| Topic Name: |
McKinsey in decline? |
| Message Name: |
Miscommunication |
| Date Posted: |
02/01/2006 |
| In Reply To: |
Undergrad84:
WRT, ??What does it mean that consulting industry placement at Stanford stayed the same over the past 8 years. How do you know that the 'fixed' percentage of the class which goes into consulting is the b&b part of that class??
If you are willing, follow me through a simple thought experiment with below set of conditions:
1) McK extends offers of employment to Stanford MBA grads that satisfactorily passed the rigorous interview process. Those applicants that get an offer are b&b in McK??s eyes. Also, Stanford grads compete with other MBAs from top universities during the interview.
2) There is no minimum recruiting quota at Stanford. (min_accept = 0, max_accept < = extended offers).
3) Those that gets an offer from McK most likely have gotten offers from multiple companies/industries (On average, class of 2005 got 3 employment offers).
4) If b&b at Stanford with multiple offers felt that McK or BCG/B is not an attractive career option, they will opt for other more attractive offers.
5) If ??4)?? happened every year starting 1997, you will eventually see smaller and smaller b&b??s opting for management consulting and it??s overall placement will deteriorate. However, number of Stanford MBA??s choosing mgnt consulting have been steady for the past 8 years as data show.
Let me paste some relevant statements from previous posts to conclude this thought experiment:
Euc: ????if you look at the employment statistics of Stanford MBAs from 1997 to 2005, you would find that the percentage of management consulting accepted offers changed from 22% to 20% and financial services (IB/IM/VC in 1997; IB/PE/HF/VC/IM in 2005) did not change at all at 25%. Same number of ??b&b?? went into financial services and management consulting in 1997 and also 2005. So stating that the quality level of MBAs have deteriorated recently due to b&b pursuing PE/HF/VC positions seems to be incorrect??data suggests that it has been this way for quite a while, at least for the last 8 years.????
EUC: ?? The phenomena of 'recent' brain drain due to b&b migrating to 1) Tech companies 2) Financial-Banking 3) Entrepreneurship is moot as illustrated by Stanford data showing the industry placement trends have been essentially been the same for the past 8 years??
|
| Message: |
I think we are talking about different things here:
Calling Marvin and I are assuming that even within Wharton, HBS, Stanford or whichever elite school only the top is b&b.
In this reasoning it is hard to find out where those top guys are going right? Are they in the part (20% or whatever it is) that goes into consulting or are they in the part (80%) that doesn't go into consulting.
I know a large number of Wharton MBA's. Many of the MBA's with more extensive (> 5 years) work experience decide to capitalize on this by for example leading real estate developments or taking on more senior positions in industry. Are they better?? Are they brighter?? No idea, tho several of them have worked in consultancy previously and might be quite skilled. Many of the MBA's with less extensive work experience (3-5 years) decide to go for a standardized / commoditized associate position at an ibank or consulting firm.
You and some others here are implicitly assuming that exactly because you are admitted to attend one of those schools you are automatically b&b. I take a smaller sample to be the b&b within those large MBA classes.
|
|
