| Topic Name: |
Ivy vs. Non |
| Message Name: |
Part Two |
| Date Posted: |
03/07/2001 |
| In Reply To: |
Some kids of extremely rich and powerful families go to UCLA. Some idiots go to Harvard. There are some brilliant people at UMich and actually a few hotties at Stanford.
Most of the posts here score an absolute zero for lucidity of thought and reek of the type of yapping, meaningless blather of self-centered know-nothings (from whatever school or background) who seem to forget that a) the world is not black and white and b) your personal opinion does not shape the way the world works.
Take the post I'm responding directly to: "If you were really soooooo smart and sooooo much better prepared you would not care what school you attended because you would know that you would be sucessful regardless of the circumstances or you would already have done something worthwhile."
One question: Does a skilled musician purposely avoid the best instructors and schools because, damn it, I'm so damn talented anyway?
If you want to waste your time purposefully setting up unnecessary obstacles to your goals, please...feel free to do so.
That being said, me Ivy, you State is not the functional equivalent of me Tarzan, you Jane.
Most of my friends ended up at Cal, LA, or one of the many Cal States or JCs in the area. Is the average Stanford student harder working and more intelligent than most of my friends? Of course. Are they all? Hell no. If some of my friends had studied more and smoked out less in HS, they could have had an even shot at the top tier.
Does having a top tier school pedigree help in the job search? You bet. It won't make you an MD at an i bank, nor will it land you the CEO spot at GE. A lot of undermotivated Ivy kids disappear into the realm of unemployment/crappy jobs. But if you've got the inclination to actually make an effort, it does a nice job of getting your foot in the door for interviews, especially if you're one of 500 students applying, all with little to no relevent work experience.
Is it fair that all other things being equal, a Stanford grad will get more visibility and attention than a Berkeley grad? (insert your favorite ivy vs. state/libbie arts school here) Actually, yes. Here's why:
Imagine you're a recruiter at at investment bank. You have 8 analyst spots open for a branch office, and anywhere from 200-500, maybe even more resumes to choose from. Forget all the corporate PR about paying attention to each resume. YOUR DUTY IS TO CULL THAT DOWN TO 20-35 interviewable candidates ASAP. Why that few? Because investment bankers have better things to do than spend their days interviewing every bright-eyed, chirpy wannabe banker out there. The first cut is done almost purely on the basis of that one page resume. Do you have time to weigh how Bobby from UCLA's GPA relates to Dan's similar one from Stanford? Can you decide who has a better personality? Can you do this across a matrix of comparing 300 people against 300 others? Do you even have the information, based on this one resume, to make such personal distinctions? There are a few hard facts in a resume, and they end up getting 90% of the attention. School? Major? GPA? Prior internship/work? Minus people who have connections, that's how the first 90% end up getting culled. If you've secured that first magical interview, your school pedigree fades and personal/personality issues become much more important (excluding, of course, the occasional asshole Ivy MD who thinks anything less is dogshit). |
| Message: |
Yeah, I've got a lot to say...
The fact is that what school you went to does give a fairly quick (if by no means thorough) idea of a couple things: your ambition and your work ethic and/or natural intelligence.
If you had 1 minute to choose between two people you've never met, one from Harvard with a 3.5 in econ, one from UVA with a 3.5 in finance, which would you choose?
It's obvious. The choice may be wrong and you may end up getting an antisocial freak who's never even learned to tie his own shoes, but you're simply playing the odds. No CIO ever got fired for recommending IBM products, and no one will take excess heat for hiring a Harvard grad? Odds are you're MORE LIKELY (though far from certain) to get a smart, reliable, hard working kid the higher up you go on the school food chain.
Clients want personality, not pedigree? Clients want results and chutzpah, not elitist decadence? Even if you get a job at a GS or a McKinsey out of undergrad, understand this: you're an excel/powerpoint/word monkey whose value lies in being reliable, not smart. It's not "I want you, fresh meat college grad, to present to the CEO of XYZ company", it's "Hey, if there are any errors in this goddamn excel model I'm giving to the client, your ass is mine. And if you're a good boy I'll let you come to the meeting, sit in the back and take notes". Top tier school kids tended to do their homework on time, listened to their parents more, and did "what was expected of them". This holds more value than some vague notion of inborn intelligence or natural charm in the business world, especially early on, than some of you would like to believe.
Most of my state school friends would quit or blow a hole at the long hours and BS I have to deal with at work. Maybe they're smarter for it. Maybe not.
If you make it up to the same level from a less prestigious school, more power to you. You slacked in the opening legs of this marathon, but 1/4 of the way through you found your second wind and caught up to the kids who sped off out the gate. If and when you make it to the GS/MSDW/McK/BCGs of the world, ask yourself this: Don't you tend to shrug off or disregard those "mediocre" 2nd rate types at AC, PWC, or some 2nd tier regional bank? Surprise! You're now a part of the system too.
Some people are lucky or have connections and maybe its not fair, but this isn't 16th century Europe, for god's sakes. Go out and earn it. Wanna be a sleazy banker? Make lots of money? Compete for the 95% of slots at Stanford that don't go to legacy rich kids. Take the added debt load, work hard, and get the damn job. End up at a 2nd tier? (by choice or by necessity) Work harder, differentiate yourself from the large majority of your slacker student body, and you should do just as well.
You're "smart" but you got passed over for something you wanted? Too bad. Everyone thinks they're smart, but not too many really are. Grow up. The world is about showing definable results, not sitting in your dorm room lamenting that how no one knows the real you. Getting into an Ivy is one of countless possible such definable results.
|
|
