Newly minted MBA? It's the best job market in years(bbc.com)
bbc.com
Newly minted MBA? It's the best job market in years
http://www.bbc.com/capital/story/20150227-bull-market-for-us-business-grads
9 comments
This is probably why the Atlanta startup scene has taken off. If you look at the area it is saturated with sales and MBA folks. They all beat their chest about how great Atlanta is for tech and how it is emerging. But in reality it, along with a lot of other traditionally non-tech towns are getting the overflow from The Valley which is over-heated.
When that bubble pops many of these towns, MBA's etc. will be faced with tough job prospects.
When that bubble pops many of these towns, MBA's etc. will be faced with tough job prospects.
Is there a city now without a 'tech' scene? From Milwaukee to San Juan - incubators, co-working spaces, education initiatives, financial & tax incentive programs, all proclaiming they will grow the entire local economy out of whatever doldrums it sits in.
In terms of bubble, the low yields on junk debt globally are a really, really big problem. An angel investment in a small startup that folds, or a VC investment in an instant unicorn (term I saw on TC recently) that imploads, your money goes to $0. Or maybe you lose 50%, 60% on a public tech company. On debt, this will impact everything from the money markets holding business and individual cash to the institutions, both public and private, that think business is good because they depend on high risk low cost finance to perform their day to day operations. 2015+ is very scary even for bears.
In terms of bubble, the low yields on junk debt globally are a really, really big problem. An angel investment in a small startup that folds, or a VC investment in an instant unicorn (term I saw on TC recently) that imploads, your money goes to $0. Or maybe you lose 50%, 60% on a public tech company. On debt, this will impact everything from the money markets holding business and individual cash to the institutions, both public and private, that think business is good because they depend on high risk low cost finance to perform their day to day operations. 2015+ is very scary even for bears.
Indeed, even Detroit has a considerable startup scene:
http://www.fastcompany.com/3014543/detroit-is-going-bankrupt...
http://www.fastcompany.com/3014543/detroit-is-going-bankrupt...
[deleted]
Usually I see the bbc.com message saying I'm blocked from the content because I'm in the UK. This time it had:
"This site was created for the BBC’s International audience by BBC Worldwide. Some elements including spelling and grammar may deviate from those found on our UK sites. BBC Worldwide is a commercial company that is owned by the BBC (and just the BBC). No money from the licence fee was used to create this website. Instead this website is supported by advertising outside the UK. The profits we make from it go back to BBC programme-makers to help fund great new BBC programmes."
Is this a new thing to let UK folk see the content, presumably without the ads?
"This site was created for the BBC’s International audience by BBC Worldwide. Some elements including spelling and grammar may deviate from those found on our UK sites. BBC Worldwide is a commercial company that is owned by the BBC (and just the BBC). No money from the licence fee was used to create this website. Instead this website is supported by advertising outside the UK. The profits we make from it go back to BBC programme-makers to help fund great new BBC programmes."
Is this a new thing to let UK folk see the content, presumably without the ads?
There's your problem right there. If you had an MBA in BBC Studies, this wouldn't be an issue -- unless you already have an MBA in BBC studies, but received it a decade ago - then you just suck at timing.
At any rate, hurry up and graduate right now with an MBA in BBC Studies so that you can capitalize on a high valuation in the current market with synergistic timing for first to market strategies that optimize for and leverage the BBC Studies MBA multi-billion dollar social niche! You'll make the world a better place!
At any rate, hurry up and graduate right now with an MBA in BBC Studies so that you can capitalize on a high valuation in the current market with synergistic timing for first to market strategies that optimize for and leverage the BBC Studies MBA multi-billion dollar social niche! You'll make the world a better place!
Bingo. Now lets mix and match plug and play best of breed solutions within our core competency for a win-win outcome.
I don't think the employment rate of people graduating from MBAs is interesting by itself. People doing MBAs usually are not in the category of people who have difficulties finding jobs anyway. I would be more interested on a statistic showing the difference in salary between the two groups since I'm not fully convinced that it's worth it financially.
If you're coming from engineering, your initial post-MBA-graduation salary will probably not be worth it, it might even be lower than what you're making. The key is the long-term trajectory. If you make it into investment banking or consulting, you'll see predictable linear salary and bonus growth year-after-year with pretty much no limit. As an engineer you'd reach a ceiling eventually and then it's the standard 2-3%/year cost of living increases until you die. If you have a tech background and are NOT planning on going into banking or consulting, doing the MBA is not worth it [EDIT]_financially_ (at best it's neutral long-term), in my opinion. This analysis, of course, ignores the general intangible benefits of education.
Your last line caught it. A lot depends on the experience going in too.
What's a CS major in the Midwest make with 2-5 years of experience make? What will they make with 4-7 years of experience?
The new MBA in banking will make 200+K with large rises. Consulting perhaps a little less, but great upside for those who make partners.
The other value for technical people is getting in to new areas. A CS major who learns Marketing and Finance may make a better CEO down the line. (Or a CS major who doesn't like coding any more) The MBA is the easiest way to make the switch.
What's a CS major in the Midwest make with 2-5 years of experience make? What will they make with 4-7 years of experience?
The new MBA in banking will make 200+K with large rises. Consulting perhaps a little less, but great upside for those who make partners.
The other value for technical people is getting in to new areas. A CS major who learns Marketing and Finance may make a better CEO down the line. (Or a CS major who doesn't like coding any more) The MBA is the easiest way to make the switch.
If you're going to B school for the salary bump, you're doing it wrong.
Serious question: why else would you go?
It's far more holistic than a simple credential that will get you a pay bump. Ten years after I graduated from B school, I've done significant amounts of business with several classmates and juat started a company with another. I married one of them, and made life long friends with many. I'm 100% positive that I've just scratched the surface of what my MBA will give me in life - much is still to come.
Contrary to the unfortunate opinions of many here on HN (I get it, I am a former engineer), there are more good MBAs than bad ones. What I can say with certainty, is that I have never spent time with a smarter, more motivated group of people than I did in B school. That includes my time at NASA and working at couple startups. It's a unique experience, and to me at least, worth the cost even with zero financial return. But if you want to make more after B school, it's easier. Not everyone chooses to.
Contrary to the unfortunate opinions of many here on HN (I get it, I am a former engineer), there are more good MBAs than bad ones. What I can say with certainty, is that I have never spent time with a smarter, more motivated group of people than I did in B school. That includes my time at NASA and working at couple startups. It's a unique experience, and to me at least, worth the cost even with zero financial return. But if you want to make more after B school, it's easier. Not everyone chooses to.
I cant say it's for everyone, and time will tell if it helps or hurts my path. Personally I wanted to make a bigger impact within my company & future companies for the solutions I was delivering. My CS courses didn't give me any information on how marketing, accounting, finance, HR or operations worked and WHY they mattered. I felt beholden to these departments to deliver the problem, i then negotiated the solution. But because i didn't know what their end goal was or how to talk in their terms, I couldn't easily reshape their problem to ask better questions. Improved understanding of these groups & their motivations let me better deliver solutions to their problems. I believe you should: 'Know your user inside and out' if you can. Sure it's not impossible to learn all these areas on your own, but I quickly got the lingo I needed to make sense in meetings with any group of the organization, and a degree that will follow me around to boot.
ymmv
ymmv
No, that only applies to PhDs.
I don't believe this is due to optimism in the market, but simply an increase in requirements for what it takes to be a candidate.
Exactly. This is the higher education bubble in action.
Read my mind...
There's a lot of people saying that MBAs are a sign of the top. Others are saying all MBAs are evil. I think it's more nuanced. (Full disclosure, I'm a CS undergrad with an MBA)
Some generalizations....
1 - MBAs tend to be risk averse.
2 - MBA career choices tend to be driven by who shows up to recruit at their campuses.
3 - MBAs tend to be value capturers and maximizers rather than value creators.
4 - MBAs tend to have debt load and follow who pays cash. (This ties with #1)
Does this mean they are all evil? No. But you get what you pay for. A fancy MBA won't create the next great thing, but could help the current great thing be a little more predictable in hitting earnings.
For what it's worth, Amazon seems to like quantitative MBAs. Google seems to like them with CS undergrads. Apple doesn't seem to care for them too much. Does that make any a black and white model?
Some generalizations....
1 - MBAs tend to be risk averse.
2 - MBA career choices tend to be driven by who shows up to recruit at their campuses.
3 - MBAs tend to be value capturers and maximizers rather than value creators.
4 - MBAs tend to have debt load and follow who pays cash. (This ties with #1)
Does this mean they are all evil? No. But you get what you pay for. A fancy MBA won't create the next great thing, but could help the current great thing be a little more predictable in hitting earnings.
For what it's worth, Amazon seems to like quantitative MBAs. Google seems to like them with CS undergrads. Apple doesn't seem to care for them too much. Does that make any a black and white model?
An economy hiring too many MBAs is never a good sign. This bubble is about to pop.
Who do you think will take the blame for this bubble?
1 of 3 things:
1) The drought. Though it's part of a longer term trend, the drought will be the cause for everyone moving out. Expect memes about having a swimming pool or watering your lawn back east.
2) Mortgage brokers again. Housing in the Bay is crazy right now, just as it was in 2008. Expect them to be blamed once more.
3) Brogrammers. Idiot kids from B-list Ivys, Duke, or the like came out to the Bay, were very bro-y (sexist, racist, drunk, foolish, etc) and killed the golden goose with their bro-ness.
If the rest of the US really takes a hit, expect stuff about 'too big to save' instead of 'too big to fail'. This is real bad and I hope it does not come to that.
1) The drought. Though it's part of a longer term trend, the drought will be the cause for everyone moving out. Expect memes about having a swimming pool or watering your lawn back east.
2) Mortgage brokers again. Housing in the Bay is crazy right now, just as it was in 2008. Expect them to be blamed once more.
3) Brogrammers. Idiot kids from B-list Ivys, Duke, or the like came out to the Bay, were very bro-y (sexist, racist, drunk, foolish, etc) and killed the golden goose with their bro-ness.
If the rest of the US really takes a hit, expect stuff about 'too big to save' instead of 'too big to fail'. This is real bad and I hope it does not come to that.
You seem to be implying the higher education bubble is restricted to or concentrated within the tech scene in California.
Thats a much more complicated thing. I don't think the higher ed bubble will pop quite as publicly as the Social-techy bubble will. Law schools serve a better example for the pop and what it'll look like.
What I'm saying is that the techy-Social bubble's blame may fall on the brogrammers as an emblem of a larger and more complex problem.
Suffice to say though, I think most people on HN these days are competent enough to know there is a bubble and the end is not 5 years out, but less than 2
What I'm saying is that the techy-Social bubble's blame may fall on the brogrammers as an emblem of a larger and more complex problem.
Suffice to say though, I think most people on HN these days are competent enough to know there is a bubble and the end is not 5 years out, but less than 2
Take the blame? The Fed & the [Insert Political Party Here]
Who is really to blame? The structural problems in the way we handle things in general :p
Who is really to blame? The structural problems in the way we handle things in general :p
This was my initial reaction also, probably because most of the people interviewed for the article were affiliated with MBA programs. The central quote was my favorite: “It’s going to be a (graduating) students’ market for the next 15-plus years.” A statement like this tells me to stay away---far away.
Yeah for a Harvard or Cranfield MBA your probably not going to do too badly second and third tier Universities not so much.
Amazon is hungry for MBAs, so getting one might be a good idea--if you want to work for Amazon in a non-technical role.
Amazon was eager. I'd highlight the non-technical role bit.
Anecdotal but heres my story regarding them: Recruiter was very excited to fly me to Seattle. I attribute the MBA to that(CS Undergrad). Unfortunately I find a common stigma attached to the MBA for technical roles. During my Technical Program Management interview none of the interviewers had a business degree. PhD in cs, and an MIS, but I didn't connect much with 2/4 of the interviewers. 'So you don't want to be a developer anymore' was one of the opening comments I received. To address this i'm currently working on an intermediate step (title=founder?) to further distance myself from pure dev and thinking about PMP & Marketing certifications to help downplay the 10 years work experience developing.
On the other side of the coin, they say that Amazon hires only one out of every 5 candidates, my sample size of 1 is too small, and I cant claim I aced every conversation.
Anecdotal but heres my story regarding them: Recruiter was very excited to fly me to Seattle. I attribute the MBA to that(CS Undergrad). Unfortunately I find a common stigma attached to the MBA for technical roles. During my Technical Program Management interview none of the interviewers had a business degree. PhD in cs, and an MIS, but I didn't connect much with 2/4 of the interviewers. 'So you don't want to be a developer anymore' was one of the opening comments I received. To address this i'm currently working on an intermediate step (title=founder?) to further distance myself from pure dev and thinking about PMP & Marketing certifications to help downplay the 10 years work experience developing.
On the other side of the coin, they say that Amazon hires only one out of every 5 candidates, my sample size of 1 is too small, and I cant claim I aced every conversation.
I think it's more of a tech company culture thing, not specific to Amazon. I've been to interviews where the interviewers were genuinely bewildered that I left a coding-only career to do a full-time MBA program.
The degree (even from a top school) doesn't really seem to help out here in the Bay Area (maybe Seattle too, I've never been there). The banks and consultancy firms would rather you had a finance or consulting background, and won't hire you unless you're fresh out of MBA school. The tech companies either can't get over their anti-MBA stigma (as if merely getting the degree makes you suddenly forget math/engineering fundamentals) or just assume you went back to school because you were a bad coder.
Most tech companies seem to have a "Chinese wall" between the tech side and the business side, and there aren't many roles out there with the opportunity to overlap. Unless you want to do a start-up, where everyone wears many hats, but I like to be able to pay my mortgage and eat.
The degree (even from a top school) doesn't really seem to help out here in the Bay Area (maybe Seattle too, I've never been there). The banks and consultancy firms would rather you had a finance or consulting background, and won't hire you unless you're fresh out of MBA school. The tech companies either can't get over their anti-MBA stigma (as if merely getting the degree makes you suddenly forget math/engineering fundamentals) or just assume you went back to school because you were a bad coder.
Most tech companies seem to have a "Chinese wall" between the tech side and the business side, and there aren't many roles out there with the opportunity to overlap. Unless you want to do a start-up, where everyone wears many hats, but I like to be able to pay my mortgage and eat.
I'm a Software Engineer who thought that the way into management was to go and get some management credentials. So I went and got a PMP, then applied for a promotion - which I got, and then quickly un-got due to office politics.
A few years later (still a Software Engineer), working for a different (much larger) company, I decide to pursue management positions again. I go and get myself an MBA (part-time, so I could continue to work). I had a few interviews for management positions at my current company during my MBA studies, but ultimately no dice. I was laid off (as part of a mass layoff) more or less immediately after graduating.
Now, I no longer care. I've become a pretty good Software Engineer so I think I'll just stick with that. I let the PMP expire (it takes time and money to maintain, consider that), though I'm afraid I'm stuck with the MBA (at least my employer had paid for it). The need to explain why I got an MBA (4 years ago) during job interviews and reassure potential employers I'm really a nerd with no management aspirations is the only lasting effect of the degree.
A few years later (still a Software Engineer), working for a different (much larger) company, I decide to pursue management positions again. I go and get myself an MBA (part-time, so I could continue to work). I had a few interviews for management positions at my current company during my MBA studies, but ultimately no dice. I was laid off (as part of a mass layoff) more or less immediately after graduating.
Now, I no longer care. I've become a pretty good Software Engineer so I think I'll just stick with that. I let the PMP expire (it takes time and money to maintain, consider that), though I'm afraid I'm stuck with the MBA (at least my employer had paid for it). The need to explain why I got an MBA (4 years ago) during job interviews and reassure potential employers I'm really a nerd with no management aspirations is the only lasting effect of the degree.
PMP? Seriously?
(I'm not saying I know anything about the value of having this certification in terms of career prospects. What I do know is that you get to memorize a ton of horseshit to then spit it out in a brain-damaged multiple-choice test, and instinctively - not based on experience - I wouldn't want to manage a project in an org which values the "PMP" label, because it sounds like the kind of project where every pencil/square of toilet paper/etc. counts, the thing as well as the org in general being barely profitable.)
(I'm not saying I know anything about the value of having this certification in terms of career prospects. What I do know is that you get to memorize a ton of horseshit to then spit it out in a brain-damaged multiple-choice test, and instinctively - not based on experience - I wouldn't want to manage a project in an org which values the "PMP" label, because it sounds like the kind of project where every pencil/square of toilet paper/etc. counts, the thing as well as the org in general being barely profitable.)
I have a good friend who went into Amazon after his MBA (formerly a MechE at Intel). They have an awesome leadership program where they start you on the line at a warehouse and work you up until you're running a big part of it, then move you to Seattle to start running pieces of the business. It's not easy, he was at the warehouse at 5am every day and worked many, many long days, but if your end goal is to be running a big company one day then it seemed like a great experience.
Amazon seems hungry for folks without MBAs as well. I've had two friends without MBAs leave our company for Amazon, one was hardly out of school for two years, and they both received incredible compensation packages.
What does "incredible" mean here? Over and above market?
Well it seems like the market is bifurcated. One is the Google/Microsoft/Apple/Amazon/Facebook market where the starting salary is between 100-130k USD/year. My understanding is that Amazon is basically on par with this group, possibly at the lower end of it depending the specific position.
Then there's all the other companies out there that employ software development teams, and probably pay 20-40% less than the aforementioned behemoth firms on average. If you work at one of those companies (and I do), Amazon's compensation package seems incredible. But maybe a bit less incredible if you divide it by the actual number of hours worked. Amazon is notorious for being a workaholic environment.
Then there's all the other companies out there that employ software development teams, and probably pay 20-40% less than the aforementioned behemoth firms on average. If you work at one of those companies (and I do), Amazon's compensation package seems incredible. But maybe a bit less incredible if you divide it by the actual number of hours worked. Amazon is notorious for being a workaholic environment.
Above market. My friends are financial analysts by the way.
I would guess that MBA school has a similar bimodal (or, at least, bimodal-ish) outcome distribution as law school.
If you go to a top-5 MBA school, the opportunities are ridiculous. I know plenty of unimpressive people making $500,000 or more straight out of MBA school. But it needs to be a top school, and there are a lot of factors (e.g. work experience) that are socioeconomic rather than merit-based.
Top MBA schools are basically a 2-year networking event. I know a couple economics professors (at top MBA schools) who refuse to teach MBA students because they're sick of having the students demand of the Dean that they reschedule exams and classes to accommodate their leisure travel, and having the students win.
Most MBAs don't get the ridiculous, unearned compensation bump that merits two years off and an expensive degree, though. If you make $500k with no skills whatsoever, then you can probably pay it off. If your next gig comes in at $75k, that isn't bad by most peoples' standards, but it'll make it hard to pay off the student loans.
If you go to a top-5 MBA school, the opportunities are ridiculous. I know plenty of unimpressive people making $500,000 or more straight out of MBA school. But it needs to be a top school, and there are a lot of factors (e.g. work experience) that are socioeconomic rather than merit-based.
Top MBA schools are basically a 2-year networking event. I know a couple economics professors (at top MBA schools) who refuse to teach MBA students because they're sick of having the students demand of the Dean that they reschedule exams and classes to accommodate their leisure travel, and having the students win.
Most MBAs don't get the ridiculous, unearned compensation bump that merits two years off and an expensive degree, though. If you make $500k with no skills whatsoever, then you can probably pay it off. If your next gig comes in at $75k, that isn't bad by most peoples' standards, but it'll make it hard to pay off the student loans.
> Top MBA schools are basically a 2-year networking event
So you're basic assumption is that there is zero to low value in actually attending the class and learning from professors? I'm confused that why would someone spend several thousands of dollars just for networking?
Why not do it you're self? Try think of creative ways to hustle. In the book Education of Millionaires [1], there was a then young and inexperienced entrepreneur who needs to connect with other already successful entrepreneurs. He cold called every CEOs of the 30 under 30 and convinced them to join a free ski trip with a group of young successful CEOs. He also found companies to sponsor the trip. Basically, he created a valuable network out of nowhere from this smart hack.
I bet if one spend 6 months full time hustling/connecting with people, one will get more value while spending less per unit time compared to a MBA. Not to mention if it is best use of time to go all out networking for an extended period of time.
In my view, networking is best done intermittently while doing something that produces value, like creating a startup or organizing a non-profit. In this case you have some context to network for. You'll know better about why and how to do networking and get more value.
[1] The Education of Millionaires, Michael Ellsberg (The author's talk about how to do networking is also very good [2])
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDmOgLabl_M
So you're basic assumption is that there is zero to low value in actually attending the class and learning from professors? I'm confused that why would someone spend several thousands of dollars just for networking?
Why not do it you're self? Try think of creative ways to hustle. In the book Education of Millionaires [1], there was a then young and inexperienced entrepreneur who needs to connect with other already successful entrepreneurs. He cold called every CEOs of the 30 under 30 and convinced them to join a free ski trip with a group of young successful CEOs. He also found companies to sponsor the trip. Basically, he created a valuable network out of nowhere from this smart hack.
I bet if one spend 6 months full time hustling/connecting with people, one will get more value while spending less per unit time compared to a MBA. Not to mention if it is best use of time to go all out networking for an extended period of time.
In my view, networking is best done intermittently while doing something that produces value, like creating a startup or organizing a non-profit. In this case you have some context to network for. You'll know better about why and how to do networking and get more value.
[1] The Education of Millionaires, Michael Ellsberg (The author's talk about how to do networking is also very good [2])
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDmOgLabl_M
It's not about networking but about the network you build. Networks are basically one of THE reasons why some people do better than others. Having a good network is also a huge driver to get a lot of startups off the ground.
It is the number one thing you can never get enough off.
It is the number one thing you can never get enough off.
I'm confused that why would someone spend several thousands of dollars just for networking?
For one, for the people who can pass the socioeconomic component of MBA school admissions, the costs are a rounding error. For the middle-class students who get in on merit, the connections are worth it.
Two factors amplify the strength of connections. One is nostalgia. There's a reason why college connections run deeper than grad-school connections, which run deeper than work connections. People tend to want to be around those who were with them back in the "good old days". The second is what I call "soft extortion", but that term might be too cynical since it's always implied. If you went drinking with someone on a regular basis and tried to run game on the same women, you both know things about the other that create a bond of "necessary trust". If you ever tried to pull something out on the other guy (i.e. hard extortion) in order to get a favor, you'd lose his trust and friendship. However, the fact that this capability theoretically exists tends to create bonds, due to peoples' aversion to cognitive dissonance. ("I trusted him enough to get piss-drunk with him back in school, so I should trust him on a $500-million deal.") Soft extortion is an extremely powerful force; it's why fraternities use humiliating initiation rites.
For one, for the people who can pass the socioeconomic component of MBA school admissions, the costs are a rounding error. For the middle-class students who get in on merit, the connections are worth it.
Two factors amplify the strength of connections. One is nostalgia. There's a reason why college connections run deeper than grad-school connections, which run deeper than work connections. People tend to want to be around those who were with them back in the "good old days". The second is what I call "soft extortion", but that term might be too cynical since it's always implied. If you went drinking with someone on a regular basis and tried to run game on the same women, you both know things about the other that create a bond of "necessary trust". If you ever tried to pull something out on the other guy (i.e. hard extortion) in order to get a favor, you'd lose his trust and friendship. However, the fact that this capability theoretically exists tends to create bonds, due to peoples' aversion to cognitive dissonance. ("I trusted him enough to get piss-drunk with him back in school, so I should trust him on a $500-million deal.") Soft extortion is an extremely powerful force; it's why fraternities use humiliating initiation rites.
> I know plenty of unimpressive people making $500,000 or more straight out of MBA school.
I assume that's finance. Is it trading, PE, IB or something else?
I assume that's finance. Is it trading, PE, IB or something else?
I assume that's finance. Is it trading, PE, IB or something else?
All of the above. It's harder for an idiot to get rich in straight trading, because there is a merit factor in that game. PE is a big one. Lots of highly-compensated but unimpressive people in that industry.
All of the above. It's harder for an idiot to get rich in straight trading, because there is a merit factor in that game. PE is a big one. Lots of highly-compensated but unimpressive people in that industry.
There is maybe one person per year without PE experience hired into a PE firm large enough to pay someone straight out of an MBA $500k. Maybe one.
I'm talking about all-in numbers, not base salaries.
How would an unimpressive person land into a top 5 MBA program? Presumably they'd take someone with solid prior work experience.
It happens a lot for various reasons. Admissions people aren't that good at their jobs, good ol' boy networks, outright cheating on standardized tests (this is a huge problem in Asia), and more than a few "dumb smart kids". Overall, good B schools (well beyond the "top 5", which I'm pretty sure consists of at least 10 schools) are full of pretty sharp folks. Some even brilliant. But quite a few dullards as well make it through the process.
Well, those unimpressive people get the needed work experience.
The "work experience" component of MBA admissions is socioeconomic. It's often worked out while these kids are still in school, that they'll do job X for 3 years and then get sent to Harvard MBA school. And while some rich kids are also impressively intelligent and creative, those tend not to be the rich kids who go to MBA school. So you get a mix of reasonably impressive (or lucky) middle-class students and unimpressive rich kids.
The "work experience" component of MBA admissions is socioeconomic. It's often worked out while these kids are still in school, that they'll do job X for 3 years and then get sent to Harvard MBA school. And while some rich kids are also impressively intelligent and creative, those tend not to be the rich kids who go to MBA school. So you get a mix of reasonably impressive (or lucky) middle-class students and unimpressive rich kids.
This is pretty accurate. I'd add to the mix "pretty impressive international students" too. They tend to have overcome similar socioeconomic disadvantages* as the middle-class students AND have overcome additional regional, cultural, and language barriers.
*I'm _cautiously_ using the word "disadvantages" here since in all honesty we're comparing really lucky students with middle-class backgrounds to ultra-lucky students with filthy rich backgrounds.
*I'm _cautiously_ using the word "disadvantages" here since in all honesty we're comparing really lucky students with middle-class backgrounds to ultra-lucky students with filthy rich backgrounds.
I feel your point about international students may be overstated. A lot of international students who come to places like HBS are extremely rich (some in the sense of owning huge portions of their country and having slaves rich).
Read about Harvard "Section X" for example. It is an elite enclave of students within HBS who outspend other HBS groups (who spend a lot anyway) by a mile.
Read about Harvard "Section X" for example. It is an elite enclave of students within HBS who outspend other HBS groups (who spend a lot anyway) by a mile.
> Most MBAs don't get the ridiculous, unearned compensation bump that merits two years off and an expensive degree
yup not top 5 school for me (top 20 maybe?), but my requirements were: set schedule for entire program (firm end date) where I didn't need to pick and schedule individual classes (cohort) and needed too be able to keep my full time job (nights & weekends). Had SUPER supportive wife, first kid born in yr 2 of the program. Was 90k with my total cost around 55k - had decent paying tech gig before hand. Luckily I landed 50K bump in pay at next gig (from 80 to 130), so it didn't take long for the investment to pay off. Should have networked more. Still introverted, but more likely to jump into starting something.
yup not top 5 school for me (top 20 maybe?), but my requirements were: set schedule for entire program (firm end date) where I didn't need to pick and schedule individual classes (cohort) and needed too be able to keep my full time job (nights & weekends). Had SUPER supportive wife, first kid born in yr 2 of the program. Was 90k with my total cost around 55k - had decent paying tech gig before hand. Luckily I landed 50K bump in pay at next gig (from 80 to 130), so it didn't take long for the investment to pay off. Should have networked more. Still introverted, but more likely to jump into starting something.
How long have you been working? Which area of the country? Do you think you could have gotten that 50k bump without the MBA? Thanks...just curious.
The statistics from Harvard do not back you up:
http://www.hbs.edu/recruiting/data/Pages/detailed-charts.asp...
10 years down the line the spread between having an MBA and not will be significant, but right after MBA school very few people (10%?) have a starting salary of even $200k. I'm sure there is a guy that came out and made $500k, but it's not anyone outside of the top 10% within the the best program in the country.
I'm considering getting an MBA (I am currently a senior software engineer, previously have been a mechanical engineer). I know that for myself personally, an MBA would definitely be a financial setback over the next 3 years. Long term, 10+ years out, it would be a big gain. I'm considering doing it, but the cost is turning me off a bit.
As another anecdote, the best "business" guy I know from my graduating class (in fact, the valedictorian from a class of 5000 people) is also considering an MBA. He is in the same boat that I am - the salaries for most people upon MBA graduation are lower than our current salaries. So what's the point? Yet 10 years from now, not having an MBA will be a liability, because other people with MBA's attribute their success to them and are skeptical of those without.
http://www.hbs.edu/recruiting/data/Pages/detailed-charts.asp...
10 years down the line the spread between having an MBA and not will be significant, but right after MBA school very few people (10%?) have a starting salary of even $200k. I'm sure there is a guy that came out and made $500k, but it's not anyone outside of the top 10% within the the best program in the country.
I'm considering getting an MBA (I am currently a senior software engineer, previously have been a mechanical engineer). I know that for myself personally, an MBA would definitely be a financial setback over the next 3 years. Long term, 10+ years out, it would be a big gain. I'm considering doing it, but the cost is turning me off a bit.
As another anecdote, the best "business" guy I know from my graduating class (in fact, the valedictorian from a class of 5000 people) is also considering an MBA. He is in the same boat that I am - the salaries for most people upon MBA graduation are lower than our current salaries. So what's the point? Yet 10 years from now, not having an MBA will be a liability, because other people with MBA's attribute their success to them and are skeptical of those without.
I'd like to see stats on salaries 10 years out, MINUS the folks who went into consulting or banking. If you get your MBA and make it into those industries, you're going to see fantastic year-over-year salary/bonus growth. If you, say, go back to a tech company and do marketing or finance, you're not going to see those huge gains, and a top school may not be worth it financially--basically you'd be doing the degree for the career change and not for a salary rocketship.
I saw a few of your comments in this thread and I'm really interested in hearing more about your experience with the MBA. Do you have time for an email? My address is my hn handle @ gmail.
Problem is that you're only considering base salary. If you get into IB/PE your annual bonus can be a lot more than that.
And yes, many overlook at the fact most MBAs already had considerable previous work experience.
And yes, many overlook at the fact most MBAs already had considerable previous work experience.
I'd love to see stats on this as well -- does anyone know if they exist, particularly vs someone who stays on a technical track (eng. manager -> director of eng. -> vp of eng -> cto).
...is it bad I read that as "newly-minted MacBook Air" until looking at the article and realising it was the other "MBA"?
I find this somewhat troubling. Trust an old-timer: When the circle comes around to the point where it tips toward hiring MBAs again, it's time to sell and take cover. A couple years after they destroy the economy again, you come back in and buy. Not necessarily a bad thing - for everything there is a season - just something to be aware of.