| Topic Name: |
Prestige |
| Message Name: |
How Prestige SHOULD be Measured |
| Date Posted: |
03/20/2001 |
| In Reply To: |
Why won't you respond to some of his "flawed logic", then, specifying some examples? I certainly didn??t find the poster??s reasoning ability questionable.
In fact, I think the poster's hypothesis is worth discussing, despite his/her age. However, Revenues per Consultant is often an effect of prestige not necessarily a cause of it.
I would also add that percentage of applicants accepted and employee turnover might be a good indicator of prestige as well. For example, McKinsey typically receives over 100,000 applicants every year and sends out a mere 1,000 offers. McKinsey partners are also considered "thought leaders" in their respective fields, and often publish in scholarly journals.
Since everyone seems to live and die by US New & World Report rankings on this board, perhaps we should strongly consider some of their criteria in our tournament (i.e. Acceptance rate and some factor of faculty/Partner recognition).
In any case, I believe the poster who says to "ignore this thread" is out of line. The first posters logic is not flawed and his figures may be more accurate than you think.
Anyway...something to chew on. |
| Message: |
Prestige should be measured along the following dimensions:
1. Desirability of the position
2. Attainability of the position
3. Perceived market value of the person after his experience at the firm
4. Actual performance of the person after leaving the firm
5. Perceived impact on clients
6. Actual impact on clients
7. Compensation
I think given the above, McK is tops by FAR. The rest...well you guys can argue about the rest.
|
|
