The Massive Pay Day For Stanford MBAs + The Big Differences Between U.S. & European MBA Programs
Maria |
December 12, 2023

In this episode of Business Casual, the hosts discuss the high demand for MBAs, referencing the soaring salaries of Stanford MBA graduates. They delve into how these salaries are linked to the school’s admission policies and its focus on high-paying sectors like private equity. The conversation also covers the differences between European and US MBA programs, highlighting the international focus and diverse experiences offered by European schools. Additionally, they address the challenges American students might face when returning to work in the US after studying in Europe, emphasizing the need for proactive job hunting.

John also encourages everyone to visit the Poets and Quants website for more insights into the differences between MBA programs and recent employment reports from top business schools.

Episode Transcript

[00:00:07.210] – John

Well, hello, everyone. This is John Byrne with Poets and Quants. Welcome to Business Casual, our weekly podcast with my co hosts, Maria Wich Vila and Caroline Diarte Edwards. As you all know by now, Caroline is the former head of admissions, INSEAD, and the co founder of Fortuna Admissions. And Maria is the founder of Applicant Lab. Right around now, one after the other, business calls are basically releasing their employment reports for this year. And I’ll tell you, the big takeaway is clear to me, and the takeaway is that MBAs are clearly in great demand based on the compensation that they’re receiving right at graduation. And we just published a report on the class that is generally the highest paid in the world, and that is the class of Stanford MBAs. And the numbers, frankly, are staggering. The average total compensation for a Stanford MBA this year reached more than $275,000. That’s up nearly 20,000 from 2022. Now, how does that even happen? Well, for one thing, the average base salary is 189. Slightly more the sign on bonus. The average this year grew, actually an astounding 25% to 42,249. And then one thing that Stanford does that a lot of other schools have discontinued doing, is asking its graduates what their expected performance bonus for the year will be.

[00:01:51.430] – John

And the average there, and this is an eye opener as well, is over 99,000. Now, how do you make sense of these numbers? I’ll tell you what. The real secret behind them is private equity. Stanford, more than any other school, and this includes schools known for finance, like Wharton, Columbia, Chicago. Booth, puts more of its class, as a percentage, into the field of private equity, which is without question the highest paying field that an MBA can enter into, PE jobs. And that’s largely because Stanford has an advantage over any other school. And it’s not the instruction in PE at Stanford that makes them stand out. It’s their admissions policies. Stanford is able to bring in a high percentage of people who already work in PE or venture capital or investment management, and then they’re funneled out into PE jobs again that pay very highly. And that is really the secret behind these very big numbers. And it’s just really astounding. I mean, don’t they shock you, Maria?

[00:03:04.110] – Maria

I don’t know. I guess inflation is a real thing everywhere these days, right? It’s not shocking. I mean, the numbers for salaries go up every year for the most part. And private equity and those sorts of similar roles are amongst the highest paying, not just out of business school, but in the world, probably. And so, as you pointed to, I think Stanford, when it comes to letting people in. It’s the exact opposite of the adage of garbage in, garbage out. It’s like gold in, gold out. Right. They let in people who are already extraordinarily accomplished in these fields. And so what employer wouldn’t want to take someone who already has a couple of years of VC or PE experience, then went through the two year Stanford program and is now emerging on the other side of these. If these folks, they might make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, but if they can bring in millions of dollars a year of profit to their firms in one way or the other, then it sort of seems like a win win situation for everyone.

[00:04:09.150] – John

Yeah, that’s really true. Caroline, you have any perspective on this from sort of a European

[00:04:15.400] – John

lens?

[00:04:16.250] – Caroline

Well, from my perspective of living here in 3 miles from the Stanford campus, a lot of the graduates stay in this area and the cost of living is one of the highest in the world. So I think that also inflates the salaries for these graduates because there’s a huge chunk, I don’t know exactly what the percentage is that stay in the Bay Area, but it’s a very large number and the cost of living is extraordinarily high. So employers have to reflect that in the office that they’re making.

[00:04:45.320] – John

Yes, absolutely.

[00:04:46.680] – Caroline

And that also means that people sometimes take those numbers at face value. And I think sometimes schools in other areas get penalized in the rankings and in how people read those salary statistics because they are feeding into a very different geographical market. And that’s true, I think for some of the US schools as well as for sure some of the international schools where the graduates are not necessarily going into such a concentrated geographical region where the cost of living is so high. So Stanford in some ways benefits from the high cost of living in the Bay Area because the salary statistics look fantastic as a result.

[00:05:31.240] – John

Yes, and I should just put a little granular detail on my comments earlier, which is this year nearly a third of Stanford’s graduates accepted jobs in just PE or venture capital. And the PE base salary for the 18% of Stanford graduate went into private equity was over 200,000, 215,000. Just base salary, median sign on bonuses 27500. But here’s the real eye popping number. First year performance bonuses expected of people who go into PE from Stanford. $160,000. If you want to know why Stanford always does so well in rankings, there’s your proof. Because essentially rankings heavily weigh starting compensation. In fact, pay and placement generally are the two most important metrics in almost all the rankings. And if your MBAs are bringing home the bacon like that, your school is going to do exceptionally well in the rankings no matter what, regardless of how much money these people were earning when they entered the school. And you can bet they’re earning well into six figures to be able to come out and make money like that. And as we have said here before, jobs in private equity are hard to get. And generally they go to MBAs who already have worked in private equity, which is sort of a catch 22 of some kind because many people will see these numbers and say, oh my God, I want to work in PE.

[00:07:05.290] – John

But frankly, if you don’t have prior PE experience in which you will be paid a good sum of money to begin with, your chances of actually landing a PE job post MBA are pretty low. The other thing we want to talk about, and I think this is fascinating, is a column that Caroline has written that’s on her website and it’s on the major differences between the European and the US MBA programs. And I love this piece because it very clearly articulates the things that you may not basically absorb or you might even take for granted, and does so in a way that really creates a pretty stark contrast between what an MBA experience is like in the US and what one might be like in Europe. Caroline, I’ll let you take the lead on this.

[00:07:55.990] – Caroline

Sure. Thank you, John. Yeah, I wanted to write this article for a while because I often get asked by candidates about this. Right. People often come to me as a coach because they’re thinking about an international MBA program and they want to talk to me about INSEAD and other international options. And I’ve lived in the US for many years. I’m very familiar with the US calls as well. So it’s often a discussion I have. So now I will be able to send them the article on your website, read this first and then we’ll talk. So I’m very happy to have that as a sort of primer for some candidates who are asking questions about that. To me, I think the key difference is the international dimension at the European schools. And I think that infuses the whole experience in a way that makes it very different from the experience that you will have at a us school. And that’s something that has really been a core part of the dna of these schools from the very beginning. INSEAD was set up about 70 years ago with the aim of. And it was set up by some former Harvard professors who wanted to set up the Harvard Business School of Europe and really make it a pan European program.

[00:09:12.370] – Caroline

And as the decades progressed, that pan European vision became really a global vision. And other schools such as London Business School, ESA, IE, increasingly Oxford, Cambridge, HEC Paris and so on, have also attracted a very global audience. And so that’s very much part of why you would go to one of these schools if you’re looking for that international perspective. So you will be in a classroom and you’ll be working in teams with people who have incredibly different backgrounds from you, professionally as well as culturally. And that can make it very challenging, right? It can make it extremely frustrating sometimes because you’ll be working with people who just have a totally different mindset to you, who’s come at things from a very, very different perspective. And that can be tough, but it’s also an incredibly rich learning experience. And I’ve talked to professors who have taught both at schools like in Seattle and London Business School as well as schools in the US. And they say it’s actually harder in many ways to teach at the international schools because you have that incredible diversity of perspective that you may have something thrown at you from completely left field that you have not anticipated.

[00:10:34.170] – Caroline

And sometimes I’ve seen professors struggle with that, quite frankly, because it is such an extraordinary mix of backgrounds and experience and perspectives and opinions. And so I think that is very enriching for someone who is looking to be internationally mobile in their career. Sometimes candidates come to me and they are based in the US and they’re know, wouldn’t it be wonderful to go and live in Fontainebleau or Singapore or London or Paris or Barcelona for a year and have a wonderful international experience? And then I’ll come back to the US and their career is completely focused on the US. And in most cases, I would advise those people to do their MBA in the US. Don’t do your MBA as a sort of like international. Exactly. You need to think about where your recruiting opportunities are going to be and where your alumni network is going to be. And if you are focused on staying in the US, in most cases, I think you’re better off doing your MBA here because your alumni network will be stronger in the US.

[00:11:45.410] – John

And Caroline, don’t most of the European schools actually put a cap on the number of students that they enroll from their home country?

[00:11:53.410] – Caroline

Well, so I think they have to be careful about saying if they put a cap or not. But in practice, they are looking to get as diverse an audience as possible. And their marketing efforts are really geared towards attracting an applicant pool that is very diverse. So I don’t think it’s necessarily much harder to get in as a domestic fact, you know, I know, for example, at London Business School, I’ve heard them complain that they have problems getting enough brits to apply because the Brits will want to go somewhere else to do their MBA. So sometimes, in fact, these schools are not getting as many domestic applicants as they would like. So they really gear the marketing efforts to bring in, attract that international audience. And therefore, I don’t think that you’re necessarily at a disadvantage if you come from one particular pool over the other, because the applicant pool is incredibly diverse.

[00:12:51.820] – John

Yeah, I guess the point I’m trying to make is that in us schools, you’re going to find plenty of international students, but always in the top schools, the majority of students will be domestic. And if you go to London Business School or HEC, Paris or INSEAD, you’re never going to find the majority of students coming from the home country, as you always will in a top program in the US.

[00:13:16.130] – Caroline

Yeah, that’s right. I was looking at your article on the Columbia class profile and I think it’s 47% international. So that’s pretty significant. It’s probably the most international program in the US. But if you dig into that, a lot of those students have lived in the US. They’re probably green card holders and a substantial chunk. So their work experience is often from the US, even though they may have an international profile. Whereas if you go to one of these international programs, then you’re more likely to be in a cohort of people who have really literally worked all over the world and are bringing that very diverse perspective. And then another key difference, of course, is that a lot of the programs in Europe are one year programs rather than two year programs. So INSEAD had pioneered the one year format when the school was founded, and a lot of other schools have followed suit. There are some exceptions. So London Business School has a two year program, but they do offer accelerated options where you can graduate after 15 months or 18 months. And then ESA is a two year program. But the majority of the programs in Europe are one year programs.

[00:14:30.210] – Caroline

And that’s a very compelling value proposition. Right? It means that you are paying tuition, fees and living expenses and foregoing your salary for one year rather than two years. And we can see in the salary statistics that a lot of those graduates are commanding impressive salaries when they graduate. So these programs typically do very well when you’re looking at return on investment. And that is often a big reason why people choose these programs, because they may be coming from countries where they don’t have those impressive salaries that we were just talking about, the private equity crowd that goes to Stanford who are earning six figure sums before they go to business school. That is not necessarily the case for many of the students feeding into the international programs. Often they’re coming from emerging economies where the salaries are much, much lower, and so they have not had the saving capacity. Or perhaps they don’t want to take out a loan to pay 200 300,000 to get themselves through a top us program. And in that case, the one year proposition is very compelling, right?

[00:15:40.090] – John

Yes, totally. Maria, do you have any thoughts on the differences in terms of how you advise clients?

[00:15:46.850] – Maria

Yeah, I think one of the things that Caroline pointed out in her article that I have also advised people on is that the European programs do tend to place value on more seasoned candidates.

[00:15:58.760] – Caroline

Right.

[00:15:59.010] – Maria

Candidates who are perhaps a little bit older than what some of the US programs are looking for. And I think it’s a deliberate choice because I think they want to bring in students who have a much deeper professional experience, who can then contribute much more in terms of classroom discussion. And so I think that’s what helps. Caroline notes in her article that, say a one year program covers about 80% of the same amount of material as a two year program, even though it’s significantly shorter. And I think the reason they can do that is because the students are coming in with a lot more lived experience and a lot more professional experience. So I think the European programs are a great choice, especially for people who might be a little bit more seasoned. The US schools, I think, sometimes miss out on some terrific talent by focusing a bit more on folks who have a couple of years less experience. So the European programs can also be great from that perspective as well.

[00:16:54.040] – John

Caroline, the other differences that you mentioned in your article go to teaching style and international exposure. Obviously, if you have a greater number of classmates that are from far flung places all over the world, they’re going to bring a much more international look at every single issue. And you were going mentioning earlier how some of these views are quite divergent and result in pretty stimulating, if disappointing or difficult conversations in some cases. Because obviously we’re in the US here, often accused of jungle capitalism in other parts of the world may even be anti capitalist or have a much more gentle view of capitalism. You’re more likely to be exposed to these various viewpoints in a classroom, right?

[00:17:52.150] – Caroline

Yes, that’s right. And the professors do rely a lot on the input and the perspectives of the students. And as Maria said, that’s also why the schools are offered admitting candidates who are, on average, maybe a year or two older than the average age in the US programs. Because with a one year format, they can’t rely as heavily as the US schools on the case study method. Because the case study method is great, but it’s pretty laborious and it really takes time to teach everything through the case study method. So on a one year program, they will definitely use case studies and that’ll be a big component of the teaching methodology, but they will also have a lot of other formats. Right? It may be lecture and discussion, it may be simulations, it may be team projects, because they are trying to be very efficient in how they are delivering the knowledge and teaching students, and they’re looking to be very time efficient. And so because they’re not relying so much on the case study method, having that experience and richness of professional and cultural experience in the classroom enables the professors to draw on that and rely on that more heavily than referring back to a case study all the time.

[00:19:13.800] – Caroline

Right? So that facilitated discussion is really a key component of the learning experience. And people often comment that they learn more, in fact, from their fellow classmates than they do from the professors. And it’s not disparaging to the professors, it’s just that you are working alongside people, learning alongside people who have such fascinating experience and so different from what you’ve done. And it can be very life changing for some people, right. You will be enticed to, perhaps enticed to a career path that you wouldn’t have otherwise thought of because of the discussions and the learning you have in that very diverse environment.

[00:19:57.070] – John

Right? And of course, this all affects the alumni network and the recruitment opportunities, as you point out in your article. How does it change one’s network that you graduate into?

[00:20:10.390] – Caroline

Yeah. So you have a much more globally dispersed network. So whereas with the US schools, the huge bulk of the network is based in the US and North America, and certainly they do have a global network, especially the bigger schools like Wharton and Harvard Business School. They do have a global network, but it’s much thinner on the ground internationally than schools like INSEAD and London Business School. And so that is tremendously valuable if you’re thinking that you might be internationally mobile in the mean. My personal experience is when I graduated from INSEAD, I went to work in Indonesia, and since then I’ve worked well, I worked in France with INSEAD, I’ve also lived in India. And each time that I’ve moved, I’ve been able to tap into a local INSEAD network and that has been absolutely invaluable. My husband, as you know, did his MBA at Stanford. And so now that we’re here in Silicon Valley, right, there’s no better network to have than Stanford GSB, for sure. When we were moving around, he often tapped into my network because there’s just far more INSEAD graduates around the world than there are Stanford GSB graduates because so many of them, it’s a much smaller program and so many of them stay in the US and in fact, vast majority, as you’ve said, or a big chunk stay in the Bay Area.

[00:21:36.530] – John

Right.

[00:21:37.040] – Caroline

So I think you need to think about where you’re going to be in the future and which network would be useful for you. It’s also, of course, a big challenge for the careers services team because if you are managing career services for a school like INSEAD, you have to manage relationships with recruiters really around the world, right? The graduates are going to work in, not sure how many it is now, but it’s sort of 60, 70, 80 different countries around the world every year straight out of the program. And so that’s much more complex to manage than it is for the US schools, where they’re primarily feeding into a domestic market. On the other hand, that can also be a strength. And I saw that when I was working at INSEAD because we went through an economic downturn. And if you’re reliant on one specific geography, that can hit you very hard. But I remember at that time, recruitment had gone down, for example, in Europe, but it had picked up in the Middle east. And so it means that I guess the schools in some ways have a more diversified portfolio of recruitment opportunities because they are feeding into positions all over the world and in a lot of different industries.

[00:22:55.680] – Caroline

And therefore that can be a great buffer in a time of economic turmoil because graduates may well be able to find, may well find that recruiters from certain regions are still recruiting heavily, even if in some other regions they are not.

[00:23:11.310] – John

Right. Now, Maria, from your perspective, if you’re an American and you want to work in the United States, but you want the kind of global exposure a European MBA would give you, will you have difficulty coming back and working in the US after you graduate with an MBA from a London Business School or an INSEAD or an aces, say, Paris, what do you think?

[00:23:35.460] – Maria

I’m not sure about difficulty, might be overstating it, but I definitely think it would be more challenging. Right. If you are studying, say, in New York City and you are recruiting for companies that are based in New York City, it’s that much easier to not only attend their formal recruiting events, but even informally, perhaps sign up to do a project with a certain company or things like that. So I do know, as Caroline alluded to, the career services offices in these European programs are trying to place students literally all over the world. And so as a result, I do think that the onus will be much more on you if you want to come back to the US. However, the good news is if you’re already an American citizen or a legal resident, you won’t have the worry of the work visa and the h one b lottery and all of that hanging over your head. But I do suspect that you’d have to do a lot more footwork on your own to network your way into that role. Right. I’m not sure if the US offices of, let’s say, the Chicago office of Bain, they might be recruiting at London Business School, for example, but it’s probably a lot more likely that they’re focusing on the schools that are more geographically closer to, you know, as Caroline said, I think, look, if you want that international experience, I think it’s certainly very valuable, but just, I think go in with eyes wide open that you might have to put in a bit more effort and be a bit more flexible in terms of your job opportunities coming back, I suspect.

[00:25:07.900] – John

Yeah. And Caroline, you think that makes.

[00:25:13.570] – Caroline

Mean. I know some of my classmates who’ve come back to the US and made very successful careers here. So people certainly do make it happen. You just need to be aware, as Maria said, that recruiters aren’t going to be recruiting in such large volumes for us offices on those European campuses. Something that you may be able to do is do an exchange program. So, for example, from INSEAD you can exchange for some of the US schools like Wharton and Kellogg. And so often students will do that and spend a semester in the US if they’re looking to target the US market. And that enables them to take advantage of career services while they’re in the US and build their network locally. So people certainly do make it work. And the European schools do have a growing network in the US. You just need to be aware that as Maria said, you may need to be much more proactive in your job search to make it happen if you want to come back to the US.

[00:26:17.050] – John

All right, well, check it out. It’s called the seven key differences between us and European MBA programs. It’s on our homepage. Already over 4500 people have read this story, so maybe you’ll be 4501 and you’ll also see the latest employment reports that are tumbling out of the schools right now. Stanford and Berkeley just came out. We have a host of others that are about to come out, and quite a few before Stanford and Berkeley, including Harvard and Dartmouth, Tuck and others. So check them all out. Meantime, thanks for listening. This is John Byrne with Poets and Quants.

The Massive Pay Day For Stanford MBAs + The Big Differences Between U.S. & European MBA Programs
Maria |
December 12, 2023

[00:00:00] John Byrne: Well hello everyone, this is John Byrne with Poets and Quants, welcome to Business Casual, our weekly podcast with my co-hosts Maria Wich-Vila and Caroline Diarte Edwards. Today we have a special guest, Heidi Hillis from Fortuna Admissions. She is based in Australia, is a senior expert coach for Fortuna, and has three degrees, all from Stanford, a BA in English literature, that’s my degree, an MA in Russian studies, and an MBA from the Graduate School of Business. And we have Heidi here to discuss some really fascinating research. Here’s what Fortuna did. They dug into the last Two class profiles of the Stanford Graduate School of Business.

That’s the class of โ€˜23 and the class of โ€˜24. They looked up all these folks on LinkedIn to identify a little bit more about their backgrounds, including their former employers and their places of undergraduate education to come up with an incredible analysis. Heidi, welcome.

[00:00:46] Heidi Hillis: Thank you. I’m glad to be here.

[00:00:48] John Byrne: Heidi, what is, what are the big takeaways from your deep dive discovery?

[00:00:54] Heidi Hillis: It’s hard to know even where to start. I think there’s a quite a few interesting kind of trends that we’ve seen that have taken place over the years. We were mentioning before the call that traditionally there hadn’t been, 10 years ago, if you’d looked, you wouldn’t have seen so many tech companies represented, but now there’s a big presence of tech companies who are feeding a lot of these MBA programs in Stanford in particular.

I think that the thing that was really interesting was, looking, not just at where the companies that were feeding the students, the applicants to Stanford. When they were working there, when they were applying, but actually the paths that they took prior to their current job.

So how many people were working, if you look at McKinsey, for example, or Bain and BCG, those are obviously companies that feed a lot of applicants to the program, but we found 20%, which seemed to be normal of, the class came from consulting, but if you actually look into the numbers in their background, You would see that actually 37 percent of these two classes had worked at McKinsey sometime prior, or actually in consulting, so it was, it’s The kind of the patterns that are behind, what you would normally see in terms of what Stanford tells us.

So you get a sense of the paths that people have taken. And so that’s something that was really interesting to see.

[00:02:16] John Byrne: Absolutely. And of course, this is this analysis goes so far beyond what any applicant would learn by simply looking at the class profile that the school up because, this level of detail is never available to people.

[00:02:33] Heidi Hillis: No, and yeah, for example, you could see that, Stanford will say that they have around, each year around 50 percent of applicants are international, which is a great statistic and gives you lots of hope if you are an international student. But when you dig into the numbers, you actually understand that.

75 percent of the people who get into Stanford actually went to a U. S. University. So even if you’re international, it does have does seem to have kind of an advantage of having been educated in the U. S. That seems to be something that they look for. However, I think. The concentration of universities in the U.

S. that are feeding to Stanford is something also that, if you’re looking at it, you might find a little bit dis, disconcerting. There’s a few programs that are really, obviously the top. Programs as you would expect places like Harvard, Stanford, Yale, the Ivies but if you look at the international universities very diverse from all over the world, really lots of people from different places, which is also really interesting.

[00:03:38] John Byrne: Yeah I tell you, one of the things that struck me in the data is how consistent it is. 10 years ago, we did the same exercise at Stanford and a bunch of other. Schools from Harvard and Dartmouth and Columbia and talk and a few others and back 10 years ago, we found that 25. 2 percent of the class of 2013 were from Ivy League colleges.

And the Ivy League 8 schools, not including Stanford. And if you included Stanford, it would have been 32. 6%. So now, let’s move forward to your data. And in 23, 30. 7 percent went to Ivy League schools, even above the 25. 2. And in 24, 27. 9 percent went to Ivy League schools. So it looks like Stanford has gotten even a little bit more elitist than it was.

Yeah,

[00:04:41] Heidi Hillis: It’s, it is it’s what the data says, right? Obviously, this is a sample. We have 80 percent of the two classes. So we don’t know where those other people went. And that might skew the data a little bit in another direction. But it is, if you look at there’s 15 schools, that include the Ivy’s and then you have UC Berkeley and obviously Stanford that really are contributing, 49 percent of the class of 23, 47. 3 percent of the class of 24. So that is a pretty heavy concentration and But, if you actually look into the data, you see a lot of people also, each of these is actually an individual story.

You see a lot of people who come from other schools as well. So it’s not like you have to give up hope if you come from a different school. I see a lot of individual stories that, from the whole range of U. S. schools that really are feeding into Stanford. So I think what the data doesn’t also tell you, unfortunately, is how many of these Of people from these backgrounds are actually applying.

So

[00:05:39] John Byrne: good point.

[00:05:40] Heidi Hillis: It’s it’s hard to know. And sometimes I think people this is. A path that a lot of people who go to these schools plan to take from the very beginning. So I would see, it would be interesting to know that I don’t know that we will ever find that out. But, um, that’s something to keep in mind as well.

[00:05:56] John Byrne: Yeah. And that’s a fair point. Because how reflective are these results of the applicant pool reflective of an elitist attitude probably a combination of if I had to guess, but, it is what it is, and these institutions obviously are great filters, so you come from McKinsey, Bain, BCG, and you go to Harvard or Stanford or Penn, and you pass through a fine filter, and it makes you less of a admissions risk than if you went to, frankly, the University of Kentucky and worked for a company that no one knows of.

That’s just the reality of elite MBA admissions, right?

[00:06:40] Heidi Hillis: Yeah. And so you will see that the people who are not going, you’ll see a lot of the people who you would, the profiles that you would expect, the Harvard undergrad that then goes to Goldman that then was working at a PE firm.

That’s a really typical profile that you’ll see. But you’ll also see some really, unique and interesting ones, which I think, Okay. Helps you understand that if you don’t have that path, you also have a real chance at these schools, and maybe even more of a chance, again, not knowing, how many of those Goldman P.

E. Harvard grads are applying. So I’m thinking of the guy that I saw who he went to UPenn undergrad, studied engineering, started out a kind of pretty typical path working in private equity, but then made a big pivot to work for go to Poland where he was working in a real estate investment firm and the head coach of the Polish lacrosse team.

So you have really interesting profiles like that, that you can see that. aren’t necessarily taking that typical path. And sometimes that really does help you stand out.

[00:07:42] John Byrne: True. Maria, what surprised you most about the data?

[00:07:48] Maria Wich-Vila: Wow. I think we already covered, the, one of the biggest ones was the number, the percentage of people who would had some sort of either their undergraduate or graduate education within the United States.

Intuitively, I had felt that was true. And sometimes when I try to, give some honest, tough love to applicants from certain countries, and they’ll say, oh, but Maria, I think you’re being a little too pessimistic. After all, X percent of the applicants at these schools are international, and Y percent are from a certain geography internationally.

I’ll say yes, but that doesn’t mean that they’re all Solely from that area. A lot of them are, do have significant international educational experiences. I think another, speaking of the international piece the percentage of people who had significant international work experience as well was something else that really jumped out at me.

Because it would signal to me that Stanford really does value this global perspective both within probably its domestic applicants and also its international applicants. So I thought that was also a really interesting piece of data that jumped out at me.

[00:08:52] John Byrne: Now remind me what percentage was that?

[00:08:56] Heidi Hillis: People who are international

[00:08:58] John Byrne: who have had international work experience.

[00:09:01] Heidi Hillis: I think it was 30%.

[00:09:02] Caroline Diarte Edwards: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, it’s pretty

[00:09:04] John Byrne: impressive.

[00:09:04] Caroline Diarte Edwards: 30%, which I was thrilled to see. As well as coming from in Seattle and Europe. Obviously the international schools put a heavy emphasis on international experience and I hadn’t fully appreciated that. A school like Stanford would also.

really value that to the same extent. And it’s great to see that candidates are making the effort to get outside of the U. S. and get international experience because I think you gain so much from that exposure. And you bring more to the classroom if you’ve got that experience. I know that both Maria and Heidi.

I’ve worked outside of the home countries as well. Pre MBA and I think that you just have so much more to contribute to the whole experience. And it was great to see that 30%.

[00:09:50] John Byrne: What else struck you, Caroline?

[00:09:53] Caroline Diarte Edwards: We talked about the concentration of academic institutions, and I was also surprised about the concentration in employers.

So while there is a very long list of employers where the students have worked pre MBA when you dig into the career paths that they’ve taken there is some interesting concentration. Heidi had noted that the reports that There are 26 companies that account for nearly one third of the class in terms of where they were working right before Stanford.

But when you look at their whole career history, those same 26 companies represent over 60 percent of the class. So that is, yeah, that’s quite extraordinary that so many of the class have experience of working at quite a short list of companies.

[00:10:46] Heidi Hillis: I think that’s reflective of, if you really think about it, you have a lot of these companies.

You’re talking about the Goldmans and the Morgan Stanley and McKinsey that have really large programs that recruit out of undergrad that are really training grounds for. A lot of people that then on to do, work in industry or go on to work for in finance in particular, a lot of people starting out at some of these bulge bracket banks and then going into.

Private equity or smaller firms. So the diversity within finance in terms of where they were working prior to MBA is quite large compared to consulting because there just aren’t as many consulting firms, but a lot of people in financing, a lot of different firms, but they, a lot of them really do start out in these training programs, these analyst programs that are so big and popular.

[00:11:34] John Byrne: Yeah, true. And looking back, I did this exercise as well. The feeder companies to Stanford 10 years ago in the class of 2023, 22. 8 percent from McKinsey, Bain, BCG, and your data, 22. 5 percent work there. Incredible consistency over a 10 year period. When you look at the top six employers 10 years ago, they were McKinsey, BCG, Bain, Goldman, Morgan Stanley, and JP.

Morgan Chase. They accounted alone for 34 percent of all the students in the class of 20, 2013 at Stanford. In your data for 23 and 24 they account for 29. 8%, just a few percentage points less. So remarkable consistency. And I think you’re right, Heidi, this is a function of the fact that these firms bring in a lot of people who are analysts and actually expect them after 3 to 5 years to go to a top MBA school.

So there’s a good number of them in the applicant pool to choose from and let’s face it, they’re terrific candidates.

[00:12:46] Heidi Hillis: Yeah. I think another pool of really terrific candidates that you see, and I don’t know what the 2013 data was saying, but is the US military, which is really, I think, again, something that I felt having worked with lots of military candidates myself, understand that, Yeah, intuitively, I would have expected, but to see it in the data is actually really interesting.

You just see Stanford in particular, I think, is really looking for leadership potential, and it’s so hard to show that as an analyst, as a consultant, but as in the military, these people have such incredible leadership experience that it really helps them to stand out.

[00:13:23] John Byrne: Yeah. And let’s tell people what the data shows.

How many out of us military academies,

[00:13:28] Heidi Hillis: In all in total, we had, 20 over the two years. So that’s in the two classes that we found. So that’s, a pretty large number. And they come from all the different academies, right? So you’ll find them from different, not academies, in the army, navy and the marines.

So you’ll see that. And you also see quite a few, in the data we’ll, we see a lot from the Israeli military as well, but that’s actually a little bit difficult to because every Israeli does go into the military. So it’s they have that in their background. Any Israeli candidate would have Israeli military background as well, but again, that’s.

Place that people can really highlight their leadership. So you had eight people from who had been, who were Israeli and obviously had military experience where they were able to demonstrate significant impact and leadership prior to MBA.

[00:14:18] John Byrne: Yeah. In fact, 10 years ago, roughly 2%. of the class went to either West Point or the U.

S. Naval Academy. Good number of people actually from the military. Maria, any other observations?

[00:14:34] Maria Wich-Vila: Yeah, I was also surprised at the fact that within those top employers And when we look at the tech companies, it was Google and Facebook and Meta with a pretty large showing. Google was actually the fourth largest employer after the MBBs and, but then, I was expecting there to be an equal distribution amongst those famous large cap technology companies.

So I, I would have expected even representation amongst Google, Meta, Microsoft, Apple, Nvidia, Amazon, et cetera. And yet. Apple and Amazon only had one or two people each versus Google at 25. So I thought that was really fascinating and it makes me wonder if perhaps it’s a function of maybe Google and Meta might give their younger talent more opportunities to lead impactful projects, perhaps.

I’m just guessing here, but maybe Apple and Amazon perhaps are more hierarchical. And maybe don’t give their younger talent so many opportunities, but I was really surprised by that. I would have expected a much more even distribution amongst the those famous those famous tech companies.

[00:15:40] John Byrne: Yeah. You’re right. And I crunched the numbers on the percentages and Google took three and a half percent of the two classes and that’s better than Goldman, Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan Chase. Facebook had 2. 7 percent and Microsoft at 1. 5, and I was shocked at Amazon because, Amazon is widely known as the largest single recruiter of MBAs in the past five years.

At one point, they were recruiting a thousand MBAs a year, but in, in one sense, maybe Amazon quite doesn’t really have the prestige. For Stanford MBAs who might rather work elsewhere, I think that might be is, you look at the employment reports at a lot of the other schools and Amazon is number one at a number of schools and very low percentage of people from Amazon going to Stanford.

We don’t know, of course, how many. Leaving Stanford and going back to Amazon, but it can’t be that many.

[00:16:41] Heidi Hillis: I wonder if there’s something about just a proximity effect here. You have the plate, like the meta and Google just being so close to Stanford, maybe it just, attracts more people applying because they.

They’re almost on campus and maybe, just being Amazon all over the world and different places could be not attracting as many. I don’t know.

[00:17:03] John Byrne: Yeah, true. The other thing, the analysis shows, and this is what you also gather from the more public class profile is really the remarkable diversity of talent that a school like Stanford can attract year after year.

It is, it blows you away, really. The quality and the diversity of people despite the concentration of undergraduate degree holders or company employers, it’s it’s really mind boggling, isn’t it?

[00:17:33] Heidi Hillis: Yeah, they come from everywhere and really interesting paths and even the people I think that, have those kind of typical paths, you see a lot of diversity within them as well.

So I think, even if you’re coming from a Goldman or a McKinsey having lived in another country or gone to done a fellowship abroad or running a non profit on the side. These things are actually what helped them to stand out. But you do see some really interesting, I think, profiles, too, of people who’ve just done, you get a sense of what it would be like to be in the Stanford classroom.

People from really unique and different backgrounds. People who come from all different countries and lawyers, doctors people who have run, nonprofits in developing countries people running large programs for places like Heineken or Amazon too. But, it’s a real diversity of backgrounds.

[00:18:27] John Byrne: Now, Heidi, I wonder if one is an applicant. Is this discouraging to read and here’s why if I’m not from Harvard, Stanford, Penn, Columbia, Brown, Cornell, Dartmouth, and if I didn’t work for McKinsey, Bain, BCG, Goldman, Google am I at a disadvantage and should I even try? Some people look at the data and come away with that conclusion.

[00:18:52] Heidi Hillis: I think it’s a reality check for a lot of people. I think it’s just, it’s really, it just helps people understand, what it, the difficulty of this, why it’s so competitive, but I think that there is, again, behind the kind of the percentages, you do look at these individual profiles and I would get, I would actually take a lot of hope from it if I were looking, as an applicant, because especially if you are.

Maybe a little bit more of a big fish or small fish in a bigger pond or big fish in a smaller pond you go to Rice or you go to Purdue or, and you do really well, those are the people who, they’re definitely looking for that diversity of background as well as the international.

I think that’s really neat. think that, instead of looking at the data and saying, why not, why I shouldn’t even apply, it’s why not me look at these other profiles of people who have taken really unique paths that that do get in. So I think it is actually a Kind of a mix of both, it is a reality check for a lot of people, but it’s actually, there is so much diversity in the data as well.

I think also one thing that we haven’t really covered is about is just the prevalence of social impact in, that’s really taken hold of the class. I don’t, again, going back to your 2013 analysis, I’m not sure how easy it was to tell that, but a lot of you can see reflected in the both the types of organizations people are working for, but also their titles and the kinds of work that they’re doing that that there’s a huge 40 percent of the class of the two classes had some kind of social impact in their background.

Whether that’s, running their own nonprofit on the side or volunteering or. Running trans transformational kind of programs within companies that are, either in finance or consulting or in industry. That’s a big trend. I think that people can take heart from as well.

So if you’re working if you feel like you’re in an organization where you’re not getting the leadership that you. can use to highlight your potential for Stanford, that’s definitely a place you can go is working for in volunteer capacity for a non profit or on the board of a of some kind of foundation.

Those are the kinds of places that you can highlight your potential

[00:21:00] John Byrne: true. And I know we have a overrepresented part of every applicant pool at an elite business school are software engineers from India. And I wonder in your analysis, how many of them did you find from like the IITs?

[00:21:18] Heidi Hillis: That’s a good question. The IITs, it was again, it was one of these you have about 50 percent of classes internet, so 25 percent of the class. was educated outside of the US. The IITs are going to be up there. Let’s see from India, 2. 1 percent of the class came from India. So probably, I don’t know offhand exactly how many of those were IITs, but

[00:21:43] John Byrne: I’ve had a lot of them.

[00:21:45] Heidi Hillis: Yeah, probably a lot of them. Although I think, that’s the other thing is that people who come, to work with me from India, they feel like if they haven’t gone to IIT, then that’s going to be a disadvantage. But I think, you’ll find that there are, there’s representation of other universities as well.

Definitely.

[00:22:00] Caroline Diarte Edwards: Yeah, I was just looking at the list of undergrad institutions. And for example, you’ve got Osmania University from Hyderabad. So it is not, it’s not all IIT. Okay.

[00:22:12] John Byrne: Yeah, exactly. And Caroline, 1 of the things about the institutions that are really represented here and that I don’t really see unless I missed it.

I didn’t see a Cambridge or an Oxford. Two of the best five universities in the world. And I wonder if that’s just a function of fewer people in the applicant pool or what? What do you think that could be about?

[00:22:36] Caroline Diarte Edwards: I had a look through the uk Institutions and you have got cambridge in there.

I think I also noticed. Bristol university there are a few different universities. So i’m aston university, which is not it’s not on a par with Oxford or Cambridge. So I think that speaks to the point that Heidi made that you don’t have to have been to an elite school to get into Stanford.

Aston is a good solid university, nothing wrong with Aston, but it’s not it’s not one of the top UK universities. So there’s definitely some interesting variety in the educational backgrounds of the students going to Stanford. And

[00:23:16] John Byrne: then, yeah, it is if you’re a big fish in a small pond, like Afton, you’ll you could still stand out in the pool.

[00:23:26] Heidi Hillis: Absolutely. There’s a lot of really interesting background, you have look hard on blue and you have Miami University and some really smaller universities abroad. I think. Again, it’s really, if you look at that, it does give you hope because it’s really what you do afterwards and if you, obviously, if you come from one of these schools, you probably want to be in the top, 5 percent of the graduating class, you want to show that you have the GPA that can support an academic background that they feel comfortable that you’ll be able to compete academically, but, and maybe that’s what you’re Offset by the, the GMA or the scores, you don’t know, we don’t have those on here.

But, um, the path post university really becomes much more important in those cases. What you’ve done since then where you’ve, how you’ve risen from starting at a entry level position to, running a division or heading a country group or something like that.

[00:24:21] John Byrne: And as far as Cordon Bleu goes, every good business program needs a Cordon Bleu, for God’s sake, right?

You want to eat well at those NBA parties, don’t you?

[00:24:32] Heidi Hillis: Absolutely.

[00:24:35] John Byrne: Maria, I’m sure that was true at Harvard.

[00:24:38] Maria Wich-Vila: I wasn’t the one doing the cooking but I certainly, I was certainly a member of the wine and cuisine society where I happily participated in the eating and consuming a part of that.

But to, to the point that we were just recently talking about. regarding being a big fish in a small pond. Not only have I seen it personally with applicants that I’ve worked with who did not attend these elite universities, but even many years ago, I attended a, an admissions conference where Kirsten Moss, who was the former head of admissions at Stanford, she actually told stories about how they’ve accepted people who even attended community college.

But within the context of that community college, they had really moved mountains. And she said that one of the things that they look for is, Within the context and the opportunities that you’ve been given, how much impact have you had? So maybe you don’t have an opportunity to go to Yale or MIT or IIT for your undergraduate, but whatever opportunity you have been given, have you grabbed that opportunity and really made the most of it and really driven change?

So she specifically called out, I believe, I believe there were two students that year at the GSB who had both started their educations, their higher educations at community college. Anything is possible. It really is about finding the people who, wherever they go, they jump in and make an impact.

[00:25:55] Heidi Hillis: Yeah, I think that to that point, I think it can almost be a more difficult if you’ve gone to Harvard and then worked at one of these, gone on one of these paths because we know that there’s, that’s an overrepresented pool in the applicant pool to stand out among those to have had that, that pedigree sometimes can be a disadvantage, right?

If you haven’t done as much as you should have with that, or if you started at that high level to show that level of progress over the course of your career is actually a little bit more difficult. Okay. And coming from a community college and rising to, a country level manager in some places is actually puts you at a significant advantage, I would say.

[00:26:31] Maria Wich-Vila: Because it’s hard for those people, it’s hard for those people to stand out, but also I think some of them go on autopilot, right? I think some people are on this kind of achievement, elite achievement treadmill, where they’re not even really thinking about what do I want to do with my life?

They’re always reaching for whatever that next, what’s the best college to go to? It’s Harvard Princeton. Yeah. Okay. Now that I’m here, what’s the best employer to work for? It’s McKinsey, Bain, BCG and without actually perhaps stopping to think about what is my passion? What impact do I want to make in the world?

And so I feel sometimes those autopilot candidates, I feel a little bit bad for them because they’re doing everything quote unquote and yet sometimes when you speak with them, that passion just isn’t there. And I do think that may ultimately harm them in the very, very elite business school.

Admissions because business schools want people who are passionate because at the end of the day, in order to do hard things, you’re going to need passion at some point to get you through those low periods. And so I think that’s something business schools look for. And I do think that sometimes these.

These kind of autopilot candidates might sometimes be at a disadvantage.

[00:27:29] Heidi Hillis: Yeah, I think that, to that point look in the data, when you look at it, you see so many people who’ve gone to McKinsey, Bain, Weasley, or Goldman, but then there’s a, you see a lot of success for people who’ve actually pivoted.

So those pivots that are post The second or third job really do show you that, if you’re if you get a candidate who’s coming from, still at McKinsey, okay, that’s fine. They have to be the top 5 percent of McKinsey, like they have to be going to get so many McKinsey applicants that the only the, you can look at the data in a couple ways.

One is, oh, my God, they took 12 people from McKinsey and the others. Oh, my God, they only took 12 people from McKinsey, right? That’s So if you want to be one of those 12, you have to be the top 12 in the world, right? Whereas if you’ve gone to McKinsey and then done an externship at a health care startup and then moved on to be a product manager at for health at Google, that kind of a path is definitely showing a little bit more, maybe risk taking, maybe ability to follow your passions.

So I think that. When I see candidates who come to me, for example, and they’re like, not thinking about applying now, but maybe in a year or two, I say, look for an externship, maybe think about pivoting out of one of these places and looking for some operational experience.

And because you see in the data that works.

[00:28:42] Maria Wich-Vila: And they’re doing themselves a service not only in terms of enhancing their admissions chances, but even just in terms of determining, what do I want to do with my career? If I do eventually want to go into industry, what functional role do I want to have?

What industry do I want to work in? So it’s, it actually benefits them in the long term to do that as well, even if they don’t go to business school. I think those secondments and externships and second job, post consulting jobs are extremely valuable. Totally agree with you.

[00:29:06] Caroline Diarte Edwards: And I’m sure they also bring more to the classroom as well.

I would think that’s also why Stanford is selecting some of those candidates, because not only have they worked at McKinsey, but they’ve also led a non profit in Africa or worked in private equity or whatever it is. So they have much more breadth that they can bring to the classroom. And I think that It’s seen as a very valuable contribution

[00:29:29] John Byrne: in Heidi.

Did you see that? The majority of the candidates to examined actually did work in more than one place, right?

[00:29:37] Heidi Hillis: Yes, most of them did. There were very few that, you see working at one place. And I would say that those are people that would have really risen through the ranks.

Someone who’s worked at Walmart and become, started in, I don’t know, in one state, but then to become a regional manager and things like that really are going to onto a global role. The people who have stayed at one place really have shown significant career progression within that.

And then the other people I think you do see a lot of movement. The big. The most typical would be from investment banking to private equity and then you do find in finance, there’s a little bit less kind of movement into other industries. You see a lot of people staying within finance, but within finance.

Yeah. Yeah. The other industries, especially consulting or other, tech, people are really moving into other places and it’s becoming, it is a little bit difficult. We have these categories that we’ve talked about, for example, healthcare, but it’s hard to categorize some of these companies.

Are they healthcare? Are they tech? There’s a lot of overlap. And so everything’s a little bit of tech in something nowadays. So whether it’s finance and fintech or education and ed tech or health care and health tech, these are all merging and combining. It’s hard to categorize them.

[00:30:53] John Byrne: So looking at the data here I wonder if you’ve seen your old classmates in the sense that these new people are very much like the people you went to school with at Stanford. I

[00:31:05] Heidi Hillis: put this out and it’s really interesting to a lot of my classmates downloaded the report and read it. And a lot of them came back and said, oh, boy, I would never get in now.

It’s these people are super impressive. I think that you see a lot of. It’s just become more and more competitive. And I think that with more information and more people every year applying, it is becoming really difficult. I think that you do see a lot of, I am encouraged by the diversity part of it that you see still Stanford.

I feel like they do take risks on some really interesting profiles and candidates that maybe some other schools are less likely to do. And so that’s what does give me. A lot of hope when I get some kind of really nontraditional candidate who wants to, their dream school is Stanford. I feel like, I say all the time, there’s a 6 percent chance.

You’re going to get in, but there’s 100 percent chance. You won’t get in if you don’t apply. So you’ve got to, you got to give it a go. And that’s, the attitude that we take to it.

[00:32:04] John Byrne: Indeed. So for all of you out there read Heidi’s article on our site, it’s called who gets in and why exclusive research.

Into Stanford GSB and I’ll tell you one conclusion I have about this is that, man, if you really want to get into Stanford, you need a Sherpa, and and Heidi would be a great Sherpa for you because the, just the profiles of these folks, where they’ve been, what they’ve done, what they’ve accomplished in their early lives is so remarkable that To compete against, in this pool for a spot in the class you need every possible advantage you can get.

And and having an expert guide you through this trip probably would be a really big advantage. So Heidi, thank you for sharing your insights with us and the research, the very cool research.

[00:33:01] Heidi Hillis: Thank you

[00:33:03] John Byrne: and for all of you out there. Good luck. And if you want to go to Stanford, you got to check out this report.

Okay. It will inspire you to up your game, even if you are from Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, or wherever McKinsey, Bain, BCG, Goldman, Google, you want to look at this report and you want to really think about. What it will really take to get in. I think it will inspire you, motivate you to really put your best foot forward.

Thanks for listening. This is John Byrne with Poets& Quants.

Maria

New around here? Iโ€™m an HBS graduate and a proud member (and former Board Member) of AIGAC. I considered opening a high-end boutique admissions consulting firm, but I wanted to make high-quality admissions advice accessible to all, so I โ€œscaled myselfโ€ by creating ApplicantLab. ApplicantLab provides the SAME advice as high-end consultants at a much more affordable price. Read ourย rave reviews on GMATClub, and check out our free trial (no credit card required) today!