11/22/13

Hey yall,

I was wondering how much does the prestige of the job matter when it comes to top MBA admissions (top 10 MBA programs). It seems like for a top MBA program you either have to be high finance (IB/Consulting), military, or come from an unorthodox career route to have a shot at some of the elite programs and a person that comes from any other route is essentially effed. Is your pre-MBA career title weighed as equal or a little more than, say say your GPA or GMAT scores?

Ultimately though, how would a more common route job fare for admissions at elite or top MBA programs (i.e: Like a financial analyst at a F100 company or a Big 4 tax/audit guy?). I am especially curious about those who are in one of the more common finance/accounting job routes (F100 Finance Analyst/Big 4) who want to transition into a high finance job post-MBA like IB/Consulting/VC.

Comments (42)

11/22/13

if you want to get into a top tier MBA, ie M7, you need have a great resume and some great brand names on your resume. If you are in banking or consulting you better be going to a top tier firm. F100 places well but usually from product management groups at brand names (Pepsico, Coke, JnJ). Also big 4 isn't that great for top tier MBA. But if you like accounting you an get some awesome, awesome jobs after your B4 experience and CPA.

Accepted.com
3/14/16

Here's the issue with Big4, they get grouped into the "professional services" bucket.
If you're in that category, your competition is IBD and Consulting. That's a losing battle.

If you're doing just about anything ELSE, then things start to look better.

Eager to learn

11/22/13

I'm really not sure, but I honestly think things like your GMAT matter more

I'm not concerned with the very poor
-Mitt Romney

11/22/13

Company brand definitely helps, but it doesn't necessarily have to be MBB/Goldman Sachs (though they do comprise a good chunk of the student body at most of these schools).

Plenty of Big 4 Accounting, Fortune 200 (preferably from rotational leadership programs-but plenty of financial analysts and project managers as well), 2nd-tier consulting firms, etc. populate the M7- top 10. I'd say that your stats and career progression can make up for any lack of prestige of your firm, to a point. As long as the company is known, you should be set. Working at a Disney, Coca Cola, AT&T, KPMG, Deloitte, etc...shouldn't put you at a big disadvantage. For starters, people with those backgrounds perform well in Ops and quant related classes, and are not that hard for career development offices to work with and place for recruiting purposes.

One of my buddies from HBS did a rotational program at Goodyear, for example. If the brand is not that well known, however, then you need to have superb stats, and a fast track career progression to seem like a big fish in a small pond. You'll still find a solid (though smaller) number of people from startups and lesser known companies who otherwise bring something else to the table.

12/10/13

I work at a no-name industrial equipment manufacturer, $10M in revenue but we're projecting 50-100% growth over the next year. I'm applying in the fall. Isn't direct experience at a high-growth PE-backed portfolio company better experience than say consulting if I wanted to get into a good school to make a career change into PE?

12/10/13

Khayembii:

I work at a no-name industrial equipment manufacturer, $10M in revenue but we're projecting 50-100% growth over the next year. I'm applying in the fall. Isn't direct experience at a high-growth PE-backed portfolio company better experience than say consulting if I wanted to get into a good school to make a career change into PE?

It's an interesting story and might make you good for the operational arm of certain funds (I have no idea what your job function currently is), but the roles these PE companies recruit for at MBA programs are primarily for investing functions, which at the lower levels is just a totally different animal than doing engineering or even corp fin work for portfolio companies. Think of all the financial analysis that needed to be done in a $2BN buyout. All the paperwork. All the time you need to spend communicating with your lender group, your advisors, your lawyers, your consultants doing due-diligence...even at the VP-level, being able to run the actual transaction process is a nightmare, which is why PE funds love hiring IB analysts. Those guys are totally familiar with it. They've spent two years on the other side of it.

FWIW, I'm not sure how competitive you would be at M7 programs? $10m in revenue is a pretty damn small industrials company. Most of the guys with your background at Booth, for example, would be at Caterpillar or John Deere or General Electric. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong.)

12/10/13

Thanks for the reply! I'm an ME, planning on matriculating to a top 10 in 2015. I've had a few PE firms say they'd give me an internship before even matriculating, and others that have said they would after I'm in a program, though these are pretty small boutique firms. I don't think getting an internship would be particularly difficult if I kept networking as aggressively as I had been.

My question was primarily related to school admissions. Would my background be more/less attractive to a top-10 or top-5 b-school than an ME at an F500 looking to do the same thing and why? I've heard that I'm automatically ruled out of top schools because my company is so small but I just don't think that's necessarily true (then again I haven't started working on my application package or reviewing schools just yet).

12/10/13

I don't think the "prestige" of your employer matters a ton in bschool admissions. If you're set on getting a top MBA, then do what you can to change what's in your control now (GMAT, extracurriculars) instead of wondering whether your college GPA or so forth is good enough. Never know until you try.

12/11/13

think prestige of your company matters quite a bit, as

(i) it gives a general sense of the quality of applicant (or at least perception of quality of applicant). ultimately, top employers and top business schools screen for many of the same things

(ii) it is an indicator of "hirability" post-MBA (i.e., people with strong brand names pre-MBA have leg up when applying for post MBA positions)

i am not making the argument that it matters more or less than gmat score or gpa. in general, if you are looking at top bschools, GMAT/gpa score alone can keep you out if you are not above a min threshold, but will not get you in

here's a example of Wharton's top pre-MBA employers -

http://poetsandquants.com/2011/08/07/top-feeder-co...

think the figures speak for themselves, but please let me know if you disagree

12/11/13

Generals2 I'd caution you on thinking that raw numbers = prestige matters. Certainly companies of 50,000 people will push more kids into bschool than a regional manufacturing business - not because of the prestige factor, but just sheer numbers.

I do think prestige matters somewhat. It is good signaling that you're capable of navigating/surviving what is considered to be one of the more successful companies around. It also shows you can jump through the hoops to land said job. However, it isn't the end all be all. Knowing your story, executing well on your interviews, doing well on the GMAT, etc are far more important.

12/11/13

hamm0:

Generals2 I'd caution you on thinking that raw numbers = prestige matters. Certainly companies of 50,000 people will push more kids into bschool than a regional manufacturing business - not because of the prestige factor, but just sheer numbers.

I do think prestige matters somewhat. It is good signaling that you're capable of navigating/surviving what is considered to be one of the more successful companies around. It also shows you can jump through the hoops to land said job. However, it isn't the end all be all. Knowing your story, executing well on your interviews, doing well on the GMAT, etc are far more important.

Disagree. Best example of "prestige" being a factor? The underrepresentation of the Big 4 at top MBA programs. Big 4 guys apply to MBA programs in comparable numbers to bankers and consultants. They have the same type of structured entry-level program, hierarchical progression, performance reviews, plans of "exit opportunities," etc. There are community service opportunities, committees where employees can demonstrate "leadership"...All the sort of stuff that adcoms like about banking consulting. They even fucking rank the firms in Vault. Plus good number of Big 4 employees come from the non-Wharton top undergrad b-schools. UMich, Berkeley, UVA, UT, Stern, etc. A hypothetical Big 4 audit MBA applicant could be a Stern kid with a 3.6, some extracurricular involvement in his business fraternity, good reviews, a promotion, and an interest in moving to MBB consulting and transitioning later on to C-level industry positions. Sounds like a pretty normal MBA applicant, yeah? Swap "Big 4 audit" with "BB, A2A promotion" and if he said hypothetical candidate about his chances on here, we'd be telling him "not HSW, but competitive everywhere else."

But you'll never see KPMG or EY as a consistent feeder into any of the M7 programs. Maybe Deloitte, but that's from their strategy consulting group. And the few Big 4 applicants who do get in are the black/Hispanic (so they fill the URM slot), or internationals (where Big 4 is much more prestigious).

So IMO, where you work is pretty damn important to the M7 AdComs.

12/11/13

LBJ's hair:

hamm0:

Generals2 I'd caution you on thinking that raw numbers = prestige matters. Certainly companies of 50,000 people will push more kids into bschool than a regional manufacturing business - not because of the prestige factor, but just sheer numbers.

I do think prestige matters somewhat. It is good signaling that you're capable of navigating/surviving what is considered to be one of the more successful companies around. It also shows you can jump through the hoops to land said job. However, it isn't the end all be all. Knowing your story, executing well on your interviews, doing well on the GMAT, etc are far more important.

Disagree. Best example of "prestige" being a factor? The underrepresentation of the Big 4 at top MBA programs. Big 4 guys apply to MBA programs in comparable numbers to bankers and consultants. They have the same type of structured entry-level program, hierarchical progression, performance reviews, plans of "exit opportunities," etc. There are community service opportunities, committees where employees can demonstrate "leadership"...All the sort of stuff that adcoms like about banking consulting. They even fucking rank the firms in Vault. Plus good number of Big 4 employees come from the non-Wharton top undergrad b-schools. UMich, Berkeley, UVA, UT, Stern, etc. A hypothetical Big 4 audit MBA applicant could be a Stern kid with a 3.6, some extracurricular involvement in his business fraternity, good reviews, a promotion, and an interest in moving to MBB consulting and transitioning later on to C-level industry positions. Sounds like a pretty normal MBA applicant, yeah? Swap "Big 4 audit" with "BB, A2A promotion" and if he said hypothetical candidate about his chances on here, we'd be telling him "not HSW, but competitive everywhere else."

But you'll never see KPMG or EY as a consistent feeder into any of the M7 programs. Maybe Deloitte, but that's from their strategy consulting group. And the few Big 4 applicants who do get in are the black/Hispanic (so they fill the URM slot), or internationals (where Big 4 is much more prestigious).

So IMO, where you work is pretty damn important to the M7 AdComs.

How hard is it for you to understand that Big 4 CPA's are not as interested in an MBA as their non-accounting counterparts? The gap will widen as most of them will already have a Masters in Accounting. They just don't care, and those that want to make it into Banking/Consulting find ways to do it without shelling out 200K for another degree.

12/11/13

putting aside the accounting example (not being flippant / dismissive, I just don't know much about it..), bottom line is that is that pre-MBA brand impacts bschool brand. granted, there will always be spots for people who do not have traditional backgrounds or work for the most prestigious firms within any given field

for example, I currently work in PE. there are several prestigious/well-know PE firms that consistently place very well in bschool / get a disproportionate share of the top bschool slots relative to the other PE firms

same goes for banks - you will notice that JPM/MS/GS are top 3 banks at Wharton (see link above)

part of this is chicken and egg - i.e., top bschools and employers screen for many of the same things

regardless, to deny a strong correlation exists between pre-MBA work experience and top bschools is uninformed at best / disingenuous at worst

12/11/13

Ruskii:

LBJ's hair:
hamm0:

Generals2 I'd caution you on thinking that raw numbers = prestige matters. Certainly companies of 50,000 people will push more kids into bschool than a regional manufacturing business - not because of the prestige factor, but just sheer numbers.

I do think prestige matters somewhat. It is good signaling that you're capable of navigating/surviving what is considered to be one of the more successful companies around. It also shows you can jump through the hoops to land said job. However, it isn't the end all be all. Knowing your story, executing well on your interviews, doing well on the GMAT, etc are far more important.

Disagree. Best example of "prestige" being a factor? The underrepresentation of the Big 4 at top MBA programs. Big 4 guys apply to MBA programs in comparable numbers to bankers and consultants. They have the same type of structured entry-level program, hierarchical progression, performance reviews, plans of "exit opportunities," etc. There are community service opportunities, committees where employees can demonstrate "leadership"...All the sort of stuff that adcoms like about banking consulting. They even fucking rank the firms in Vault. Plus good number of Big 4 employees come from the non-Wharton top undergrad b-schools. UMich, Berkeley, UVA, UT, Stern, etc. A hypothetical Big 4 audit MBA applicant could be a Stern kid with a 3.6, some extracurricular involvement in his business fraternity, good reviews, a promotion, and an interest in moving to MBB consulting and transitioning later on to C-level industry positions. Sounds like a pretty normal MBA applicant, yeah? Swap "Big 4 audit" with "BB, A2A promotion" and if he said hypothetical candidate about his chances on here, we'd be telling him "not HSW, but competitive everywhere else."

But you'll never see KPMG or EY as a consistent feeder into any of the M7 programs. Maybe Deloitte, but that's from their strategy consulting group. And the few Big 4 applicants who do get in are the black/Hispanic (so they fill the URM slot), or internationals (where Big 4 is much more prestigious).

So IMO, where you work is pretty damn important to the M7 AdComs.

How hard is it for you to understand that Big 4 CPA's are not as interested in an MBA as their non-accounting counterparts? The gap will widen as most of them will already have a Masters in Accounting. They just don't care, and those that want to make it into Banking/Consulting find ways to do it without shelling out 200K for another degree.

Are you seriously arguing that the reason you don't see Big 4 candidates at M7 program is because they don't apply? That's just factually not true.

12/11/13

LBJ's hair:

Ruskii:
LBJ's hair:
hamm0:

Generals2 I'd caution you on thinking that raw numbers = prestige matters. Certainly companies of 50,000 people will push more kids into bschool than a regional manufacturing business - not because of the prestige factor, but just sheer numbers.

I do think prestige matters somewhat. It is good signaling that you're capable of navigating/surviving what is considered to be one of the more successful companies around. It also shows you can jump through the hoops to land said job. However, it isn't the end all be all. Knowing your story, executing well on your interviews, doing well on the GMAT, etc are far more important.

Disagree. Best example of "prestige" being a factor? The underrepresentation of the Big 4 at top MBA programs. Big 4 guys apply to MBA programs in comparable numbers to bankers and consultants. They have the same type of structured entry-level program, hierarchical progression, performance reviews, plans of "exit opportunities," etc. There are community service opportunities, committees where employees can demonstrate "leadership"...All the sort of stuff that adcoms like about banking consulting. They even fucking rank the firms in Vault. Plus good number of Big 4 employees come from the non-Wharton top undergrad b-schools. UMich, Berkeley, UVA, UT, Stern, etc. A hypothetical Big 4 audit MBA applicant could be a Stern kid with a 3.6, some extracurricular involvement in his business fraternity, good reviews, a promotion, and an interest in moving to MBB consulting and transitioning later on to C-level industry positions. Sounds like a pretty normal MBA applicant, yeah? Swap "Big 4 audit" with "BB, A2A promotion" and if he said hypothetical candidate about his chances on here, we'd be telling him "not HSW, but competitive everywhere else."

But you'll never see KPMG or EY as a consistent feeder into any of the M7 programs. Maybe Deloitte, but that's from their strategy consulting group. And the few Big 4 applicants who do get in are the black/Hispanic (so they fill the URM slot), or internationals (where Big 4 is much more prestigious).

So IMO, where you work is pretty damn important to the M7 AdComs.

How hard is it for you to understand that Big 4 CPA's are not as interested in an MBA as their non-accounting counterparts? The gap will widen as most of them will already have a Masters in Accounting. They just don't care, and those that want to make it into Banking/Consulting find ways to do it without shelling out 200K for another degree.

Are you seriously arguing that the reason you don't see Big 4 candidates at M7 program is because they don't apply? That's just factually not true.

You don't see as many Big 4 candidates at M7 programs because not as many Big 4 CPA's are interested in pursuing an MBA. As a result, less of the "top" talent applies to M7 programs because they have other, arguably better exit opportunities the spending 200K on another masters degree.

What you're doing is assuming that somehow these schools have a quota for n amount of people from x workplace. That's just not teh case, less people with good stats applying means less people getting accepted.

Accepted.com
12/11/13

It's important. Your undergraduate prestige is also critical.

12/11/13

A Wharton AdCom said that ugrad prestige doesn't matter necessarily, and that for example someone that took hard courses in a hard program and got a B average is a stronger candidate than someone that took easy courses at an ivy league and got A's, ceteris paribus.

12/11/13

Khayembii:

A Wharton AdCom said that ugrad prestige doesn't matter necessarily, and that for example someone that took hard courses in a hard program and got a B average is a stronger candidate than someone that took easy courses at an ivy league and got A's, ceteris paribus.

Said adcom was full of sh*t.

A 3.8 from Harvard stands a far better chance at every single school than a 3.1 state school engineer does.

12/11/13

Khayembii:

A Wharton AdCom said that ugrad prestige doesn't matter necessarily, and that for example someone that took hard courses in a hard program and got a B average is a stronger candidate than someone that took easy courses at an ivy league and got A's, ceteris paribus.

Yeah, unfortunately that was a baldfaced lie. You can check admissions stats for yourself on Poets and Quants (MBA admissions website): undergrad prestige is absolutely a factor in MBA admissions. When that AdCom referred to "hard courses at a hard program" she meant like, engineering at MIT. Not at Podunk State University.

12/11/13

Where you work pre-MBA is almost certainly going to be a factor in bschool admissions.

Take two fictional applicants with similar backgrounds of top tier Ivy > BB IBD > PE > Bschool application. Each has a 3.7+ with economics degree and 750+ GMAT. It'd be pretty hard to distinguish which candidate has the early upper hand wouldn't it?

Now, maybe we break it down a little.

Harvard > GS TMT > KKR > Bschool application

Yale > BAML Industrials > non-branded MM PE > Bschool application

Now which candidate has the upper hand all else equal?

It's just a tool they use to distinguish between a remarkably similar pool of applicants. When you're staring at a group of Ivy educated 26 year old males with 700+ GMATs who all had roughly the same career experiences/progressions and same future career goals you need something tangible to distinguish between them.

There are a ton of factors that go in MBA admissions, the importance of which change slightly depending on the candidate.

patternfinder:

Of course, I would just buy in scales.

See my WSO Blog | my AMA

6/29/15

Spot on! IMO this is the most convincing post here!

Does this mean that a non-BB 2nd tier banker (think standard chartered, daiwa, soc gen, hsbc, santander, jefferies) screwed with his M7 bschool applications if pretty much everything else is equal like the rest of the banker-->PE-->bschool with other similar background crews?

Not everyone is meant to make a difference. But for me, the choice to lead an ordinary life is no longer an option.

6/29/15

If he is equal in everything, but has worse work experience, then he has a weaker profile.

3/16/16

An adcom is not going to value GS TMT over BAML Industrials because quite frankly they just see bulge bracket IBD. Adcoms are not nearly as in tune to IBD group rankings as monkeys are. A top performing analyst (3rd year promotion, top tier bonus bucket, letter of rec) at BAML Industrials is going to get the nod over an average GS TMT analyst.

Working at KKR vs. Non-Branded MM PE will make a difference. If it's KKR vs. New Mountain Capital/Warburg/Irving Street tier shop, it's going to come down to performance at PE shop and how unique/compelling the applicant's story is (the the industrials guy w. BAML>New Mountain vs. a guy who is all over the place w. GS>KKR has a leg up)

12/12/13

You only need look at any admissions report to see that company prestige matters and that the same names appear over and over in lists of incoming classes. However, my one caveat is that so long as the company is well known and your job interesting enough, you have a decent to good chance. It signals to adcom that you can sit in front of a major employer and interview well, and that you've been pre-screened by a major company willing to invest in you. The key word is "interesting", though-which is why I think the Big-4 folks are a bit underrepresented relative to bankers/consultants (but enough still get in). One of my buddies is applying to the M7 and has a resume that screams "Lifetime Accountant". I had to get her to tone it down a bit because adcoms will see it and tell her she needs a CPA rather than MBA, and because accounting resumes tend to put the reader to sleep. I imagine that working on huge deals at BBs or Consulting on business strategy out of Bain for F500s is more attention grabbing than managing a general ledger. And yes, prestige is positively correlated w/ the former. Gross oversimplification, I know, but I think the idea of doing "sexy" work strikes a chord w/ Adcoms.

3/25/14

TheGrind:

You only need look at any admissions report to see that company prestige matters and that the same names appear over and over in lists of incoming classes. However, my one caveat is that so long as the company is well known and your job interesting enough, you have a decent to good chance. It signals to adcom that you can sit in front of a major employer and interview well, and that you've been pre-screened by a major company willing to invest in you. The key word is "interesting", though-which is why I think the Big-4 folks are a bit underrepresented relative to bankers/consultants (but enough still get in). One of my buddies is applying to the M7 and has a resume that screams "Lifetime Accountant". I had to get her to tone it down a bit because adcoms will see it and tell her she needs a CPA rather than MBA, and because accounting resumes tend to put the reader to sleep. I imagine that working on huge deals at BBs or Consulting on business strategy out of Bain for F500s is more attention grabbing than managing a general ledger. And yes, prestige is positively correlated w/ the former. Gross oversimplification, I know, but I think the idea of doing "sexy" work strikes a chord w/ Adcoms.

I have an issue with looking at it this way, though. For example, a program that admits 60% of people from a finance background doesn't necessarily imply that the school is looking mostly for people with a finance background, or that a finance background will help your chances of being admitted. Correlation doesn't equal causation. And while one can look at admissions statistics and see that prestigious schools/firms are highly represented, that doesn't tell the entire story because people who went to prestigious schools have tended to demonstrate capable leadership at school/work. It wasn't just the name of the school being considered. So somebody that went to a no-name school and started their own business(es) after graduation while participating in community volunteer work, has more leadership/initiative experience than someone who went to an ivy league undergrad, didn't participate in extracurriculars, and then landed a BB banking job out of college with no volunteer experience.

If you look at the stats, the former just tends to be uncommon, but that doesn't mean they have "less of a chance" because they didn't go to the ivy league ugrad school or have the BB banking job. So my point is that while prestige has weight, adcoms dig deeper than an employer and look at the whole picture.

12/13/13

For what it's worth, there are a handful of people at Booth from big four accounting firms (and even further down firms like BDO). All in though, ye I would say prestige matters, but definitely something that can be overcome.

3/24/14

Sorry for digging an old topic out, but does anybody have an idea for how MasterCard Worldwide would look to MBA adcoms? I know it is an industry leader in payments alongside Visa and AmEx, but do you guys think it would be considered a strong brand name? Trying to assess whether it would be a good decision to start my career with their rotation program and any insight would definitely help.

3/24/14

It certainly wouldn't hurt. It's both a well known brand and a company that isn't overrepresented in MBA classes, which may help your application stand out. Depending on how well you do in the Rotational program and how you spin the job into your story/career goals you could potentially build yourself an M7 worthy resume. You'd certainly get a look from most general management programs assuming your other stats are in order. Barring any superior offers I'd snatch this one up in a heartbeat; it's def. not a bad way to start your career.

3/25/14

Appreciate the insight!

3/25/14

@khayembii I'm not sure that you guys really are disagreeing that much. No one with any actual knowledge is saying that you can't get in without a name brand employer. That's obviously wrong. However, as much as AdComs like to pontificate about wanting "different" and "unique", their actions don't reflect that. GSB probably gets three times as many entrepreneurs/small business people/whatever than it has spots in its class. They still make up a tiny percentage of admits compared to MBB/BB/other elite things. Sure, a few exceptional ones will get in, but that's because they are truly exceptional.

AdComs read tons of applications in a given day. Of course they're looking for something interesting, but at the same time, the first document they go to is the resume and academic numbers. Bottom line is that no matter how interesting you are, if you don't have a name that jumps out on your resume, it will raise some questions with the reader. Now, if it turns out the name he/she doesn't recognize was a company recently sold to Google for $25M, and now you've founded a small VC firm and have already invested in SnapChat, you'll probably overcome that issue.

Unfortunately, if you're employee #4 at an interesting, but struggling start-up (aren't most start-ups struggling in some way), you might not overcome that issue. You won't overcome that despite some probably pretty awesome experiences, but that's just how it goes. I think what @TheGrind is saying is that it helps to have a name associated with "sexy work" on your resume because it gives you immediate credibility with someone who looks at like 25 apps per day.

Also, I don't know why we're discussing start-ups, because they're a totally different breed of applicant. This post is much more relevant for guy thinking about taking a F500 job as opposed to a F100 job, or a Tier 3 consulting vs. Tier 2 consulting, or whatever. In those cases, you are essentially falling into a bucket below other potential applicants, because you're already at a less selective/prestigious/high quality experience place (as AdComs see it).

Honestly, I just think it's too utopian to think that AdComs (at top schools) really, really dig into your profile. At the same time, it's too short-sighted to think that they immediately dismiss you if you don't have one of 20 employers on your resume.

3/25/14

Old Man Marley doesn't care about where you worked.

3/25/14

This point has already been made, but what U.S. Americans should know is that in the rest of the world including Canada, England, Australia Big 4 and Accounting are held in very high regard. A lot of CEO's and bankers are former accountants and have the ACCA designation.

U.S. Americans = Americans who have no knowledge of what goes on abroad. You know where I learnt this! (Miss Teen SC)

ACCA = CPA

3/26/14

Don't remember the specifics, but Poets & Quants did a story on feeder companies to Stanford and discovered that students with MBB, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and J.P. Morgan/Chase on their resumes made up roughly 1/3 of the class out of ~500 people. Of course these already tend to be high achieving people with Ivy/top undergraduate backgrounds, stints at PE MFs and killer ECs. And this is before you factor in the Amazons, Googles, military, etc...

3/27/14

I got into a M7 full time program, while working in operations at a Top BB bank (doing some global project management work, but nothing WSO would find impressive). High gmat score will make up for a lot. I tend to think its better to have a worse job title at a brand name company when it comes to Bschool admissions, than to have a cool job at worse known company. It seems like business schools favor some guy doing mid office work at goldman, over someone doing front office M&A at some MM firm.

3/27/14

So, what you are saying is, even though you might work in Audit, the global brand name in your Resume will help you in admissions.

3/27/14

krypton:

So, what you are saying is, even though you might work in Audit, the global brand name in your Resume will help you in admissions.

exactly

3/28/14

I think so. These schools love the idea of attracting the talent from "top" firms. It's not uncommon to see lists of companies from where students hail in their brochures. It probably helps with keeping placements at 90%, since your pre-MBA resume will impact the quality of your recruiting process-if it doesn't determine your recruiting experience outright, consulting and banking notwithstanding.

3/8/15

.

Johnny Rocket

3/7/15

Prestige brand name doesn't matter in HBS admissions. They're HBS, they can afford to take about 100 people per class from non "prestigious" backgrounds.

Don't know about Stanford.

A school like Wharton or Columbia which are in struggles for rankings, your undergrad school and employer prestige matters a lot.

3/8/15

Johnny Rocket

3/9/15
6/29/15
Add a Comment