Trump’s Likely Impact On Business Education
Maria |
November 15, 2024

In this episode of Business Casual, John Byrne, Maria Wich-Vila and Caroline Diarte Edwards delve into the ramifications of Donald Trump’s re-election for U.S. and international business schools. They discuss the expected challenges and policy changes that might affect student demographics, particularly international applications, highlighting the potential shifts towards business schools in other countries due to perceived unfriendly policies towards immigrants and international students. 

The conversation also touches on the broader economic and social implications of these changes, providing a well-rounded perspective on the future of business education in a politically shifting landscape.

Episode Transcript

[00:00:07.440] – John

Well, hello, everyone. This is John Byrne with Poets and Quants. You’re listening to Business Casual, our weekly podcast with my co-host, Maria Wich-Vila and Caroline Diarte Edwards. Big news, of course, in the US, which means it’s worldwide news. Donald Trump has won re-election to become President of the United States in January, so just a couple of months away. And we think that this is going to have a big impact on almost everything in the United States. And if it has an impact in the US, the biggest economy in the world, it will have a big impact everywhere because the ripple effect will just go through the world economy. And we think that one of the areas that is, frankly, in the crosshairs of the Trump administration higher education. When you look at why Donald Trump won re-election and won it decisively, it really comes down to one demographic. It’s uneducated voters. By and large, those without college degrees who have become in the United States disillusioned and aggrieved over the country’s direction, the loss of union jobs that paid them a good wage, the loss of a lot of jobs that went overseas over the last quarter of a century or more and has changed the standard of living for those folks, they’re angry, they’re upset, and they want to disrupt things.

[00:01:43.500] – John

They voted for Donald Trump in huge numbers, and that’s really what got him elected. And on one level, then you could argue that his election is a function of a war of sorts between the US US-educated people and those who are uneducated and who have not benefited from the prosperity in the US economy in the way that those who have gone to college and gotten an undergraduate degree, or even more importantly, an advanced degree, are almost living on a different planet than folks who have only graduated from high school. It is within that framework that you have to think that Trump will to operate as President, meaning that, to put it in the starkest terms, he would be an enemy of higher education. The Republican Party in the United States has not been all that supportive of higher education for quite some time. To give evidence to all this, even Biden has publicly said that the vast majority of jobs that were created under the infrastructure bill were going to people without college degrees. And even vice President Kamala Harris, who is campaigning to win this election, had said publicly that she will go through all the federal jobs and redefine them to make sure that as many as possible do not require a college degree.

[00:03:21.280] – John

So this has become a big and major issue. So the question then is, what will happen to higher education under a Trump administration? Now, this is definitely speculative, but it’s largely based on what he has said and what he has done in the past. And let’s go right to Caroline, because you’re our international maven. I think the number one immediate concern is the international applicant pool to business schools. In the US, it’s generally one-third of all master students are international. In some schools, it’s much higher. They are a source, an important source revenue for the schools. They’re an important part of the business model that sustains these business schools. What do you think is going to happen?

[00:04:08.210] – Caroline

Well, as you said, it’s speculation, although we do have the evidence of what happened with the previous administration. So I think we can speculate fairly confidently the applications from international applicants will go down. We saw that very clearly under the previous Trump administration, as there were concerns, difficulties with visas and then just generally about concerns about a less welcoming climate and less welcoming environment for international candidates, and particularly candidates from certain backgrounds. Of course, there was the Muslim ban to the previous administration. So I’m sure we will see a drop. So from an international perspective, that will benefit international schools, right? So I’m sure that schools like INSEEP, where I worked, and London Business School, and some of the other top international schools will see applications from candidates who might otherwise have looked to come to the US, including candidates from the US who might otherwise have stayed domestically, but who are now thinking, Well, this may be a great opportunity to get out of here for a year or so and get an international experience. Who can’t stomach the idea of living for four years under Trump. So I’m sure there will be some young Americans who will be looking to get an international experience as well.

[00:05:34.040] – Caroline

I think it will be a bonus for some of the international schools. Having said that, I don’t think any of them would have voted for Trump. No. Knowing the communities at these schools, I’m sure that they’ve all been as horrified as we are by what has happened. But of course, the UK schools have suffered post-Brexit, so at least there may be a silver lining for those schools that this may help to turn things around a little bit with the post-Brexit impact and also the change in visa regulations in the UK, which has resulted in a drop of international applications to UK schools. Perhaps there’s some hope there that things may turn around. Also, of course, with the new labor government, perhaps visa regulations will in any case change in the UK. But I think from the US perspective, it is rather bleak for business schools. International traditional candidates bring a great deal to the classroom experience. They add a lot of different perspectives, a lot of different experience. They really enrich the programs, the learning experience, they enrich the community, and that adds to the experience for everybody. It enhances the learning experience and the social experience for all students.

[00:06:53.160] – Caroline

And so that is going to diminish the value of the learning experience that you will get at at the US schools, unfortunately, for everybody. I think it diminishes the programs as well as it will diminish their financing because international applicants are a great source of revenue for US schools. That’s going to have an impact on budgets. I think, as we’ve seen in the past, the top schools will remain very strong because they have a loyal pipeline of candidates always coming through. Thick and through thin, they will have a strong pipeline. So I’m not worried about the Harvard’s and the Stanford’s and the Whartons of this world. But for schools that are a little bit further down the pecking order, where they have a bit more of a volatile situation, they could begin to struggle.

[00:07:58.090] – John

And this works on two levels. I mean, The first level is the one you pointed out, which is, oh, boy, Trump is elected. He doesn’t like immigrants. Therefore, the US is going to be increasingly unwelcome place to be. So therefore, I don’t want to put up with that. So that’s on the candidate side. But then you have what the government will do. Will they actually place restrictions on international students to study in the US? Or will they slow down the visa process so that it takes an awfully long time to get a student visa, and a year in which you were intending to start ends up being the following year, which decreases the pool and slows down whatever flow of international students remained. So you got this work in on two different levels here, and that’s really problematic. And we do have, as Caroline pointed out, the evidence from the previous administration, when literally there were There are international students in the US in MBA programs who are reluctant, reluctant to go on a global emersion tour for fear that they would not be allowed back into the country because some of their classmates had difficulty coming back because of Trump’s draconian immigration policies.

[00:09:24.350] – John

I think that that is the one obvious thing that will happen. I don’t think it’s speculative at all. Something that could be speculative, although it has been promised, is the elimination of OPT. Now, that’s optional practical training. It’s the reason why so many business schools, and the vast majority of them in the past five years, have had their graduate program, STEM certified, because a graduate from a STEM program program gets to spend not only 12 months in the US in a job, but an additional two years. So you get three years of working experience. Trump has said, and his special advisor for immigration has said that they intend to end this program. Whether they will, who knows? But this has come up a number of times on the campaign trail, and They feel pretty certain they want to get rid of it. That would also be a real major dent because those who still would apply to a US school thinking that, okay, it may not be the situation that I ideally want, but I’ll go there and I’ll get a great education. I’ll ultimately get a job. If I’m in a STEM program, I’ll be able to work in the US for at least three years, which gives me three shots in a H-1B visa, you may have suddenly find that that’s no longer available.

[00:11:06.380] – John

Just don’t know. We’ll have to see how that plays out. And I think in the first three to six months of the Trump administration, we’ll see how much he does. And how chaotic and disruptive it becomes. Caroline, what do you think?

[00:11:22.240] – Caroline

Well, I do wonder if he will implement everything he’s talked about, right? Because as you said in our pre-podcast discussion, he talks about a lot of things in the first administration which never got done. I think the reality will kick in of the implications of some of these policies. I think that there is hope that he won’t implement all of these very counterproductive policies. You have to wonder about policies that change immigration for young, talented professionals, because that brings so much value to the American economy. And so that’s really shooting the US in the foot if they do change that. So perhaps there was a lot of bluster on the campaign trail that may not translate into actual policies. We can but hope at this stage.

[00:12:27.300] – John

Right. Maria, your thoughts?

[00:12:30.170] – Maria

As much as I wish that hope is something that comes to pass, unfortunately, we’ve already seen in his previous administration that he did, in fact, take steps. Now, I don’t think that they were as draconian or as sweeping as he would have wished. But we’ve seen this movie before. We know how it ends. And so we know that a lot of that bluster, he does, in fact, try to implement it, and he often succeeds. And I believe he will be even more successful in doing these things because I think he learned his lesson, so to speak, from the last time when he had these advisors who were perhaps more experienced in certain things, but then they would put guardrails around him, and he clearly did not like those guardrails. And so there aren’t going to be some of these generals and these quote unquote grownups in the room to curtail his impulses, his worst impulses, because he’s just simply not going to hire them this time, I suspect. So I do think that it’s going to be bad for international students who are trying to study in the US, both in terms of getting into the country and then staying in the country.

[00:13:45.100] – Maria

But I also think some of his policies, if they come to pass, are going to be really bad for domestic MBA candidates as well. If these tariffs come into play, the resulting price increases are going to drive demand down. So if you’re aspiring to work in, say, any company that has a hardware component to it. Let’s say a large percentage of Apple’s revenues still come from the phone and the hardware and the desktops and computers that they make, all of those Prices are going to go up, and so demand will probably go down. Health care is another industry that relies really heavily on international supply chains. So the cost of health care, which is already pretty astronomical, is going to go up. Should Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Become the head of our country’s health policy? Any company that makes vaccines is going to suddenly see a dramatic drop, perhaps in their revenues. If people stop getting vaccinated as much, we’re going to start seeing the next pandemic that might come or even the old pandemics from 100 years ago that we thought we were done with. They may make a return. So I think that there’s a lot of…

[00:14:58.790] – Maria

The immediate losers in this are the international students. But I also, I don’t think that this is necessarily a slam dunk for domestic students as well. And as you have both pointed out, in the longer term, the American economy suffers because so many of our most talented executives were, in fact, international students themselves, right? The heads of Google and Microsoft and NVIDIA, and even Elon Musk himself was an international student who benefited from US policies that allowed him to come and study here and start businesses here. So it’s a real shame, and I don’t think there are any winners in this.

[00:15:42.420] – John

Yeah. I mean, there’s A firm that’s tracking some search traffic in the aftermath of Trump’s win on studying on campus for bachelor and master’s programs. And in The last 48 hours, there’s been a huge spike in the US from domestic students, researching programs in other countries. Traffic on the Canadian business schools is up 825% in the last two days. On United Kingdom’s goals, it’s up 530%. Interestingly enough, in Ireland, it’s up 1,300%. In Sweden, for some reason, it’s up 600%. But in any case, there’s been a major surge among US students looking to study abroad since Trump won the election only two days ago. We’re recording this two days after his win. The other thing he has promised to do is to dismantle the Department of Education. Now, the Department of Education in Washington supports, obviously, education throughout the country. It is also the administrator of all the federal loan programs that help people study in college. Trump and his advisors have said that they would like to transfer that function to the Treasury Department because they handle money. But any dismantling I think the handling of the Department of Education would be very disruptive to higher education in general and also cause more chaos.

[00:17:24.860] – John

If in fact, in this handoff of the federal loan programs to Treasury Department, if that comes off, there’s bound to be a heck of a lot of things that fall through the cracks, could delay the approval of federal grants study in college that could prevent more people from enrolling. Then you have DEI, diversity, equity, and inclusion. The Republican Party has been at war against DEI programs at universities for quite some time now. With Trump in office, you can expect probably things like federal funding to any universities could be used as a leverage point to eliminate a DEI program on the basis that it’s essentially mandated affirmative action, and it discriminates against certain types of students. That could also be another source of trouble. Don’t think we’re all here being pessimists because we’re making these judgments and speculations on the basis of having lived through four years of a Trump era before, when in fact, as we pointed out, he had more guardrails around him and he was new to government. He really didn’t know what leverage to push or how to get things to happen. In this case, it looks like he will have a Republican-controlled Senate and a Republican-controlled House so that he’d be able to do things more quickly more sweepingly, and he will, in fact, recruit around him in terms of advisors and cabinet members and department heads, people who are far more loyal to him than they have expertise in the given fields in which they’re assigned.

[00:19:17.620] – John

That’s why we think that more of his promises on the campaign trail are likely to happen, even in diminished form. Yeah, is he going to increase? Is he going to a tariff on every product and they’re going to be 30 plus %? Highly unlikely. But will he put tariffs on most products and it could be 5 or 10 %? Probably. And that could cause a recession in and of itself. Ondly enough, though, You look at Wall Street and the stock market hit a new record in the aftermath of his election. How do you figure that out, Maria?

[00:19:55.190] – Maria

Well, I think that there’s a couple of things going on here. I think there’s this narrative that Biden has been bad for business. I think one could make the fair argument that Lena Khan has, in fact, stifled certain M&A deals. I don’t think that that critique is entirely unfounded. I think that there’s this idea that with less regulation, fewer things standing in the way of, say, large mergers and acquisitions going through less government scrutiny. Now, whether or not that lack of government scrutiny ends up being good for the American consumer, the American citizen, who knows? I mean, a lot of these guardrails were put into place in the first place to protect people from monopolies forming or other negative externalities that happen when business does not have any guardrails placed on it. But to the extent that less regulation, less scrutiny of deals, et cetera, et cetera, is good for business, I do think that that is why the stock market is behaving the way it is.

[00:20:58.690] – John

Yeah. I think, I think they’re very eager to get another big tax cut, too. That’s what’s going on as well. Caroline, you are very well connected globally, and I wonder, what’s the reaction you’re getting? I mean, even in your own firm, you have people planted all over the world who are advising candidates all over the world. What are you hearing out there already?

[00:21:26.440] – Caroline

Yeah, I’ve had a lot of messages over the last 24 hours, and it’s astonishment, right? People are shocked and horrified, generally, about what has happened and trying to comprehend. I think it’s sad. It really diminishes the US on the international stage. I think people are surprised at someone who seems so ill qualified, indicted criminal, and so on. You could make a very long list of the reasons why he should be President. On an international level, people find it quite hard to believe that the US has frankly sunk this low. It diminishes the US as well because the US is therefore seen as less of a reliable partner internationally and a more volatile country. So on many different levels, I think it damages the US internationally, both in perception and then in relations and in so many different dimensions.

[00:22:35.340] – John

In fact, your colleague and co founder of Fortuna, Matt Simons, sent me a little note because he had a conversation with one international MBA applicant who applied in around one. And here’s what that person said, It’s challenging to grasp how such a significant portion of Americans resonate with the vision that Trump and the Republican Party represent. What’s even more concerning is how this might affect international students and professionals who contribute so much to the US. The climate feels less welcoming, and I’m sure many others feel so uncertain about their place and future here. And I think that’s really true.

[00:23:15.240] – Caroline

Yeah, that sums it up very well.

[00:23:18.790] – John

That’s what I thought. Now, at the same time, there’s no way you can imagine any upside to higher education with Trump’s election. No, impossible. Possible. But on the other hand, the dean of the Cogod School of Business, who has been a guest on this podcast over at American University, David Morchick, he immediately sent out a note to the community and struck, even though he was personally disappointed in the outcome of the election, he struck a more positive note. He mentioned that our work in academia is more important today than it was yesterday. If you believe we need to address the climate crisis, we should work to create more sustainable world through business as progress in the next few years will come through business, not government. If you believe that better business practices can help people of color and those who are impoverished, participate more fully in the economy, our scholarship and teaching in that area has never been more critical. Each of you changes lives every day with teaching, research, and engagement with students, helping young people reach their full potential enabling them to launch meaningful and successful careers. At the bottom of this, look, it’s four years, conceivably.

[00:24:40.870] – John

These things go up and they go down. I can almost tell you with certainty that within two years when there’s a midterm election, there’ll be some backlash because you can expect Trump to do some crazy things, and then his powers will be greatly It is an up and down thing. With an MBA degree in particular, we’re looking, again, we always say, look at the long term. Even when you evaluate the ROI on an MBA, we have told you in the past, do not merely look at starting salaries. The value of this degree is over a lifetime of work, personal too, not only professional. I also think that many decisions that can at this time, rather than to be disenchanted and disillusioned, you keep your head down and you think about the long term and how this is really, in the grand scheme of things, an ephemeral victory that has yet to play out. Now, Maria, I know you have inspirational words to impart as well to all our listeners, right?

[00:25:52.360] – Maria

I mean, people with these leanings have come to power in different countries in different periods of history, and it might take a while for the damage they do to be rectified. But ultimately, I do think that progress is eventually made. We saw it in Latin America, for example, when Pinochet came into power, Chile did eventually recover from that. They’re like, look at Germany today, look at where it was 90 years ago, 80 to 90 years ago, and look at where it is today. There’s definitely hope in the longer term. So I would just not lose hope overall, even though it means that the next four years might require some buckling up because I think it might be a bumpy ride ahead.

[00:26:42.340] – John

Buckling up and hunkering down. Yes, indeed. Well, if you want to read what we think, too, there’s a commentary on the site on Poets and Quants that I wrote yesterday, What Trump’s victory means for business education. Check it out. Meantime, thanks for listening. Sorry, this one’s a little more pessimistic than we’d like to be, but we all think there’s reason for it. Hey, this is John Byrne with Poets and Quants.

Trump’s Likely Impact On Business Education
Maria |
November 15, 2024

[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 ‘23 and the class of ‘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? I’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 “scaled myself” by creating ApplicantLab. ApplicantLab provides the SAME advice as high-end consultants at a much more affordable price. Read our rave reviews on GMATClub, and check out our free trial (no credit card required) today!