Any thoughts on how Booth really stacks up against Harvard, Wharton, and Stanford in the recruiting world? Businessweek ranks Booth the #1 Full-Time program this year, but I find it hard to believe that, all else being equal, a Booth grad gets picked over a Harvard grad. The prestige factor that comes along with a Harvard MBA has to tip the scale in that direction. Thoughts?
Trending Content
Career Resources
Booth is incredibly strong on the quantitative front. Our MD had an MBA from Harvard, but he would get nervous when a Chicago or Stanford guy would start talking about anything more complicated than addition our subtraction. Chicago guys are known for having a disciplined and somewhat numerical approach to stuff.
I guess the real question is what do you need to complement your background? If you have a liberal arts undergrad and IBD or Sales background and want to move into something like research or asset management, I'd strongly recommend Chicago or perhaps Wharton. If you have an engineering undergrad, quant trading professional work, and want to go into consulting in some Northeastern city, Harvard is probably the better choice.
Chicago and Northwestern are a little less selective than Harvard, Penn, Wharton, Yale, and Stanford but they still manage to have the same reputation among hiring managers- and they manage to kick Stanford's, Yale's, and Wharton's butt. This should tell you something about the overall value and quality of the programs. I also think this is where you start seeing the self-selection of cultures for the schools. If you want to signal that you're exclusive, that's Harvard. If you want to realize your potential, though, you're really looking at Booth or Kellogg. Booth is the more quantitative program; Kellogg is more soft-skills.
The two far and away highest from a reputation and recruiting perspective are Harvard and Stanford. I would say a step down from there would be Wharton and Booth and below that would be CBS, Kellogg, MIT, etc. I say this only from a VC/PE and recruitin perspective.
Illini programer, I am not sure why you are mixing Yale in there as their MBA program is reputable, but no where near the others. I get you are alluding to someone's background, but the undergrad kicking other undergrads butt has nothing to do with the reputation of the business schools.
Your advice can be simplified to say if you have a quantitative background and want more of a general managment style teaching go to x y and z, but if you want more of a quantitative background a, b and c are the best choices.
Interesting perspectives. I'm a non-MBA grad student at Chicago, so I can confirm the heavy quantitative tilt to most of what goes on there. I've taken a few Booth classes in the FT program, and was curious to see how it stacked up outside of the rankings. I'm toying with the idea of doing the whole MBA there after I'm done with my current program. I wonder if having a recommendation from a Booth prof, speaking to my performance in a Booth class, will carry some extra weight with the admissions board :)
I guess my point is that if you are OK with how you are doing, only look at selectivity. If you want a program that's actually going to make you a more valuable manager, though, and have you managing the Stanford and Wharton grads in a few years, Booth and Kellogg deserve a long, hard look.
When the Chicago MBAs would show up and start talking about analytics with our Harvard MBA MD, his eyes would glaze over and he'd get a nervous look on his face. My manager would usually shoot me a wry smile and later comment that our MD might be a good people person but had no clue how the business worked. This is the stereotype that haunts Harvard MBAs.
If you want to be one of the numbers guys- or a very strong manager who can walk circles around the Harvard and Stanford grads when you start talking about risk or estimates and projections, Booth is the school to go to where you can actually learn something on that front. They do look for a bit of an older crowd, however.
Wait, so you're saying that Booth and Kellogg grads have a better reputation than Stanford and Harvard grads, and ultimately get better jobs, earn more, and manage S/H grads?
What world is this true in? Do you have any data that suggests this? Because I have some: http://www.businessweek.com/interactive_reports/mba_pay_2009.html
Funny, looks like in the first year out of business school, HBS grads make $134k, Stanford grads make $128k and Booth grads make only ... wait, what is it ... $110k? All that "reputation" and "butt kicking" must be pretty awesome to take a $24k pay cut. But of course 20 years down the line, when all the H/S grads are working for Booth grads, this trend reverses.
Wait... what's this? 20 years after the MBA, HBS grads make $230k, Stanford grads make $202k, and Booth grads make only $171k? That's so wierd ... why would a Booth grad make only $171k and pay the HBS grad working for them $60k more?
Suffice it to say, the fact that the average age at HBS and Stanford is several years lower than the average age at Booth really twists an extra knife into your argument. All else equal, you'd expect the 27 year freshly minted HBS MBA grad to make less than the 31 year old freshly minted Booth MBA because of the sheer difference in experience.
It's ok, Booth is still ranked #1 =)
Funny to see this post, as just this morning I had a conversation about this very subject. Full disclosure, I picked Chicago over my other options (including the above mentioned). My rational was centered around the fact that I was planning on heading into banking and had a limited background finance. I had a lot of experience leading people and managing teams, but little experience with financial models or accounting. It struck me that if I was going to succeed over the long run, I needed to turn my weaknesses into strengths, and Chicago has certainly done that.
I am about to head off to the very NYC banking job that I had decided would be my "best case scenario" post b-school, so I could not be happier. During recruiting I actually did not get many quantitative questions, and I attribute this to the fact that people assumed I "had the chops" to do the job because I had the education to back it up. Looking back, I am sure that I would have been plenty happy in Palo Alto or Allston, but I think I made a smart decision that I hope will serve me well for years to come. I came to school with one goal in mind; I achieved that goal (however improbable) and along the way I picked up an amazing education and made friends that I will value for the rest of my life.
Over the past year I have had a lot of people ask me for my advice on forming a decision tree regarding which admission offer to take, and I try to never sell them following my path, it strikes me that school is a decision that you really have to make yourself, and you should try to do it as objectively as possible. I have a few friends who have had the same options and have gone other places, and I have a few friends who had the same options and joined me. That said, both groups are likely very happy, and if you find yourself in such a situation and a had decision I have two bits of advice. First, be grateful that you have such a problem and a hard decision, you really are blessed and hundreds of people would kill to have "half of your decision". Second, consider what you want out of the experience and be honest with yourself.
LOL, sounds like someone's pissed about his school's rankings and the lower cost of midwestern living. Shrug. Guess selectivity doesn't get you very far in the business world.
Obviously everyone's opinion will be skewed towards people they have/are currently working with, their managers from xyz school, etc. I've worked with people from reputable top 25 programs to HSW, and frankly they are all great. That said there will be a few bad apples in the bunch but overall the quality of these grads are very good.
If you are choosing between Harvard and Booth, you are indeed in a enviable position and it all boils down to what you want from your 2 years on out. Each school has its reputation, culture, city, alumni, etc. that you need to fully factor into your decision. It's not that black and white to say that a Harvard grad will almost always get picked over a Booth grad - by the end of the day it all depends on the individual person.
Although I do not know anyone who chose another school over HBS, after H/S (even Wharton) it becomes more gray. There are definitely cross admits across all top programs, and I know that the Wharton/CBS/Booth/Kellogg crowd with cross admits have a lot to think about and need to weigh the differences and what fits them best.
Vel eius dolorem numquam minima. Possimus doloremque ipsum expedita nihil illo. Sed occaecati velit quasi quo et omnis est qui.
Vero incidunt commodi voluptatibus eos accusantium accusamus illum. Suscipit quia est mollitia. Corrupti quas fugit necessitatibus magnam. Accusamus eaque impedit dolorem repellendus.
Inventore et quod fugit ut. Amet harum architecto repellendus doloribus. Exercitationem delectus eius perspiciatis libero est ratione consequatur. Aut praesentium voluptas facilis aut explicabo nobis ad officia.
Atque voluptatum quibusdam blanditiis. Natus enim voluptatem veritatis est mollitia magnam aut. Sit quisquam molestiae a esse molestiae. Omnis ut illum quisquam minus. Molestiae illo rerum qui aperiam repudiandae consequatur veritatis labore.
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...