The 2025 Financial Times MBA Ranking
Maria |
February 25, 2025

In this episode of Business Casual, the hosts dive into a controversial article from The Economist questioning the value of an MBA. They dissect the article’s claims, highlighting the cyclical nature of employment trends and the selective job acceptance of top MBA graduates. The discussion also explores the impact of AI on the job market and reaffirms the long-term value of an MBA in navigating complex business environments. Tune in to hear why the hosts believe the MBA is far from obsolete and remains a powerful asset for future leaders.

Episode Transcript

sM[00:00:00] John Byrne:

Hello everyone. This is John Byrne with Poets and Quants. Welcome to Business Casual, our weekly podcast with my co host, Caroline Diarte Edwards and Maria Wich-Vila. We were astounded to read, in a recent issue of The Economist, a piece that basically questions the value of the MBA. The title of it is, Why Elite MBA Graduates Are Struggling.

Is the Degree Still Worth It? And basically what The Economist did was, it took the latest employment reports from the top schools and showed that obviously in the past year, MBA graduates have had a more difficult time finding the jobs that they want. It noted that at the top 15 business schools, the share of students who sought and accepted a job offer within three months of graduation fell by six points to 84%.

If you compare that to the average over the past five years, the share declined by eight points. And it goes on from there and gives a bunch of different reasons why it thinks that business schools are in trouble and the MBA is in decline. What it doesn’t know, in fact, is that still the numbers of people getting jobs within three months are very high.

At schools who reported the worst numbers, like at Harvard and MIT, where 23 percent of the graduating class did not accept a job three months after graduation. It makes no note that a lot of this has to do with selectivity, meaning the graduates who quit jobs that paid them a fair amount of money are very effective in the jobs that they want to get after their MBA.

And in many cases, they jobs. With companies that don’t do recruiting of MBAs on the natural cycle of recruiting and that’s primarily because they don’t recruit a lot of MBAs. We’re talking about employers like hedge funds, private equity firms, some wealth management places, early stage companies, and some startups that obviously it’s onesie and twosie kind of recruitment of MBAs.

And they don’t recruit on a cycle where, okay, the everyone’s graduating at this date. And so we’ll start them in August. And that’s part of what has gone on at some of the schools that are reported these lower numbers. The other thing is, yes, the economy was little uncertain and consulting firms did cut back on their hiring and certainly tech firms did as well, but all signs are for already a recovery.

You talk to career management people at the business schools and they will tell you that the number of companies returning to recruit people for internships and for job offers and the job boards have become just loaded with a lot more jobs than they had a year ago. So Maria, what do you make of the economist’s sort of negative take on the MBA?

[00:02:58] Maria Wich-Vila:

Everything old is new again and whatever gets clicks, you can’t fault them for going after the clicks, although I do wish that their their analysis would have been a little bit more in depth and a little bit more trying to get at some of the core reasons behind some of these numbers, so the title says why elite MBA graduates are struggling to find jobs, but then the It doesn’t really answer that question.

It just talks about these numbers are going down. And, I think economies are cyclical. And as the economy cycles through its ups and downs, the hiring is also going to cycle through ups and downs. And one year real estate might be the hot industry that everyone goes into and then two years later, no one’s going into real estate and the same thing happens with tech.

I’m sure that we’re going to start seeing an influx into manufacturing probably in the next year or two. So these cycles come and go. And so I think that overall the death of the MBA reports of the death of the MBA have been greatly exaggerated. One point that the article made was that they thought that perhaps these consulting firms might start looking more towards people who have advanced degrees in technology instead of only going after MBA talent.

And that might work in the short term, but I do think that is not sustainable long term because the technological aspect of it. That’s only one piece of it. The technology, without knowing how to implement the technology alone doesn’t do a whole lot. You need to know how to implement it, how to implement it well, and how to implement it efficiently.

Even in this nascent age of ai, we see so many hallucinations in ai, for example, where an AI algorithm or a chat bot will give you an answer that is absolute nonsense. Waving, throwing your hands up in the air and saying that’s it. It’s over for the MBA because the AI is going to take over everything and only the engineers will have jobs.

If that were the case then there would have never been the rise of the MBA in the first place because it’s not like degrees in computer science did not exist until this year. That technological talent has always been out there. And yet, employers have found that there is in fact a benefit towards having a managerial education that looks at the different moving parts of an organization, operations, marketing, finance, etc.

And knows how to keep all of those pieces in balance when making decisions. I, Do you think that this is just a temporary glitch in things? And I think that we will reach an equilibrium again, once the economy starts to turn around.

[00:05:21] John Byrne:

Caroline, your take?

[00:05:24] Caroline Diarte-Edwards:

Yeah, I’m a big fan of the economist usually, but I find this article rather sloppy.

And we’ve seen it before. Every time there is a downturn in the recruitment market. And there is a downturn with every economic cycle. And there’s another generation of journalists who jump on this and think they’ve discovered something new and make a big song and dance about it, predicting the downfall of the MBA.

And then surprise, 12 months later, they’re writing about the uptick in recruitment for business school graduates. I think the article completely fails to take into account the longer term perspective and how we have seen this happen again and again over the decades. So I think, unfortunately, it’s a rather poorly informed journalist who doesn’t understand the context who’s written this article.

And it’s a shame because The Economist has a very big platform, and this article, I’m sure, has had a lot of visibility. So I think it’s a bit unfair to knock the MBA and question its fundamental value just because there’s been a batch of disappointing recruitment statistics. And, you make a very good point, John.

I think a lot of graduates from the top schools are incredibly picky about the positions that they want to take up. And I’m sure that if they took the first job offer they got, or they were willing to take any job offer that came their way, then all of those Harvard and MIT grads, etc, could have jobs lined up pretty damn quickly.

And that is backed up also by the data that you note in your article about some of the mid tier schools who actually have. Pretty strong recruiting statistics, right? So it doesn’t mean that if you’re graduating from Manchester business school, you have better opportunities than if you’re graduating from Harvard business school, but Harvard’s had a downturn in their recruitment stats and Manchester’s had an improvement in their recruitment stats.

So what it means is that those Manchester graduates are taking jobs that probably the HBS graduates are not going to take, right? So those top tier school graduates are are taking their time and. Yeah, rightly they have fantastic credential under their belt. They will have amazing opportunities and they don’t have to jump on the first thing that comes knocking at their door.

Yeah, it it’s a disappointing article in my view.

[00:07:55] John Byrne:

And then the writer even quotes in books that are negative on the MBA that are more than a decade old, which is really astounding. Now, Maria, you made note of this in our pre podcast call. Maybe you can talk a little bit about that.

[00:08:14] Maria Wich-Vila:

Yeah, in the middle of this article, there’s a really superfluous paragraph that cites a study from 2007 that says that when compared with firefighters, MBA students are more likely to be upset if a friend bought the same car as them. Okay, what? This study is from 17, almost perhaps even 18 years ago.

And what does this have to do with employment?

I’m used to using the phrase apples and oranges a lot. So comparing apples and oranges, comparing firefighters with MBAs, what does this have to do with. Anything, a study from 17 years ago about what MBA students think about car purchases oh this doesn’t even belong in the same publication, much less the same article, it almost felt like to me there was some sort of like a word limit that the writer was trying to get at.

And they’re like here’s some stuff that I put together for a completely unrelated article. Let me just paste it in here. So I just, I don’t understand that at all. And then also at the very bottom of the article, there’s a heading right before the end that says Donald Trump, MBA. And not only does the following paragraph not really have anything to do, I guess indirectly with Donald Trump, but Donald Trump doesn’t have an MBA.

So when Caroline, again, our resident diplomat, our resident ambassador said, I think that the author does not fully understand the context. Yeah, they don’t. Do they think that Donald Trump has an MBA? Cause Donald Trump does not have an MBA. So right off the bat I whoo, this is a head scratcher of an article.

And unfortunately it, I think it does make some interesting points. It certainly raises some interesting questions, but then unfortunately it doesn’t then proceed to answer them. And then what other, what few interesting points it does make or interesting questions it does make it it, it discredits itself with this random article about by the way, while we’re talking about how McKinsey is hiring fewer people from Harvard let’s also bring up a study about MBAs and firefighters and how they compare with their, what, with their car purchase decisions.

Okay. Okay. Yes, sorry. Sorry, sorry economist.

[00:10:11] John Byrne: Caroline your favorite magazine is really did a boo here I think.

[00:10:15] Caroline Diarte-Edwards: Yeah, they certainly did. Bad marks. Zero out of 10 for the economist , it’s a shame because,

[00:10:24] John Byrne: yeah, go ahead.

[00:10:25] Caroline Diarte-Edwards: I was just gonna say, it’s a shame because I think as Maria said, it does raise some interesting questions and I think there is an important debate to have about how the job market may transform.

We are living in an age of unprecedented change with artificial intelligence, and that is going to transform the job market. And it may be that schools are feeling the impact of that already. It may be that, for example, consulting firms are not needing to recruit as many junior staff as they needed to in the past because of AI.

We also know that AI is going to create a lot of jobs. And we know that business schools have done a great job in integrating AI into the curriculum. So they are preparing graduates to, to take leadership roles and manage change and do all of that implementation work that Maria talked about, but they’re just, they’re going to be massive shifts, right?

In the jobs that People took coming out of business school 10 years ago will look very different from the jobs that people will be taking out of business school in 10 years time. And I think those shifts are starting to play out. And I think, they could have done a bit more research to understand.

What is happening on how that transformation is playing out. And you also cite in your article, an interesting report that talks about the expectation of a growth in demand for MBAs. And AI is predicted to create more jobs than it destroys. And I think MBAs are going to be very well positioned to take advantage of that, right?

Because MBA graduates are well prepared to to manage Organizational change, transformation, take the lead in a context of ambiguity in a fast changing environment they are well equipped with those skills, so I think the business school graduates are going to be very well positioned in this new job market.

And it’s a shame I think The Economist didn’t dig into that a little bit more.

[00:12:23] John Byrne:

Yeah, if anything, AI is going to have a greater impact on business undergraduates who, have done very well. In the past, but the truth is that the enrollment in undergraduate programs at a number of universities now it’s just astounding.

There are some universities where business undergrads make up well over a third of all the undergraduates at a university and everybody has been expanding these programs over the last decade. Because they’re in such demand. But you wonder how AI is going to eliminate some of those entry level jobs for undergraduates and will undergraduates be finding themselves working for insurance companies and not meeting the expectations that have been met by a previous generation of undergrads.

In terms of the graduate degree, I agree with you. Look, business is not getting simpler. It’s getting more sophisticated, more challenging, more competitive, more global, more disruptive. And that calls for higher education, smarter people not dumber people and not less education. So as the world becomes more challenging and more complex, it’s going to require managers who can deal with that complexity.

And I think. That graduate education is a great start for training people to basically deal with and manage the complexity of business today. Caroline, I think you have recently absorbed a future of work report from the world economic forum. What does that say?

[00:14:03] Caroline Diarte-Edwards:

I was just reading an article about that, and they say that 60% of employers expect digital access to transform their business by 2030.

And it says that analytical thinking remains the most sought after course skill with seven out of 10 companies considering is it essential in 2025. So I think that’s very relevant, right? Because business schools are definitely giving. graduates great frameworks and cultivating analytical thinking.

It goes on to say, this is followed by resilience, flexibility, and agility, along with leadership and social influence. So it talks about creative thinking, et cetera. So all of those skills are skills that are cultivated through an MBA program. So I do think that this research that the World Economic Forum has done.

really speaks to the the skills that will be required. And I think that MBA graduates will be very well positioned in that environment. And I think it’s also important to keep in mind that as a graduate degree, Business school prepares you for so many different paths, right? There are other graduate degrees that are much more specific and I think can get you locked into a specific career path.

And that is not the case with business school. I think one of the beauties of this this degree path is that it means that you can Tackle any role in a business environment in the future. It just gives you that amazing foundation and business school graduates often are changing careers and they often reinvent themselves, not just when they graduate, but again and again in their careers.

And it gives them the confidence and the skills to do that. But also I think that the network gives you. A fantastic safety net, because it means that if things don’t work out in your current career or your current position, you have an amazing network of people you can reach out to who can help you with your next step and help you move to a new position or help you transform your career again if you need to.

That’s an amazing resource and asset to have that stays with you. Without throughout your career. So I think that it’s a great asset to have that equips you for an environment. That is where the pace of change is increasing and you will need to reinvent yourself in a way that you can’t even anticipate now.

So I think those softer skills that the MBA cultivates will continue to be relevant and probably even more relevant in 10 years time than they have been in the past.

[00:16:48] John Byrne:

I think getting an MBA degree is a heck of a lot easier than getting a medical degree, a law degree, or a computer science degree.

And yet, you’re not locked into law, medicine, or computers if you get an MBA degree. So I think that’s for all things to they support the notion that the most popular graduate degree in America, in part because of all of these attributes that you can place on it. And the flexibility the degree gives you in the world of work.

So I, I think we can pretty safely conclude that the economist is badly misinformed and misread a slight decline in employment stats for one year to go on and extrapolate that to say the degree may not be worth it anymore. And And we’re going to even cite studies that are over a decade old to tell you how MBAs aren’t as good as firefighters as people,

[00:17:49] Maria Wich-Vila: …which in fairness is probably a valid statement to make!

I just want to be clear, but it’s just not super relevant to the discussion at hand.

[00:17:58] John Byrne: …says the Harvard MBA marry to another Harvard MBA? That’s right.

[00:18:04] Maria Wich-Vila: And we thank our firefighters here in LA every day. So…

[00:18:08] John Byrne: And you know what, Maria, I think of you as a firefighter anyway.

[00:18:13] Maria Wich-Vila: You know what? We MBA graduates are putting out fires of different sorts.

Slightly less perhaps a little bit less fatal, but fires nonetheless (?) .

[00:18:24] John Byrne: There you have it. Take a look at the Poets and Quants commentary, The Economist Asks, Is the MBA Worth It? And take a look at The Economist article and see if you draw the same conclusions as we did about it. This is John Byrne with Poets and Quants.

Thanks for listening.

The Economist Dis on MBAs: Is the Degree Still Worth It?
The 2025 Financial Times MBA Ranking
Maria |
February 25, 2025

[00:00:00] John Byrne: Well hello everyone, this is John Byrne with Poets and Quants, welcome to Business Casual, our weekly podcast with my co-hosts Maria Wich-Vila and Caroline Diarte Edwards. Today we have a special guest, Heidi Hillis from Fortuna Admissions. She is based in Australia, is a senior expert coach for Fortuna, and has three degrees, all from Stanford, a BA in English literature, that’s my degree, an MA in Russian studies, and an MBA from the Graduate School of Business. And we have Heidi here to discuss some really fascinating research. Here’s what Fortuna did. They dug into the last Two class profiles of the Stanford Graduate School of Business.

That’s the class of ‘23 and the class of ‘24. They looked up all these folks on LinkedIn to identify a little bit more about their backgrounds, including their former employers and their places of undergraduate education to come up with an incredible analysis. Heidi, welcome.

[00:00:46] Heidi Hillis: Thank you. I’m glad to be here.

[00:00:48] John Byrne: Heidi, what is, what are the big takeaways from your deep dive discovery?

[00:00:54] Heidi Hillis: It’s hard to know even where to start. I think there’s a quite a few interesting kind of trends that we’ve seen that have taken place over the years. We were mentioning before the call that traditionally there hadn’t been, 10 years ago, if you’d looked, you wouldn’t have seen so many tech companies represented, but now there’s a big presence of tech companies who are feeding a lot of these MBA programs in Stanford in particular.

I think that the thing that was really interesting was, looking, not just at where the companies that were feeding the students, the applicants to Stanford. When they were working there, when they were applying, but actually the paths that they took prior to their current job.

So how many people were working, if you look at McKinsey, for example, or Bain and BCG, those are obviously companies that feed a lot of applicants to the program, but we found 20%, which seemed to be normal of, the class came from consulting, but if you actually look into the numbers in their background, You would see that actually 37 percent of these two classes had worked at McKinsey sometime prior, or actually in consulting, so it was, it’s The kind of the patterns that are behind, what you would normally see in terms of what Stanford tells us.

So you get a sense of the paths that people have taken. And so that’s something that was really interesting to see.

[00:02:16] John Byrne: Absolutely. And of course, this is this analysis goes so far beyond what any applicant would learn by simply looking at the class profile that the school up because, this level of detail is never available to people.

[00:02:33] Heidi Hillis: No, and yeah, for example, you could see that, Stanford will say that they have around, each year around 50 percent of applicants are international, which is a great statistic and gives you lots of hope if you are an international student. But when you dig into the numbers, you actually understand that.

75 percent of the people who get into Stanford actually went to a U. S. University. So even if you’re international, it does have does seem to have kind of an advantage of having been educated in the U. S. That seems to be something that they look for. However, I think. The concentration of universities in the U.

S. that are feeding to Stanford is something also that, if you’re looking at it, you might find a little bit dis, disconcerting. There’s a few programs that are really, obviously the top. Programs as you would expect places like Harvard, Stanford, Yale, the Ivies but if you look at the international universities very diverse from all over the world, really lots of people from different places, which is also really interesting.

[00:03:38] John Byrne: Yeah I tell you, one of the things that struck me in the data is how consistent it is. 10 years ago, we did the same exercise at Stanford and a bunch of other. Schools from Harvard and Dartmouth and Columbia and talk and a few others and back 10 years ago, we found that 25. 2 percent of the class of 2013 were from Ivy League colleges.

And the Ivy League 8 schools, not including Stanford. And if you included Stanford, it would have been 32. 6%. So now, let’s move forward to your data. And in 23, 30. 7 percent went to Ivy League schools, even above the 25. 2. And in 24, 27. 9 percent went to Ivy League schools. So it looks like Stanford has gotten even a little bit more elitist than it was.

Yeah,

[00:04:41] Heidi Hillis: It’s, it is it’s what the data says, right? Obviously, this is a sample. We have 80 percent of the two classes. So we don’t know where those other people went. And that might skew the data a little bit in another direction. But it is, if you look at there’s 15 schools, that include the Ivy’s and then you have UC Berkeley and obviously Stanford that really are contributing, 49 percent of the class of 23, 47. 3 percent of the class of 24. So that is a pretty heavy concentration and But, if you actually look into the data, you see a lot of people also, each of these is actually an individual story.

You see a lot of people who come from other schools as well. So it’s not like you have to give up hope if you come from a different school. I see a lot of individual stories that, from the whole range of U. S. schools that really are feeding into Stanford. So I think what the data doesn’t also tell you, unfortunately, is how many of these Of people from these backgrounds are actually applying.

So

[00:05:39] John Byrne: good point.

[00:05:40] Heidi Hillis: It’s it’s hard to know. And sometimes I think people this is. A path that a lot of people who go to these schools plan to take from the very beginning. So I would see, it would be interesting to know that I don’t know that we will ever find that out. But, um, that’s something to keep in mind as well.

[00:05:56] John Byrne: Yeah. And that’s a fair point. Because how reflective are these results of the applicant pool reflective of an elitist attitude probably a combination of if I had to guess, but, it is what it is, and these institutions obviously are great filters, so you come from McKinsey, Bain, BCG, and you go to Harvard or Stanford or Penn, and you pass through a fine filter, and it makes you less of a admissions risk than if you went to, frankly, the University of Kentucky and worked for a company that no one knows of.

That’s just the reality of elite MBA admissions, right?

[00:06:40] Heidi Hillis: Yeah. And so you will see that the people who are not going, you’ll see a lot of the people who you would, the profiles that you would expect, the Harvard undergrad that then goes to Goldman that then was working at a PE firm.

That’s a really typical profile that you’ll see. But you’ll also see some really, unique and interesting ones, which I think, Okay. Helps you understand that if you don’t have that path, you also have a real chance at these schools, and maybe even more of a chance, again, not knowing, how many of those Goldman P.

E. Harvard grads are applying. So I’m thinking of the guy that I saw who he went to UPenn undergrad, studied engineering, started out a kind of pretty typical path working in private equity, but then made a big pivot to work for go to Poland where he was working in a real estate investment firm and the head coach of the Polish lacrosse team.

So you have really interesting profiles like that, that you can see that. aren’t necessarily taking that typical path. And sometimes that really does help you stand out.

[00:07:42] John Byrne: True. Maria, what surprised you most about the data?

[00:07:48] Maria Wich-Vila: Wow. I think we already covered, the, one of the biggest ones was the number, the percentage of people who would had some sort of either their undergraduate or graduate education within the United States.

Intuitively, I had felt that was true. And sometimes when I try to, give some honest, tough love to applicants from certain countries, and they’ll say, oh, but Maria, I think you’re being a little too pessimistic. After all, X percent of the applicants at these schools are international, and Y percent are from a certain geography internationally.

I’ll say yes, but that doesn’t mean that they’re all Solely from that area. A lot of them are, do have significant international educational experiences. I think another, speaking of the international piece the percentage of people who had significant international work experience as well was something else that really jumped out at me.

Because it would signal to me that Stanford really does value this global perspective both within probably its domestic applicants and also its international applicants. So I thought that was also a really interesting piece of data that jumped out at me.

[00:08:52] John Byrne: Now remind me what percentage was that?

[00:08:56] Heidi Hillis: People who are international

[00:08:58] John Byrne: who have had international work experience.

[00:09:01] Heidi Hillis: I think it was 30%.

[00:09:02] Caroline Diarte Edwards: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, it’s pretty

[00:09:04] John Byrne: impressive.

[00:09:04] Caroline Diarte Edwards: 30%, which I was thrilled to see. As well as coming from in Seattle and Europe. Obviously the international schools put a heavy emphasis on international experience and I hadn’t fully appreciated that. A school like Stanford would also.

really value that to the same extent. And it’s great to see that candidates are making the effort to get outside of the U. S. and get international experience because I think you gain so much from that exposure. And you bring more to the classroom if you’ve got that experience. I know that both Maria and Heidi.

I’ve worked outside of the home countries as well. Pre MBA and I think that you just have so much more to contribute to the whole experience. And it was great to see that 30%.

[00:09:50] John Byrne: What else struck you, Caroline?

[00:09:53] Caroline Diarte Edwards: We talked about the concentration of academic institutions, and I was also surprised about the concentration in employers.

So while there is a very long list of employers where the students have worked pre MBA when you dig into the career paths that they’ve taken there is some interesting concentration. Heidi had noted that the reports that There are 26 companies that account for nearly one third of the class in terms of where they were working right before Stanford.

But when you look at their whole career history, those same 26 companies represent over 60 percent of the class. So that is, yeah, that’s quite extraordinary that so many of the class have experience of working at quite a short list of companies.

[00:10:46] Heidi Hillis: I think that’s reflective of, if you really think about it, you have a lot of these companies.

You’re talking about the Goldmans and the Morgan Stanley and McKinsey that have really large programs that recruit out of undergrad that are really training grounds for. A lot of people that then on to do, work in industry or go on to work for in finance in particular, a lot of people starting out at some of these bulge bracket banks and then going into.

Private equity or smaller firms. So the diversity within finance in terms of where they were working prior to MBA is quite large compared to consulting because there just aren’t as many consulting firms, but a lot of people in financing, a lot of different firms, but they, a lot of them really do start out in these training programs, these analyst programs that are so big and popular.

[00:11:34] John Byrne: Yeah, true. And looking back, I did this exercise as well. The feeder companies to Stanford 10 years ago in the class of 2023, 22. 8 percent from McKinsey, Bain, BCG, and your data, 22. 5 percent work there. Incredible consistency over a 10 year period. When you look at the top six employers 10 years ago, they were McKinsey, BCG, Bain, Goldman, Morgan Stanley, and JP.

Morgan Chase. They accounted alone for 34 percent of all the students in the class of 20, 2013 at Stanford. In your data for 23 and 24 they account for 29. 8%, just a few percentage points less. So remarkable consistency. And I think you’re right, Heidi, this is a function of the fact that these firms bring in a lot of people who are analysts and actually expect them after 3 to 5 years to go to a top MBA school.

So there’s a good number of them in the applicant pool to choose from and let’s face it, they’re terrific candidates.

[00:12:46] Heidi Hillis: Yeah. I think another pool of really terrific candidates that you see, and I don’t know what the 2013 data was saying, but is the US military, which is really, I think, again, something that I felt having worked with lots of military candidates myself, understand that, Yeah, intuitively, I would have expected, but to see it in the data is actually really interesting.

You just see Stanford in particular, I think, is really looking for leadership potential, and it’s so hard to show that as an analyst, as a consultant, but as in the military, these people have such incredible leadership experience that it really helps them to stand out.

[00:13:23] John Byrne: Yeah. And let’s tell people what the data shows.

How many out of us military academies,

[00:13:28] Heidi Hillis: In all in total, we had, 20 over the two years. So that’s in the two classes that we found. So that’s, a pretty large number. And they come from all the different academies, right? So you’ll find them from different, not academies, in the army, navy and the marines.

So you’ll see that. And you also see quite a few, in the data we’ll, we see a lot from the Israeli military as well, but that’s actually a little bit difficult to because every Israeli does go into the military. So it’s they have that in their background. Any Israeli candidate would have Israeli military background as well, but again, that’s.

Place that people can really highlight their leadership. So you had eight people from who had been, who were Israeli and obviously had military experience where they were able to demonstrate significant impact and leadership prior to MBA.

[00:14:18] John Byrne: Yeah. In fact, 10 years ago, roughly 2%. of the class went to either West Point or the U.

S. Naval Academy. Good number of people actually from the military. Maria, any other observations?

[00:14:34] Maria Wich-Vila: Yeah, I was also surprised at the fact that within those top employers And when we look at the tech companies, it was Google and Facebook and Meta with a pretty large showing. Google was actually the fourth largest employer after the MBBs and, but then, I was expecting there to be an equal distribution amongst those famous large cap technology companies.

So I, I would have expected even representation amongst Google, Meta, Microsoft, Apple, Nvidia, Amazon, et cetera. And yet. Apple and Amazon only had one or two people each versus Google at 25. So I thought that was really fascinating and it makes me wonder if perhaps it’s a function of maybe Google and Meta might give their younger talent more opportunities to lead impactful projects, perhaps.

I’m just guessing here, but maybe Apple and Amazon perhaps are more hierarchical. And maybe don’t give their younger talent so many opportunities, but I was really surprised by that. I would have expected a much more even distribution amongst the those famous those famous tech companies.

[00:15:40] John Byrne: Yeah. You’re right. And I crunched the numbers on the percentages and Google took three and a half percent of the two classes and that’s better than Goldman, Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan Chase. Facebook had 2. 7 percent and Microsoft at 1. 5, and I was shocked at Amazon because, Amazon is widely known as the largest single recruiter of MBAs in the past five years.

At one point, they were recruiting a thousand MBAs a year, but in, in one sense, maybe Amazon quite doesn’t really have the prestige. For Stanford MBAs who might rather work elsewhere, I think that might be is, you look at the employment reports at a lot of the other schools and Amazon is number one at a number of schools and very low percentage of people from Amazon going to Stanford.

We don’t know, of course, how many. Leaving Stanford and going back to Amazon, but it can’t be that many.

[00:16:41] Heidi Hillis: I wonder if there’s something about just a proximity effect here. You have the plate, like the meta and Google just being so close to Stanford, maybe it just, attracts more people applying because they.

They’re almost on campus and maybe, just being Amazon all over the world and different places could be not attracting as many. I don’t know.

[00:17:03] John Byrne: Yeah, true. The other thing, the analysis shows, and this is what you also gather from the more public class profile is really the remarkable diversity of talent that a school like Stanford can attract year after year.

It is, it blows you away, really. The quality and the diversity of people despite the concentration of undergraduate degree holders or company employers, it’s it’s really mind boggling, isn’t it?

[00:17:33] Heidi Hillis: Yeah, they come from everywhere and really interesting paths and even the people I think that, have those kind of typical paths, you see a lot of diversity within them as well.

So I think, even if you’re coming from a Goldman or a McKinsey having lived in another country or gone to done a fellowship abroad or running a non profit on the side. These things are actually what helped them to stand out. But you do see some really interesting, I think, profiles, too, of people who’ve just done, you get a sense of what it would be like to be in the Stanford classroom.

People from really unique and different backgrounds. People who come from all different countries and lawyers, doctors people who have run, nonprofits in developing countries people running large programs for places like Heineken or Amazon too. But, it’s a real diversity of backgrounds.

[00:18:27] John Byrne: Now, Heidi, I wonder if one is an applicant. Is this discouraging to read and here’s why if I’m not from Harvard, Stanford, Penn, Columbia, Brown, Cornell, Dartmouth, and if I didn’t work for McKinsey, Bain, BCG, Goldman, Google am I at a disadvantage and should I even try? Some people look at the data and come away with that conclusion.

[00:18:52] Heidi Hillis: I think it’s a reality check for a lot of people. I think it’s just, it’s really, it just helps people understand, what it, the difficulty of this, why it’s so competitive, but I think that there is, again, behind the kind of the percentages, you do look at these individual profiles and I would get, I would actually take a lot of hope from it if I were looking, as an applicant, because especially if you are.

Maybe a little bit more of a big fish or small fish in a bigger pond or big fish in a smaller pond you go to Rice or you go to Purdue or, and you do really well, those are the people who, they’re definitely looking for that diversity of background as well as the international.

I think that’s really neat. think that, instead of looking at the data and saying, why not, why I shouldn’t even apply, it’s why not me look at these other profiles of people who have taken really unique paths that that do get in. So I think it is actually a Kind of a mix of both, it is a reality check for a lot of people, but it’s actually, there is so much diversity in the data as well.

I think also one thing that we haven’t really covered is about is just the prevalence of social impact in, that’s really taken hold of the class. I don’t, again, going back to your 2013 analysis, I’m not sure how easy it was to tell that, but a lot of you can see reflected in the both the types of organizations people are working for, but also their titles and the kinds of work that they’re doing that that there’s a huge 40 percent of the class of the two classes had some kind of social impact in their background.

Whether that’s, running their own nonprofit on the side or volunteering or. Running trans transformational kind of programs within companies that are, either in finance or consulting or in industry. That’s a big trend. I think that people can take heart from as well.

So if you’re working if you feel like you’re in an organization where you’re not getting the leadership that you. can use to highlight your potential for Stanford, that’s definitely a place you can go is working for in volunteer capacity for a non profit or on the board of a of some kind of foundation.

Those are the kinds of places that you can highlight your potential

[00:21:00] John Byrne: true. And I know we have a overrepresented part of every applicant pool at an elite business school are software engineers from India. And I wonder in your analysis, how many of them did you find from like the IITs?

[00:21:18] Heidi Hillis: That’s a good question. The IITs, it was again, it was one of these you have about 50 percent of classes internet, so 25 percent of the class. was educated outside of the US. The IITs are going to be up there. Let’s see from India, 2. 1 percent of the class came from India. So probably, I don’t know offhand exactly how many of those were IITs, but

[00:21:43] John Byrne: I’ve had a lot of them.

[00:21:45] Heidi Hillis: Yeah, probably a lot of them. Although I think, that’s the other thing is that people who come, to work with me from India, they feel like if they haven’t gone to IIT, then that’s going to be a disadvantage. But I think, you’ll find that there are, there’s representation of other universities as well.

Definitely.

[00:22:00] Caroline Diarte Edwards: Yeah, I was just looking at the list of undergrad institutions. And for example, you’ve got Osmania University from Hyderabad. So it is not, it’s not all IIT. Okay.

[00:22:12] John Byrne: Yeah, exactly. And Caroline, 1 of the things about the institutions that are really represented here and that I don’t really see unless I missed it.

I didn’t see a Cambridge or an Oxford. Two of the best five universities in the world. And I wonder if that’s just a function of fewer people in the applicant pool or what? What do you think that could be about?

[00:22:36] Caroline Diarte Edwards: I had a look through the uk Institutions and you have got cambridge in there.

I think I also noticed. Bristol university there are a few different universities. So i’m aston university, which is not it’s not on a par with Oxford or Cambridge. So I think that speaks to the point that Heidi made that you don’t have to have been to an elite school to get into Stanford.

Aston is a good solid university, nothing wrong with Aston, but it’s not it’s not one of the top UK universities. So there’s definitely some interesting variety in the educational backgrounds of the students going to Stanford. And

[00:23:16] John Byrne: then, yeah, it is if you’re a big fish in a small pond, like Afton, you’ll you could still stand out in the pool.

[00:23:26] Heidi Hillis: Absolutely. There’s a lot of really interesting background, you have look hard on blue and you have Miami University and some really smaller universities abroad. I think. Again, it’s really, if you look at that, it does give you hope because it’s really what you do afterwards and if you, obviously, if you come from one of these schools, you probably want to be in the top, 5 percent of the graduating class, you want to show that you have the GPA that can support an academic background that they feel comfortable that you’ll be able to compete academically, but, and maybe that’s what you’re Offset by the, the GMA or the scores, you don’t know, we don’t have those on here.

But, um, the path post university really becomes much more important in those cases. What you’ve done since then where you’ve, how you’ve risen from starting at a entry level position to, running a division or heading a country group or something like that.

[00:24:21] John Byrne: And as far as Cordon Bleu goes, every good business program needs a Cordon Bleu, for God’s sake, right?

You want to eat well at those NBA parties, don’t you?

[00:24:32] Heidi Hillis: Absolutely.

[00:24:35] John Byrne: Maria, I’m sure that was true at Harvard.

[00:24:38] Maria Wich-Vila: I wasn’t the one doing the cooking but I certainly, I was certainly a member of the wine and cuisine society where I happily participated in the eating and consuming a part of that.

But to, to the point that we were just recently talking about. regarding being a big fish in a small pond. Not only have I seen it personally with applicants that I’ve worked with who did not attend these elite universities, but even many years ago, I attended a, an admissions conference where Kirsten Moss, who was the former head of admissions at Stanford, she actually told stories about how they’ve accepted people who even attended community college.

But within the context of that community college, they had really moved mountains. And she said that one of the things that they look for is, Within the context and the opportunities that you’ve been given, how much impact have you had? So maybe you don’t have an opportunity to go to Yale or MIT or IIT for your undergraduate, but whatever opportunity you have been given, have you grabbed that opportunity and really made the most of it and really driven change?

So she specifically called out, I believe, I believe there were two students that year at the GSB who had both started their educations, their higher educations at community college. Anything is possible. It really is about finding the people who, wherever they go, they jump in and make an impact.

[00:25:55] Heidi Hillis: Yeah, I think that to that point, I think it can almost be a more difficult if you’ve gone to Harvard and then worked at one of these, gone on one of these paths because we know that there’s, that’s an overrepresented pool in the applicant pool to stand out among those to have had that, that pedigree sometimes can be a disadvantage, right?

If you haven’t done as much as you should have with that, or if you started at that high level to show that level of progress over the course of your career is actually a little bit more difficult. Okay. And coming from a community college and rising to, a country level manager in some places is actually puts you at a significant advantage, I would say.

[00:26:31] Maria Wich-Vila: Because it’s hard for those people, it’s hard for those people to stand out, but also I think some of them go on autopilot, right? I think some people are on this kind of achievement, elite achievement treadmill, where they’re not even really thinking about what do I want to do with my life?

They’re always reaching for whatever that next, what’s the best college to go to? It’s Harvard Princeton. Yeah. Okay. Now that I’m here, what’s the best employer to work for? It’s McKinsey, Bain, BCG and without actually perhaps stopping to think about what is my passion? What impact do I want to make in the world?

And so I feel sometimes those autopilot candidates, I feel a little bit bad for them because they’re doing everything quote unquote and yet sometimes when you speak with them, that passion just isn’t there. And I do think that may ultimately harm them in the very, very elite business school.

Admissions because business schools want people who are passionate because at the end of the day, in order to do hard things, you’re going to need passion at some point to get you through those low periods. And so I think that’s something business schools look for. And I do think that sometimes these.

These kind of autopilot candidates might sometimes be at a disadvantage.

[00:27:29] Heidi Hillis: Yeah, I think that, to that point look in the data, when you look at it, you see so many people who’ve gone to McKinsey, Bain, Weasley, or Goldman, but then there’s a, you see a lot of success for people who’ve actually pivoted.

So those pivots that are post The second or third job really do show you that, if you’re if you get a candidate who’s coming from, still at McKinsey, okay, that’s fine. They have to be the top 5 percent of McKinsey, like they have to be going to get so many McKinsey applicants that the only the, you can look at the data in a couple ways.

One is, oh, my God, they took 12 people from McKinsey and the others. Oh, my God, they only took 12 people from McKinsey, right? That’s So if you want to be one of those 12, you have to be the top 12 in the world, right? Whereas if you’ve gone to McKinsey and then done an externship at a health care startup and then moved on to be a product manager at for health at Google, that kind of a path is definitely showing a little bit more, maybe risk taking, maybe ability to follow your passions.

So I think that. When I see candidates who come to me, for example, and they’re like, not thinking about applying now, but maybe in a year or two, I say, look for an externship, maybe think about pivoting out of one of these places and looking for some operational experience.

And because you see in the data that works.

[00:28:42] Maria Wich-Vila: And they’re doing themselves a service not only in terms of enhancing their admissions chances, but even just in terms of determining, what do I want to do with my career? If I do eventually want to go into industry, what functional role do I want to have?

What industry do I want to work in? So it’s, it actually benefits them in the long term to do that as well, even if they don’t go to business school. I think those secondments and externships and second job, post consulting jobs are extremely valuable. Totally agree with you.

[00:29:06] Caroline Diarte Edwards: And I’m sure they also bring more to the classroom as well.

I would think that’s also why Stanford is selecting some of those candidates, because not only have they worked at McKinsey, but they’ve also led a non profit in Africa or worked in private equity or whatever it is. So they have much more breadth that they can bring to the classroom. And I think that It’s seen as a very valuable contribution

[00:29:29] John Byrne: in Heidi.

Did you see that? The majority of the candidates to examined actually did work in more than one place, right?

[00:29:37] Heidi Hillis: Yes, most of them did. There were very few that, you see working at one place. And I would say that those are people that would have really risen through the ranks.

Someone who’s worked at Walmart and become, started in, I don’t know, in one state, but then to become a regional manager and things like that really are going to onto a global role. The people who have stayed at one place really have shown significant career progression within that.

And then the other people I think you do see a lot of movement. The big. The most typical would be from investment banking to private equity and then you do find in finance, there’s a little bit less kind of movement into other industries. You see a lot of people staying within finance, but within finance.

Yeah. Yeah. The other industries, especially consulting or other, tech, people are really moving into other places and it’s becoming, it is a little bit difficult. We have these categories that we’ve talked about, for example, healthcare, but it’s hard to categorize some of these companies.

Are they healthcare? Are they tech? There’s a lot of overlap. And so everything’s a little bit of tech in something nowadays. So whether it’s finance and fintech or education and ed tech or health care and health tech, these are all merging and combining. It’s hard to categorize them.

[00:30:53] John Byrne: So looking at the data here I wonder if you’ve seen your old classmates in the sense that these new people are very much like the people you went to school with at Stanford. I

[00:31:05] Heidi Hillis: put this out and it’s really interesting to a lot of my classmates downloaded the report and read it. And a lot of them came back and said, oh, boy, I would never get in now.

It’s these people are super impressive. I think that you see a lot of. It’s just become more and more competitive. And I think that with more information and more people every year applying, it is becoming really difficult. I think that you do see a lot of, I am encouraged by the diversity part of it that you see still Stanford.

I feel like they do take risks on some really interesting profiles and candidates that maybe some other schools are less likely to do. And so that’s what does give me. A lot of hope when I get some kind of really nontraditional candidate who wants to, their dream school is Stanford. I feel like, I say all the time, there’s a 6 percent chance.

You’re going to get in, but there’s 100 percent chance. You won’t get in if you don’t apply. So you’ve got to, you got to give it a go. And that’s, the attitude that we take to it.

[00:32:04] John Byrne: Indeed. So for all of you out there read Heidi’s article on our site, it’s called who gets in and why exclusive research.

Into Stanford GSB and I’ll tell you one conclusion I have about this is that, man, if you really want to get into Stanford, you need a Sherpa, and and Heidi would be a great Sherpa for you because the, just the profiles of these folks, where they’ve been, what they’ve done, what they’ve accomplished in their early lives is so remarkable that To compete against, in this pool for a spot in the class you need every possible advantage you can get.

And and having an expert guide you through this trip probably would be a really big advantage. So Heidi, thank you for sharing your insights with us and the research, the very cool research.

[00:33:01] Heidi Hillis: Thank you

[00:33:03] John Byrne: and for all of you out there. Good luck. And if you want to go to Stanford, you got to check out this report.

Okay. It will inspire you to up your game, even if you are from Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, or wherever McKinsey, Bain, BCG, Goldman, Google, you want to look at this report and you want to really think about. What it will really take to get in. I think it will inspire you, motivate you to really put your best foot forward.

Thanks for listening. This is John Byrne with Poets& Quants.

Maria

New around here? I’m an HBS graduate and a proud member (and former Board Member) of AIGAC. I considered opening a high-end boutique admissions consulting firm, but I wanted to make high-quality admissions advice accessible to all, so I “scaled myself” by creating ApplicantLab. ApplicantLab provides the SAME advice as high-end consultants at a much more affordable price. Read our rave reviews on GMATClub, and check out our free trial (no credit card required) today!