Harvard versus Stanford for Entertainment industry

MBAApply:

janjdtej:

Hi everybody.

Which MBA program (Harvard or Stanford) would be a better choice for someone interested in the entertainment industry afterward? In particular I'm interested in movie production.

I know both have alums high-up in the media world but certainly one must have a bit of an edge over the other? Is Stanford better due to locale and networking on WC or is Harvard better because the Harvard brand is stronger in general (I know they're tied as #1 but in general people who dont know this are more impressed by Harvard).

Thanx! :-)

Not sure what aspect of the industry, but a lot of b-school applicants I encounter that are interested in the industry tend to see themselves as producers, or are interested because of the so-called "creative aspect" -- and if that's the case, then no b-school, not even H/S are really a fit. In fact, an MBA can even be a bit of a liability because you will end up having to dispel long-held prejudices that MBA-types lack any imagination (i.e. your creative input will be constantly discounted simply because of the stereotypes people have about MBAs as being bean counting dullards). Having an MBA from HBS or Stanford won't change that perception: you will simply be seen as a prestigious bean counter. And that isn't too far from the truth: even though I have an MBA, I wouldn't trust the overwhelming majority of MBAs from any top b-school for any creative input.

There are essentially three kinds of jobs in the industry: performance, production, and corporate.

PERFORMANCE: actors, dancers, musicians/singers, etc. BFA or MFA programs. Julliard, Yale School of Drama, Berklee (music), The New School (The Actors Studio), Tisch (NYU), North Carolina, and so forth. And in the UK, you have schools like RADA. Most grads don't end up making a full-time living as performers, but the credential allows them to teach or set up their own vocational schools (which can make more $$$ than you may initially think).

PRODUCTION: producers, directors, editors, writers, cinematographers, grips, gaffers, colorists, production designers, costume, location scouts, and so forth. This is where film schools come in - BFA or MFA programs. Top schools are USC, NYU, UCLA, North Carolina, Florida, Columbia, Emerson, and so forth. These are generalist programs that teach students all different aspects of the production process. Typical career path of a graduate is freelancing in whatever projects they can get in whatever capacity starting as interns/assistants (most recent grads would've done a hodge podge of gigs from editing to grip to camera op to being a production assistant) - and over time, they tend to specialize based on what they keep on getting hired for and what they're good at. For VFX, you also have grads coming out of art schools.

CORPORATE: marketing, corporate finance, treasury/accounting, HR, investor relations, corp development, and so forth. These are where MBAs do get hired. The thing is, these jobs are no different than any Fortune 500 job, since you're in a corporate office environment - your job isn't to be on a film set. Your job is really no different than any other corporate job - generating reports and presentations and spreadsheets. It's a stable job, but you're pretty removed from anything creative or anything to do with production. The folks in these positions tend to be a hodgepodge of educational backgrounds: from film school to MBAs to CPAs to JDs. Again, it's in this tiny part of the industry (corporate) where you'll find MBAs. Finally, what's also in here are the agencies: traditionally many of them are lawyers since the work is highly contract driven; it's more apprenticeship driven than credentials - i.e. you have to start as a lowly assistant no matter your background and work your way up.

To be blunt, if you're really interested in the business side of entertainment, you really should aim for an MFA at a top film school - the biggest one being USC.

A lot of folks knock USC Film School for being short on substance and long on network, but that's what it's set up to be. The biggest most powerful school alumni network in the industry by far is USC. Think of USC in the entertainment industry like HBS is to the business world. It churns out a lot of grads that end up in every nook and cranny of the industry.

If you're looking to be a producer, USC has the Stark program (an MFA for aspiring producers) as well as its regular MFA. Other schools to look at are NYU and UCLA, in that order, especially if you're looking at the commercial and business side of things. If it's more about being a great director with a unique voice, I'd say NYU has that edge. Or another way to put it: USC is strongest in industry brand/contacts/production, NYU for film directing, and UCLA for writing.

The media/entertainment industry is even more driven by network, since it's project-based (so many folks make a living by freelancing from one gig to the next, with their respective guild or union providing the kinds of health/pension/fringe benefits one would normally get working as an employee at a firm). As such, you hunt for work based on referrals. And given that MBAs are virtually non-existent in many parts of the industry (and even in the corporate bubble, it's not like Wall Street, consulting or Silicon Valley where there's tons of MBAs) - you will have a minimal network to draw upon compared to those who went to film school.

Finally, if you're looking for a steady income or to become rich, don't bother working in entertainment. You will make more money in tech, Wall Street or any other industry with far less effort and uncertainty.

SB to you Alex. I work for one of the big studios in the Corporate bucket and this is 10000000% right. People don't come here to make money; sure you can make a comfortable salary and have a decent lifestyle but even the top non-CEO/CFO C-suite executives aren't pulling much more than a million or so a year in this industry (compared to, say, tech or finance at least).

However, if you're interested in the business side of things, basically everyone in my company that's above analyst/associate level has an MBA. Only the best and the brightest get promoted without one.

Lastly, it's not exactly a good time in the space right now. There's a lot of changes going on in the industry

To answer your original question: it doesn't matter. My company basically treats those as the elite bucket and you get placed into the top group (corporate strategy, division with the biggest PnL) etc.

MBAApply:

janjdtej:

Hi everybody.

Which MBA program (Harvard or Stanford) would be a better choice for someone interested in the entertainment industry afterward? In particular I'm interested in movie production.

I know both have alums high-up in the media world but certainly one must have a bit of an edge over the other? Is Stanford better due to locale and networking on WC or is Harvard better because the Harvard brand is stronger in general (I know they're tied as #1 but in general people who dont know this are more impressed by Harvard).

Thanx! :-)

Not sure what aspect of the industry, but a lot of b-school applicants I encounter that are interested in the industry tend to see themselves as producers, or are interested because of the so-called "creative aspect" -- and if that's the case, then no b-school, not even H/S are really a fit. In fact, an MBA can even be a bit of a liability because you will end up having to dispel long-held prejudices that MBA-types lack any imagination (i.e. your creative input will be constantly discounted simply because of the stereotypes people have about MBAs as being bean counting dullards). Having an MBA from HBS or Stanford won't change that perception: you will simply be seen as a prestigious bean counter. And that isn't too far from the truth: even though I have an MBA, I wouldn't trust the overwhelming majority of MBAs from any top b-school for any creative input.

There are essentially three kinds of jobs in the industry: performance, production, and corporate.

PERFORMANCE: actors, dancers, musicians/singers, etc. BFA or MFA programs. Julliard, Yale School of Drama, Berklee (music), The New School (The Actors Studio), Tisch (NYU), North Carolina, and so forth. And in the UK, you have schools like RADA. Most grads don't end up making a full-time living as performers, but the credential allows them to teach or set up their own vocational schools (which can make more $$$ than you may initially think).

PRODUCTION: producers, directors, editors, writers, cinematographers, grips, gaffers, colorists, production designers, costume, location scouts, and so forth. This is where film schools come in - BFA or MFA programs. Top schools are USC, NYU, UCLA, North Carolina, Florida, Columbia, Emerson, and so forth. These are generalist programs that teach students all different aspects of the production process. Typical career path of a graduate is freelancing in whatever projects they can get in whatever capacity starting as interns/assistants (most recent grads would've done a hodge podge of gigs from editing to grip to camera op to being a production assistant) - and over time, they tend to specialize based on what they keep on getting hired for and what they're good at. For VFX, you also have grads coming out of art schools.

CORPORATE: marketing, corporate finance, treasury/accounting, HR, investor relations, corp development, and so forth. These are where MBAs do get hired. The thing is, these jobs are no different than any Fortune 500 job, since you're in a corporate office environment - your job isn't to be on a film set. Your job is really no different than any other corporate job - generating reports and presentations and spreadsheets. It's a stable job, but you're pretty removed from anything creative or anything to do with production. The folks in these positions tend to be a hodgepodge of educational backgrounds: from film school to MBAs to CPAs to JDs. Again, it's in this tiny part of the industry (corporate) where you'll find MBAs. Finally, what's also in here are the agencies: traditionally many of them are lawyers since the work is highly contract driven; it's more apprenticeship driven than credentials - i.e. you have to start as a lowly assistant no matter your background and work your way up.

To be blunt, if you're really interested in the business side of entertainment, you really should aim for an MFA at a top film school - the biggest one being USC.

A lot of folks knock USC Film School for being short on substance and long on network, but that's what it's set up to be. The biggest most powerful school alumni network in the industry by far is USC. Think of USC in the entertainment industry like HBS is to the business world. It churns out a lot of grads that end up in every nook and cranny of the industry.

If you're looking to be a producer, USC has the Stark program (an MFA for aspiring producers) as well as its regular MFA. Other schools to look at are NYU and UCLA, in that order, especially if you're looking at the commercial and business side of things. If it's more about being a great director with a unique voice, I'd say NYU has that edge. Or another way to put it: USC is strongest in industry brand/contacts/production, NYU for film directing, and UCLA for writing.

The media/entertainment industry is even more driven by network, since it's project-based (so many folks make a living by freelancing from one gig to the next, with their respective guild or union providing the kinds of health/pension/fringe benefits one would normally get working as an employee at a firm). As such, you hunt for work based on referrals. And given that MBAs are virtually non-existent in many parts of the industry (and even in the corporate bubble, it's not like Wall Street, consulting or Silicon Valley where there's tons of MBAs) - you will have a minimal network to draw upon compared to those who went to film school.

Finally, if you're looking for a steady income or to become rich, don't bother working in entertainment. You will make more money in tech, Wall Street or any other industry with far less effort and uncertainty.

MBAApply:

janjdtej:

Hi everybody.

Which MBA program (Harvard or Stanford) would be a better choice for someone interested in the entertainment industry afterward? In particular I'm interested in movie production.

I know both have alums high-up in the media world but certainly one must have a bit of an edge over the other? Is Stanford better due to locale and networking on WC or is Harvard better because the Harvard brand is stronger in general (I know they're tied as #1 but in general people who dont know this are more impressed by Harvard).

Thanx! :-)

Not sure what aspect of the industry, but a lot of b-school applicants I encounter that are interested in the industry tend to see themselves as producers, or are interested because of the so-called "creative aspect" -- and if that's the case, then no b-school, not even H/S are really a fit. In fact, an MBA can even be a bit of a liability because you will end up having to dispel long-held prejudices that MBA-types lack any imagination (i.e. your creative input will be constantly discounted simply because of the stereotypes people have about MBAs as being bean counting dullards). Having an MBA from HBS or Stanford won't change that perception: you will simply be seen as a prestigious bean counter. And that isn't too far from the truth: even though I have an MBA, I wouldn't trust the overwhelming majority of MBAs from any top b-school for any creative input.

There are essentially three kinds of jobs in the industry: performance, production, and corporate.

PERFORMANCE: actors, dancers, musicians/singers, etc. BFA or MFA programs. Julliard, Yale School of Drama, Berklee (music), The New School (The Actors Studio), Tisch (NYU), North Carolina, and so forth. And in the UK, you have schools like RADA. Most grads don't end up making a full-time living as performers, but the credential allows them to teach or set up their own vocational schools (which can make more $$$ than you may initially think).

PRODUCTION: producers, directors, editors, writers, cinematographers, grips, gaffers, colorists, production designers, costume, location scouts, and so forth. This is where film schools come in - BFA or MFA programs. Top schools are USC, NYU, UCLA, North Carolina, Florida, Columbia, Emerson, and so forth. These are generalist programs that teach students all different aspects of the production process. Typical career path of a graduate is freelancing in whatever projects they can get in whatever capacity starting as interns/assistants (most recent grads would've done a hodge podge of gigs from editing to grip to camera op to being a production assistant) - and over time, they tend to specialize based on what they keep on getting hired for and what they're good at. For VFX, you also have grads coming out of art schools.

CORPORATE: marketing, corporate finance, treasury/accounting, HR, investor relations, corp development, and so forth. These are where MBAs do get hired. The thing is, these jobs are no different than any Fortune 500 job, since you're in a corporate office environment - your job isn't to be on a film set. Your job is really no different than any other corporate job - generating reports and presentations and spreadsheets. It's a stable job, but you're pretty removed from anything creative or anything to do with production. The folks in these positions tend to be a hodgepodge of educational backgrounds: from film school to MBAs to CPAs to JDs. Again, it's in this tiny part of the industry (corporate) where you'll find MBAs. Finally, what's also in here are the agencies: traditionally many of them are lawyers since the work is highly contract driven; it's more apprenticeship driven than credentials - i.e. you have to start as a lowly assistant no matter your background and work your way up.

To be blunt, if you're really interested in the business side of entertainment, you really should aim for an MFA at a top film school - the biggest one being USC.

A lot of folks knock USC Film School for being short on substance and long on network, but that's what it's set up to be. The biggest most powerful school alumni network in the industry by far is USC. Think of USC in the entertainment industry like HBS is to the business world. It churns out a lot of grads that end up in every nook and cranny of the industry.

If you're looking to be a producer, USC has the Stark program (an MFA for aspiring producers) as well as its regular MFA. Other schools to look at are NYU and UCLA, in that order, especially if you're looking at the commercial and business side of things. If it's more about being a great director with a unique voice, I'd say NYU has that edge. Or another way to put it: USC is strongest in industry brand/contacts/production, NYU for film directing, and UCLA for writing.

The media/entertainment industry is even more driven by network, since it's project-based (so many folks make a living by freelancing from one gig to the next, with their respective guild or union providing the kinds of health/pension/fringe benefits one would normally get working as an employee at a firm). As such, you hunt for work based on referrals. And given that MBAs are virtually non-existent in many parts of the industry (and even in the corporate bubble, it's not like Wall Street, consulting or Silicon Valley where there's tons of MBAs) - you will have a minimal network to draw upon compared to those who went to film school.

Finally, if you're looking for a steady income or to become rich, don't bother working in entertainment. You will make more money in tech, Wall Street or any other industry with far less effort and uncertainty.

Great answer. Thank you, Alex!