Associate to top Business School
Assuming you get promoted to associate but still think it is worth it to go to bschool for the networking, ect what options do you have?
Is 3 years as an analyst than another 2 or three as an associate at a BB equilvlent to going from analyst to pe? What do the banks think? Do they not want you to leave at that point? Would it be possible to come back as more than a first year associate?
Elaborate please. Why would you want to network when you're already in a BB? Is HF or PE your ultimate destination?
No, my ultimate goal would be MD at a BB. But it seems that most MD's have MBAs. I know that most people use MBA's to change jobs but it is also a great networking opportunity, espeically at HBS, Stanford, ect.
So my question is if you get directly promoted to associate is there no reason to get an MBA because you will come back as an associate? Or could you come back as a VP or at least at the same level associate you left at?
But then on the other hand it seems that if you leave go work in PE for 3 years or so, then Bschool, then associate, you basically just spent five years to come back in as an associate verus those five years at the bank you could probably be vp?
Most MD's have MBA's because people fail to realize that direct promotion to Associate is a relatively new trend. I personally feel if your ultimate goal is to become MD, then there is no reason to go to B-School unless you want to take 2 years off.
I plan to get my mba regardless of a potential promotion to associate - IMO it will just look better on a resume. If you skip the MBA and, after working in banking for say 7 straight years you are finally burnt out, your options are significantly more limited than if you had done 5 years in banking and have a top tier MBA.
I dont want to be a banker for life, and even if you did, at least an mba lets you feel like you are CHOOSING banking instead of being stuck with it.
If you don't get axed, there is no point in getting an MBA unless you want to change career paths.
Ever heard of guys going to get there MBA after a few years as an associate at a BB? (direct promote from analyst)
Why would you want to get an MBA if you have been directly promoted to associate after being an analyst for two years?
Considering you did well enough in order to be promoted to a position that usually requires an MBA, it doesn't make much sense from an opportunity cost or even necessity point of view unless you plan to switch your career path.
Yes, the CEOs of the major BBs basically all have MBAs from very good schools, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are many top traders that deal in commodities etc.. that don't have MBAs and are still pulling the ridiculous $35 million a year
Related question that didn't get answered in the b-school forum:
for those who aren't promoted to associate directly, would they prefer going straight into business school, but generally do other work because it's too hard to get into b-school with only 2-3 years of exp.?
Definitely do other work after being an analyst for two years if you did not get the direct promote to associate.
Your chances of getting into a top 5-10 MBA program with only 2-3 years of work experience are not very high at all. The average amount of work experience for the top 5-10 MBA programs is around 5 years.
I'm not saying you can't get into a top 10 MBA program after only working as an analyst for two years, just remember that those who do make into these elite MBA programs after two years are most definitely the exception and not the rule.
thanks jamba, clarification: assume you somehow know 100% that you would be admitted, would you get more experience to be a better MBA student and associate candidate or just get on with the b-school?
If you plan to switch careers get the MBA. With an MBA from Harvard Business School you can get into basically any industry that you want.
Hedge Funds, Venture Capital, Private Equity, Management Consluting, Investment Banking, you name it.
If you want to stay in finance and if you are going to be in Sales & Trading I would advice against it for the reasons I have mentioned above.
I would be in Investment Banking not S & T. Is the MBA still not worth the opportunity cost?
Also, do you think that assuming you got into a decent PE shop after 2 years as an analyst it would be worth it to do that, then the MBA, then go back into banking just for the buy side exposure? Eventually I might try to get into PE after making VP/MD in investment banking where I think the MBA and PE experience might help?
Voluptate aspernatur eveniet minus ipsa. Quis rerum suscipit est eaque. In nobis praesentium ut error consequatur. Odio error dolore alias eum et dicta ut. Quas qui magni dolores vel architecto et repellat.
Illo velit amet ea aperiam. Culpa et nihil nemo mollitia eos. Eum ratione consectetur a aspernatur illo. Vel laboriosam consequuntur libero tempore.
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...