Do we really need 5+ years of work experience for top MBA?
Based on MBA class profile stats for top bschools, the average number of years of work experience was over 5 for almost all bschools except Harvard (4.7 years) and Stanford (4.6). Wharton, Booth, Kellogg, Sloan, Columbia, Ross, Anderson, and even LBS had an average of 5 years while others like Tuck, Haas, Fuqua, and Stern, averaged at around 5.2-5.5.
Does this mean that folks on the traditional 2+2 IB/Consulting -> PE path are disadvantaged by coming in with merely 4 years of work experience when it comes to MBA candidacy?
How does this fare for folks not on the average overachiever's MBB/ EB/BB IB -> MF/UMM PE path - does it make sense for these folks to apply after 5 years to improve their chances (maybe after becoming Sr.Assoc?)
Is the data skewed towards the majority of the MBA candidates that are on a non-traditional path (including military & international folks who did 3-year degrees) and are using an MBA to switch their career path?
Another issue with this is how does this fare for people who took GMAT/GRE immediately after graduation (undergrad) as their scores will expire (in 5 years) when they will apply for an MBA?
bump
4 at matriculation is the sweet spot. The average is brought up by candidates with 7-8+ years who apply late. Particularly common in the military. I had 4 and my work exp is way less prestigious than IB > PE.
The least you see for M7 admits now adays is 3 at matriculation.
As long as your GMAT score is not expired, adcomms look at it like any other score.
A pariatur sequi ipsam quia quod. Voluptatem illum molestiae ex consectetur.
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...