to follow a similar application process for “elite” industries. I’m not surprised that those same people are looking to check all the right boxes again, in order to follow another ‘holistic’ application process into a top MBA program, which supposedly, after checking all the right boxes again and following yet another similar application process, will lead them to the success they’ve been yearning for since their youth. I always wonder:
Is that what you want, or is that what people expect of you?
Most underrated poster on wso.
all that box checking makes my head spin
No kidding, hopefully they wade out into the unknown at least once.
Yeah people are completely delusional.
You have a point but there is also the herd mindset that one observes in the work place, so people like to follow others like to lead. Either, way it is about what information/experience people are exposed to, for example going to an ivy league school for some is due or die while for others they could not careless. There are plenty of wealthy, successful people who never even went to college but it all boils down to what a person wants out of life and knowing who they really are inside, this is not an easy task, so some follow what others have done etc.
When I am looking to network, I find that the people at the top (C-suite, MD's, Partners etc.,) have all types of academic background and pedigree -engineering, undergrad finance, Master of Accountancy + CPA, MBA...
However, when I see the guys at the very top of their company who also sit on the boards of other companies, start large non-profits, and serve the government in appointed roles... These guys nearly ALL have HBS or equivalent on their resume.
This for me is why B-school is an end in itself. I want to go to a top B-school not because it will open up any job opportunities or significant pay-bumps that I didn't have access to before, but because it will open up opportunities outside of my direct line-of-sight. I can plan well enough for the IB-PE-Upper Management Industry track and execute fairly well without an MBA. However, an MBA will open up more opportunities that I don't yet know about and have less well-defined paths.
This is an interesting point you bring up. I actually did some research and it seems to not be true.
Several articles point to this if you do a quick Google search. HBR said roughly 29% of top 100 CEOs have MBAs. For full methodology read their article free online. Ft also indicates that only some 69 of f500 have MBAs. Note f500 is based on American Companies only.
So the figures, the "everyone", you are talking about is not quite so true. So I must respectfully disagree.
Edit; quoting in reference to the everyone I was referring to.
"These guys nearly ALL have HBS or equivalent on their resume."
Hey, so I think he's actually trying to predict his likelihood on an individual basis although he may not have phrased it as such. About 1/3 of those with an undergraduate degree pursue a master's degree. Out of those master's degrees, about 1/5 are MBAs. Now, not all undergraduate degrees are likely to lead to a potential Fortune 100 CEO-ship leading to some population bias, but nonetheless, let's be extremely conservative and say that 1/15 UG/MBA combo is pared down to 1/10 prevalence. We now have a condition whereby 9/10 of workers "eligible" for a fortune 100 CEO position without MBAs and 1/10 with MBAs. In this case, an MBA makes you 300% more likely to attain a fortune 100 CEO position. My point is, the MBA appears to be represented within fortune 100 CEOs in a highly outsized fashion relative to the prevalence of eligible candidates within the college-educated population.
You missed my point entirely. Did you even read my post or just jump to an antithesis position and start quantifying it?
"I find that the people at the top (C-suite, MD's, Partners etc.,) have all types of academic background and pedigree -engineering, undergrad finance, Master of Accountancy + CPA, MBA..."
" I want to go to a top B-school not because it will open up any job opportunities or significant pay-bumps that I didn't have access to before, but will open up opportunities outside of my direct line-of-sight. "
also You cannot quote the word "everyone" if I never used it my original post.
Silver banana awarded for use of the word stratospheric
Well, I think you mistake B-School as a goal versus being a means to an end. There is no disagreement that the younger crowd think it is a goal, but it overlaps with being a means to an end. As ArcherVice pointed out, there is a set career path that seems to be lauded by the WSO crowd. We all know, generally speaking, the check boxes and way points used here - 4 Years at a top Undergraduate institution followed by 2 years in IBD or Consulting at a top firm, maybe a post-Analyst/pre-MBA Position for a year or two but that's not required, and then 2 years at a Top MBA Program followed by PE/HF/VC/Etc. on the route to being a master of the universe.
Here's the rub though, the two overlap in more ways than you can think. A goal is nothing but an endpoint on one trip and a point of origin on another. The overlap is not hard at all to see, unless you choose to create two discrete classifications that you will not overlap. It's a means to an end, but a goal along the way. It's not limited to serving a single purpose.
This is exactly why I love Jason Silva! Check out his channel "Shots of Awe" on youtube
Illum temporibus non eum eligendi et. Rerum ipsa esse nesciunt mollitia et natus corrupti. Dolorum eius facere adipisci voluptatem ut qui doloremque.
Quis nam eveniet commodi et. Id deleniti culpa deserunt magnam deleniti cum. Illo enim autem est minima aut dolor aut.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...