Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Only in person non-executive MBAs mean something. The online MBAs are cash cows for the institutions. The Executive MBAs are cash cows for the institutions.

Prestigious MBAs:
UPenn Wharton
Harvard
Stanford
MIT
Chicago
Northwestern
Columbia
Yale
NYU
Dartmouth
Oxford
Insead
LSE

That's it folks!

The most prestigious MBA degree programs are:

Stanford, Harvard, & Wharton

Chicago & Northwestern

MIT

Columbia, Yale, INSEAD, NYU, & Dartmouth

LSE & Oxford

Agree with minor tweaks to your prestigious MBA list:
Tier 1: Stanford, Harvard, Wharton UPenn [ultimate bragging rights]
Tier 2: MIT [king of quant]
Tier 3: Chicago, Northwestern [USNWR wrong as 1, 2 more appropriately here seems like USNWR tends to elevate these 2 two]
Tier 4: Columbia, Yale, INSEAD, NYU, Dartmouth, LSE, Oxford [Still great, some might put the European schools in Tier 3]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The truth is that most EMBA students would not be admitted to regular MBA programs despite have stellar credentials because EMBA candidates have too much work experience. Regular MBA programs require group projects. Regular MBA students are just learning management skills. A typical EMBA candidate would destroy the balance in an MBA group project due to too much knowledge & experience.

Also, believe it or not, an important part of regular, full-time MBA programs is drinking (socializing) together. Lots of drinking. Some claim that regular full-time MBA programs are as much about drinking/socializing as they are about learning the kiddie steps of management.

Most holders of an undergraduate business degree regard full-time MBA programs as redundant, but may enter an MBA program for a second chance at being hired by a better company for a better position.

Yeah this (ie drinking and socializing) is very much true from what I have seen from a few friends who did it elsewhere as well as those that did the dual degree MSFS/MBA while I was at SFS (which frankly I realize now is another "useless" Masters now that I am out of it and in the market for a while, I am fine since it was free and went towards decent paying career, but I would hate to be saddled with the debt and the low paying jobs out of the MSFS like some of my peers).

Anyway, it seemed like the MBA folks had a great time, had weekly socials and etc. As I view it, an MBA's value is not necessarily what you learn, but the networking you do and the on-campus recruitment that occurs.

(I am the poster who you quoted.)

I agree with your post 100%. However, I would like to add that an MBA program also has value in that it teaches one a framework approaching & resolving problems/business issues.

True that is a great point as well, it does tech you how to think through and address problems companies face. The HBS case method most (all?) MBAs use is quite useful.

Student body has average stats and is too provincial compared to top MBA programs, which pull the best and brightest from around the world.

Georgetown mba here again. Yes it did teach me to evaluate industries and companies as well, so now I can do it for my company. It was a great education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The truth is that most EMBA students would not be admitted to regular MBA programs despite have stellar credentials because EMBA candidates have too much work experience. Regular MBA programs require group projects. Regular MBA students are just learning management skills. A typical EMBA candidate would destroy the balance in an MBA group project due to too much knowledge & experience.

Also, believe it or not, an important part of regular, full-time MBA programs is drinking (socializing) together. Lots of drinking. Some claim that regular full-time MBA programs are as much about drinking/socializing as they are about learning the kiddie steps of management.

Most holders of an undergraduate business degree regard full-time MBA programs as redundant, but may enter an MBA program for a second chance at being hired by a better company for a better position.

Yeah this (ie drinking and socializing) is very much true from what I have seen from a few friends who did it elsewhere as well as those that did the dual degree MSFS/MBA while I was at SFS (which frankly I realize now is another "useless" Masters now that I am out of it and in the market for a while, I am fine since it was free and went towards decent paying career, but I would hate to be saddled with the debt and the low paying jobs out of the MSFS like some of my peers).

Anyway, it seemed like the MBA folks had a great time, had weekly socials and etc. As I view it, an MBA's value is not necessarily what you learn, but the networking you do and the on-campus recruitment that occurs.

(I am the poster who you quoted.)

I agree with your post 100%. However, I would like to add that an MBA program also has value in that it teaches one a framework approaching & resolving problems/business issues.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Historically BusinessWeek/Bloomberg was the ranking of MBA programs that mattered, not USNWR. Maybe that's changed.

1) Stanford
2) Chicago
3) Dartmouth
4) Virginia
5) Columbia
6) Harvard
7) Northwestern
8) Pennsylvania
9) Michigan
10) Berkeley

Georgetown is #24.

Poets&Quants also creates an aggregated ranking.

1) Stanford
2) Harvard
3) Dartmouth
4) Columbia
5) Yale
6) Duke
7) Cornell
8) Virginia
9) Michigan
10) NYU

Poets & Quants rankings are ridiculous; Penn-Wharton is ranked at #31 while Chicago-Booth & Northwestern-Kellogg are ranked at #11 and #12 respectively. What a joke. Chicago-Booth, Northwestern-Kellogg, and Penn-Wharton are all Top 5 MBA programs in the real world.

Agreed. That person is completely talking out of their a**. No one in the MBA world takes the Bloomberg/BWeek rankings seriously. It's always been USNWR, for better or worse.

Anonymous wrote:The truth is that most EMBA students would not be admitted to regular MBA programs despite have stellar credentials because EMBA candidates have too much work experience. Regular MBA programs require group projects. Regular MBA students are just learning management skills. A typical EMBA candidate would destroy the balance in an MBA group project due to too much knowledge & experience.

Also, believe it or not, an important part of regular, full-time MBA programs is drinking (socializing) together. Lots of drinking. Some claim that regular full-time MBA programs are as much about drinking/socializing as they are about learning the kiddie steps of management.

Most holders of an undergraduate business degree regard full-time MBA programs as redundant, but may enter an MBA program for a second chance at being hired by a better company for a better position.

Yeah this (ie drinking and socializing) is very much true from what I have seen from a few friends who did it elsewhere as well as those that did the dual degree MSFS/MBA while I was at SFS (which frankly I realize now is another "useless" Masters now that I am out of it and in the market for a while, I am fine since it was free and went towards decent paying career, but I would hate to be saddled with the debt and the low paying jobs out of the MSFS like some of my peers).

Anyway, it seemed like the MBA folks had a great time, had weekly socials and etc. As I view it, an MBA's value is not necessarily what you learn, but the networking you do and the on-campus recruitment that occurs.

Anonymous wrote:An interesting aspect of EMBA programs is that other members of one's cohort can be instrumental in getting a classmate a plum job interview. The contacts made in EMBA programs are very valuable and can lead to meaningful recommendations for particular positions only available to those with relevant work experience and a history of success. Some companies are hard to get into, but knowing an experienced manager or executive can remove barriers and open doors.

That was me.

Why talk to a recruiter when I already have weekly study group with a senior executive at the company? And we are taking about their real business problems all the time?

I got all the interviews I wanted, people knew me and my work. They could vouch for me.

But oh no not the lack of prestige!!!!!!

I didn’t even know Georgetown had an MBA program and I’ve lived here forever. Not a top
Program

The truth is that most EMBA students would not be admitted to regular MBA programs despite have stellar credentials because EMBA candidates have too much work experience. Regular MBA programs require group projects. Regular MBA students are just learning management skills. A typical EMBA candidate would destroy the balance in an MBA group project due to too much knowledge & experience.

Also, believe it or not, an important part of regular, full-time MBA programs is drinking (socializing) together. Lots of drinking. Some claim that regular full-time MBA programs are as much about drinking/socializing as they are about learning the kiddie steps of management.

Most holders of an undergraduate business degree regard full-time MBA programs as redundant, but may enter an MBA program for a second chance at being hired by a better company for a better position.

An interesting aspect of EMBA programs is that other members of one's cohort can be instrumental in getting a classmate a plum job interview. The contacts made in EMBA programs are very valuable and can lead to meaningful recommendations for particular positions only available to those with relevant work experience and a history of success. Some companies are hard to get into, but knowing an experienced manager or executive can remove barriers and open doors.

Regarding whether or not an EMBA is prestigious (or even more prestigious than an MBA) is an odd question.

EMBAs are for experienced, successful executives with lots of work experience who are typically being groomed by their current employer for a higher position within the business organization.

Regular MBA students primary interest focuses on switching careers.

The course material is the same at Kellogg, Booth, & Wharton for EMBAs & MBAs, but EMBAs discuss issues & problems at a higher level than do the less experienced regular MBA candidates.

At U Penn-Wharton:

EMBA students average 12 to 13 years of work experience versus 4 years work experience in the full-time MBA program

The 80% GMAT range is higher for EMBA candidates: EMBA 680-750 versus 570-760 MBA

EMBA candidates are focusing on increasing management skills while MBA are focused on learning management skills.

EMBA programs are strictly cohort based while MBA students can choose different electives courses than those taken by their peers.

The typical EMBA candidate would be bored & frustrated in a regular MBA program due to the lack of experience. Full-time MBA candidates have to learn the kiddie steps that a typical EMBA candidate mastered years ago.

It can be time and cost effective to do a decent part-time MBA program in the evenings if one is still fairly young and has stamina. I did it in 2 years with employer covering most of the cost, it was pre-kids and took most of the evenings and one summer, but really helped my career and also served as an indicator of my work capacity to my org and also future employers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't consider an MBA to be prestigious these days, regardless of the university. Everyone has one. They are as common as BA/BS degrees. Also, most MBA programs can now be completed fairly easily online even from prestigious universities.

My spoiled niece had her retired dad do most of her online MBA work. They are a total farce. And I believe Georgetown has all sorts of online and weekend MBA programs, so who knows who actually did a “real” one. Credentialism has jumped the shark. Too many nitwits with too many bogus degrees.

I think it is relatively easy to differentiate between a full MBA at the business school and abbreviated MBAs at extension schools. I imagine most schools are quite clear about notifying students about how to describe their “degree”. At least at Georgetown they were and I was in the regular full program.

I would never assume an executive MBA had any relationship to a full MBA. It doesn’t make a full MBA useless just because a condensed versions, which can be differentiated, exist.

Doesn’t Georgetown offer both an executive MBA (or profession development / night school) as well as a real MBA?

Are they really much different? Are they perceived differently by employers?

Typically, an executive MBA is more prestigious than just a regular MBA for youngsters with just a couple of years of post-undergraduate degree work experience.

Actually, it’s just the opposite, I see an executive mba as more of an honorary degree. That one is definitely part time or online, and given to people who have already made it to the C suite or senior leadership. The full-time MBAs usually have around 5 years of work experience and actually have to do work in their classes.

Reasonable opinion for one who lacks actual knowledge, but I disagree. Regular full-time MBAs are for those with 2 to 5 years of post-undergraduate degree work experience; Executive MBAs typically require at least 10 years of post-undergraduate work experience and 5 years work experience as a manager or above. all executive MBAs are cohort based and are designed to be part-time as most or usually all participants are working while enrolled in an EMBA program.

Regular MBA candidates would be lost in an EMBA program. Regular MBAs are at the kiddie stage with respect to management know-how and experience.

No. Executive MBAs are NOT prestigious.

Agree 100%

Anonymous wrote:Only in person non-executive MBAs mean something. The online MBAs are cash cows for the institutions. The Executive MBAs are cash cows for the institutions.

Prestigious MBAs:
UPenn Wharton
Harvard
Stanford
MIT
Chicago
Northwestern
Columbia
Yale
NYU
Dartmouth
Oxford
Insead
LSE

That's it folks!

The most prestigious MBA degree programs are:

Stanford, Harvard, & Wharton

Chicago & Northwestern

MIT

Columbia, Yale, INSEAD, NYU, & Dartmouth

LSE & Oxford