Why Domestic MBA Applicants Are In A Slump
Maria |
August 24, 2022

Our hosts John, Maria, and Caroline have some long-standing questions to address in this episode of Business Casual, including what might be the possible reason for the fluctuating number of domestic MBA applications. Is the MBA beginning to lose its prestige?

And one more subject that some applicants would likely find intriguing is what our hosts have to say about a question about white males in particular in the US feeling they don’t have a fighting chance, given all the talk and attention paid to diversity, and all the scholarship funds that are being funneled into making incoming cohorts far more diverse than they had been before.

Episode Transcript

[00:00:07.330] – John

Welcome to Business Casual, the weekly podcast of Poets and Quants. I’m John Byrne with Poets and Quants with my cohost Maria Wich Vila and Caroline Diarte Edwards. Caroline, of course, is the former head of Admissions at INSEAD and the co founder of Fortune Admissions, a leading admissions consulting firm for MBAs. And Maria is the founder of Applicant Lab. We’re going to talk today about the slump in domestic applications. This is something that has been going on for a while. I think this slump right now has become fairly significant. And if you look at some of the class profiles that have been released in the last week or two, here’s what you’re finding. Wharton overall apps down 14%. UCLA down 20%. Darden down 3.5%. Cornell won’t even say what its application numbers are. I assume that they’re down in fairly significant double digits as a result. And the other trend you see, besides the fact that they’re down, is that in general, international enrollments are not only up in these classes, but they’re often at record levels. The only exception here is Wharton, which is pretty much steady. The international cohort in this year’s incoming classes, 35% versus 36%.

 

[00:01:30.850] – John

But look at UCLA, 47% of the class incoming or international versus 36 the year before. At Darden, it’s a new record, 43% versus 40%. At Cornell, it’s 43% versus 35%. And what those numbers tell you is basically international applications continue to be strong even though there’s a lockdown in China and they’re basically drawing more from an international pool because there are fewer domestic applicants. Now, there are a lot of ideas around there about why this is happening. We’ve talked a little bit about one in the past, which is that the economy in the US. Has been very hot and employers are trying to hold on to their young professionals and doing everything from offering them increases in pay to increase in responsibilities to keep them out of graduate school. But there’s also this whole notion that more and more people are questioning the value of the degree. The degree looks awfully expensive, particularly because you’re only going to see the price tag on them and not the discounts afforded on the price by scholarships and fellowships. There’s a sense that the degree is just not as exclusive as it once was. There are, after all, 1100 accredited MBA programs by the ASCAP.

 

[00:02:58.070] – John

There are some companies that have relied on MBA hires for a long time, and they basically have opened up new pathways. Even the MBB firms are hiring laterally from the big Ford to some extent. So you don’t have in many cases, an MBA is a requirement for your way on the top. I’m with Carolina. Have you seen this trend in your clients and what do you think is the main reason behind it?

 

[00:03:27.340] – Caroline

Yeah, I agree. I think it’s a combination of all the things that you’ve mentioned and some of those are long term trends, right? So things like you mentioned about how an MBA is not required to progress in some careers to the same extent that it was in the past. That trend has been going on for 1520 years, I would say. I think that’s a good thing. I don’t think that people should do an MBA because it’s required by their employer. And frankly, I’ve seen some people in the past do that, and they weren’t as committed to the whole experience as other people who are super motivated to do the MBA. And they probably took the place away from someone who might have got more out of it. I think it’s good that people are doing it for the right reasons and not because their employees said, if you want to get a promotion, you have to head off to business school first. So I think it’s good that there are multiple ways to progress in companies and not just head off to business school. And there was a dip in volume of international applicants and international students at the top US schools during the Trump years.

 

[00:04:45.450] – Caroline

So it’s good to see that those applicants coming back. And I’m a huge fan, as you know, of the benefits of having a strong international community on MBA programs for everybody. And I think everyone benefits from that. So I think that’s a very positive trend, that there will be an increased representation of international students with all the wonderful diversity and variety of perspectives that that brings to the business school classrooms. I think that’s a very positive evolution at the US business schools. So I would agree that there is a downward trend, but I also think that it may well be short-lived, right. Because we are anticipating the strong possibility of a recession in the coming months. And if that does happen, then there’s likely to be a big increase in application volume domestically. So it’s probably a short term trend right now, and it will be interesting to see. I think things could change quite quickly.

 

[00:05:47.190] – John

Yeah. Maria?

 

[00:05:49.710] – Maria

Yeah, I think, first of all, I want to say, like, let’s put these plummeting numbers into perspective. I think that we are coming off of record high applications during the peak COVID years. For example. Yes, if I’m doing the numbers right, I think Wharton might be down, say, 13% versus last year, but then it was 11% versus the year before, and it’s actually 7% higher than where it was three years ago. So, you know what? These fluctuations sort of come and go, and I don’t think I want the story to necessarily be like, oh, domestic applications are down so much. It’s a big tragedy because I think that’s a fair thing to do would be to compare them more against sort of remove the past two years from the data set as an anomaly. Although, admittedly, like, in this day and age, the unexpected is now expected. And so I almost wonder if that could also be an explanation as to why things are decreasing. Maybe it is that at first when the pandemic first hit, everyone thought, well, the economy is definitely going to take a hit and so now I should try to find refuge in business school.

 

[00:07:00.860] – Maria

But now there is so much, maybe there is going to be a recession in three months. Maybe there isn’t going to be a recession in three months. Maybe there’s going to be another strain of COVID in three months, or maybe three months are going to find a vaccine that solves it forever. And so I feel like maybe for some people, because two years ago, at the beginning of the pandemic, it was clear that things were definitely going in a downward negative direction, now we’re in choppier waters. I feel like where things go, they go up and then they go down and they go up and they go down. So I almost wonder if part of it might be some people saying, you know what, maybe there’s going to be a recession, maybe there’s going to be another strain of covet that’s going to ruin everything. Or maybe we don’t know if things are going to go up or down or up or down because there have been such mixed news and mixed messages and all kinds. I almost wonder sometimes people might be clinging to their jobs just out of a sense of at least I know that this is steady and hopefully this is like a little life raft that I can bob.

 

[00:07:55.570] – Maria

I can sort of bob up and down on the waves as they crest and fall, or at least I can sort of hang on to that. And I wonder if that’s a part of the mentality as well.

 

[00:08:05.190] – John

What about this notion that the degree itself, it’s been the most popular graduate degree in America for quite some time now, overtaking the Master’s in education. I wonder if there is something to the fact that it doesn’t feel as exclusive a degree it once was. Maria, what do you think of that?

 

[00:08:25.230] – Maria

I think that there’s always, for any luxury good, the more there is of it, the less luxury as it is. I mean, that’s the definition. That’s the very definition of it, right? Like if Harvard College or Yale College or MIT were to accept every single person who could go, who was smart enough to go, and all of a sudden we have 200,000 people a year graduating with a degree from MIT. Guess what? That is going to make it seem less exclusive. It doesn’t matter what the good or service is. So I think that there is something to that. However, I don’t know that the numbers really back that up, because if that were the case, then what we would see, at least at the top schools, is we would see salaries staying steady or going downwards. We would see lower employment rates we would see people having a harder time getting a job upon graduation. So if the market really were overly saturated, I think that the numbers would bear that out.

 

[00:09:18.490] – John

Yeah, that’s a really good point. And what we’re seeing are record compensation levels and record placement levels.

 

[00:09:24.960] – Maria

Right. Perhaps overall, in the overall market, when we talk about, yes, there are over 1000 MBA programs out there. Sure. An MBA from mom and Pop Cornerstore University probably not really going to make that much of a difference in someone’s life, but in terms of the top sort of 2050, maybe even top 100 schools, there may be that perception out there that, yeah, well, now everyone’s got an MBA, so I’m not going to do it. But at the same time, like, the numbers don’t lie and employers are definitely putting their money behind these graduates and they are doing so consistently, so they have to like what they see when they get this new talent in their doors, hence why they keep coming back year after year. That may be the market perception, but I think a quick glance at the career reports would hopefully squash that pretty quickly.

 

[00:10:14.900] – John

Yeah, that’s a super good point. Caroline, in Europe, where the MBA degree is not even the most popular graduate management degree, it happens to be the Masters in Management. I’m thinking there should be no issue that the MBA is not as exclusive as it once was. Right. In fact, if anything, there should be greater acceptance of the degree that initially didn’t have as much acceptance in Europe as it had in the US.

 

[00:10:42.230] – Caroline

Yes, it’s true. It’s not as well known a qualification still as the MBA is in the US. Right. It’s not as ubiquitous. And so I think that employers you say that the MBA may have lost some prestige in some people’s eyes. I think that just having it, having an MBA is not enough. Right. Whereas in the past, perhaps if you said you had an MBA, that carries more ways. What matters today is where you got your MBA from. Right. I think that carries much more weight than it may have done in the past because there are so many other schools, and that’s true in Europe as it is elsewhere. It’s what you do with a degree that matters. And so it may still make a lot of sense for someone to go to business school and get an MBA, even if it’s not the most prestigious school. Right. If it’s not one of the top ten top 20 international schools, if they’ve got a good reason to do it and they know how they’re going to leverage that experience and how they’re going to put that knowledge to work, they will still learn a great deal from the program.

 

[00:11:56.610] – Caroline

There are a lot of great schools out there, so I think it’s important for candidates to understand why they’re going to business school and what they’re going to get out of it. And there are many different reasons and there are many different paths into business school and out of school to make it a successful proposition.

 

[00:12:15.070] – John

The other thing is, there are some other trends, I think, that have occurred that have taken a bite out of the applicant pool. One is the proliferation of online MBAs. They’re not for everyone, but when you’re looking at the entire market, and there are now more than 350 online MBA programs in the US alone, each of them with a good number of students in them, you can say, well, had to have some siphoning effect on the full time market. And the same is true for all the specialty masters programs in business that have become quite popular. Also, the undergraduate business degree, an undergraduate business education is so much better today than it had been a quarter of a century ago. And because business majors are the most popular majors in America, it may be that a lot of people just don’t think they need a graduate degree when they’ve already had a very good undergraduate business experience. And then I had an admissions consultant. I had a conversation with someone last week who raised another issue, and I wondered how the two of you react to this. She thinks that white males, in particular in the US.

 

[00:13:29.230] – John

Feel they don’t have a fighting chance, given all the talk about diversity and all the attention paid to diversity and all the scholarship money that’s being funneled into making incoming cohorts far more diverse than they had been before. Maria, do you buy that?

 

[00:13:47.900] – Maria

I mean, any white male candidate who says, wow, I would have loved to apply to business school, but I’m not going to because more women are going or more people who aren’t white are going, if you’re that weak of spirit, then I don’t think it’s a huge loss for the overall applicant pool. Like, if you’re such a big whiner. I think that a lot of very mediocre white men use the influx of women and minorities as an excuse for their own mediocrity. And now that they have to compete against more people, maybe before they didn’t have to compete as much against people who were motivated and intelligent, but now there’s more competition and it’s easy to point the finger towards things that are visible. So gender is something that is visible. Race and ethnicity are often very visible. Someone who practices a certain religion that might be visible. So when you find things that are easy to look at or to see, then you can say, well, I’m the victim here. It’s funny that some white males who today might be complaining, they might not realize that 30, 50 years ago, if they would have not even gone to an Ivy League college for undergrad, they wouldn’t have been even in the running for a top MBA.

 

[00:15:03.110] – Maria

And so the same diversity that is now giving what some of these men may consider to be a quote unquote unfair advantage to say, women and minorities. They are also beneficiaries of that because of the school’s attempts over the past several decades to not only recruit people from Harvard, Yale, Princeton, brown right. So I think sometimes it’s easy to look at the other and to say, wow, that increased competition. It’s not fair. But you know what? I think the thing that I always love numbers. And you point to those similar GMAT scores. The fact that the schools have been able to maintain. If not raise their average GMAT scores over the past several years. If it really were.

 

[00:15:49.840] – John

Quote.

 

[00:15:50.090] – Maria

Unquote. Less qualified applicants getting in and taking the place that a white male. Quote unquote. Deserves. Then the numbers would bear that out. And they don’t. So that is a far more diplomatic version that just came out of my mouth than the version that is in my head. But hopefully I was able to walk a fine lady.

 

[00:16:12.900] – John

I’m very impressed with that. Very good explanation.

 

[00:16:16.790] – Caroline

Thank you.

 

[00:16:17.520] – Maria

I’m going to put myself on mute, though, now and scream it along.

 

[00:16:22.370] – Caroline

We will read between the lines.

 

[00:16:26.330] – John

That’s why I asked you, maria, first. Caroline, your take on it.

 

[00:16:33.620] – Caroline

Yeah, I think that it’s a bit rich, right, coming from the group that has reigned supreme for decades, to sit now say, oh, well, it’s not fair, they are getting in, and it’s making a bit harder for me. It’s really pathetic, and I totally agree with Maria, and I’ve heard some people use this and as she says, it’s an excuse for maybe not trying and for perhaps not having the same success that they might have had 2030 years ago when other groups were not getting a fair shot at things. Right. So it is rather pathetic, and I don’t agree that it’s true. I think if you have a strong case, if you’re a strong candidate, regardless of your ethnicity and so on, then you have a fair shot at getting into business school. Perhaps you don’t have a much better chance than everyone else, as you did in days past, but that’s something that we should be all be glad about rather than complaining about. It may be that there are white males who in the past might have thought, I really have to go to business school for the reasons that you were mentioning earlier, that it’s sort of expected as part of my career path at my investment bank or at my management consulting firm.

 

[00:18:05.890] – Caroline

That may have been the case in the past where they felt that they really needed to do that to progress, and that’s not the case anymore. So maybe some of those white males aren’t applying because they don’t absolutely have to and they’re not terribly motivated to do so. Again, maybe there is a drop in that group applying to business school. But as I said, I think people should apply for the right reasons and not because they feel that it’s a hoop that they have to jump through. They should apply because they’re truly motivated and they’re really passionate about pursuing that as part of their personal development.

 

[00:18:46.750] – John

And all this brings me back to something we’ve said here before and said it more than once. If you want to go and you are a domestic applicant, my goodness, make sure you apply in the Round One for the Round One deadlines, because we expect this decline to continue. But if the recession occurs, as Caroline has mentioned earlier, and the trend that has been historical is withheld is held up, we would expect to see a significant increase in applications, possibly even as early as Round Two. And so we think we’ve said this before, round One is a fantastic time to apply to a highly selective MBA program. If you are a domestic applicant, for sure, that’s always true to try to get in there early as long as you think you can make your best case. But for domestic applicants, I think that’s especially true given the continual decline in the applicant pool of domestic candidates. Any last words, Maria?

 

[00:19:59.450] – Maria

I think that there are just always going to be these fluctuations up and down. And I just think that what folks should do is look at the degree, decide if the pros and cons and expenses and pay offs make sense for them, and then go for it. And also keep in mind that one thing that’s very nice about the MBA process as compared to other forms of higher education is that if you don’t get in one year, you can always try again. You don’t just get one shot at it. So just keep trying and or also be flexible. Right. Some of those alternative degrees that you mentioned, John, is a reason why perhaps the MBA itself may be losing some of its sheen. Those alternative degrees also, however, give you as an applicant alternatives to strengthen your education and to advance your career that don’t necessarily require the MBA. So just sort of be flexible with how you go through your life and your career and I think you’ll be fine.

 

[00:20:54.110] – John

And I’m going to remind people that when they look at the price tags of MBA programs and they’re shocked by them to remember that the price seems to be transparent, but the actual cost is not. And that’s because there is a lot of scholarship money sloshing around. And all of these schools in the last 10, 15, 20 years, dean’s have made it a priority to go out and fundraise for scholarship money. So these price tags are heavily discounted. And there are many MBA programs that in fact operate at a loss because they’re so heavily subsidized by the schools. And part of that is the whole rankings game and gaining a high ranking that casts more favorable shadow and everything else the school does. But it’s a shame that those discounts are not more transparent for candidates because you basically have to go through the marathon journey of taking the test. Scoring well. Doing the apps. Executing a really good app. Getting your recommendations. Going through the interview. All these hurdles before you find out if you’re going to get any money from a school and if there was a way to make more transparent those scholarship awards and to put into perspective those high price tags.

 

[00:22:16.640] – John

I think that actually would help the industry a lot. Caroline, don’t you think that’s true?

 

[00:22:23.030] – Caroline

It’s very true, John, that it’s impossible for candidates to know at the outset what the true cost for them will be, and that makes planning very difficult and does put some candidates off. The issue is that schools are using scholarships to manage their yield, to make sure that they are able to attract the very best candidates and retain the very best admits. And so if they were more transparent upfront about who gets what money, might make it more difficult for them to use their scholarship funds in that way. So there’s certainly benefits to the schools of having some flexibility behind the scenes of how to allocate those funds. But it’s definitely an interesting debate because, as you say, the price tag can be very off putting for some candidates. And I’m sure there are people who don’t apply because of that, not realizing that if they actually went through the process and got admitted, at the end of the day, they may end up getting some really good financial support from the school and it would actually be more feasible than they imagined.

 

[00:23:33.530] – John

Right? And only recently Harvard announced. For example. That they’re going to give out far more full rides for their MBA program than they ever had before. Which is also ups the ante for all the schools that are in the fear group that Harvard competes in. Because even if they don’t match it. They’re going to feel pressure to throw more money in the kitty to hand out to really qualified applicants if they want to land. And that’s part of the game. So, big takeaway. Hey, if you’re a domestic applicant, get your application in round one. We think this is an ideal shot for you, and I think admission offices are going to we often say they’ll wink at one bad aspect of your application and tend not to wink at two, whether it’s a low GPA or a below average GMAT or GRE score, or maybe your work experience isn’t as exclusive or redeeming as they would like. Well, I actually think they’re going to wink at two things if you’re a domestic applicant, maybe only one if you’re an international applicant. So get your append before the recession makes a big difference and pushes volume back up.

 

[00:24:50.090] – John

This is John Byrne with Poets and Quants. Thank you for listening. Thank you, Maria, and thank you, Caroline, for your insights.

 

The Economist Dis on MBAs: Is the Degree Still Worth It?
Why Domestic MBA Applicants Are In A Slump
Maria |
August 24, 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!