When are you TOO SUCCESFUL for MBA?

Close friend starts his MBA at around the same time I do. We are silently competing. He in the first semester of the MBA receives the dream offer of a lifetime that many of us can't figure how he achieved. Someone he knows pulls a superstring. He realizes that he cannot F up the new position and departs school because the position is what ppl go to b-school for and he can always double back (i'm doubting). Did he screw himself? Will there come a time where he could have gone further, but his lack of an MBA makes someone else more competitive?

ex-CEO at my pre-MBA firm (was HBS and ex-MBB, and overall a great guy) supported my MBA ambitions, and added:

"If you want to do it, don't push it off. It's meant to be an early-career move."

The more your situation somehow disqualifies you from "early-career" status, the less sense an MBA makes for you.

I suppose this question is a bit short-sighted. It focuses almost entirely on compensation. While a lot of people get their MBAs to increase their likelihoods of achieving high-paying jobs, some do so for other reasons. Places like HBS are extremely rare. There are very few places in the world that aggregate so much talent, ambition, heritage and money in a single location. As with all schools, you learn more from the people than anything else. If you view your MBA as a 2-year networking social with clever, driven, intelligent people who might sleep with you, the investment makes some sense.

For me, I'm much happier hanging out with people who aspire to wealth that intend to keep pursuing it than I am chilling with the idle rich. I probably gave up 7 figures in total compensation to go back to graduate school, but I was already wealthy and on the verge of burning out, so I needed a respite from the tortures of working in your 20s in any of the industries people on this forum care about. I don't regret it even a little.

I like to use my money to buy experiences that I enjoy. I enjoyed being in a top school surrounded by at least a few great minds. You can't really buy that experience any other way. Maybe if I were slightly more powerful, I'd get to go to Davos every year or attend the Bilderberg meetings (to be fair, I've been to Davos before), but that's a few days only. I suppose you could lump in the Aspen Ideas Festival, the Allen & Co Sun Valley Conference, and Bezos's MARS and Campfire retreats, but if you're getting invitations to all of these, you definitely don't need an MBA.

If you wanted to look at the decision from an economic perspective, you would need to broaden your definition of expected value to include total utility. As that utility function would include personal factors for non-monetary items, I think it will be difficult to create a blanket decision model for the general populace.

The lack of grammar in this thread is hurting my eyes.

"Would rather go to "a" prestigious school" "He "is" in the first semester"

and... obvious things are obvious.

A few situations where I would say the MBA is not worth it. BTW I am talking about normal FT MBAs where you stop working, not online or PT MBAs some firms require to promote their internal employees. If you need one of those just do it online wherever is the cheapest or your firm will pay for it.

You don't have time to put in a quality application and can't reasonably get into a top 20 or 30 school depending on your goals.

People with less than 3 years postgrad work experience (you need 2 years minimum to be seriously considered at all, and usually you need 4-5).

Would advise against IB analysts doing an MBA unless necessary to make associate because its more common to be promoted to associate without one anyways.

People who have been at the VP level in MO/BO roles for a significant amount of time (if you wanted IB you should have gone for it a while ago, banks will question if you were ever cut out for it in the first place if you are that far into your career, I'm not sure if it is even possible to break in at the VP+ level).

IB guys that left for PE or VC and are doing well / like it. If you think the prestige of an MBA business schools">M7 / top 15 MBA would be beneficial look at something like Booth or Ross PT.

People who joined MBB out of undergrad who have the opportunity for a promotion without one.

Entrepreneurs with successful businesses and established networks (why pay for something you don't need?).

People over 35 who graduated college right after high school aka have >10 years work experience (EMBA is probably a better cultural fit).

People who make over 150k AND have the opportunity to continue to increase their salaries in their field, MBA grads usually start earning around this figure out of school so you would be sinking money into tuition without getting any ROI.

If you already have a BBA, the MBA will not be as helpful (but could still be a good option for you given the other criteria I mentioned above).

You may notice a lot of these categories overlap for people. The MBA is a very niche degree catered to professionals on the younger side, which is why it is unfortunate so many crappy schools offer one and accept anyone who takes the GMAT and is approved for the loans.

Strictly from a financial side, yeah there are going to be plenty of times where the MBA isn't the "right" decision. If we look at a broader scope, say taking into account personal achievement/development (damn I sound like such a f*cking millennial right now) it may be the "right" decision. If you're already making plenty of dough and money really isn't a concern, the MBA could be a great way to build your network and explore new industries.

I'd also second what was said above about doing the MBA early and if you do it later consider the executive MBA route. I did my MBA straight out of undergrad which probably isn't ideal, but it was much easier working part-time and going to school than trying the full-time work + student gig. A good friend is doing that right now and he has his hands quite full.

I'm of the opinion, not that that means anything, that for finance or other professionals who are already on or pursuing a specific career path, the MBA is an antiquated credential. A relic of the 80's and 90's. Even on an intangible basis, if you want to go back to what you were doing before B-school, your deal IQ and network will be weaker than the other guy who continued on to a VP or principal position.

A friend of mine is at currently at Stanford Business School, despite being worth around $60 million. For him it was all about networking -- you can meet and form relationships with some of the best minds in the world at places like Harvard and Stanford, and he thought that would help him the most in the long-run given that he's still relatively young.

If your prospects at your current firm are better than the Wharton MBA you just got into, expect a senior MD to directly give you that hint, and suggest you stay on.