I am considering the option of an MBA in 2 years to jump to M&A or RX at a BB or EB. I am looking for MBA in top European Schools (LBS, INSEAD, HEC Paris) as they are cheaper and some of them are just 1 year long.
I always saw INSEAD as a very prestigious Business School, probably the best after HBS, Wharton, Stanford and MIT Sloan), I rate INSEAD above good schools such as Yale, NY Stern, Columbia, Kellogg or Chicago Booth.
But when I take a look into their employability statistics, they are terrible in finance.
I have been searching on LinkedIn, and there are very few Associates /VPs at BB from INSEAD.
Does anyone know why?
First off, INSEAD is not on par with top US business schools, so I wouldn’t rate it as high as Booth/CBS/Yale/Tuck/Stern. Then, INSEAD is known for inflating its ranking and job placement. The school isn’t that hard to get into and its MBB numbers are inflated by the amount of people sponsored by their firm to go there. INSEAD is essentially a quick and dirty way for MBB to get a MBA stamp on its consultants so that they can bill their hours higher.
Then, the caliber of INSEAD students is not better than US T15 schools. Some may even argue it’s worse. The consequence is that INSEAD talent is not as “hot” as talent from top US business schools. Add to that the fact that INSEAD's focus is consulting rather than finance and this leads to weak finance/IB recruiting.
Finally, MBA IB recruiting is limited in Europe and only LBS places well in IB among European schools. For the limited MBA Associates spots in London, banks prefer to stick to LBS and top US schools (CBS and Stern in particular have programs to place their European students in London).
TL; DR: INSEAD is an overrated school. The only European MBA that I would say is worth the money is LBS, otherwise go look at the US top 15. If you really want to study in Europe, Masters (MiM, MiF) are the way to go (i.e. HEC has great MiM/MiF programs, but a mediocre MBA, and it's one of the better European MBAs)
Does INSEAD focus more on IFRS instead of GAAP? Maybe that has something to do with it?
Maybe although I imagine other schools like LBS also emphasize the IFRS, so there's probably more to it. Since my comment got some heat from other users below, I'll also clarify that I don't think INSEAD is a bad school at all - it's just not "elite tier" in the way that the US Top 7-10 (+LBS) is. But it's still a highly recognized MBA and a global brand, so by no means a bad choice
Responding to this very misinformed post. I’m an Ivy League undergrad + Insead MBA currently working a few years post Insead at an investment bank. Now that I am helping with recruiting, I have a better understanding of how it works.
1. MBAs matter less in Europe than they do in the U.S. Period. The only super target schools for London IBD are Insead / LBS. Insead places fewer people in banking due to self selection (most go to consulting).
2. In general, including in high finance, Insead is seen as more prestigious / elite than LBS - LBS has really been on a decline the last 5-10 years and is seen as now easier to get into than Insead. Insead is the only Euro school that competes with US M7 and its reflected in its alumni (compare list versus LBS and other Euro schools). Its network is impressive, tight and strong. Insead is number 2 in the world (only behind Harvard) in current CEO count among FT500 companies; it ranks number 4 in total start up capital raised globally (only behind Harvard, Stanford, Wharton), and is the number one producer of talent to McKinsey globally. Frankly, it’s on a different level than LBS (which in itself is a great school). Both LBS / Insead can get you MBA internships in banking - but the long term alumni network and prestige of insead is unmatched in Europe / Asia / Middle East when comparing against other Euro schools). In Europe, there are boutique private equity firms that only hire Harvard, Wharton and Insead.
INSEAD is not on par as M7 / LBS. Period. Anyone whose gone to a top school knows this, but will be polite enough to not say it to your face. As a personal data point, all the folks I know who went to INSEAD (~5) were rejected from the M7s...
Really depends on the region. In the US, its prestige and outcome is not on par with the M7s (it is closer to top 15 level Duke, Yale SOM, Cornell etc). However, in terms of global prestige, outcomes, influence and student quality - Insead is better than the bottom of the M7 and quite significantly ahead of a school like LBS. Insead's global reputation has really started to shine after its successful integration of a Singapore and now a Abu Dhabi campus.
That being said, however, Insead is simply easier to get into than some of the M7s. It has a very large class size, with an acceptance rate of 30% (which is a lot for an elite school). Remember, it does not have an undergrad or random cash cow masters, so it needs to admit a larger cohort than it would like. But Insead has one of the highest yield rates of any b school in the world and draws top tier / elite talent where a lot of students pick Insead as its first choice. A lot of very strong European and Asia students who want to stay closer to home routinely pick Insead over non Harvard / Stanford M7s. The top of its class, therefore, is likely stronger than non H/S/W M7s but its bottom weaker (as it is easier to get into Insead except for maybe Kellogg / CBS).
Ultimately, the most prestigious jobs post MBA (MBB / IBD / Corp Strategy) all consider Insead and M7s to be super target schools (LBS has unfortunately been diminishing in student quality likely due to Brexit and poor overall name recognition). Some ultra elite private equity firms only hire out of Harvard, Stanford, Wharton and INSEAD which is a testament to the brand name it has in certain parts of the world.
Would also second this comment. Many people on this forum obviously ignored the fact that location plays a very big role here. Comparing INSEAD to US schools is thus not an apples to apples comparison. US MBA candidates have access to the strongest economy in the world. Everything is so structured and robust that you have a consistent pipeline to IB recruitment every single year, making it a feasible path for a post-MBA career. That's often not the case in Asia where the economy is much smaller and structured recruitment is generally non-existent.
I have heard from a friend that went there that not many INSEAD students target IB. I would look at other schools if this is your objective.
Also keep in mind that INSEAD requires students to speak English plus have practical knowledge of a second language to enter and add practical knowledge of a third language while there. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but might be a detractor for some people. Even if you are already speak two languages, you might not want to add a third during your MBA.
I think frankly that the program structure is to blame more than anything. A one-year program is not good for career switchers, even if you do the Jan. intake (the sept. intake should be reserved for sponsored students). The schedule for banking recruiting along with the heavy networking expected during the fall first year really puts INSEAD students at a disadvantage and that gets reflected into banking placement. Knowing this, students obviously self-select and you therefore see much fewer interest in finance as a results. If you do decide to go back to school and get your MBA, I would strongly recommend a 2-year program.
INSEAD...Harvard..Booth? Lost you there haha
Insead > Booth outside of the U.S. ; I know it’s hard for Americans to understand but outside the U.S. (Europe, Asia, Middle East), Insead brand prestige far surpasses that of Booth to be honest and Insead is up there with H/S/W. They have a much bigger presence globally and been in the U.S. if you look at US salaries only insead average salary is higher than Booth…
The statistics are heavily influenced by the fact that everything is so skewed towards consulting, so INSEAD is not that terrible in placing grads in finance as you say. Certainly there are a few technical problems though. One of the two intakes that they offer doesn't allow a summer internship due to time and even the other one has a pretty tight timeline (i.e. you start working on the applications before you start classes). As you may imagine, if you join INSEAD and you don't know what you want to do with your life, you will have likely missed the boat of IB recruitment already. As a consequence of all the above, less people in finance, less alumni, less informal networking opportunities. However, there are also far less people fighting for IB. If IB is your objective from the start you will be okay as it still places well. Regarding quality, I agree with the above comments, US top programmes are another league.
Not sure if you're asking this question from a European/Asian or a US context, since the US region is tagged in your post.
Short answer is, if you're dead set on using the MBA to transition to a BB associate role in the US, you should do a top MBA in the US (doesn't need to be M7 to get BB interviews).
Longer answer on the placement. For that, you need to pretty much ignore what the Intern in IB above said (as INSEAD has actually one of the most detailed employment reports of any school and the MBA there is seen on par in Europe and Asia with LBS and M7 schools). As mtnmmnn and the VPs above said the following lead to a seemingly poor placement in finance. I went to INSEAD myself, so fell free to consider my answer either biased or insightful (although I hope the latter comes across).
1. Programme structure for any 1 year MBA is not ideal for banking, as you need to do an internship. So, in INSEADs case, if you start in either September or January, you need to intern in summer and start full time either in March or Sept the year after. Especially for the July class, it's a long time to wait more than a year to start your full time role. This has lead to multiple students doing their internships at a BB in London, and then going for a different role because they don't want to wait a year (happened to about 5 people I know).
2. The structure, which is hopefully well known to prospective students before joining, leads to less interest in banking from the class, which in time leads to less recruitment from banking (comparable to more finance focused schools, such as LBS).
3. The MBA associate recruitment process is not as universally prevalent in Europe and Asia as it is in the US. In fact, when I did my MBA, several BBs did not even run any type of MBA recruitment in Europe, vs US where they all had large classes. Going from INSEAD to the US is very hard if you don't have a green card/citizenship, which only about 10% of the class at INSEAD will have.
So, to sum up, there is recruitment for BB IB at INSEAD, just not in the same numbers as at M7 or LBS. Most people that wanted IB from my class got an internship, but almost none are still in banking now. When I asked them about the MBA summer associate class at their BB, it tended to be a third INSEAD, a third LBS and a third other schools. Not sure if that's still the case, as it was a few years ago.
Spot on answer right here +SB. No idea what that first poster is talking about (clearly an overzealous intern who needs knocking down a peg or two).
Also IESE is a solid third after LBS / INSEAD. Other than those three representation is pretty thin on the ground (though HEC and Judge have sent a few here and there).
Can’t believe this is not well known but here goes. THERE IS NO REAL MBA ASSOCIATE RECRUITMENT IN EUROPE. Not meant to come across aggressively, but honestly you need to realise that if you have NOT DONE IB PRE-MBA and you are looking for London offices, you only have 4-5 places (BB) that take MBAs. EBs, MMs, etc do not take MBA Associates. The senior/lateral market for IB Associates in UK is not from MBA career chamgers. It is actually from Big4 Auditors turned senior analysts/junior associates.
Just because there are fewer banks recruiting post-MBA doesn't mean there is "NO RECRUITING" as you so gracefully exclaimed. Plenty of spots for someone committed enough to get banking and plenty of firms willing to do ad-hoc hires outside of a formal MBA Associate intake.
Sure, I mean practically no recruiting in comparison to structured in takes like US. The thing about “ad-hoc” hires is that 1) they are once in a blue moon/luck dependent, 2) if you have not done IB before (even if in another continent) etc it is hard to even get interviews, 3) I wouldn’t want to throw c. €100k down the INSEAD drain HOPING that when it comes to recruit some “ad-hoc” positions may be there. My point is simple. It is not a structured path into IB in London, and I don’t believe that (less than c. 30 summer (i.e. not even associate) MBA associate vacancies) merit doling out cash to pursue this career trajectory. I am not saying this out of spite or whatever dude, I am saying this because having worked and interviewed at most BBs and MMs as a lateral, I categorically asked the question to HR & Bankers and in 90% of the cases was told a flat ‘No!’.
To add, CBS (and I assume Booth/Wharton) send a few to BB London offices every year - there are alumni over there who help facilitate the process, as there isn't a formalized one. If you want to switch into finance, you need to go to a US-based program, especially one with a finance legacy like W/B/C.
Hardly anyone recruits for IB and for few who are interested, the vast majority get a spot - C, GS, MS do OCR and will typically interview those interested. Other BBs and EBs are more ad hoc (and this is across all schools)......a lot of misleading posts here.
general rule of thumb - if you want a US job, go to a US school; if you want a consulting job, go to INSEAD, if you want an IB job, go to LBS; if you want PE, go to INSEAD; if you want corporate; either works and if you want an Asia or EMEA jobs, go to INSEAD.
Insead is all sponsored consultants, def not taken very seriously. Plus, you need an internship to switch into banking if you don't have prior experience. The Non-LBS Euro schools really just do not compare at all to M7. Why do you think it's "easier" to get in? Because so many fewer apply.
This didn’t age well… LBS is definitely not at the same level as Insead anymore. The school (maybe because of Brexit) has really lost its appeal and struggles to attract high caliber candidates like Insead. Insead remains the only Euro school in par with M7, and this is reflected in alumni quality, rankings, acceptance and yield rates and job placements. Even in Europe, I’ve seen boutique private equity firms only hire Harvard, Stanford, Wharton or Insead - Insead is worse than the first three but LBS is not even in the picture to be honest.
This didn’t age well… LBS is definitely not at the same level as Insead anymore. The school (maybe because of Brexit) has really lost its appeal and struggles to attract high caliber candidates like Insead. Insead remains the only Euro school in par with M7, and this is reflected in alumni quality, rankings, acceptance and yield rates and job placements. Even in Europe, I’ve seen boutique private equity firms only hire Harvard, Stanford, Wharton or Insead - Insead is worse than the first three but LBS is not even in the picture to be honest.
This didn’t age well… LBS is definitely not at the same level as Insead anymore. The school (maybe because of Brexit) has really lost its appeal and struggles to attract high caliber candidates like Insead. Insead remains the only Euro school in par with M7, and this is reflected in alumni quality, rankings, acceptance and yield rates and job placements. Even in Europe, I’ve seen boutique private equity firms only hire Harvard, Stanford, Wharton or Insead - Insead is worse than the first three but LBS is not even in the picture to be honest.
This didn’t age well… LBS is definitely not at the same level as Insead anymore. The school (maybe because of Brexit) has really lost its appeal and struggles to attract high caliber candidates like Insead. Insead remains the only Euro school in par with M7, and this is reflected in alumni quality, rankings, acceptance and yield rates and job placements. Even in Europe, I’ve seen boutique private equity firms only hire Harvard, Stanford, Wharton or Insead - Insead is worse than the first three but LBS is not even in the picture to be honest.
This didn’t age well… LBS is definitely not at the same level as Insead anymore. The school (maybe because of Brexit) has really lost its appeal and struggles to attract high caliber candidates like Insead. Insead remains the only Euro school in par with M7, and this is reflected in alumni quality, rankings, acceptance and yield rates and job placements. Even in Europe, I’ve seen boutique private equity firms only hire Harvard, Stanford, Wharton or Insead - Insead is worse than the first three but LBS is not even in the picture to be honest.
This didn’t age well… LBS is definitely not at the same level as Insead anymore. The school (maybe because of Brexit) has really lost its appeal and struggles to attract high caliber candidates like Insead. Insead remains the only Euro school in par with M7, and this is reflected in alumni quality, rankings, acceptance and yield rates and job placements. Even in Europe, I’ve seen boutique private equity firms only hire Harvard, Stanford, Wharton or Insead - Insead is worse than the first three but LBS is not even in the picture to be honest.
Laudantium aliquid suscipit a et est blanditiis. Consequuntur molestiae molestiae voluptates labore eligendi explicabo. Qui ipsam ut et iure consequatur fugit eius sed. Mollitia illo ab unde amet soluta veniam.
Deserunt aut molestiae ullam dolorem. Est sit ut vitae eligendi dignissimos aliquid numquam. Voluptate molestiae laudantium rerum numquam expedita.
Rerum quia hic quis nihil veniam omnis quod. Aliquid omnis et laborum. Illo quo provident aspernatur nam aut blanditiis sint nobis. Eos minus excepturi pariatur voluptas debitis alias. Consectetur quia sapiente animi accusamus nihil unde in qui. Rerum necessitatibus voluptas architecto voluptas.
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...
Asperiores qui natus dicta eligendi molestiae et tempora. Et suscipit omnis dolorem modi. Porro quia sit minima dicta.
Sunt velit magnam optio ipsam quia vel. Iusto ullam ullam omnis ut omnis nihil. Qui sunt quam est enim rerum enim error fuga. Velit non natus similique non molestiae.
Minus consequuntur dignissimos dolore velit omnis. Maxime non beatae deleniti sequi qui. Quidem officiis nemo recusandae recusandae consequatur praesentium. Veniam sit quisquam dolore libero eveniet ut. Rerum consectetur voluptatem sed ex dolorem repellat. Eaque nisi debitis exercitationem cum libero eligendi consequuntur.