Why MBA Pay & Placement Are Down This Year
Maria |
December 16, 2024

In this episode of Business Casual, the hosts discuss the current state of MBA job market trends and employment reports. They delve into the implications of the delayed and unflattering employment data from notable business schools like NYU Stern, UVA Darden, Georgia Tech, and Vanderbilt. The conversation highlights a shift in the kinds of jobs MBA graduates are taking, with many moving into sectors like healthcare and retail, which typically offer lower salaries but may align more closely with their career aspirations. The hosts also explore the potential impacts of artificial intelligence (AI) on future employment trends, suggesting a rebound in consulting roles as firms seek to navigate AI integration.

The episode reflects on the cyclical nature of MBA recruitment and emphasizes the importance of viewing career paths as long-term journeys.

Episode Transcript

[00:00:04.390] – John

Hello, everyone. Welcome back to Business Casual, the weekly podcast of Poets and Quants. I’m John Byrne, and my co-hosts here are Caroline Diarte Edwards and Maria Wich-Vila. They are in the house. There’s plenty of news to report. This is the time of the year when business schools release their telltale employment reports. I got to tell you, there’s a real lag this year in schools that would routinely report in early and late November who have yet to disclose how their Class of 2023 graduates have done. I’m thinking it’s because the numbers aren’t all that flattering. The numbers that we already have from NYU Stern, UVA Darden, Georgia Tech, and Vanderbilt, which are the only four notable schools that have put out numbers, all show a decline in average or median starting salaries for MBAs, as well as a decline in placement. I think it’s worth talking a little bit about this and what it really means. At NYU Stern, for example, offers at graduation were down nearly 5 percentage points to about 80.6%, while offers by three months after graduation were down by more than 8 points to 86.1%. In many cases, these kinds of numbers and the slight declines in base salaries, and we’re talking single digits, are coming off record highs.

[00:01:48.810] – John

We’ve seen in the past 5, 10 years, unprecedented increases in MBA pay, which for a little while was static. So the numbers do reflect select a slight fall from record numbers. The other thing that’s happened, of course, is the uncertain economy led many consulting firms to hire fewer MBAs last year. And of course, tech Companies were trying to rightsize after a hiring binge over a number of years, so employment there was down. What that meant, too, is that a lot of MBAs, for example, had to go and take jobs in healthcare, in consumer products, goods, in manufacturing companies, and the like, retail, that typically pay less, but in fact, may be the kinds of careers that young MBAs would like to join. That’s part of the context. The other thing that’s going on, I think that makes these numbers less worrisome is AI. Companies are very anxious about AI. They’re eager to employ young people to figure it out, and oftentimes, they will employ consultants. We would expect that the consulting industry is going to bounce back very strongly in terms of MBA recruitment in 2024 because more companies will be turning to the consulting firms to figure out how to use AI in a proprietary way for smarter and quicker decision making and for analysis.

[00:03:24.270] – John

So we think this is a temporary thing. Caroline, you’ve been through these ups and downs in the economy, and so have you, Maria. What do you think?

[00:03:32.600] – Caroline

Well, as you say, it is a cyclical pattern that we see in MBA recruitment, and that has always been the case, and it’s correlated with the economic climate. And there was a downturn in recruitment last year, but it was not a major downturn. It was not a big recession. And as you said, historically, the long-term trend has been very positive. And I think that in the long term, that trend will continue. So yes, it’s a small downturn, but I don’t think that it’s, as you said, it’s not a major concern. Often, graduates are able to shift to other firms if the company that they were targeting or their plan A career path was not immediately available, often they still have other fantastic opportunities, like you say. It does happen sometimes. The MBA graduates don’t get their dream job straight out of business school, but that doesn’t mean that they won’t get there eventually. I often see that MBA graduates will take a job immediately post-graduation that was maybe not their top choice. But then within a year or two, they’ve managed to make a shift. And so often, their career path means that they will take…

[00:04:47.540] – Caroline

There’ll be a stepping stone post-MBA that will then help them get to exactly where they want to be. And so I’m sure that will happen with some of those graduates from the 2024 class.

[00:04:59.920] – John

We’re really talking about slight decreases in pay. For example, at NYU, the average starting salary in 2023 was 168, 182. In 2024, it’s 166, 148, so it’s off by $2,000. And signing bonuses are off by about a thousand. The average was 37,000 in 2024. It was 38,2 in 2023. So these are not major declines, they’re slight declines. There’s slight declines, and it’s really a function of the mix of jobs that MBAs were taking in 2024. Maria, you’ve seen these ups and downs as well.

[00:05:41.030] – Maria

Yes, absolutely. I mean, as Caroline said, as the economy has its changes from time to time, those are going to be reflected in the graduation opportunities that people pursue. But I also agree with her that your career is a marathon and not a sprint. I do I think that if you are graduating into a market situation where maybe that first choice dream job isn’t available, take something that is adjacent. Take something that will still give you some of those foundational skills that you would need for that dream job. So that way, when that opportunity does present itself in one, three, seven years, whatever it is, you can just grab it. So I do think that the Career Services offices of the schools are probably being very strategic with students if those students are not getting their first choice to think about, Okay, well, how can you set yourself up so then that way, you will be ready to grab that job when it eventually does become available to you because it eventually will. I also thought it was interesting that a lot of the shift in NYU, just because that’s the data that we have the most of right now, there did seem to be an increase in the consumer package goods and retail, general retail, which was interesting for me.

[00:06:52.990] – Maria

Maybe people were taking those jobs because they didn’t have a choice. But I also think that there’s definitely a lot to be said for going to work for some of these larger traditional companies. They might not be as shiny or as sexy as some of the more recent tech companies, but I think they offer tremendous opportunity for growth. I think they offer tremendous work-life balance. I do think that a lot of these traditional industries are now about to start implementing AI. They’re about to start becoming much more digitally savvy to use the digital aspects of, let’s say, optimization or data analysis to take a new technology, shiny technology, but to adapt it to their more old-fashioned business. There may be some really interesting opportunities at these companies that maybe 15 years ago, you would say, Well, who’s going to go Walmart? Something like a Walmart or a Parker & Gamble or what have you might not be very exciting. But now, if Procter & Gamble is coming to me and saying, Well, we want you to optimize our supply chain for whatever it is that we make. I mean, who knows? That actually might be really compelling.

[00:07:54.020] – Maria

It was interesting not to segue us to another topic that we have on deck for today. But you guys also have an article at Poets and Quants about some of the best companies to work for if you want to become a leader in the future. I thought it was really interesting that Procter & Gamble, Pepsi Company, Johnson & Johnson, those are all in the top 15 to 20. Walmart is number 26. I wonder if there might be some… Some students are, in fact, looking at their careers more as a marathon and saying, Well, if I start my career at a Procter & Gamble, for example, maybe that will set me up in the longer term for this job and this influence that I want to have. So obviously, we’re only speculating, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s some element of that occurring as well.

[00:08:40.300] – John

And that pattern at NYU Stern was repeated at UVA Darden as well, where more students were going into retail and consumer products, goods, and health care, where the salaries tend to be slightly lower than they would be in consulting or investment banking. That’s really true. I think this brings to mind one my pet peeves about students who look at ROI based solely on the starting compensation they’re likely to make when they graduate. This is a long-term journey. Your MBA is going to change your trajectory in many different ways. And the investment return can’t be measured by a single year in what you make when you graduate. It’s really over a lifetime of earnings and a lifetime of opportunities in the network that you graduate into, which expands your opportunities and lets you see many that would otherwise be invisible to you.

[00:09:37.110] – Maria

I was going to also argue that there’s total compensation, but I think another metric that I personally like to look at, and I think more and more people of this generation are looking at as well, it’s not just what your total compensation, but what’s your compensation per hour worked? So it’s true. Look, management consulting, investment banking, those jobs are going to pay a lot of money, but you might make, I don’t know, 30 100% more money, but you might be working twice as many hours or something along those lines. So we have friends who have been working at an IBM or a Microsoft for 20 years. And if they had spent those 20 years at McKinsey, would they be making more? Sure. But they have also had to work. They have the 40-hour work week. They have those more sane and humane, perhaps, corporate policies. I think, I don’t know. Again, speculation, but I wonder if you look at total comp, that will push you in one But if you look at if another metric that’s important for you is more, okay, compensation per the actual amount of hours that I have to work, I think that a lot of these other industries and functions can provide excellent opportunities along those lines as well.

[00:10:44.600] – John

Yeah, That’s so true. I mean, a number of years ago, we actually ran a story that counted this up. It showed that MBAs, for example, at McKinsey typically work around 60 to 80 hours per week, and the average is 72 hours per week, maybe making it one of the most demanding work schedules among any MBA-type jobs. And true enough, at tech firms, consumer product companies, health care, other fields, people don’t put in 80 hours, 72 hours a week. So you’re right. If you took out your calculator and you figured out, Okay, how much am I making per hour? You might actually make more at a Pepsi, a Procter & Gamble, a Microsoft, dare I say, United Health care at this moment than you would at a McKinsey of Bain BCG or Goldman Sachs or Morgan Stanley or JP Morgan. I mean, that’s just the reality of it. This list that Maria was referring to is interesting. It was conjured up by Time magazine with a consulting firm. And what they did is they searched the backgrounds of a number of what they call influential leaders in companies. And then they saw which companies were in their background that got them to those influential positions and came up with a list of the best companies for future leaders.

[00:12:12.010] – John

Mckinsey is number one, IBM is number two, Goldman Sachs is three, Accenture is four, Procter & Gamble is five, PwC, six, PepsiCo, seven, Deloitte, eight, Bank of America, nine, and Ernst & Young, 10. Notice that none of the big tech companies not Apple, not Microsoft, not Meta, not Alphab, or Amazon are in the top 10, which is interesting to me. Microsoft does show up at 11, and Alphab is in there at 13, so it’s not like they’re far away. But, Caroline, what do you make of this list? Is this poppy cock?

[00:12:50.090] – Caroline

Well, I think there’s some interesting data in there, and it’s not terribly surprising. Consulting firms do very well, and we know that they are very good at recruiting outstanding candidates and giving them fantastic work experience, great exposure, as well as developing them and offering great opportunities to learn and grow through their careers at those firms. So I don’t think that’s terribly surprising that they would be there. I think it’s a shame that it’s a US only list. Far too often, rankings, in my view, are very myopic in just looking at the US perspective. And yes, okay, it would have been a lot more research, much more expensive to take a broader perspective, but still, I think that’s a missed opportunity. And then it does seem that younger firms seem to be at a disadvantage in this ranking, given the way that they’ve structured it and given that people who’ve joined younger firms, often the tech companies, who may be still at a younger age but have progressed very rapidly in their careers, they may not be well-reflected in this ranking because the ranking doesn’t take into account their current position. Taking the sample, they look at the current position, but when they calculate the ranking, they don’t look at the current position.

[00:14:15.910] – Caroline

And some people from tech firms may have progressed very rapidly and therefore may not have so many years of leadership experience because they may have just risen up the ladder much more quickly. And so I think that it doesn’t fully reflect actually the picture today. It is a historical perspective. So I wouldn’t encourage candidates looking at which firms they want to target for their job opportunities. I wouldn’t encourage MBA graduates to set too much store by this ranking.

[00:14:51.350] – John

Yeah, true. I mean, places like BP, Volkswagen, Siemens, and many other companies that are great places to work, including things like even the Japanese and German automakers, all excluded from this list. And how they did it is interesting. I mean, they apparently identified, and I’m not sure how, 4,000 of what they call the most influential leaders from various areas of the US society. Then they scoured their CVs to determine where they had worked in the past and basically then assumed that these companies would be great ladders for one to climb on to reach into this influential stratosphere. Now, Maria, what do you make of this?

[00:15:43.120] – Maria

Well, I think similar to MBA rankings, we should take it with a grain of salt. But I do like similar to when MBA rankings do this as well, when it does bring to folks attention, the fact that there’s more than just three firms out there that are worth working for. More than just five schools or seven schools out there that it’s worth going to, that are worth going to. So for example, when the MBA rankings come out, it might help people realize, Oh, actually, if I go to a school that is ranked top 20, top 25, top 50, it’s still going to be an excellent school. It’s the same with this. I like this in the sense that it does, I think, imply or give the message to folks who might be getting their MBAs right now. Like, yes, sure, if you want to work at McKinsey, you want to work at Goldman Sachs. But in case you don’t get that job, right? Coming off of the topic we were just discussing, in case you don’t get that job, there are so many other excellent companies out there that are going to give you fantastic training.

[00:16:42.760] – Maria

Look at how these are going to serve as launching pads for the rest of your career. Think about the skills that you’re going to develop and acquire in that employer. So I do like very much the fact that I would almost start sharing this, I think, with folks who are getting ready to graduate just because this give that message of like, Oh, look, it’s not McKinsey, BCG, Bain, JP Morgan. Of course, those elite firms are in there, but there are so many other excellent companies as well. My one wishlist, I have several wishlist for this, but one in particular that I would really like to see, because I think this is true when we see this with MBA rankings, when MBA rankings pull out the schools into specialties or into certain industries. So the best MBA for real estate, the best MBA is for sustainability, the best MBA is for healthcare. I do think that this list would have been a little bit more interesting, perhaps not by industry, but by function. For example, the fact that Deloitte is number 8 and Ernst & Young is number 10, I wonder, a lot of times, those companies do have consulting, strategy consulting firms, digital consulting firms, but they also started primarily as accounting firms and auditing and CPA firms.

[00:17:53.040] – Maria

I think that a lot of CPAs and accountants leave that couple of years of auditing training, enter the corporate world, and eventually become CFOs. So when we look at that list of the 4,000 influential leaders that time shows, if a number of them are CFOs, as one of the many C-suites that are influential, that makes a lot of sense that Deloitte and Ernst & Young would be there. They are the two main factories of CPAs. And so I do think that that, breaking that out into maybe one more level of granularity would be that much more useful. But aside from that, it’s It’s fascinating. It’s a fascinating study and it’s really interesting.

[00:18:34.760] – John

Yeah, and it’s fun to look at the list. There are quite a few companies on there, and many… I think you’re right. It broadens your view of all the different opportunities that are available to you If you’re an MBA or even an undergraduate business student, for that matter. Maria, of course, mentioned rankings, and I got to tell you that we just came out with our composite ranking for US MBA programs. We will, in the next few days, our international list. Just to remind you how we do that, it’s a composite, meaning we take what we think to be the five more credible rankings. We weight them by what we think is their authority or credibility in the space, the five of our US news, the Financial Times, Bloomberg, Business Week, LinkedIn, and Princeton Review. We mash them together and we come up with an overall rank. This year, for the first time in 15 years that we’ve been doing this, Northwestern Kellogg is number one, Stanford is number two, Chicago Booth is three, Harvard, four, UVA, Virginia had its highest rank as well as Kellogg. They came in at five, which makes them the number one public business school on the list.

[00:19:46.840] – John

Here’s the benefit of this list. In one small glimpse, you can see where any given school ranks across these five different programs and then see how we match them up. So As opposed to going to one list or another list and looking at them in isolation, you can see if there’s an anomaly among the ranks across these five lists, you could see if there’s consensus, which would give you greater confidence that that school is indeed at a certain rank. We give you the top 100 in the US and the top 50 outside the US. If If you’re going to play with rankings and look at rankings, this is a good list to look at because you can look at them all in one fell swoop. I know that there’s been independent research that has shown that after US news, this is the most sought after and looked at ranking even ahead of the financial times, which is interesting. But I think it’s because you get it all in one place, which is helpful. There’s a ton of data and a ton of analysis in the story. Do check it out and do be aware that all three of us are fairly cynical about rankings in general.

[00:21:09.450] – John

You’ve heard Caroline, Maria, and I discount a lot of this stuff, but it’s a helpful list just to see where schools are, what schools have momentum, what schools are on a decline. And you could all find this out in the 2024, 2025 MBA ranking that we just published. Then look for the international list as well, which is about to come out in a couple of days. All right, so there you have it. Don’t worry about those declining employment rates and starting salaries for MBAs. We think it’s an aberration and temporary. Check out the list of companies that time came up with, which are in the background or on the resumes of people who’ve achieved a fair amount of responsibility and power in the US companies. And then check out our ranking and see where your target schools way. Meantime, I know you’re putting the finishing touches on your round two apps. We covered that really well, I thought, in our last podcast. If you missed it, go and listen to it. It’ll be helpful to you. This is John Byrne with Poets and Quants. Thanks for listening.

The Economist Dis on MBAs: Is the Degree Still Worth It?
Why MBA Pay & Placement Are Down This Year
Maria |
December 16, 2024

[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!