I've been researching MBA programs on the East Coast and have noticed that professionals from Energy are barely represented at schools like Columbia and Stern. Columbia's class profile shows only 2% from energy background and 3% for Stern.
I know almost everything Energy related is in Houston and many Energy people go to UT or Rice but I would think that the industry would be better represented given how large it is now.
I'm in Energy and have started looking more at schools out East. I want to work in Energy post-MBA so I'm probably going to come back to Houston if I do decide to leave the city for my MBA. I know certain schools like Columbia and Wharton would give me a clear advantage over someone from Rice/UT for jobs in Houston. But lets say I can't get into those two schools (very likely), would it serve me better to attend Rice/UT or go for Stern/Duke/Cornell for my MBA?
I guess my question is, at what point will the massive cost of going out East outweigh the benefits? Which schools out East would hurt me more than help me in getting a job in Houston post-MBA.
I would not mind attending Rice but NYC is a great city to live in for a few years...
those numbers are more energy focused jobs.... not energy banking, energy trading etc etc etc
This is probably be true, but I don't think its as "clear" of an advantage as you're thinking. Energy really likes to hire among "their own"
I don't think that they would give you any distinguishable advantage over UT at all. They may for Rice, but the location of those two schools coupled with their networking ties to the energy sector in Houston essentially net out the finance strength and brand of a Columbia or Wharton IF you are certain you want to work in Energy for the duration of your career. You get better optionality out of those names if unsure.
This is what I've gathered as well.
Although, I didn't want to come out guns blazing with "Wharton ain't got shit on UT/Rice, come at me bro"
Yeah, energy is pretty much the only industry where it's not always better to come from an M7 school. Texas dominates in Texas, like it or not.
While McCombs and Rice have a solid network in Houston, it has been my experience that a lot of firms look to hire non-Texas MBAs in order to provide a level of variety to their firms. If you look at the energy groups at CS, GS, TPH, and MS you will find a significant number of east coast folks mixed in. However a few shops like BarCap and Simmons tend to be very Texas focused, part of this is driven by an extreme focus on domestic transactions. While the east coast friendly groups tend to do a significant amount of international work. Both are winning strategies, but it depends on what game you are playing.
If you want a degree that will give you the maximum amount of flexibility over the long haul I would consider looking at Chicago, or Wharton. HBS and Stanford are also great programs, but they tend to focus on "softer" skills which might matter less if you are going into the energy business.
All that said, I don't think Columbia or NYU would do the trick. I would look a little higher.
Thanks for all the input guys. This really helped. I'm really aiming for Columbia because it's probably the best school that I will have somewhat of a chance of getting into. Another reason I want to go Columbia is because of NYC. I've made connects in the Energy industry down in Houston but having that network in NYC would be pretty sweet long term. Also, I just want to live in NYC for a few years, see how that's like. I'm not really one for a gameplan, I believe things kind of fall into place if you work hard.
Comment deleted
In my experience, if your wanting a job in energy banking, I would suggest Rice or UT. Through all of my networking in energy banks, most of the bankers that I met were from Rice/UT, with a small handful of Chicago/Wharton, even fewer Harvard MBA's.
For the rotational programs, from my experience working at a super major, they recruit from a lot of schools for the programs. They tend to favor engineers/IB Analysts/Consultants for those positions. I have met individuals from Harvard/Stanford/Wharton/Chicago/Rice/UT/UNC/Duke/etc...Just go to a school that you feel you will succeed at. From my conversations with an Exxon recruiter, they recruit directly from 14 schools for very few positions, same goes for Chevron. They really focus on Grad (>3.8)and Undergrad (>3.5) GPA. For these programs, they don't focus as much on MBA school, as they do on previous experience and GPA. These might even be harder to get than IB positions as they have high starting salaries (plus bonus) and oil & gas hours (typically 9/80 schedule).
It's always my advice to attend the school that offers the opportunities that you are looking for at the best price. The only schools that I would pay full tuition cost for are HBS/Wharton/Chicago/Stanford (for finance focus). All other schools would have to offer some financial assistance. No school can guarantee that you will get you that coveted job. So go to the school that offers the opportunities and won't leave you balls deep in student loan debt. Also, go to a school in an area where you want to live for the first 5 years post MBA.
Energy MBA (Originally Posted: 01/17/2014)
Recently, I've started looking into different MBA programs. I went to the University of Texas for undergrad and currently work for a boutique oil and gas investment company. I want to stay in the oil and gas business after graduate school, so I have been looking at Energy MBA programs.
Does anyone have an opinion on Rice's or UT's programs? I've also entertained the idea of studying at an international school. However, in my opinion, it makes sense to stay in Texas considering the boom that's taking place, Houston's energy hub and my long term plan of being in Texas.
Neither place poorly but UT will place better
I wouldn't do international unless you plan on working in that country.
UT and Rice both place great into Texas's energy sector.
Try Booth with strong placements to consulting firms with strong energy practices..Mck and Booz
Chicago Booth has also placed folks at all of the top energy banking groups in the last few years. They have put people at Simmons, Goldman, Morgan, Credit Suisse, BarCap, and have a near lock on TPH.
HBS seems to do well at Simmons, but a lot of those guys seem to be returning analysts.
UPenn placed two at Goldman in Houston last year, but I don't know where else.
UT basically has a near lock on JPM, but they take a few other MBAs each year for diversity.
Isn't MIT really strong in energy as well? Or is it just for clean energy?
I don't know how MIT places for Oil & Gas. I have only met a few technical people from MIT in my 6 years working in the E&P environment, none came from MBAs. One of the technical people I met from MIT interned in our office one summer. Very smart individual but didn't get a return offer because he lacked personal skills.
However, MIT is very well respected and if you wanted to work in O&G your would definitely have opportunities coming from that school. Having said that, I believe most people from MIT focus on clean energy.
. . .
Every bank recruits at McCombs for Houston IB and if you know you want to do energy (oil and gas) I don't think there is a better place to be. Two years in Austin makes it an even bigger no-brainer. UT and Rice had ~ 75% of spots in Houston last summer, with a few one-offs (SMU, etc). We probably could have had even more but one large bank was particularly unlucky with their offer acceptances so they might have drawn east coast guys after offering 4 UT people (maybe Rice filled them out, not sure).
UT also sent a few guys to new york, which most banks were happy to accommodate if you state that preference up front...there just aren't that many people who come to TX and then want to go to NY.
Tudor is probably the only firm that really seems to prefer east coast but I think a lot of that is a function of their desire/requirement to get people with banking experience, which is more likely found among the students at east coast schools.
McCombs has a solid program, but it is more than a little arrogant to say that the only reason that shops draw from the east coast MBA programs is because they cannot find enough McCombs grads. Sure a lot of McCombs grads head to shops in Houston but that is because lots of McCombs grads recruit for jobs in Houston. UPenn and Chicago Booth each graduate roughly 100 folks into ibanking jobs in the US each year, and even more if you look at those numbers in an international context.
Consider that 5-7 banking and PE candidates from each of the east coast schools want to head to Houston each year and they tend to have a near 100% placement rate in the field. Then consider that nearly 90% of the McCombs grads heading to banking want to work in Houston and it starts to look like it might be easier coming from the other direction.
I am sure that McCombs has its fine qualities, but to say that other schools pick of their scraps might be a little bit of a hard sell to make.
The numbers are the numbers, and I prefaced with "if you know you want to do energy". With maybe 2-3 exceptions, every school is regional, whether they believe it or not, and it will take more legwork to break out of the natural geography of a school, and into the geography of another. Especially true in the unique culture of TX, and even more so if you have no ties to the area.
And scraps are certainly not limited to east coast schools, there are scraps from everywhere! (including chicago). They might have near 100% summer placement...but their FT conversion is not so good in my experience.
I would disagree with your last statement, or at least amend it to say. Most schools are regional, and there are a few that are internationally respected.
McCombs own numbers say that 7% of the 260 students last year took jobs in i-banking and sales and trading. Which means that 18 folks secured positions both in and out of Houston. It strikes me as unlikely that there were less than 20 folks in the entire MBA program who wanted to work in banking in Houston. Yes this is possible, but the numbers seem pretty shaky if you are arguing that every McCombs student who wanted to work at a bank in Houston got a job with one and then these shops had to turn to other schools to fill the rest of the spots.
I have worked with a number of McCombs folks who are really smart, and from what I can tell they got a first rate education. But I don't think you can honestly try to pitch to folks that it has the pre-eminent energy banking franchise. Most "east coast" schools have produced an energy group head and I cannot think of one that has come from McCombs (could be wrong here, but I honestly cant remember one). Sure Skip McGee sits on the McCombs board, but he did not even go there. The guy is a Princeton alum who went to law school.
McCombs has a great reputation and network in Texas, but it has its limits.
[
McCombs has a great reputation and network in Texas, but it has its limits.[/quote]
IN TEXAS!!!!!!!
.
B-School Bound - I don't know where you got those numbers, but they are not 100% correct. Most of the east coast school students that were offered positions at GS and Barclays were offered because either a UT or Rice student turned the job down and accepted at another bank. The numbers of yours that I know are wrong are for Simmons, MS, and DB. All had Rice interns that accepted full time positions, plus DB did not offer the HBS guy.
I agree with the other posters that have said UT and Rice get first chance at the energy IB positions. This internship year Rice placed 9 and I have heard UT was somewhere around 15 in energy IB.
People from the east coast can make it, but it's not as easy. Not saying it can't be done. Most east coast MBA's that I had coffee with had some previous energy experience as an engineer.
.
I'd prefer to avoid what individual firms i have or do not have knowledge about on here...But i originally said UT+Rice.
And I would also urge you 1.) check your stats and 2) to find out who didn't get a FT offer this year and last and see which schools those people came from. That might be a more telling statistic.
Also worth noting that the OP asked about Stern/Columbia/Cornell relative to Rice/McCombs.
And, while it might surprise you, there were no more than 20-25 in my class who seriously pursued banking. Sure more signed up for interviews, but only 20-25 really went to the info sessions, etc...and at least 5 had no shot on account of English.
So how does McCombs do in New York IB-wise? Does a UT MBA mean you're destined to work in Houston?
UT is on my short list right now (full-time MBA), but I'm not sure that I'd like to spend the next 40 years of my life in Texas. Any advice/opinions would be great to hear.
Thats blasphemy dude, cut that shit out.
To actually answer your question, of course McCombs is going to be more regionally weighted than HSW. However, once you actually break into the industry I would think your work experience has a whole lot more weight than where you got your MBA.
Modi consectetur sint dignissimos ut ut. Fugiat nihil aliquid aperiam neque sit ut tempore velit. Quos aut dolore ut voluptatem est. Modi itaque facere sapiente asperiores in voluptates natus. Praesentium eligendi at quia porro accusantium.
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...
Libero molestiae aliquam dolorem necessitatibus est aspernatur. Sit nihil sit in aperiam.