Undergraduate Business Schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a free market capitalist who completely supports business as a worthy career, but I wonder why any bright kid who can attend a selective college would choose to major in business for his/her undergrad degree. Why do I say this? For the following reasons:

1. If one wants to maximize possibilities for the most sought after business jobs (eg, IB, consulting, hedge fund, PE, VC, top corporate jobs), then an MBA from a top business school is the ultimate credential. But if someone is going to get an MBA down the road, why major in business in undergrad instead of anything else that won't be duplicative with graduate business school education? The top business schools are generally looking to admit and train future leaders who have not already specialized in business education as college. I would argue that any STEM subject or economics would be a better major for someone with quant skills looking to get an MBA later, and any liberal; arts major would also be better for a non-quant student also looking to get an MBA.

2. Yes, maybe your chances of getting an entry-level job in IB or consulting out of undergrad is higher with a business major from a top school, but the vast majority of these kids are probably thinking of getting an MBA after 2-3 years of work experience. If that is the case, why not study something else or a broad range of subjects in college when this is your last chance to explore and take whatever class interests you? And if your goal is to attend an M7 graduate business school, all things being equal, your chances of getting admitted with an undergrad business major is less because the value-add of a MBA is also perceived to be less by admissions officers who seek to build a diverse and interesting class with people from all academic backgrounds.

To sum it up, I'm arguing that an undergrad business degree is the worst education a smart kid can pursue. I didn't say it's the worst decision one can make or that it can't lead to a decent job after graduation, I'm just saying it's a poor education for someone smart enough to get into a highly selective school because that person could gain a more well rounded education, achieve the same outcome after graduation, and attend a top graduate business school without spending precious 4 years studying business in college.

.

+1

Apparently you have never met all the absolute failures in life who majored in STEM and then go for an MBA. Borderline autism and unable to manage anything or anyone but couldn’t hack it in their own job. Cornell’s “twelve month option” was full of these people. The simple fact is that STEM does not attract broad thinkers and people with people skills. Plenty of smart kids go to business school for undergrad and it is the person’s general abilities in a variety of areas that determines future career success. I know many people with undergrad business degrees that are making a bunch of money now. Some pursued grad degrees in various fields, other stopped at undergrad. I also know many many STEM majors who are not making much money now, including those with MS and PhD. For reference, my cutoff for a bunch of money is more than 200k and my cutoff for not much money is less than 100k

[Anonymous]

We aren't talking apples and apples in some of these discussions. An in-demand econ major will be quantitatively heavy beyond econometrics. But weaker students tend to struggle with that part and tend to avoid it. All econ grads even from a top school are not comparable for quant skills.

On the other hand, certain undergrad business programs that are more competitive for admission may involve paradoxically easier coursework, though obviously that depends on the major/concentration in the business program.

I'd rather not send my kid to undergrad business for management. But finance or, better yet, accounting? Heck yeah. Over three decades ago, I remember my dad suggesting accounting and I scoffed. I was an econ major, one who ended up knowing nothing practical at a time when it was not easy to find that first job out of college. If I had a do-over, I'd at least have taken a few undergrad business courses if I could get into them. I'm thrilled that my freshman (undecided major but swears against econ after a bad AP teacher) took accounting this semester. Unfortunately transfer into the undergrad business program isn't an option. Hoping kid picks up a few more business courses for context and skills.

[Anonymous]

My accounting classes as a business undergrad at a flagship state college were some of the most productive classes I've taken. The ability to learn how to read a financial statement and understand what it means is huge.

The smartest guy I ever worked for was a University of Chicago MBA. I learned a lot about excel spread sheets from him. He was not too proud to mop the hallways of our offices every Friday afternoon. The UPS driver always got a chuckle when he would stop by to use our restroom on Friday afternoons and said we had the only corporate CEO that mopped the hallways on Friday afternoons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a free market capitalist who completely supports business as a worthy career, but I wonder why any bright kid who can attend a selective college would choose to major in business for his/her undergrad degree. Why do I say this? For the following reasons:

1. If one wants to maximize possibilities for the most sought after business jobs (eg, IB, consulting, hedge fund, PE, VC, top corporate jobs), then an MBA from a top business school is the ultimate credential. But if someone is going to get an MBA down the road, why major in business in undergrad instead of anything else that won't be duplicative with graduate business school education? The top business schools are generally looking to admit and train future leaders who have not already specialized in business education as college. I would argue that any STEM subject or economics would be a better major for someone with quant skills looking to get an MBA later, and any liberal; arts major would also be better for a non-quant student also looking to get an MBA.

2. Yes, maybe your chances of getting an entry-level job in IB or consulting out of undergrad is higher with a business major from a top school, but the vast majority of these kids are probably thinking of getting an MBA after 2-3 years of work experience. If that is the case, why not study something else or a broad range of subjects in college when this is your last chance to explore and take whatever class interests you? And if your goal is to attend an M7 graduate business school, all things being equal, your chances of getting admitted with an undergrad business major is less because the value-add of a MBA is also perceived to be less by admissions officers who seek to build a diverse and interesting class with people from all academic backgrounds.

To sum it up, I'm arguing that an undergrad business degree is the worst education a smart kid can pursue. I didn't say it's the worst decision one can make or that it can't lead to a decent job after graduation, I'm just saying it's a poor education for someone smart enough to get into a highly selective school because that person could gain a more well rounded education, achieve the same outcome after graduation, and attend a top graduate business school without spending precious 4 years studying business in college.

Top students get into investment banks, private equity and hedge funds from undergrad. There's no reason to major in Economics when they could major in Finance from a top undergraduate business school. Of course if they go to an Ivy they could major in history and get into Wall Street. But that doesn't hold for students from top publics like Michigan, UVA, etc.

Finance is a better major than Economics since Economics is entirely bullshit, and MBA doesn't cover much Finance anyways

When you say Finance is a better major than Econ, let's distinguish between finance for dummies vs real quant finance. The former is what IB'ers, PE and VC do, anyone with decent high school arithmetic skills can understand financial statements and build Excel models which is why history majors from Ivy schools are capably suited. Real quant finance as practiced by the elite hedge funds requires graduate-level math, stats, and computer skills which is why they hire PhD's in quant fields. These jobs are well beyond the reach of business school kids, either undergrad or MBA, because they require elite skills, not Finance as taught in business schools. Anyone can learn NPV and derivative pricing concepts, but not everyone can apply sophisticated math models and algorithms to exploit data correlations to make money.

When I say Finance undergraduate, I meant the former, not quantitative finance.

Finance at top undergraduate business schools is far better than Economics, while getting the lower-level theoretical Economics courses are required anyways. And it is quantitatively heavy.
Economics major, meanwhile, is generally the path that students that can't even get into the undergraduate business school of their universities take. Basically, pre-Finance kids that can't get into their undergraduate business school drop out into Economics. It's a major for relatively mediocre students in the vast majority of universities throughout the country, including UVA, UT-Austin, U-Michigan, who otherwise have great undergraduate business schools.

Of course, at schools without undergrad business schools i.e. Harvard, those that want to go into business generally take Economics. But if there is an undergrad business school, then Finance major is generally better and filled with better students due to the filtering when applying for the undergrad business school.

Let's presume that your assumptions are correct, that business-minded students at universities with undergrad business schools prefer that option over majoring in Economics in the liberal arts school because they perceive this route to be more directly applicable to their near term goal of getting a finance-related job after graduation. However, there are 2 counterarguments to your position, one of which you have alluded to:

1. Why is that the most elite colleges don't offer an undergrad business major (with the exception of Penn and Wharton, but that reveals more about Penn and its relative standing)? Harvard and Stanford and other Top 10 schools have graduate business schools and could easily extend that to an undergrad option, but why don't they? Because they don't feel that devoting 4 years to studying business is a worthwhile undergrad pursuit when one can specialize in that profession later by getting an MBA. Instead, they hope to cultivate critical thinking skills which will serve their student well no matter what career they eventually pursue.

2. You criticize Econ as being more theoretical than Finance which is more practical, but that is exactly the point if the goal is to develop reasoning skills. Econ at the best schools is heavily quantitative and the best preparation for graduate school Econ is math which aligns with the skill set that quant finance is seeking. Students would be far better served majoring in Econ and taking lots of advanced math courses while also taking a few business school courses at their university than majoring in business in undergrad. Study any liberal arts subject and then get your MBA at an M7 business school. Would you rather have an undergrad business degree from Wharton or an MBA from Wharton?

I don’t understand why you think that a major in math or economics “cultivates critical thinking skills” but a major in finance or accounting does not.

Re: your less question. Why not both? I mean, I probably wouldn’t want to go to Wharton for both my undergrad and master’s but an undergrad degree from Berkeley Haas or WashU Olin or UMich Ross followed by MBA at Wharton? Sounds great.

[Anonymous]

Your last question ** ^

[Anonymous]

My sister was an Econ major at Wharton. Honestly she is a lot of times kind of clueless and lacks business sense.

It was the Marines that taught her management skills.

[Anonymous]

Here’s my take on the UG biz degree vs. Econ/liberal arts:

I graduated with econ a few years ago from a semi-target (think Notre Dame or Vandy) and I have a job in FP&A at a tech company. To me, recruiting straight out of college with a non-business degree is a bit of an awkward place to recruit from. Most dumb HR people will ask you "why econ" (or history, or math, or whatever) as if there were a chance you could find work as an "economist" or “mathematician” straight out of undergrad. However, when you get to actually interview with the team you would potentially work with, many managers find it refreshing someone has a "bigger picture" about the economy and will sometimes ask you macro economic trends if they ask about your major.

The thing about majoring in something outside of business/finance if you want to work in the field is that you still need to convey that you know financial modelling and basic accounting. Many times in interviews, I had to specifically call out that I had accounting courses in my curriculum and that I have an equal amount of finance And business courses as well. As long as you can convey that, then you should be fine. But please do not think for a second that you can major in history and that they will hire you simply because you come across as intelligent, well-spoken, and having critical thinking skills. Ultimately whoever is hiring you wants you on data analysis and financial modelling, not researching macroeconomic trends or medieval history. So if you cant convince them of a basic DCF, or even a rollforward you're SOL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here’s my take on the UG biz degree vs. Econ/liberal arts:

I graduated with econ a few years ago from a semi-target (think Notre Dame or Vandy) and I have a job in FP&A at a tech company. To me, recruiting straight out of college with a non-business degree is a bit of an awkward place to recruit from. Most dumb HR people will ask you "why econ" (or history, or math, or whatever) as if there were a chance you could find work as an "economist" or “mathematician” straight out of undergrad. However, when you get to actually interview with the team you would potentially work with, many managers find it refreshing someone has a "bigger picture" about the economy and will sometimes ask you macro economic trends if they ask about your major.

The thing about majoring in something outside of business/finance if you want to work in the field is that you still need to convey that you know financial modelling and basic accounting. Many times in interviews, I had to specifically call out that I had accounting courses in my curriculum and that I have an equal amount of finance And business courses as well. As long as you can convey that, then you should be fine. But please do not think for a second that you can major in history and that they will hire you simply because you come across as intelligent, well-spoken, and having critical thinking skills. Ultimately whoever is hiring you wants you on data analysis and financial modelling, not researching macroeconomic trends or medieval history. So if you cant convince them of a basic DCF, or even a rollforward you're SOL.

This is the truth. Very well put.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here’s my take on the UG biz degree vs. Econ/liberal arts:

I graduated with econ a few years ago from a semi-target (think Notre Dame or Vandy) and I have a job in FP&A at a tech company. To me, recruiting straight out of college with a non-business degree is a bit of an awkward place to recruit from. Most dumb HR people will ask you "why econ" (or history, or math, or whatever) as if there were a chance you could find work as an "economist" or “mathematician” straight out of undergrad. However, when you get to actually interview with the team you would potentially work with, many managers find it refreshing someone has a "bigger picture" about the economy and will sometimes ask you macro economic trends if they ask about your major.

The thing about majoring in something outside of business/finance if you want to work in the field is that you still need to convey that you know financial modelling and basic accounting. Many times in interviews, I had to specifically call out that I had accounting courses in my curriculum and that I have an equal amount of finance And business courses as well. As long as you can convey that, then you should be fine. But please do not think for a second that you can major in history and that they will hire you simply because you come across as intelligent, well-spoken, and having critical thinking skills. Ultimately whoever is hiring you wants you on data analysis and financial modelling, not researching macroeconomic trends or medieval history. So if you cant convince them of a basic DCF, or even a rollforward you're SOL.

+1. I'm trying to encourage my undecided kid to pick up a business minor, at a minimum as some sort of hedge against uncertain employment prospects. Add skills to the resume.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here’s my take on the UG biz degree vs. Econ/liberal arts:

I graduated with econ a few years ago from a semi-target (think Notre Dame or Vandy) and I have a job in FP&A at a tech company. To me, recruiting straight out of college with a non-business degree is a bit of an awkward place to recruit from. Most dumb HR people will ask you "why econ" (or history, or math, or whatever) as if there were a chance you could find work as an "economist" or “mathematician” straight out of undergrad. However, when you get to actually interview with the team you would potentially work with, many managers find it refreshing someone has a "bigger picture" about the economy and will sometimes ask you macro economic trends if they ask about your major.

The thing about majoring in something outside of business/finance if you want to work in the field is that you still need to convey that you know financial modelling and basic accounting. Many times in interviews, I had to specifically call out that I had accounting courses in my curriculum and that I have an equal amount of finance And business courses as well. As long as you can convey that, then you should be fine. But please do not think for a second that you can major in history and that they will hire you simply because you come across as intelligent, well-spoken, and having critical thinking skills. Ultimately whoever is hiring you wants you on data analysis and financial modelling, not researching macroeconomic trends or medieval history. So if you cant convince them of a basic DCF, or even a rollforward you're SOL.

I agree with everything you said. If you are a student at a top 20 school, by all means take 3-4 undergrad business school classes in Accounting, Finance, Marketing at your university's business school, but for God's sake don't waste you time majoring a business. Instead, get some functional knowledge of business thru selected courses, major in anything else (preferably STEM), and then got your MBA from an elite business schools after some work experience. That;s the ideal path.

[Anonymous]

It’s an utter waste of time to major in business as an undergrad (and the degree isn’t well regarded). Those programs are more akin to trade schools. Undergrad education should be focused on building skills and capabilities that can be transferred to a work environment....critical thinking, research, writing, oral communication, reasoning and logic, decision making, etc. As others have said, major in a humanities or social science discipline, graduate and work four years and then go to a top 10 MBA program if you can.

[Anonymous]

Please disregard all posters who are advising the shelling out 150k on an MBA degree after you major in a completely unrelated field is "the ideal path." The demand for MBAs has been decreasing for years and is being substituted by one-year intensive masters degrees that are more technical in nature (finance, accounting, data analytics, etc.). The biggest bang for your buck is definitely not majoring in STEM and then getting an MBA.

[Anonymous]

SO much bad information being spewed here from people who have no idea how undergrad recruiting works if your are trying to do anything banking, finance, audit or consulting related. If you are not at a "targeted" university for undergrad, ie one that these companies actually actively recruit on campus for, do not think that a liberal arts degree is going to magically open doors for careers in these areas. If you are from a top rated larger university, that has an undergrad business school, it is very difficult to secure internships and jobs with an econ or other non business degree (engineering is an exception). The recruiters assume that you could not get into the business school if you have a liberal arts degree but are wanting to do business/banking. If you are from a top 20 liberal arts school that is desired by some of these industries, you can break into these fields though with a little planning. If you want a more "insider" look at how all this works, look at the forum for "Poets & Quants". Do not look at USNEWS and all the other BS ranking sites for advice. They are useless. Also, an MBA is very valuable currently, but after a few years in the industry. Most companies will not only pay for it, but will help you get into a top MBA program, in exchange for a promise to continue to work for them for a period of time, typically 2-5 years after you get the MBA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s an utter waste of time to major in business as an undergrad (and the degree isn’t well regarded). Those programs are more akin to trade schools. Undergrad education should be focused on building skills and capabilities that can be transferred to a work environment....critical thinking, research, writing, oral communication, reasoning and logic, decision making, etc. As others have said, major in a humanities or social science discipline, graduate and work four years and then go to a top 10 MBA program if you can.

This is entirely false. A undergraduate degree in Finance from a top undergraduate business school i.e. Wharton, MIT, Berkeley, Michigan, etc. will be rigorous and will build 'critical thinking, research writing, reasoning, logic' etc.
Social sciences - economics, political science primarily - are entirely bunk disciplines. They are useless at the undergraduate level to find any job in any industry, they are extremely weak quantitatively.
Humanities at a top school i.e. history, English, are great disciplines but do not have quantitative backing that most businesses look for. Furthermore humanities courses at large universities like Michigan will be worse due to the fact that humanities need to be taught in a small class-room setting with lots of discussion, not large lecture halls
Math, engineering, and natural sciences like Physics are of course great disciplines and respected in business.

Anonymous wrote:SO much bad information being spewed here from people who have no idea how undergrad recruiting works if your are trying to do anything banking, finance, audit or consulting related. If you are not at a "targeted" university for undergrad, ie one that these companies actually actively recruit on campus for, do not think that a liberal arts degree is going to magically open doors for careers in these areas. If you are from a top rated larger university, that has an undergrad business school, it is very difficult to secure internships and jobs with an econ or other non business degree (engineering is an exception). The recruiters assume that you could not get into the business school if you have a liberal arts degree but are wanting to do business/banking. If you are from a top 20 liberal arts school that is desired by some of these industries, you can break into these fields though with a little planning. If you want a more "insider" look at how all this works, look at the forum for "Poets & Quants". Do not look at USNEWS and all the other BS ranking sites for advice. They are useless. Also, an MBA is very valuable currently, but after a few years in the industry. Most companies will not only pay for it, but will help you get into a top MBA program, in exchange for a promise to continue to work for them for a period of time, typically 2-5 years after you get the MBA.

This is very much true.
Again, anyone who wants to work in business/finance and goes to Michigan, UVA, UT-Austin to major in economics rather than Finance will be considered to be someone that couldn't get into the undergraduate business school.
This is simply the fact of the matter. Economics is a major riddled with students that couldn't get into the undergrad business school. Furthermore, its the moneymaking-major for the university that takes any students not cut out of Finance or STEM, like a default major. Non-serious students get weeded out of majors like Math/Physics and even Finance, and end up majoring in Economics.

Are there great students that major in Economics to go to Ph.D. in Economics? Perhaps. Those students are better served majoring in math/applied math/statistics than Economics though.

If you do not want to go to graduate school for Economics, don't major in Economics. If you do want to go to graduate school in Economics, preferably don't major in Economics, major in Math/Applied Math/Statistics. If you do major in Economics, take as many applied math courses as you can.

Here's some threads about economics undergraduate major from a board for Economics Ph.D's:
https://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/what-has-ruined-econ-undergrad-education/
https://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/why-let-undergrad-econ-courses-so-easy-and-trash

When any recruiter looks at a Economics degree, they don't think "critical thinking, rigor, logical, research". They think "this kid couldn't even get into the undergrad business school" or they think "this kid came to college not know what to major in", or "this kid got weeded out of STEM".

At least with degrees with English and History, the recruiter assume that the student is very interested in those subjects and has rigorous research/essay-writing skills if they come from a rigorous humanities-focused school.

[Anonymous]

PP, I know of a Big 10 school where a friend's son wanted to go into accounting. The process is you get accepted to the university, go for a year, then apply to its undergraduate business school. Long story short, didn't get into the business school and now he is transferring to another school to get his degree.

It's a racket because this university accepts a ton of people knowing that getting into the business school is a numbers game with way too many qualified applicants.

Posts & Quants is OK but I think John caters too much to the top of the top schools. The University of West Buttcrack can teach accounting as well as Wharton. Believe or not, the MBA and accounting subreddits have useful information.