| Topic Name: |
Ridiculous Rankings |
| Message Name: |
Dear Vault Member,
|
| Date Posted: |
04/24/2000 |
| In Reply To: |
I work for a top two strategy consulting firm...mckinsey or bcg you take a guess. Kellogg is definitely one of our core recruiting schools and we take many recruits from there, but there is a definite informal undercurrent at the firm that feels that Kellogg grads are substandard in terms of analytical ability and have a higher attrition rate at the associate/consultant ranks. I've heard from friends of mine that this is definitely two at the other major strategy firms - bah and bain.
While I don't think this should be a MAJOR point in your decision making process, if you are ambivalent between the top four (Harvard / Stanford / Wharton / Sloan), I would go for one of the top four. Conversely, if you decide you like Kellogg for other reasons - people, curriculum, environment, don't let this reason hinder you because it is ultimately your own abilities that will get you promoted once you are in MC.
|
| Message: |
Dear Vault Member,
Thank you very much for your kind advice.
Frankly, I do like Kellogg for various reasons. I like its environment a lot(it is known to be very safe) & love the team culture (although some claim that the "team culture" is no longer unique to Kellogg but available at any other school). I was leaning toward Kellogg. However, having read your posting, am little concerned that the "informal undercurrent" might be strong enough to form a stereotype toward all Kellogg grads & therefore work as a hinderance to their success at the firms.
Could you please advise whether you think it is that strong or I can ignore it.
Know it is a silly question but would appreaciate some further advice.
Thanks a lot
|
|
