The M7 Business Schools: An Artificial Construct Or Something Meaningful?
Maria |
September 6, 2022

In this episode of Business Casual, our hosts are going to discuss one of the biggest questions that most aspirants are probably wondering but are not openly discussed: Do M7 Business Schools offer the best MBA programs, or are they a product of an artificial construct orchestrated by elite private schools?

For decades, M7 has been a deciding factor for most students when deciding which business school to attend. Now the big question is, which one should you look at first in choosing a school: your focused subset or the brand reputation that comes with it?

Episode Transcript

[00:00:07.330] – John

Hi, I’m John Byrne with Poets and Quants. Welcome to our podcast Business Casual, with my co host Maria Wich Vila and Caroline Diarte Edwards. This podcast is sponsored by the Gies College of Business. Are you thinking about earning your MBA with the fully online IMBA from the University of Illinois Gies College of Business? You can earn your degree on your schedule without ever leaving your home. You’ll learn from Gies College of Business top faculty and build a global network of experienced peers. At a cost of just $23,000, it’s no wonder the IMBA comes with a 96% student satisfaction rate. Apply by October 6 to start classes in January. Learn more at onlinembaillinois.edu. Well, today we want to talk about the M 7. Now, you might ask, what is the M7? If you are a regular listener to this podcast, you probably know only because you would be in the know. But if you’re not, the M7 refers to the Magnificent Seven. It’s a group of super elite private business schools in the United States. Each of them recognizes each other as peers, and they’re generally considered to have the world’s best MBA programs.

[00:01:31.620] – John

Now, this is something that’s existed for decades. It was originally formed as an informal gathering of the deans. But even to this day, the deans of these M7 schools still meet on a regular basis, as do the admission directors, the career management directors, and even the PR people of the M7 schools must have the chagrin of other schools that are not included in this M7 construct. So to me, the question is, is this an artificial construct that has no meaning for the applicant and in fact, does disservice to the broader array of excellent business schools that have stellar MBA programs? The M7 are obviously Harvard, Stanford and Wharton. MIT, Columbia, Chicago, Booth and Kellogg’s School of Management. Every year we do a look at the M7. We basically examine them on every possible level, from the cost of the degree of these programs to their admit rates to their latest rankings. It’s a dissection of not only which schools they are, but how they’re performing against each other. Now, Caroline, I’m sure, will have a very strong reaction to the M7 because, after all, it’s completely US  centric and fails to recognize the global nature of graduate management education.

[00:03:01.610] – John

Caroline. Am I right?

[00:03:04.190] – Caroline

Well, it’s fine as a reference point, I guess, for the US. Market, but as you say, it’s a rather myopic perspective of the business school market and the best business schools out there. This is a group of wonderful institutions and things don’t change terribly rapid in the business school world. So, as you said, top institutions decades ago, and they are still outstanding institutions, and I can understand the benefits for them of networking together and sharing information and collaborating and so on. But from a candidate’s perspective, I’m not sure it’s terribly useful. But there are a lot of other great programs out there that are, in my opinion, some of them as good as these schools in the US. As well as internationally. So internationally, in Sierra and on the business school are our peers with this group. And even in the US. Schools like Berkeley, Haas are just as good as these schools. So it’s a bit of an old fashioned perspective of the market, I think, and I’m not sure it’s terribly useful for an applicant.

[00:04:23.070] – John

Yes, I would agree with you. And I think it’s misleading because there is an obsession with the M7 when you could very much argue that schools like London Business School. INSEAD Yale School of Management. Dartmouth Tuck School of Business. UC Berkeley Haas School. Every British is good. If even not better. Than some of the M7. Certainly. And in many cases would be better suited for a given applicant. Given their own interests and passions. Maria, your thoughts?

[00:04:54.290] – Maria

Yeah, absolutely. I think whenever I’m in doubt for anything, I always go to the numbers. Not that numbers are the whole story, but numbers can tell a lot of the story. And so if you go to look at, for example, the starting salaries for graduates of not just the M7, but the top ten, top 15 programs, there is very little variability. And so what that says to me is that the market, even though applicants themselves may say, oh, it has to be M7, or bust the market, aka. The free market recruiters and employers are valuing people from other programs that are very good programs, but not technically in the M7, employers are valuing those graduates just as much. So when applicants get really all bent out of shape about it, it is an artificial construct. If there were like a 20% difference in that post graduation compensation, I would say, well, maybe you should really think about it. But it’s very little variability. And so, I don’t know, I feel so bad when I meet someone. Just yesterday I was talking to someone who is an aspiring web designer, web entrepreneur who got into the MMM program at Kellogg.

[00:06:15.240] – Maria

And I know that Kellogg is in the M7, but there are people out there who are like, well, Harvard, Stanford, Wharton and it has to be that. And if it’s not that, then I’ll be disappointed. But I’m like the MMM program, which those of you who don’t know, it’s like a design master, masters in Design. That’s one of the most amazing programs out there for what this person wants to do. And I was like, even if you were to go to Harvard, you would not get those design classes that you’re going to be getting at the Kellogg MMM program. So, I mean, we could talk all day long about all various examples about depending on what your goals are. I see. Use this example a lot. If you want to go into the entertainment industry, yeah, you can target the M7, but UCLA or even USC is going to get you in front of those decision makers doing projects, doing internships, and getting yourself set up on that career path. For example.

[00:07:06.650] – John

If you want a global education and you want to rub shoulders with people from all over the world and not token representatives in a US class, you would go to INSEAD and London Business School or at the same Paris or IESE in Barcelona rather than a US school. Caroline that’s what drew you to INSEAD originally?

[00:07:30.710] – Caroline

Yeah, absolutely. I was already working outside of my home country when I was thinking about applying to business school, and I was interested in having an internationally mobile career. And so in Sierra was extremely attractive, and it adds a huge amount to the learning experience to be in a classroom with people from literally all over the world who’ve worked in so many different industries and careers from different backgrounds. It adds a lot of richness to the conversation and to the learning experience. So it’s a tremendous community. And of course, that then gives you access to an incredible global alumni network. So wherever I go in the world now, I have friends, I have classmates, I have a database of alumni that I can reach out to. So it’s a wonderful asset to have.

[00:08:28.670] – John

And going back to what Maria said about compensation levels, not only are the compensation levels not all that different across, let’s say, the top 15 schools in the US. And some of the European schools. But more importantly, even the acceptance rates in some cases are lower at non M7 schools than they are at M7 schools. Berkeley’s acceptance rate is extremely low, lower than Columbia, lower than not MIT, lower than Kellogg or Chicago Booth, for example. And that acceptance rate, while it’s not everything, it does suggest how highly selective the school is. And some of these schools have. When you look at the stats on incoming classes in regards to standardized test and GPAs, some of these other schools have actually Gmail scores that are in the same ballpark with the M7. It also strikes me that in this day and age, the M7 strikes me as an elitist construct that’s more or less out of tune with today’s times. And I know there are schools just below the M7 that are frustrated, unhappy, and I’ll use the word pissed off that they are excluded from these meetings of admission directors, deans, and other officials of these schools.

[00:10:06.490] – John

Just because of some old fashioned notion of what the best MBA programs are isn’t any latest in a way for seven schools to continue to meet together. And I don’t even know they’re supposed to talk about best practices, but that even to me, suggests that there can be competitive interests or issues that evolve in these conversations, like we’re going to charge X amount for our tuition this year. We’re going up by 8%. What are you doing? Now, I know you guys might be squirrely about that, but I’m being realistic. Maria, can’t you imagine that happening?

[00:10:53.510] – Maria

I mean, they’d go to jail, I think, if they did that, so I can imagine it if they were caught in a fictitious Hollywood version of that meeting. I mean, yeah, only if they were caught, I guess. But why would you want to risk going to jail? Like, the tuition numbers are pretty public information, and the historic increases in tuition is also public information. So I don’t really know that there would be like, a huge benefit to being like, ha ha, you’re going to increase your prices by two 4%. We were only going to increase ours by two 2%. I don’t think that the benefit is worth the risk. Out to your question about whether or not it’s elitist, I just think it’s an interesting sort of artificial construct. Like, it just so happens that these seven schools were at the top of their game at a certain point and they decided to get together. It’s kind of like when people look at the Ivy League and they think that, yeah, it just so happens that the Ivy League schools often do have a good education. But the Ivy League was never founded as an educational it was founded as an athletic conference, like the Big Ten.

[00:11:57.530] – Maria

So when people say, like, oh, it has to be, I have to go to an Ivy League school, it’s like, well, yeah, but wow, you could probably get a better education at the University of Michigan or depending on what you want to do. And so I just feel that these labels it’s just an interesting human trait. Like this need to even within it’s not good enough to say, I’m going to a top 50 business school or a top 25 business school. Like, I’m not even going to a top ten business school. No, I’m in M7. And then within the M7, it’s like, well, there’s Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, and within Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, there’s Harvard, Stanford, and within Harvard, Stanford, there’s Stanford. And so it’s just like there’s this weird psychological need to always be kind of one upping the eliteness of something, and I don’t know what that says. There’s some sort of evolutionary psychology reason for that.

[00:12:48.210] – John

It’s true. We’re so rank conscious, aren’t we?

[00:12:50.310] – Maria

Yeah. But at the end of the day. It doesn’t matter. Especially because not to keep going back to career outcomes. But as soon as you get on that job. If you do go to one of those big employers. If you set foot on Amazon or Microsoft or McKinsey or whatever. Like the day you start working. It’s all about how well you work and what your output is. And no one’s going to be like.

[00:13:10.300] – John

Well.

[00:13:10.480] – Maria

Wait a minute. You went to Harvard. But you did a lousy job. But you went to a school that’s ranked higher than this other person. You went to Haas. Like, no one’s going to give you a free pass. You still have to do the work. So, I don’t know, I understand why from, again, evolutionary psychology and when we were hunters, gatherers, whatever, but boy, oh, boy, there are certain vestiges of our brains that do not serve us well in the modern world, and I think this is one of them.

[00:13:36.670] – John

So, bottom line, Caroline, what do you tell your applicants when they tell you, I want to go to an M7 school?

[00:13:44.090] – Maria

Yeah.

[00:13:44.780] – Caroline

I think it doesn’t serve candidates very well because they’re short changing themselves. If what they’re focused on is a specific subset of schools or a brand reputation, what they need to do is get to know the school as well and understand, given their background and given what they need to learn and given what they want to do post MBA, which school is going to be the best fit for them and which is the right community. And you need to do a lot more research to understand that than just to focus on shortlist of schools. As you say, that was formulated years and years ago. So it’s a starting point.

[00:14:29.880] – Maria

Right.

[00:14:30.430] – Caroline

And it’s a brand, I guess.

[00:14:32.630] – Maria

Right.

[00:14:32.840] – Caroline

It’s brand positioning. But it’s important as a candidate, given the amount of time and money that you can invest in your MBA, to really get under the hood of the program and understand how you’re going to fit in and what you’re going to get out of it. And that may well not be an M7 school.

[00:14:51.960] – John

Really true. The other thing I wanted to talk about is, what about going to an M7 school? So obviously we have Caroline, who went to INSEAD, which is often at the top of all the rankings of non US schools and has also been at the top of all the global schools in a ranking at the Ft in the past. And we have Maria from Harvard. I wonder if there’s a disadvantage in actually going to a school like INSEAD or Harvard because it sets expectations. Now, I’m not suggesting that a graduate from one of these schools cannot meet or exceed those expectations. What I’m suggesting is that sometimes people can have misinformed or misleading expectations of what to anticipate from a Harvard MBA, an INSEAD MBA, and could transpose certain attributes. Like everyone might think, not knowing Maria, that because she has a Harvard MBA, in her resume, she must be a sharp elbow master of the universe who only went to Harvard because she’s interested in making money. Maria, is that you?

[00:16:12.240] – Maria

No.

[00:16:14.970] – John

We know you, and we know it’s not true.

[00:16:17.320] – Maria

I mean, if it is me, I’ve certainly made very odd choices in my life. Very good. I am not very good at executing on goals. Yeah, I think there’s obviously the stereotype around all elite MBAs. I think Wharton also suffers quite a bit from that sort of negative brand recognition. And yeah, I also think that there is an element of if an employer hires an MBA from a certain school, again, it’s so interesting to me how people tend to obsess with just getting into school. As if getting into school is the end of your life. You still have a whole life afterwards and you still have to work for 30 more years afterwards and you still have to you know, it’s so funny to me because if you get into the school and then they hire you and you’re not all that good at what you do, you don’t really have a lot of insight. People don’t like to work with you, it’s not going to matter. And in fact, if especially, like a smaller company hires you, they are going to expect you to do a whole lot of really impressive stuff all the time.

[00:17:25.010] – Maria

And so if you’re like, well, that’s not me, but if I can fool the admissions committee into letting me in, that’s all I need to do. It’s like, well, okay, even if you manage to do that, at the end of the day, you’re going to go work for someone and you’re going to have to have a lot of positive attributes. So it’s not just about getting in. It’s a marathon, not a sprint. It’s such an overused term. I hate it. But it’s overused for a reason, because it’s true.

[00:17:50.790] – John

Now, Caroline, your husband assures me that your elbows are as sharp as razors. Is that right?

[00:17:57.870] – Caroline

Well, I only sharpen them on him. I think there are misconceptions about people who go to business school and my experience has been very positive of my classmates, of the alumni. It’s an incredibly supportive community. So I think it’s a shame if there are misconceptions about who those people are. But I think employers and those are the people that count at the end of the day.

[00:18:31.760] – Maria

Right.

[00:18:32.030] – Caroline

The recruiters, they understand the value that MBA graduates bring and I’m sure that sometimes there are situations when those graduates are a bit too big for their boots right. And come in thinking that because of what they have achieved and the fact that they have graduated from a certain school, that their success is assured. I’m sure that does happen. Right. And I’m sure they get brought down to earth fairly rapidly in the real world. But generally, I think the schools do a good job of picking students who have the qualities that they will need to succeed. As Maria says, there is no point in getting into the school and the schools want to bring people in who are going to make the most of the program and be able to succeed where they graduate and make the most of that educational experience. So they are doing their best to pick people who have the qualities that will enable them to succeed. And hopefully that’s not all about sharp elbows.

[00:19:42.630] – John

Agreed. So there you have it. Yes, the M7 is an elitist, artificial construct. People are still obsessed with it. They shouldn’t be. There are many of the schools that are good or better for you than an M7 school. So I think the advice that Caroline mentioned earlier is the appropriate advice. And Maria, too. You find the school that’s right for you, and it may be at UCLA or USC, because you’re focused on the entertainment industry. Or it could even be a school that you wouldn’t think of that’s not even the top 20 or whatever. Or if you want a global lifestyle and global professional career, you might be far better off in an INSEAD London business school at Paris and Issa and Barcelona, or another European school. It’s all about you and what you need to succeed in life and to make it a meaningful experience, which is something we always say. But I think it’s important to remind people who are fixated on the so called M7. And I’ll admit, we feed this obsession with our annual looks at the M7 because we know, yes, people do search on Google for the M7, wondering what it is or how they compare with each other.

[00:21:10.840] – John

So we’re as guilty as anyone else out there for propagating this notion that there is an M7 that exists and is alive and well. And in true truth, it does exist. These deans are still meeting on a regular basis, but it shouldn’t mean a whole lot to you. This is John Byrne with Poets and Quants. I want to thank Caroline and Maria for their loss today. And I want to thank our sponsor, Gies College of Business. Are you thinking about earning your MBA with the fully online IMBA from the University of Illinois Gies College of Business? You can earn your degree on your schedule without ever leaving your home. You’ll learn from Gies College of Business top faculty and build the global network of experienced peers at a cost of just $23,000. It’s no wonder the IMBA comes with a 96% student satisfaction rate. Apply by October 6 to start classes in January. Learn more at onlinembaillinois.edu.

The Economist Dis on MBAs: Is the Degree Still Worth It?
The M7 Business Schools: An Artificial Construct Or Something Meaningful?
Maria |
September 6, 2022

[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!