Before you jump to conclusions that the notion of this post is meant to be followed by ultra snarky comments, inducing this type of dialog is not my intent.
Rather, my intent is to understand, all things equal, how each type of MBA program's reputation is viewed against one another and if a distinction should be made when talking about how one obtained their MBA degree.
Here is the scenario:
Let's say you're at a networking event. You meet "A", "B", and "C". Each are at the same firm, attended the same top business school, and completed their FT MBA, EMBA, and Part-Time MBA, respectively. They are each 30 years old and did their MBA's at different stages in their career.
- Given the scenario, what would be your first impression on each person's overall business ability?
- After a few years does it really matter if you got a FT MBA vs EMBA vs Part-Time MBA at a top business school?
I'm considering getting an EMBA or Part-Time MBA because I don't want to switch industries and I might have my education paid for my my employer.
However, I'm wondering, will I say, "I got my MBA from Top School XYZ" and question whether I should really say "I got my EMBA from Top School XYZ". I know it's petty, but should there be a distinction?
The bottom line is if I go the EMBA route, will I be missing out?
swagger is something you either have (or developed over a period) or don't. you don't obtain swagger by doing a FT MBA. The people that think they've "obtained swagger" from getting an M7 MBA have really only obtained douchiness.
@ Ipso facto, Swagger comment aside, is their a wide distinction in the quality of a FT MBA graduate vs EMBA graduate?
My stereotypical expectations: (assuming no other factors involved)
"Business Ability" has absolutely nothing to do with going to school. That I can tell you.
Overall "Business Value" then?
In a perfect world, an MBA should boost your business ability, but maybe value would be a better way to put it.
I just think you're looking at it the wrong way. The reason to get any type of MBA is to further advance your career.
Obviously a FT MBA opens more doors to opportunities, but if the EMBA serves the purpose for your goals, go for it. Don't only choose a program for its name, even if it means you can say you got your MBA there.
If the school is constant, the only difference between programs is selectivity right? Because generally speaking the selectivity goes: FT>PT>EMBA. However, that doesn't say much except possibly the age when that person got their MBA. Business ability is a matter of knowledge and experience. Getting into a top program FT doesn't necessarily mean that someone has more "business knowledge", it just means that they had a work history and profile that the adcom liked and a good looking GMAT. The PT guy could have had the same, but maybe his company paid for it which is why he (she) went PT. An executive probably just wanted a promotion or wanted some more depth industry insight. I don't think you can compare prestige because it's apples to oranges for the most part.
FT vs PT (Originally Posted: 10/18/2010)
I know there are a few threads on FT vs PT MBA programs and the benefits of both...I was just curious if it is true that PT MBA programs for a school are easier to get into? Any thoughts? TIA
FT P.H.D or FT M.B.A. Programs are 10x better than PT programs. You get out in about 2 years, and you make a lot more moolah in the end. If you MUST work, the PT is better than nothing. but if you have a choice, my friend, go with FT.
If you check the admission stats on the Business Week rankings website, you will see that PT MBA program in the SAME SCHOOL generally has average GMAT which is 70 points lower than FT MBA program in the same school. If you happen to be working in a town like Chicago or New York City and you cannot get into the FT programs like Booth, Kellog, Columbia, Stern, then the PT programs at these schools offers a very attractive option to get the SAME MBA DEGREE (PT is not mentioned on the degree). FT is definitely better from career standpoint (probably because the FT students are smarter). Many employers pay full tuition for PT MBA, so you could save $180 K MBA debt + two years salary.
only go PT if the firm you work for is paying for it fully, otherwise the reason you are going (to get a diff job) is nullified in the end by a lack of career services
FT people at NYU get access to career services and OCR, part timers get nothing... 'on campus recruiting isnt the only way to get a job you can network too' to quote them
Depends on the school. I'm doing Ross PT...will be done next Dec (3 yrs). I couldn't afford to quit work to go to school. With Ross though, we get all the benefits of the FT student when it comes to OCR...I thought this would be the case with most schools but I've come to find out that its not. The only think that PT students are barred from is "bidding" for internship interviews. But most PT students are working full time anyways so most are not looking to get internships to begin with.
You also want to see if you can transfer into the full time program from the part time at certain stages, some schools allow this. That gives you the flexibility of finishing of the MBA quicker, and maybe even doing an summer internship if you decide to leave your employer.
Good point. At Ross, as long as you have taken the core classes, and you can prove that you are not working FT anymore, you can transfer to the FT program.
Not all schools allow that. When checking out PT programs, dig heavily into things like OCR, transfering to FT, PT placement stats.
Interesting PTMBA vs FTMBA stat (Originally Posted: 09/18/2015)
All,
I just received access to the GMAC recruiters survey. There's plenty of interesting information inside it, but one particular nugget I think would be relevant to a lot of recent discussions is this fact: Only 27% of recruiters actively recruit PTMBAs, vs 63% for FTMBA. Of those, 50% of employ PTMBAs, vs 72% that employ FTMBAs. The numbers are only worse for Exec and Online MBAs. The N is 748.
I've posted my link to the survey below to see if it gives access to others. If it doesn't, you'll all just have to take my word for it until I find a way to share.
https://research.gmac.com/utile/CRS2015/index.aspx?DR=SurveyIncentive
Let me know if it works, and I'm looking forward to seeing what other insights you all derive.
not surprising at all actually. PTMBAs have less jumps usually, and are often employed during the PTMBA.
edit: nevertheless, thanks for sharing the data. Some other pieces are pretty interesting.
Another interesting thing that I noticed was the "Reputation of Business School" 48% recruiter said Not Important while 43% said Important.
Assumenda quae est iusto accusamus. Suscipit culpa distinctio harum consequatur itaque impedit consequatur.
Vitae molestiae temporibus dignissimos aspernatur. Quia repellendus esse dolores autem ex error. Dolor illum neque tempore eveniet laboriosam provident.
Nesciunt dolor molestias eum qui voluptatem fuga corporis. Nulla ipsum sed inventore. Omnis ut eius sunt non. Qui debitis deserunt ratione consectetur accusamus. Voluptas magni id corporis qui corporis dolore voluptate. Repellendus voluptate molestias excepturi vitae.
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...