How did Harvard become the most powerful US university brand in the world?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard's reputation has definitely suffered in the past couple of years but it's still popular. But if it has some more high profile controversies, it will go downhill fast. PP is right in that they have been letting in a large crop of unimpressive TO students.

Why are their students not impressive? Some people seem to think that Harvard has lost prestige because they have some students and faculty that have been critical of Israel.

That's merely a blip. But it is part of a larger pattern. Harvard admits for undergrad these days are generally not regarded as the best and brightest. And there's a large activist contingent - protesting for the sake of protesting something.

Grad programs are different though. Outside of a few mediocre programs like Kennedy, it's the reason Harvard maintains its academic prestige.

I used to think that the business school was Harvard's power center, but now I think it's the law school. The sheer amount of global power in the alumni of that one part of the institution is just absurd: foreign and domestic heads of state, legislators, SC justices, fortune 500 CEO, entertainment execs, billionaire investors and their billionaire children, authors, national security agents, intellectuals, etc. This doesn't even include their absolutely rock star faculty. I think that one part of the university is responsible for a large part of the Harvard reputation, and my hunch is that once they realize it the law school administration is going to start demanding a lot more in terms of resources from the rest of the university. No more crumbling buildings that look like an inner city slum.

Graduate school is not undergrad — and is program specific. Yale Law is more prestigious than Harvard Law. Which you should know…

Not in global rankings, and not in any meaningful way (i.e., other than US News and various internet weirdos that fixate on their weird methodology.) The depth and reach of Harvard law is frankly unmatched.

Yeah, no; this is not even debatable. Nobody cares about global rankings and what you internationals think…everyone in the U.S. legal community knows Yale is the top (bull)dog.

Very NPC take.

It’s not really a “take”; you are just showing your ignorance.

THe peer reputation subscores in US news rankings have always been the same or higher for Harvard. Not that rankings matter, but I hardly think it's "not even debatable"

“Not even debatable” refers to a certain subset of individuals to which you clearly do not belong.

On another note, if you are the “cart before the horse” poster who deems Harvard’s esteem as being driven by its law school, I can assure you that it is “not even debatable” that Harvard’s esteem derives — and has always derived — from “Harvard College.” The same is true for all elite American schools. Conflating graduate school with undergraduate school prestige is an international thing for those unfamiliar with the U.S. educational system.

I am not the poster you are referring to, and I'm definitely not international, but I think s/he has a point. A lot of the famous alumni people point to (the are actually law school, not college graduates.

I am not a graduate of either, but I have been a biglaw partner, and I definitely think it's debatable which law school is better. Harvard, if I recall correctly, often beats Yale in various peer academic and judge ratings. At least the faculty at HLS seems more impressive, but I think that may actually be because YLS' faculty has fallen over the years. For what it's worth, which may not be much, I know if I was a student being presented with the choice today, I would prefer HLS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stanford's more recent rise, especially in terms of international prestige, is notable. Harvard has been somewhat hurt, more outside the US than here, by being viewed as below MIT and Stanford in the hottest STEM fields.

Does Oxbridge get more prestigious based on how Chinese and Indian nationals (as the highest proportion of international students) perceive it? Does Harvard? Stanford? Williams? Grand Ecoles?

Doesn’t work that way…

Exactly. This mindset is a Harvard one..."I can go to a rural Indonesian village and they'll know my college! How powerful!" Sure Harvard man, I too spend time in...Indonesian villages. The Harvard degree runs stellar in America and that's all that really matters for most graduates, not their ability to impress some family 4000 miles away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our kid will be attending Davidson this fall. Before his interest in the school, I didn’t realize how much it benefits from the Duke family endowment. If you’re interested, you can Google it.

Why is the portion of the Duke family endowment that is regularly donated to Duke University not considered part of the Duke University endowment? Given the size of these donations, it suggests that the real Duke endowment figure heavily exceeds the stated value of the Duke University endowment, but I can never figure out what Duke gets out of their perpetually undervaluing their own endowment (particularly when other universities seem to overvalue theirs).

What universities are over or undervaluing their endowments? There are accounting standards that are applied.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s the first or best-first US college, so it’s got historical roots and a long time to collect archives and wealth. Second, it’s near a big city that became a center for commerce and industrialization. Industrialization required science/education. Third, Harvard quickly pivoted from a religious focus to a secular institution and expanded its areas of study to support business, science, and industry. Fourth, in turn wealthy industrialists supported Harvard.

Some have mentioned the rise of Stanford. See any similarities between its location to Silicon Valley, its educational programs, and the source of its wealth.

A good contrast to Harvard is William and Mary. WM is also old and educated many historical figures. But, it was repeatedly decimated by war, both the AR and the Civil War. It was significantly supported by the crown and the Anglican Church, which made it difficult to pivot to a secular university. Finally, Williamsburg was once the capital of Virginia, but it was eventually moved to Richmond. So, WM was not at the center of commerce and new thought. Ironically, Jefferson created UVA as a pivot from WM to emulate the secular universities of the NE. The Rotunda, the focal point of the campus was a library, not a church.

Interesting and accurate take regarding William and Mary. UVA has had the elite draw for generations going back to Jefferson, something no other public college can claim.

No

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For its first 200 years, Harvard was the place where East Coast wealth sent its young men. They weren't there to learn anything practical. That would be for people in the trades. The US was a much more stratified society back then. And Harvard functioned as a kind of finishing school for the male offspring of the elite. And over time, its impact on society compounded with more and more generations of Harvard men becoming presidents, senators, heirs to fortunes, etc. And that has a momentum all on its own. A Harvard degree for a man was essentially their calling card for entry into the elite.

Obviously times are different. But the fascination with Harvard is an echo of that time. It's antiquated, but it persists.

That isn't true. Students tended to not travel very far because travel was to difficult.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our kid will be attending Davidson this fall. Before his interest in the school, I didn’t realize how much it benefits from the Duke family endowment. If you’re interested, you can Google it.

Why is the portion of the Duke family endowment that is regularly donated to Duke University not considered part of the Duke University endowment? Given the size of these donations, it suggests that the real Duke endowment figure heavily exceeds the stated value of the Duke University endowment, but I can never figure out what Duke gets out of their perpetually undervaluing their own endowment (particularly when other universities seem to overvalue theirs).

What universities are over or undervaluing their endowments? There are accounting standards that are applied.

You're going to want to sit down for this . . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our kid will be attending Davidson this fall. Before his interest in the school, I didn’t realize how much it benefits from the Duke family endowment. If you’re interested, you can Google it.

Why is the portion of the Duke family endowment that is regularly donated to Duke University not considered part of the Duke University endowment? Given the size of these donations, it suggests that the real Duke endowment figure heavily exceeds the stated value of the Duke University endowment, but I can never figure out what Duke gets out of their perpetually undervaluing their own endowment (particularly when other universities seem to overvalue theirs).

What universities are over or undervaluing their endowments? There are accounting standards that are applied.

You're going to want to sit down for this . . . .

Which means what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our kid will be attending Davidson this fall. Before his interest in the school, I didn’t realize how much it benefits from the Duke family endowment. If you’re interested, you can Google it.

Why is the portion of the Duke family endowment that is regularly donated to Duke University not considered part of the Duke University endowment? Given the size of these donations, it suggests that the real Duke endowment figure heavily exceeds the stated value of the Duke University endowment, but I can never figure out what Duke gets out of their perpetually undervaluing their own endowment (particularly when other universities seem to overvalue theirs).

What universities are over or undervaluing their endowments? There are accounting standards that are applied.

You're going to want to sit down for this . . . .

Which means what?

Acounting standards are complete crap, particularly for illiquid assets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a question particularly for those knowledgeable about university history. Of the T10 US universities, which are all exceptional, Harvard particularly stands out as a brand--one that surprisingly blows away every other university. This is true even compared to other old universities (like Yale) and especially true from the the vantage point of those outside the US. But in a way, this is surprising because it was not historically inevitable; other universities could have overtaken Harvard, but never did and the brand just seems to be getting stronger. Wealth is not a complete explanation, since there are other wealthy universities (perhaps even wealthier on a per capita basis). It can't be because of extraordinary management, as Harvard is often regarded as somewhat poorly managed and steeped in inertia. So I'm curious what particular historical events transpired to bring Harvard forth as the brand synonymous with university excellence.

It's not. Your whole question is flawed. Biggest brands -- Stanford, MIT, Yale, Princeton.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a question particularly for those knowledgeable about university history. Of the T10 US universities, which are all exceptional, Harvard particularly stands out as a brand--one that surprisingly blows away every other university. This is true even compared to other old universities (like Yale) and especially true from the the vantage point of those outside the US. But in a way, this is surprising because it was not historically inevitable; other universities could have overtaken Harvard, but never did and the brand just seems to be getting stronger. Wealth is not a complete explanation, since there are other wealthy universities (perhaps even wealthier on a per capita basis). It can't be because of extraordinary management, as Harvard is often regarded as somewhat poorly managed and steeped in inertia. So I'm curious what particular historical events transpired to bring Harvard forth as the brand synonymous with university excellence.

It's not. Your whole question is flawed. Biggest brands -- Stanford, MIT, Yale, Princeton.

Yale's branding is culturally non existent compared to MIT, Stanford, and Harvard...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a question particularly for those knowledgeable about university history. Of the T10 US universities, which are all exceptional, Harvard particularly stands out as a brand--one that surprisingly blows away every other university. This is true even compared to other old universities (like Yale) and especially true from the the vantage point of those outside the US. But in a way, this is surprising because it was not historically inevitable; other universities could have overtaken Harvard, but never did and the brand just seems to be getting stronger. Wealth is not a complete explanation, since there are other wealthy universities (perhaps even wealthier on a per capita basis). It can't be because of extraordinary management, as Harvard is often regarded as somewhat poorly managed and steeped in inertia. So I'm curious what particular historical events transpired to bring Harvard forth as the brand synonymous with university excellence.

It's not. Your whole question is flawed. Biggest brands -- Stanford, MIT, Yale, Princeton.

Ha ha. Funny. Harvard trumps them all. And they all had anti-Israel protests by the way, not just Harvard

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard's reputation has definitely suffered in the past couple of years but it's still popular. But if it has some more high profile controversies, it will go downhill fast. PP is right in that they have been letting in a large crop of unimpressive TO students.

Why are their students not impressive? Some people seem to think that Harvard has lost prestige because they have some students and faculty that have been critical of Israel.

That's merely a blip. But it is part of a larger pattern. Harvard admits for undergrad these days are generally not regarded as the best and brightest. And there's a large activist contingent - protesting for the sake of protesting something.

Grad programs are different though. Outside of a few mediocre programs like Kennedy, it's the reason Harvard maintains its academic prestige.

I used to think that the business school was Harvard's power center, but now I think it's the law school. The sheer amount of global power in the alumni of that one part of the institution is just absurd: foreign and domestic heads of state, legislators, SC justices, fortune 500 CEO, entertainment execs, billionaire investors and their billionaire children, authors, national security agents, intellectuals, etc. This doesn't even include their absolutely rock star faculty. I think that one part of the university is responsible for a large part of the Harvard reputation, and my hunch is that once they realize it the law school administration is going to start demanding a lot more in terms of resources from the rest of the university. No more crumbling buildings that look like an inner city slum.

Graduate school is not undergrad — and is program specific. Yale Law is more prestigious than Harvard Law. Which you should know…

Not in global rankings, and not in any meaningful way (i.e., other than US News and various internet weirdos that fixate on their weird methodology.) The depth and reach of Harvard law is frankly unmatched.

Yeah, no; this is not even debatable. Nobody cares about global rankings and what you internationals think…everyone in the U.S. legal community knows Yale is the top (bull)dog.

Very NPC take.

It’s not really a “take”; you are just showing your ignorance.

THe peer reputation subscores in US news rankings have always been the same or higher for Harvard. Not that rankings matter, but I hardly think it's "not even debatable"

“Not even debatable” refers to a certain subset of individuals to which you clearly do not belong.

On another note, if you are the “cart before the horse” poster who deems Harvard’s esteem as being driven by its law school, I can assure you that it is “not even debatable” that Harvard’s esteem derives — and has always derived — from “Harvard College.” The same is true for all elite American schools. Conflating graduate school with undergraduate school prestige is an international thing for those unfamiliar with the U.S. educational system.

I am not the poster you are referring to, and I'm definitely not international, but I think s/he has a point. A lot of the famous alumni people point to (the are actually law school, not college graduates.

I am not a graduate of either, but I have been a biglaw partner, and I definitely think it's debatable which law school is better. Harvard, if I recall correctly, often beats Yale in various peer academic and judge ratings. At least the faculty at HLS seems more impressive, but I think that may actually be because YLS' faculty has fallen over the years. For what it's worth, which may not be much, I know if I was a student being presented with the choice today, I would prefer HLS.

Just trying to follow your logic: it is debatable which law school is better, but Harvard’s unparalleled prestige over any other university is derived from the status of this same law school? I think I got it now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard's reputation has definitely suffered in the past couple of years but it's still popular. But if it has some more high profile controversies, it will go downhill fast. PP is right in that they have been letting in a large crop of unimpressive TO students.

Why are their students not impressive? Some people seem to think that Harvard has lost prestige because they have some students and faculty that have been critical of Israel.

That's merely a blip. But it is part of a larger pattern. Harvard admits for undergrad these days are generally not regarded as the best and brightest. And there's a large activist contingent - protesting for the sake of protesting something.

Grad programs are different though. Outside of a few mediocre programs like Kennedy, it's the reason Harvard maintains its academic prestige.

I used to think that the business school was Harvard's power center, but now I think it's the law school. The sheer amount of global power in the alumni of that one part of the institution is just absurd: foreign and domestic heads of state, legislators, SC justices, fortune 500 CEO, entertainment execs, billionaire investors and their billionaire children, authors, national security agents, intellectuals, etc. This doesn't even include their absolutely rock star faculty. I think that one part of the university is responsible for a large part of the Harvard reputation, and my hunch is that once they realize it the law school administration is going to start demanding a lot more in terms of resources from the rest of the university. No more crumbling buildings that look like an inner city slum.

Graduate school is not undergrad — and is program specific. Yale Law is more prestigious than Harvard Law. Which you should know…

Not in global rankings, and not in any meaningful way (i.e., other than US News and various internet weirdos that fixate on their weird methodology.) The depth and reach of Harvard law is frankly unmatched.

Yeah, no; this is not even debatable. Nobody cares about global rankings and what you internationals think…everyone in the U.S. legal community knows Yale is the top (bull)dog.

Very NPC take.

It’s not really a “take”; you are just showing your ignorance.

THe peer reputation subscores in US news rankings have always been the same or higher for Harvard. Not that rankings matter, but I hardly think it's "not even debatable"

“Not even debatable” refers to a certain subset of individuals to which you clearly do not belong.

On another note, if you are the “cart before the horse” poster who deems Harvard’s esteem as being driven by its law school, I can assure you that it is “not even debatable” that Harvard’s esteem derives — and has always derived — from “Harvard College.” The same is true for all elite American schools. Conflating graduate school with undergraduate school prestige is an international thing for those unfamiliar with the U.S. educational system.

I am not the poster you are referring to, and I'm definitely not international, but I think s/he has a point. A lot of the famous alumni people point to (the are actually law school, not college graduates.

I am not a graduate of either, but I have been a biglaw partner, and I definitely think it's debatable which law school is better. Harvard, if I recall correctly, often beats Yale in various peer academic and judge ratings. At least the faculty at HLS seems more impressive, but I think that may actually be because YLS' faculty has fallen over the years. For what it's worth, which may not be much, I know if I was a student being presented with the choice today, I would prefer HLS.

Just trying to follow your logic: it is debatable which law school is better, but Harvard’s unparalleled prestige over any other university is derived from the status of this same law school? I think I got it now.

When did I say that "Harvard's unparalleled prestige over any other university is derived form the status of this same law school?" You must have been a Yalie...lol.

[Anonymous]

Why are we debating law schools?
Yale is perceived as the #1 law school.
Whether it deserves that status or not is questionable

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are we debating law schools?
Yale is perceived as the #1 law school.
Whether it deserves that status or not is questionable

To be fair, why does Yale always perform the same or worse than Harvard in peer surveys if it is axiomatic that it is perceived that way?