Fellow WSO members,
I know a lot has been said about this but the threads I was able to find were pretty old, so I would really appreciate your comments.
Kellogg or Booth
Kellogg and Booth are peer schools. They are relatively equal in terms of PE, VC, and PE/VC/HF. However, Chicago based firms recruit at both schools
Booth is a commuter school. Relationships are driven more shared interests and clubs as opposed to having the same cohort for every class over the period of two years. Booth has a flexible curriculum with a focus on analytics. The school places about seven percent of its graduates into private equity.
Kellogg appears to be a more tightly knit community. You’ll be living in a similar area as other students and seeing the same faces for two years. Kellogg has a wider recognition outside of finance. But it is regarded as the marketing school. It has been a top-ranked school for a longer period of time than Booth. Kellogg places just five percent of its graduates into private equity.
Recommended Reading
Booth no question. Kellogg is great but does not match your goals.
Kellog is definitely not a finance school (see: Wharton); however, I hear its program is much more prestigious than most of the other top schools.
Go for Booth. Better job opps and stronger network for MM PE. You'd have plenty of chances for Kellogg too, but Booth is still #1.
go with Kellogg - PE recruiting at both places is not different enough to really matter. The half ride - $50k will definitely feel good.
I think you should clarify your goals and the answer will become obvious. If you want to work in VC or HF, why not just go work in one of those? Neither school will help. If you want PE or IB, go to whichever school has better recruiting for that (probably Booth). It reads like you are unsure what you want to do and are trying to hedge with a very expensive piece of paper.
I'm a n00b when it comes to MBA's/financial aid, but is it possible to show Booth how much you got from Kellogg and see if they'll match it? Or was the Kellogg $$$ merit-based?
Definately Kellogg; they are viewed as equals.
H/S - same
W - 3rd
Columbia,Chicago,Kellogg,MIT-->all the same in terms of prestige
Thank you everyone for comments so far. Neither Kellogg, nor Booth are hotbeds for HF/VC/PE and I completely understand that there is a very strong possibility that I would go back to IBD and will try recruiting for HF/PE after my MBA. I do not need an MBA per se, but I think an elite MBA is viewed positively, will help me expand my network and, honestly, refocus and spend full time recruiting. Both schools enroll a decent amount of PE pre-MBA associates who want to go back to PE but are either burnt out right now (that could be the case with me - I jumped from one job to the next, got a promotion and on to the next one) or simply HAVE to go to do an MBA.
I tend to make emotional decisions, but this not the one I could afford to lose. I am visiting both schools pretty soon and will spend some time at the career centers but just wanted to solicit your feedback while I am waiting. In addition, I will also try to see if Booth matches my Kellogg scholarship, since it could be a factor.
Really appreciate your comments, so if any one has more to add - would love to hear from you!
Agree with MPG here. Both are peer schools and Kellogg is offering you a half-tuition scholarship. Unless you're in a position where that amount of money is meaningless to you, then I'd suggest going with Kellogg (plus that seems to be where your heart is leaning, too).
not trying to derail the conversation, but how were you promoted in one year? Does this ever happen?
It does not normally happen, but I got pulled from another department by a very senior MD and, given I have been working in the bank for the last two years, he insisted on me getting a third year position in his group and getting promoted in literally 6 months after joining. Go figure.
Honestly, my heart tells me Kellogg and my brain tells me Booth. I dislike the lack of community at Booth and flexible curriculum can be a huge advantage but it comes with a huge downside of not being able to bond with classmates as much. Plus commuting to Booth from downtown would suck.
But on the other hand, the whole reason of going for an MBA is to get a job, so I want to make sure I am not cutting my chances in half by going to Kellogg (9th in finance) vs. Booth (2nd in finance). Do same firms generally recruit at both schools? Does Booth get significantly more finance recruiting? Will I be perceived at a disadvantage by going to a "general management" school vs. "finance" school recruiting for HF/PE and/ or IBD?
Women are definitely hotter at Kellogg and, as much as one would want to dismiss 1/2 ride, if the schools are tied, it becomes relevant.
Fcuk, I hate labels.
I imagine Kellogg has more attractive women -- that should be the tiebreaker here.
EDIT: I'm being completely serious.
Also, life at Kellogg seems like more fun than life at Booth.
I can assure you that in terms of fun...
living in downtown Chicago > living in Evanston
Just visit the two schools and go where you feel comfortable. That scholarship from Kellogg is pretty sweet and would be really hard for me to turn down. One thing I'll say about U Chicago is that it doesn't feel like a commuter school. 60% of the student body lives in a one mile radius around Millenium Park, so it's a great community and you get to live in downtown Chicago.
I know a ton of people that have attended and are currently attending Kellogg and Booth. I think a lot of your Pros / Cons are incorrect. I'll do my best to address them. Apologies for the length -- I attempted to respond to each point individually.
I agree that Chicago is a great finance school. I don't necessarily believe it is "better ranked." It is very common for people to lump Booth and Kellogg into the same bucket when discussing rankings. The differences are marginal at best once you take a look at rankings from a broad set of publications. Personally, I believe the concept of the flexible curriculum and the focus on analytics are Booth's true competitive advantages. The school puts a heavy focus on data-driven decision making as opposed to HBS's case-study driven environment. You may like this, you may not, but it is meaningful to the finance industry. 1) I disagree with the limited social interaction. While the flexible curriculum means you won't be going through the program with a cohort, you're still attending classes and working on group projects. My friends at Chicago have certainly bonded with their classmates, although it is usually over shared interests and clubs rather than repeat class projects.2) Chicago is no doubt a commuter school. As was pointed out above, most of the students live in downtown Chicago. I hate commuting myself, so this is definitely a con, but also a plus. My understanding is that the students frequently go out drinking in the city together rather than Kellogg students who stay in Evanston. Evanston has extremely limited restaurant and nightlife options compared to the city of Chicago. So the trade-off here is commuting to class and living in the city versus living near class and commuting to the city.
3) Agree with your point that rankings have been up recently. More people in and outside of finance seem to know about Kellogg than they do about Booth.
4) I somewhat agree with this point, but I think it is moot. Neither Kellogg nor Booth have a strong PE presence through OCR. Most PE firms seem to focus OCR efforts at HBS / W and somewhat at Stanford. Kellogg/Booth get the Chicago-based PE firms. Given your goals, I think you'll need to conduct the job search largely on your own regardless of which school you go to. Given Kellogg has a longer history of placing into PE, I think Kellogg's network will be more valuable here, but make no mistake, you likely won't be securing a PE job at either school through OCR.
Agree w/ Rankings -- Kellogg has a longer history as a top program.Agree w/ Program --- but see last point above.
Agree w/ Community --- but I disagree that it is better/worse relative to Booth per point #2 above. Booth students build community, but in a different way. I'd would argue that it is easier to build community at Kellogg due to having a captive audience though.
Agree w/ Community #2 --- This seems to be the same pro as "Tight knit community" ???
Per my initial paragraph above, I don't think Kellogg is necessarily considered "lower ranked" by most of the population. Relative to Booth, this should be a non-issue.
Disagree w/ typical finance school --- This is an elite MBA program, you are going to be taught more finance than you'll ever need to know as a banker / PE guy. Yes, not every student is going to be interested in going into finance, but that is true of every school. Even Wharton and Booth place a ridiculously large percentage of their students in consulting each year. Kellogg has a reputation as a marketing school, but they are not lacking in finance.
Agree w/ Networking point.
CompBanker - Thank you very much for the detailed response! That's precisely what I am looking for - a fairly unbiased straightforward commentary and I totally don't mind the length or/ my assumptions being critically dismissed. Thank you.
CompBanker - Great post! Did you ever share with the community where you'll be going this fall? I believe you said somewhere in the M7, right?
Try and leverage the Kellogg offer with Booth and see if they can cough up some cash.
I'll do that but if Booth gives the same amount wouldn't that be the same dilemma? Wouldn't it come down to the preference then (e.i. "how I feel?) or do you feel like Booth would trump Kellogg in finance placements? The way I think about them now (correct me if I am wrong) is people self-select Booth or Kellogg, hence Booth gets more people interested in finance --> more people get finance jobs. I just want to make sure the same employers come to campus in both schools. All I will need is a foot in the door.
I think the below article from Poets & Quants is a must read for you. It is a little bit dated, but I think the trends are still fairly similar. There are also additional articles, which are newer on both Booth and Kellogg.
This article pits both programs head to head in measurable criteria... Believe the stats are on page 6 of the article:
poetsandquants(dot)com/2010/07/02/chicagos-booth-vs-northwesterns-kellogg-school/6/
Take the money.
Any chance you can elaborate please?
I think you really need to visit the two schools to get a more accurate picture of your choices. Right now some of your assumptions are off base. Here's my two cents.
Do not look at placement numbers as a sign of what recruiting will be like at either school (maybe it can be a gauge for size of network within an industry). There is a huge self selection bias embedded in employment data. If a large number of students elect not to recruit for a certain industry/function then those percentages will be lower. It's difficult to tell from placement stats if people accepted offers with their 1st choice industry/function. Both Booth and Kellogg place pretty well in middle market PE and I know for a fact that a few PE firms do recruit at Booth. However, it's widely known that PE is mostly an off-campus career search. Knowing this you need to look at the career services resources of each school to see how supported you will be in your job search. I anticipated a primarily off-campus search for my internship and full-time job so when choosing schools understanding how much help I'd receive from career services was a key component of my decision.
As for Kellogg's community vs. Booth's...I think your assessments are off. Both schools have an extremely strong student led/oriented culture. Booth students are just as involved in the school as Kellogg students. However, the difference is in how community is built at each school. To be perfectly honest, neither school has a Tuck or Stanford like community. They are way too big for everyone to know everyone. Kellogg people are really tight with their cohort. Booth people bond through classes, clubs, trips, LEAD cohorts, etc. There are more touch points so you wind up with friends from both classes, different cohorts, and with different recruiting interests. I wouldn't say one is better than the other, it's just different. You need to decide if you fit significantly better in an environment where you have prolonged interactions with the same 65-75 people, but don't know too many other people or a place where you pick up your friends as you go along based on common interests. That's up to you.
In terms of the competition for finance jobs at Booth I think that you may be off base. Yes, there are a lot of people doing IB/PE/VC/IM/HF/CF but those numbers have declined significantly. In fact one bank even cancelled on campus interviews because there just wasn't enough interest to justify the expense. There aren't an exorbitant # of people competing for these jobs. Almost everyone I know who recruited for IB got at least one offer if not multiple offers. Some people have already received PE offers. I think it would serve you well to speak to 2nd years who interned in PE and see how they sourced their jobs and how the Booth brand and network is perceived. Also ask them if they felt as though there were a ton of classmates going for the same jobs as them. Just from observation I think people had many different areas of interest even within PE (based on size of firm, location, types of deals sourced, etc.) and often pursued different companies.
As for the money, it's nothing to sneeze at. If all else is equal or if you're leaning Kellogg anyways, it's okay to go to the highest bidder. However, if you think that Booth would be the best choice career wise then try to leverage the offer from Kellogg to get a bit more money from Booth. Also remember that Booth announces fellowship offers close to the R2 deposit deadline. Just because you didn't get money when admitted doesn't mean you won't get money at all.
Sorry for the long response but I hope this answers some of your questions.
Do not buy into the "less competition" thing. If the school is really well known for something, IT HELPS. You get the benefit of the doubt and all else equal with a candidate from a school known for a different specialty, you will probably also get the nod.
As for community/network-building, trust me, this comes from shared interests, not from shared classes. Of my highest-quality friendships and relationships at business school, possibly only ONE was facilitated/significantly-enhanced by sharing a class.
The most legitimate reason for choosing Kellogg over Booth is the scholarship $$, both due to the direct financial impact as well as the added prestige of attending with a large scholarship (recruiters notice this and are impressed by it). Weaker relative competition at Kellogg (not to mention that the competition ISN'T weak) and relationship-weakness from Booth's flexible curriculum... neither hold.
I was accepted at both schools and went through almost the exact decision process you are going through. I had IB experience, but also had pre-MBA PE experience.
For comparison, here's some recent data about student employment in PE/VC (All data from school websites): Booth - 10% summer / 7% full-time Kellogg - 7% summer / 5% full-time HBS (by far best PE/VC placement for MBAs) - 11% summer / 16% full-time
Those %s have been more or less constant for many years -- links to data are posted below. They are also highly subject to self-selection given the different profiles of entering classes at each school.
In summary, I'd say if your goal is PE/VC or a Distressed HF, then do not go to business school. If you don't have pre-MBA experience in PE/VC, your odds of breaking into the field from are de minimis at best.
The %s are incredibly low, and that doesn't even take into account the fact that ~70% of full-time offers are people going back to their old fund. The remaining 30% are generally students with pre-MBA PE experience who don't have a spot at their old fun (fit, fundraising, geography, etc.) and THEN there a few people with no prior PE experience who break in to the field.
Depending on your personal situation, I'd consider breaking into PE, then going to b-school if necessary. Otherwise, you're going to be pursuing a career where most of competition has a built-in experience advantage.
PM me if you want to discuss in greater detail. Full disclosure: I chose Booth. It's a wonderful school, but I do not envy my peers who are trying to break into PE with no prior experience.
Links: http://www.chicagobooth.edu/employmentreport/ http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/career_employer/Employment_Statisti… http://www.hbs.edu/recruiting/mba/docs/HBS_CPD_2012_2013.pdf
Good Luck.
Tough decision, and tougher for me to opine since I'm WL-ed at Kellogg and was dinged by Booth (my dream school).
Unquestionably, Booth will give you a better shot at securing the job you want. Kellogg won't get the same buy-side firms coming to campus, not even close. That alone is worth the $50k in tuition, no question you will more than make that up with the higher expected earning power out of school.
It does sound like Kellogg is more your style in terms of the experience and building a network, and this is tough to quantify, but i would leave the scholarship $ out of your decision - it's just a teaser.
-Judge
Given your career stated career goals, I'm not sure that you need the MBA just yet. You could break into your backup goal, "elite boutique" right now, and with effort, you could probably break into PE or VC now as well. You should wait a year and see what your networking efforts yield. I agree with BananaStand that the post-MBA opportunities are not as rosy as you might expect.
Louboutins - While I agree with you that an MBA might not be required just yet, I think it's important to approach each case separately. "I do not need an MBA per se, but I think an elite MBA is viewed positively, will help me expand my network and, honestly, refocus and spend full time recruiting."
I don't need it but that's something I am interested in, and considering my specific case, it is either now or probably never.
Thank you all for your comments thus far - really, really helpful and I have been working with the admissions at both schools to figure out their resources and expertise. Hopefully scholarship part works out also, but I agree, that should not be the decision making factor.
I understood that when I posted originally. My point was more that it is a pretty big gamble given that you have not refined your career goals. PE / VC / HF to me just signals "I'm burnt out from banking and want something different."
As others mentioned, getting into the buyside after b school without prior pre-MBA buyside experience is tough.
Essentially, I think your premise that "An elite MBA is viewed positively, will help me expand my network" is a bit flawed. Not because won't expand your network. It will definitely do that. But is that network expansion going to really get you anywhere that you aren't currently able to go. I don't really see that it is.
Now, there are other completely acceptable reasons to go to b school, and I'm sure you have them. I understand burnout (am currently evaluating the exact same issues and haven't found conclusive answers myself), but you just have to weigh them all together, because as you correctly stated, you can't afford to make an impulsive decision on this.
It sounds like you are thinking about things the right way. Hopefully that link helps (can't post actual links yet).
Lots of good comments here. I will address some of you Booth cons briefly based on my experience here thus far: • Limited social interaction – flexible curriculum does not allow bonding
I think this is patently false. The flexible curriculum lets you self select and take classes with people who have similar backgrounds and interests as you - or take classes with people who don't. It's all up to you. Plus from a 'bonding' standpoint you have six weeks of LEAD with people in your cohort/squad, not to mention your random walk mates. These create a lot of really strong connections. I have heard this criticism leveled against Booth many times, but have found absolutely no evidence of it.
• Commuter school - not really in Chicago
Kind of. I mean, yes we all commute and Hyde Park is not downtown Chicago, but we all live in downtown Chicago, most of (65-70%) in one of five buildings in a two block radius. We see and go out with each other a lot. There is a real sense of community among the class downtown. That said, if the twenty minute train ride is going to drive you bonkers, that's something to think about.
• Rankings have been up only recently
Fair enough, I guess. But I think the world is trending in a way that favors the Booth method and approach to business. I do not think it is cyclical.
• A ton of finance professionals seem to go with Booth which would also mean marginally more competition at OCR
This is, for lack of a better term, wack. The whole argument that you would go to a school because there is less competition is complete bunk. More finance professionals means a better finance network, better recruiting, better finance classes, a better finance curriculum, and a better finance brand. Firms don't have school quotas and if the Booth kids out-compete the Kellogg or the Columbia or the Wharton kids they get more jobs.
If your ultimate goal is distressed HF, come to Booth. It's not a great shot at ANY b-school, but Booth is one of the best. There curriculum is crazy good (there's a class on Hedge Fund Investing, classes on Fixed Income Asset Pricing, etc., etc.), the network is great (Oaktree was founded by a Booth alum). And if your backup is elite IB, there isn't a better place to be in my opinion.
The last thing I'll say is you should visit both.
Good luck and congrats.
Louboutins and Leverage - Thank you again for the feedback!
My decision on the topic is still very much evolving but here are some initial comments after chatting with students from both schools:
What I still can't wrap my head around is why there are so many more people at Booth getting IB/HF/IM jobs if there are the same opportunities at both schools and whether there is that much easier to get a finance job at Kellogg. Why wouldn't it if you are competing with a 100 people vs 300 (based on the employment data in 2012). I have also heard that if you did finance before coming to Kellogg you have a huge upper hand in recriting.
One theory that would make the competition argument invalid is the fact that firms could adjust the size proportionally to the interest, hence the same amount of people would recruit for the same jobs. Any other thoughts?
This is exactly what's happening. Competition will be similar at both schools.
For IB/HF/IM, there's more interest at Booth than at Kellogg, so the firms adjust their allotment for each school accordingly. For marketing, there's more interest at Kellogg than at Booth, so firms adjust their allotment for each school accordingly.
That said, one advantage of going to Booth (over Kellogg) for IB/HF/IM is that Booth will have a larger alumni network in the industry, have more robust IB/HF/IM professional groups, and attract a slightly wider range of boutique firms to campus. The same can be said about Kellogg and marketing.
booth = entrepreneurship and IM kellogg = marketing and management
IBD you can do from either, consulting you can do either. show me where in kelloggs employment section they have an area for 'investment management'. IM is going to be tough at either without a markets background or heavy markets interest
when it comes to IM hierarchy, i have always heard chi/columbia/wharton (and HBS and GSB sure), then sloan, and tuck, and then shit gets real tough but anderson and cornell have some things. ive never heard kellogg ever brought up
if by 'all the same funds' you mean that fidelity and other big long only shops, sure, they go to every school. chicagos flex curriculum and bevy of economics/finance courses and being able to tailor vs having to do a core will be VERY critical in prepping for those interviews
Please see below. 4% of Kellogg students got jobs in IM: http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/career_employer/Employment_Statisti…
I spoke with someone at Booth and the person mentioned that as long as you worked in finance (IBD, PE etc) IM is open to you. I doubt that all 190 people had IM background: http://student.chicagobooth.edu/group/img/career.htm
By comparison 9.5% of Boothers went to IM: http://www.chicagobooth.edu/employmentreport/functions.aspx
From all the data, I am wondering why i) less people go to IM from Kellogg (but with a higher median salary $135K vs $100K) ii) whether it means less competition since there are not that many people going into finance from Kellogg (opportunities seem to be the same for both schools).
I am obviously being a bit of a devil's advocate, just trying to get people commenting again - the comments a week ago were incredibly insightful and helpful.
Will you be going to both schools' admit weekends. I advise you attend Booth on Friday and Kellogg on Saturday.
One thing to watch out for in those employment reports is the breadth of each schools definition of IM. Surely kids from these schools aren't working in back office, but my guess is the figures above understate the difference in quality between placement at the schools, with booth of course placing better in the more sought after jobs with HF's
Let's recap:
Let's call it a tie. Go to the one which is giving you the scholarship money.
So, I visited both schools. Here is my summary:
Kellogg: - down to earth students - beautiful campus, ugly building - far away from Chicago - students do go out but it's definitely not as often, the town has like 3 bars - not a whole lot of people interested in finance
Chicago: - great building, beautiful campus in a "kill zone" - a whole bunch of people interested in finance- a ton of competition - students live in the Loop, which is central to all fun areas around
I have decided to go to Chicago - it'll be harder to participate in the buy out lab (competition will be fierce), harder to compete (students seem to be very savvy in finance) but I really dig living in the city, flexible curriculum and the fact that I can learn a ton from a whole bunch of my classmates vs 30-40 people who have prior finance experience at Kellogg. Don't get me wrong - I loved both schools but for my career Chicago will be more helpful, maybe not as much short term as long term.
Hope this thread helps other people as well. Thanks everyone for commenting.
Congrats and good choice
Congrats on your decision. One point that I wanted to leave behind on this thread is that the "competition" argument within b-schools doesn't apply for buy-side finance jobs (HF/PE/VC/even mutual funds to some extent). Most of those firms take so few interns and new hires from MBA programs that you are competing with everyone, from every top MBA, all at once. It isn't like banking recruiting where Goldman will have a set allotment of people to hire from each school and you only have to beat out your classmates for one of those spots - you need to be a compelling candidate on a national level.
So I always advise people to choose the school that will maximize their potential in that industry, whether that's through networking, student clubs, conferences, in-school internships, good professors/classes, etc.
Not trying to knock your decision at all - Booth is a great place for all of the above. Just wanted to put my 2 cents in.
Completely agreed. Once again, by no means do I think Kellogg is not a good school, I just thought that for someone who have spent time in finance, will go back to finance and studied business admin in undergrad, Booth will provide more opportunities to drill into very specific subjects and interact with other finance professionals.
It was a tough choice, but I have to stand by it now.
Kellogg vs. Booth - Private Equity (Originally Posted: 02/16/2010)
Harvard's admission black box didn't work out for me, but Kellogg and Booth have. I did 2 years in BB IB and 2 Years at a growth equity shop, both with a focus on a sector I am interested in. Post-B-School, I want to go back into PE, hopefully in the Chicago area. I'd be great if I can get people's opinion n which of the two options are "Better" for my goal and any thoughts on the programs themselves. Thanks guys.
Based on my experience in PE, I would strong reco that you attend Booth. The school has a far superior reputation within the finance community and is geared towards your background and future goals. Seems like a no brainer to me and Ive researched b-schools extensively for the past 2 years although Ive yet to apply anywhere. Good luck.
wow...can't believe u werent able to get into HBS with BB IB and PE
I'm just an undergrad (and at UChicago no less) so of course there is an element of bias involved, but I like to think I have a fairly strong grasp on certain industry dynamics, and I don't really think the decision is that close. Booth has a very strong presence in finance, and having taken classes there I have seen a very strong recruiting presence. Credit Suisse flew in several hundred Uchi grad employees (including the CEO, who is a Booth Grad) to strengthen their recruiting presence. I realize of course that this isn't Private Equity, but I think it's indicative of Booth's reputation in high finance as being in the same general league as HBS, Wharton, etc.
False. H/S/W have significantly stronger reputations than Booth in finance, especially private equity. With regards to the OP's question, I was under the impression that Kellogg is more of a general management oriented business school. Booth's program is known to be quite quantitative. Consequently, if the private equity industry isn't simply paying lip-service to the idea of focusing more on operational streamlining within their portcos, it might make sense to go with Kellogg. Please take this with a grain of salt, as it is nearly pure speculation on my part.
Congrats on your acceptances, Genuine.
I'm beginning banking myself and looking to also do PE then business school. Could you let me know your gpa and GMAT so I have a better idea what is needed to get into b school?
If you take a look at the post MBA hire profiles at MDP (arguably biggest PE fund in Chicago) most come from Harvard and Kellogg. It could just be this certain firms allegiance to certain schools. Additionally, it's just a single data point, but one to consider if you want to stay in Chicago.
There are more or less equal numbers of people representing the two schools in Chicago PE, but I hear that Booth gets better recruiting. I would assume this to be due to self-selection (more people interested in PE going to Booth).
Thanks everyone; no clear answer, but the answers were informative. Kellogg now has a dedicated TRACK for PE and admittedly has a fairly solid alumni base in Chicago at firms such as GTCR and MDP. They also have a fellowship researved for people with previous PE experience with plans to continue in the industry. However, across the board Chicago (Booth) seems to be more widely known for their finance program (seems like mostly IB).
Instead of having me chose, maybe HBS can just interview me and end this the easy way....
Disclaimer: currently at Booth, MM PE pre-mba (and there are plenty of other PE pre-MBAs at Booth)
I don't think you can go wrong at either of these schools. My personal opinion is that for PE, your results will be driven more by yourself rather than the marginal difference from Booth or Kellogg. However, there are others of my classmates, who are more focused on PE than I am (I'm looking at public buyside), who strongly feel that Booth is much more powerful than Kellogg. If I were you, I would make an effort to visit the admit weekends and talk to as many folks as possible. Keep an open mind, and I'm guessing you will feel a stronger fit with one of the schools.
Is the sector you focus on healthcare? If so, then it's a no-brainer (Kellogg).
I'm hoping to dual Finance (PE track) and Biotech there when the time comes. The biotech concentration looks very interesting.
I know this is a single data point, but I interviewed for (and was rejected from) a 1st-year analyst role in a RE PE shop in Washington, D.C. in 2007. The primary guy/associate was a Booth graduate.
I'm no expert on this stuff, but let's not split hairs and look at this from a common sense perspective:
Your Goal = Work in PE in Chicago
Both Schools = In Chicago
Both Schools = Send a good amount individuals to PE every year all across the country.
If you're good, getting into PE from either of these places will not be an issue (especially given your experience). At the end of the day your choice should be based on the other factors - how well you liked the students/faculty/campus, cost, extracurriculars offered, etc. - since the fact that one may be ranked by US News & World Report as #3 and the other as #5 will really mean nothing at the end of the day.
You've probably slaved away the past four years working in finance. Go somewhere that you ENJOY.
I agree with fibows, as fit with the school is more important than anything else. Where would you enjoy yourself more? You'll have opportunities at both. Also, finance reputation matters very, very little for PE. It's more about who you know and what is your background.
As a first-year student at Kellogg with many PE friends at school, 90% of PE recruiting is up to you. It is non-structured and all off-campus. So, the only advantage Booth may have is more alumni to reach out to as a place to start recruiting. Although, I would bet that they really don't have that many more alumns in PE than Kellogg. Anyway, go where you feel most comfortable as the schools do have very different cultures.
Fibows, IBPEHFVC, jb32 all have it right -- PE is a hard nut to crack anywhere, even if you're at HBS or at Stanford. Most of the time, the people who get these jobs post MBA did PE before business school or had stellar experiences in investment banking.
For what it's worth, I applied to Harvard, Stanford, Wharton and Kellogg in round 1 this year, and am now considering two of those schools (will have to make a decision soon though). My decision not to apply to Booth was because I already have five years of experience in finance, namely bulge-bracket equity research and middle-market private equity, and I was looking to broaden my experiences. Wharton was really the only "finance school" that I looked at, but the fact is they have very good programs in management and marketing as well.
My interest in the general management programs (Harvard, Stanford, and Kellogg) was largely driven by the fact that as a pre-MBA associate in private equity, I felt like I had all the transactional stuff down cold but I really had no idea about what made a potential target company "great" and how we could go about improving it. Sure, one can always say that the company would yield a fantastic IRR if only we could grow sales by X% and flatline R&D at Y% of sales while incrementally increasing sales and marketing expense by Z%...but what does that really mean? How does a company actually do that? And post-MBA, if I decide I want to keep doing PE, how can I possibly sit on the board and advise a portfolio company's management about what to do when I have no experience or education in general management myself?
Basically, it's possible that other people that have worked in private equity are much more comfortable with the operational elements of a company. However, running a business is something I was always tangentially curious about, and I had thought that leaving equity research for private equity would give me more exposure to that area. Indeed, that's true to the extent that I had a lot more access to data vs. when I was on the public investment side, but even so, it was really just more number crunching and analysis, except we could crunch more numbers and analyze more stuff. At the end of the day, I'm quite confident that I will be a smarter businessperson and investor by getting a general management degree. That's certainly no knock on Booth, MIT, Columbia, and the other fantastic schools in the top tier...but those were the reasons for why I decided to apply to the schools I did.
To get back to the original poster's main point, I think Kellogg and Booth are sufficiently close in rankings that you really need to consider (1) which of those programs will best fill the voids in your knowledge, and (2) where you'll enjoy school the most. I knew I'd probably have a good time at any of the schools I applied to. Fit is incredibly important because it will dictate not only how great an experience you'll have at those schools, but also how well you can assimilate and utilize the school's network. You can't go wrong either way, but one choice will probably be more "right" for you than the other. Ultimately, both Booth and Kellogg will create great opportunities for you; the rest of the equation is about how much you're willing to take advantage of those opportunities.
Hope this helps and sorry if this post was a bit long and verbose. Need to run and catch a flight to Australia...got a vacation to take and kangaroos to feed.
fibows is absolutely right. Visit the schools, hang out with students, party with them, imagine yourself living in the neighborhood - where you'd go for entertainment, food, etc. You are well on the track to a career in PE and going to either Kellogg or Booth over the other isn't going to materially affect the outcome for you. Go to the school you like, get in with the other PE guys, get involved and have a great 2 years. Good luck.
Ea tempore veritatis autem labore sit. Dolor autem dolorum tempore quidem adipisci delectus ipsum. Et voluptas aut voluptatem et ea totam.
Quas minima repellat voluptates. Qui est sequi ullam eius officiis aut. Quisquam blanditiis autem impedit est molestiae quam. Dignissimos illum dolore impedit doloribus impedit. Alias eius est amet et. Quia velit quaerat doloribus ipsa perferendis natus et.
Nam ut quo cum quod inventore. Et quibusdam maxime sed tempora assumenda iste fugiat. Et distinctio at nihil.
Non autem consequatur culpa quae. Excepturi perspiciatis excepturi libero modi. Perspiciatis qui molestias aliquid quis voluptatibus minus quae. Ipsum unde nesciunt est hic nesciunt dolor. Quod veniam fugiat eveniet sed eos necessitatibus. Tempore enim repellat quo quaerat deserunt beatae ipsa. Dolor voluptatem reiciendis quae.
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...
Rem iure ducimus blanditiis velit totam. Dolores ea cum provident incidunt et voluptate. Ut harum placeat voluptas optio aperiam distinctio. Labore quo ut voluptatum ut velit non.
Ex impedit a dolorum dolor nemo. Eum doloremque tenetur eum magnam atque commodi ducimus. In enim impedit ab commodi at.
Tempora voluptatum rerum nemo laboriosam sed accusamus. Unde dignissimos quos facilis labore quia. Hic officiis qui minus animi libero dolor eum. Eum harum vel quia delectus eos id.
Quia quam sed error. Expedita voluptates expedita aut nesciunt. Officiis et deserunt qui dolorum. Vel ex deleniti iusto distinctio magni voluptatum nisi. Sunt aliquam ut rerum voluptatem. Ab sunt pariatur aspernatur omnis qui ut.
Neque et quae ea sapiente qui itaque. Maxime quam vel quis eligendi repellendus sit. Eos accusantium rerum ut error voluptatem vitae distinctio.
Vero ea dolorum libero sunt quod eligendi. Error quia ea sit assumenda laudantium esse occaecati. Iste rem laborum occaecati tempora. Sunt ad perferendis qui iure voluptatem esse. Accusantium fugit quam aut maiores sint sequi voluptas. Ratione nihil beatae nihil facilis quisquam reprehenderit velit.
Quia eaque deleniti minus consequatur. Eos dolorem eveniet sed est officiis ut modi eius. Qui et nostrum expedita. Quis ut consequatur ipsam quia.
Ipsa aliquam sapiente nihil voluptatem et accusamus. Vel possimus non delectus quos voluptatem. Rerum sit numquam exercitationem. Quia doloremque recusandae expedita sunt exercitationem.
Perferendis a asperiores porro. Cupiditate quaerat est adipisci dolores.
Voluptatem impedit maiores distinctio delectus. Est est quos et vitae similique voluptatem ipsum. Mollitia rerum itaque et. Dolorum voluptatem quo saepe dignissimos molestiae. Reiciendis eos cum amet quidem maxime officia. Quasi minima temporibus est voluptatem tempore. Aut est dolorem et esse.