MBA before or After Job?

I definitely appreciate both of you guys commenting. Yeah I agree looking too far into the future, so ill focus on getting into a target. Thanks and have a good weekend guys

If the graduate degree you're looking for is an MBA, you should NOT got until you've worked a post-college job for a few years.

You aren't going to get into a reputable MBA program without prior work experience. If you don't understand the degree or how it works, you should do some basic reading to start.

OP,

I think that you should do some basic research into a career. I'm not sure what your idea of what a "professional" is, or what being "successful" really entails, however what is obvious is that you need to - for complete lack of any more suitable words - get a clue.

Seeing your resume thread was some scary shit, to be frank. You haven't even begun to embark on the road that leads to you being a professional in any field (whether it's medicine, law, business, public works, whatever) and you're talking about being a "running a business" and "being successful."

I'm not saying that it isn't possible, I'm saying that you're so far off the path that any type of grad school should be postponed until you actually have a reason to go. Why spend more money on school?

It sounds like you have an interest in this thing called "business." I think that the first thing you should do is study something related to it at the undergrad level. Economics, business administration, or accounting. Then you'll have an idea of what the landscape looks like. From there, you can begin checking out potential career paths.

Entrepreneurship, if that's your thing, requires you to be highly astute. I sincerely hope I am not the first person to say this to you: it does not seem like you have the necessary traits of a successful entrepreneur.

That isn't to say that you can't develop them - anyone can - but you're far, far away from where you want to be.

Personally, I recommend that you tell your boss at Starbucks to go die, and start reading up on business/business culture/business skills/accounting/entrepreneurship, and finally, get some internships at companies that interest you.

Perhaps the above 3 steps are out of order. But I do think that they are each necessary steps.

Whatever you do, don't give up! Unless you decide to become a doctor. I actually recommend that for you. 8 more years of school and a linear progression into a chosen field - you could even get into something related to massage therapy, which you worked in before.

ceccorp

I want to one day run a business and be very successful. I was wondering: should I go to graduate school? Also should I work after I graduate and go later or should I go strait after graduating undergraduate school?

I have a feeling you're in highschool right now...focus on that first

I'm thinking maybe a troll post here...

This is a horribly ambiguous (and by extension, just plain horrible) forum topic. You gave us basically zero information about anything.

Face, meet palm.

why bother with mba if you were promoted to associate without an mba in ib.........

If you're a 3Y analyst and are likely to get promoted to Associate, why would you even want to do B-School? Don't waste your money. NOT worth it.

Unless, you want to exit IB and explore something else. If so, what?

i think it might be worth it if the markets turn and we dont see the same kind of deal flow that we do today. for those of us that are going to be first years this summer, it might be perfect timing. the way i see it, the end of this bullish cycle will come in about 2-3 years. we can ride the wave, and leave to take our little MBA-vacation right before it crashes. then come back once the market starts to heat up again.

of course, this is an optimist's point of view, but who knows... it could happen.

in the end, an MBA should be viewed as vacation from work for those in IB.

I admit I considered B-school after the 2001 fiasco. It was perfect timing... however I'm not entirely certain I would have gone otherwise. That was a LOT of debt, and to boot the job market wasn't f'n fantastic when I graduated in 2005...

I am reposting my post from the "Do true superstars go to business school?" thread under the "I-Banking Discussion" forum.

After reading this thread, I would caution that you should be careful from whom you are seeking advice. Do true ballers get MBAs? Damn right. Look at your associate class; the percentage with and without MBAs. Then look at your MDs; the percentage with and without MBAs. Skewed ratio, right? There are tons of associates without MBAs but few MDs. What does that tell you? Associates directly promoted from analyst are great associates but they tend to not be as good at VP and above because they don't have the educational grounding (this is broadly speaking of course; there are tons of an non-MBA MDs and so on). Frankly, directly promoting analysts to associates provides great firepower while maintaining the option to have them continue on in the business but often results in a “weeding out” at the VP / Director level. This is just good business and maintains the pyramid structure of the industry.

Getting an MBA has a great deal of value, not only for the obvious contacts, but also for the depth and breadth of theoretical knowledge. I’m glad engineers think that an MBA is a useless designation. That’s why I make six times as much money.

Getting advice from college kids speculating on a chat site is dangerous. Be careful to whom you listen.

I did my MBA after one year as an associate. I did it to demonstrate that 1) I had been selected and promoted and 2) that I had more than just an analyst career behind me. That is not to say that going direct from being an analyst isn't also a good path. Every year post-associate promotion that you wait makes the decision more expensive from an opportunity cost standpoint. Every year you wait also puts you at risk of quitting the business and doing something else because the guys with MBAs bypass you in review and responsibility.

My $0.02 is that you do it either at the end of your analyst gig or in the early part of your associate gig. I don't put it up for debate that it is a good decision to go to business school. Those that advocate against going to business school are typically college kids and analysts. Anyone else just hasn't looked critically at it (i.e., read my post above and then think about it).

The comment is a bit misdirected in my opinion; I should clarify the comment "weeded out". People leaving because they can't deal with the politics, need soft skills and getting fired are all part of it. I'm not saying it is deliberate in each case but the trends are clear. And yes, I firmly believe that lacking the "crucial management" skills is a direct result of not having an MBA. It is a foolish statement to think otherwise.

When I re-read your comment, I think you are proving my point, not debating it. I just don't think you see it.

Ok, so you assume that someone like me hasn't looked at it critically?

Now, I've read your post above. Actually, I read it twice, in this thread and in its original thread.

I clearly went to B-school. I chose the MBA so I could reinvent myself sort of speak. Do I think that an MBA made this huge difference on my career and life? Well, not really. I'm just being honest here. I'm not advocating a total disregard for B-school, I'm simply sharing another perspective with folks. Had I made better decisions earlier in my career I could have foregone the MBA entirely, that's all I'm actually trying to say.

The debate is not the merits of going. The debate is IF to go. That's the first question. The second question is WHEN.

If someone is a 3Y analyst and is likely to be a 1Y associate and they are in it for the long haul, then yeah, I truly think they could blow off getting an MBA. Not worth it.

Nayls, an MBA does not shape a man/woman's character and experience so much so that they're inevitably without fail going to be guaranteed being a strong manager, VP, Director, MD etc. C'mon, seriously.

One of the questions on the original post is "is it worth it?". I say yes. I posted a separate post to address the other issues.

My point very clearly is that when you look at ibanking there is real value to getting an MBA. It makes a huge amount of difference and your anecdotal comments prove this.

Is going into PE and hedge funds a good option? Sure. But they are generally lifestyle choices, particularly at the VP/Director level. People leave because they are logging too many hours, getting underpaid because of politics and are not getting the junior support because they are often not good managers (I spent 110 hours a week in the office for my VP, you better damn well do it for me).

All of these reasons are part of the compliment of skills you get from an MBA. I have seen it over and over again where a great associate gets blown up as a VP. No people skills, no sales skills, just analytical skills. Perhaps that is an argument to take a general management MBA over a more technical quant-school degree but the proof is in your own bank. Look around.

I actually don’t know much about you and your career aadpepsi but I am surprised that you are not finding the softer side of your MBA to be a true advantage over the direct promotes (assuming you are above associate).

Yes, the softer side of my profile is an advantage over direct promotes. I agree with this. I'll emphasize though this is NOT attributable to having pursued an MBA. I believe I intrinsically have this, i.e. soft skills are a facet of my professional profile that I nail hands down.

I'm actually weaker on tech skills. What the MBA gave me was greater credibility in this regard. It made my "story" complete.

Nayls, the MBA does not develop soft skills... teach management fundamentals, yes. Broadens your perspective, true. But an MBA just doesn't automatically convert weak managers to phenomenal managers.

I think we’re talking degrees of impact here and not whether there is one. You can’t convert an idiot to being smart with an MBA. It is hardly a holy grail. Most bankers I know are smart people with good “intrinsic” skills. The problem is, they learn from people who aren’t always good with people. Associates and junior VPs are famous for being successful by making sure (by screaming) analysts get their work done. In my experience, the associates / VPs without an MBA don’t know the limits. What worked as an associate does not work as a VP and you have to recognize how your job changes. In my opinion, an MBA does provide skills to cope with that change.

An MBA doesn’t CREATE soft skills, but it does DEVELOP them. I’ll agree to disagree with you on this topic. An MBA does convert weak managers into better managers and it does convert good managers into great managers. It is part of a toolkit that makes those with MBAs more potent than those without. I would be interested to see if you disagree that there are more MDs with MBAs as a percent than there are associates with MBAs. Name any number of reasons; technical skills, perspectives, soft skills, whatever. I don’t think you can isolate why it happens, but I think you can agree that it happens.

Yes, it appears we're talking about Degrees of Impact. I'll agree to disagree with you too.

There is a degree of "socialization" that happens in B-school. Being exposed to people at different management levels and different professional and life experiences teaches you to stretch yourself and to reflect on your management "style".

I will concede there are more MDs with MBAs as a percent than there are associates with MBAs. We definitely can't isolate this to the sheer essence of an MBA. I think it's more perhaps a general attrition.

Re-reading Nayls comment above, I'm not sure he was referring to himself--in which case I'm not referring to him!

I'm not convinced that an MBA DIRECTLY gives you either hard skills or soft skills.

I will grant (which I think both Nalys and Aadpepsi are trying to say) that there is a certain osmosis effect in learning soft skills in the MBA because you have to work in groups with so many different people with different backgrounds. Also, it often gives credibility just to have an MBA on your CV.

HOWEVER, I personally believe the true value in the MBA is the post-MBA network. In this case, I don't mean for getting jobs (though this is also true), but someone from a top MBA is going to have a lot of reasonably high level contacts both at other banks and in industry. Why is this important?:

1) As you move up in i-banking (VP/MD), the roles become a lot more sales oriented. Having contacts from your MBA network can be advantageous when trying to get in the door places.

2) You have large, diverse support group. Without an MBA, you probably only know the culture and practices of the group and bank you have always been in. With a network of friends at other banks, you can pick their brains, find out how things work at other places, get advice from when they faced a similar problem, etc.

This in my opinion is the value of an MBA as it pertains to soft skills.

In the quote you refer, I was speaking from experience but not speaking about myself (my point was your point that it is not a sustainable attitude; I inferred that people leave after having taken such an attitude over time).

I also agree on the value of an MBA network, but still say there is more to it. I suppose I just find it a weak argument that those that survive in the banking world “intrinsically” have good soft skills and by coincidence more of those people did their MBAs. By extension, there seems to be an argument that those that went to business school “intrinsically” have better soft skills than those who didn’t (or that everybody’s bank is a statistical outlier in that it is random and just sample error).

In my MBA, we had actors come into our classes to do role-playing with the students to teach best practices around dealing with people. We spent weeks on how to navigate political environments and what sort of behavior is acceptable at work and what sort is not acceptable. We took personality tests and learned about the kinds of things we should look out for in our own interpersonal relationships and exercises on how we can modify behavior to better match an at-work environment. We studied classic personality types and learned how to interact with them. We learned how to recognize such classic types in both the major and minor forms and learned how to construct arguments to each type. This was all done in class and as part of a general management MBA. The fact that we worked in groups in everything we did and learned “by osmosis” from our professors and classmates only served to cement these learnings. These classes taught me a great deal about interacting with both senior and junior colleagues and it is this learning to which I refer when arguing that an MBA is valuable in banking. And I haven’t even started talking about strategies to deal with clients.

Agreed. I had the same BS role play type class in B-school and thought it was a farce.

Throughout my career I've learned the most by sheer brute experience. My worst experiences taught me the most regarding dealing with people and clients.

Second to a broad professional experience, I've learned the most by hanging on the coat tails of senior people.

Sure, got it. You had a mime. A mime would make me say the same thing. I guess it is consensus that those who did an MBA have soft skills intrinsically and that the courses add no value. Got it.

I think its fair to say that technical and soft skills can be developed in many different ways.

There is certainly value in pursuing an MBA --- but it is not fair to conclude that it is superior to other methods. With that said --- many employers think that is necessary for mid-level and senior-level staff to have MBAs.

IMHO --- leaving the work force for 2-years is absolutely insane. But what do I know? I am a buy-side guy :o)

Lots of research has be done in this area:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=909910 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=929926

My view is that an MBA is value added, whether it provides you with greater economic gain or not. If you have the benefit of being promoted to associate and continue for a year or two (thus delaying the MBA) it is of benefit (in my opinion). The more mature and experienced you are going into the program, the more you will take out of it (within reason).

Of the MDs that I have worked with, the ones I respect most and that have the greatest insight and capability ALL had their MBAs. I can think of only one or two (out of dozens) of MDs who didn't have MBAs that I thought were particularly good. This may be anecdotal and based only on my own experience; I have seven years of experience in investment banking, almost five of which are for top wall street investment banks (including currently). My experience covers four countries and both product and industry groups. I say that getting an MBA clearly improved my ability to be a good banker.

keep in mind that correlation is not necessarily causation. What nobody brought up, is that the most motivated/smartest people are the ones who are able to get into a top business school. Rather than be the MBA that helps them get promoted, it could very well be that their "motivation " is the cause for both the MBA AND Promotions, and whether or not they hold that piece of paper is insignificant.