I know a guy with a really big head(literally) that went to Wharton. He’s also a partner at a $2 billion hedge fund at the age of 32. He’s pretty cool so you should do it
If I could go back in time, I’d do a part-time or executive MBA, rather than the fulltime MBA that I actually did. People focus on the $90,000 tuition of a full-time MBA, but the really expensive part is the lost wages over the 20 months that you take off from work. In fact, if I could go back in time, I might just do the CFA and skip the MBA. In terms of financial investment, the return on the CFA is about 100x better than the return on an MBA. On the other hand, if you can get in to somewhere really fancy and prestigious like Wharton (most people can’t), you should go regardless of the economic payoff.
Most eMBA programs result in the same degree as full-time or part-time. Whether it’s prestigious or not depends on the perception of that who reads your resume - some people won’t question whether it’s full-time or executive MBA, some will ask and perceive eMBA as less prestigious, and yet others will think it’s better because you bring both exceptional experience and academic background. Since you’re already in a highly sought after job, your experience will probably speaks more loudly than an MBA. But if your company pays for the education and you can gain the Wharton network, then why not?
I think this really depends on what profession you are in. If you want to move up in say, IB or consulting, an MBA can be pretty important. If you’re working in product development at Apple, it’s probably less important.
sleepybird Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The Economist thinks you shoulnd’t do MBA > altogether. > http://www.economist.com/whichmba/think-twice Not sure the article dissuades an EMBA from Wharton with company sponsorship. It’s focusing on taking two years out of the work force and not having a great ROI.
Well, I think from a more practical standpoint, the other thing you need to think about is who really cares about your MBA. For the most part, your professional life will be defined by your work experience rather than business school. My friends that graduated from top schools that have been out in the workforce for 2+ years all say that while their network is valuable, most of their reputation is built on work and nobody cares where you went to school…somewhat discouraging to people like myself at top tier business school programs but what can you really do. I’ve loved my experience at business school and it’s given me access to some pretty cool internship opportunities so far, but mostly I just like being around my peers, some of whom I think are lightyears ahead of me in terms of business wisdom/experience and whom I can learn a lot from. Most important thing is to look at the quality of the network you’ll be in and how much that’s worth to you. Potential investors / employers aren’t going to fork over extra bucks because you went to Wharton EMBA (or even full-time for that matter) – say for example if you’re in investment management, people are going to want to look at your track record and understand how you think about investing, so the incremental value of the EMBA brand is debatable. From a personal standpoint, you have to ask yourself how much you value the EMBA network…but take the full-time Wharton network out of the equation because those students are not really interested in connecting with EMBA’s. EMBA is a totally distinct program with very little overlap, especially in networking which is what matters most. But if you like the EMBA network, then why not? Sorry if this message was rambling, been sleep deprived working on recruiting stuff
Is there a precedent at your firm? I’ve seen people do EMBA and benefit, particularly if you are planning on moving into a more general management or global role. Prestige is largely derived from difficulty of being accepted (although the two are certainly a feedback loop), so from that point of view it is not as prestigious. Then again, you are competing with a different, more experienced pool of candidates. I say go for it, provided it will not overly interfere with your job.
"Asset management clients do like to see top schools on the bios of the professionals that are taking care of their money.; I work in AM and certainly agree with this. I go Stern part-time and we are allowed to participate in the recruitment. Depending on where you are in your career, however, the positions may not be attractive to you.
Here’s a compare and contrast: http://www.wharton.upenn.edu/mbaexecutive/admissions/compare-wharton-programs.cfm There are some odd things about the EMBA. You have to live in “program-related housing”, whatever that is: “2010 tuition for two-year program – $163,200 for Philadelphia, $172,200 for San Francisco. Includes tuition and fees, books, and program-related housing and meals. Transportation, airfare for required international trip, and parking not included. Program-related housing and meals are included in the tuition and fees. The residential component is an integral aspect of the total program experience and required on program nights.” Do they tuck you in at night too?
I’m not sure why you’re surprised they’re including housing/meals in the program cost. If accepted then I would be flying in to San Francisco every two weeks. Two nights of hotels every other week would be costly and a headache to organize. Plus, it’s likely a good opportunity to build the network with fellow EMBA students.
I’m thinking of getting my boss to sponsor me for the LBS EMBA in return for continuing in my present gig. I’d expect to be flown in / housed and fed for that too whether it is the program or my firm. Would be great to meet people at other shops and open up opps for a hop somewhere down the line for some real money. Can hardly think of a downside other than it means losing a day of work every two weeks… i’m sure I could live with that.
A bunch of people on here have been fretting about whether an EMBA is as good as a “real” (full-time) MBA. I’ve been thinking: you could easily make the arguement that the EMBA is far *MORE* prestigious than a “regular” MBA. To go the EMBA route, you have to have an employer that thinks you’re such a star that they’re willing to sponsor you for a very expensive education. To go the full-time MBA route, you merely need to convince a school to let you in. And I’m certain that an EMBA class would attract a much higher calibre of student, in terms of life success. A typical full-time MBA class is full of 28-year-olds that have accomplished little in their careers so far.
I somewhat agree, Wendy. It would be interesting to track the career path of full-time Wharton MBAs versus executive. There just aren’t many part-time or executive MBA programs out there worth much. I respect Harvard for never offering anything but the full-time, but I think Wharton may be able to capitalize on many successful professionals that don’t want to take two years off from their career. Numi, I’d be surprised if the Wharton alumni network doesn’t embrace the EMBA students. It’s very likely these students are fairly successful professionals and would be a benefit to the full-time crowd.
Danny Boy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I’m not sure why you’re surprised they’re > including housing/meals in the program cost. If > accepted then I would be flying in to San > Francisco every two weeks. Two nights of hotels > every other week would be costly and a headache to > organize. Plus, it’s likely a good opportunity to > build the network with fellow EMBA students. While it may work for you, that doesn’t mean it makes sense in general. What if you already own a home in the city?
I think you’re exactly opposite. It’s very likely that it works in general for the commuting students and a very small minority already have local housing. It’s not like Wharton is a school that only attracts candidates who attend because of the convenient location. I’m guessing the tight living locations help form bonds between the students allowing for networking and long-lasting relationships.
Wendy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A bunch of people on here have been fretting about > whether an EMBA is as good as a “real” (full-time) > MBA. > > I’ve been thinking: you could easily make the > arguement that the EMBA is far *MORE* prestigious > than a “regular” MBA. > > To go the EMBA route, you have to have an employer > that thinks you’re such a star that they’re > willing to sponsor you for a very expensive > education. You could make this argument, but it doesn’t make any sense. An EMBA is simply for wealthy/successful 30-somethings with loads of free weekends looking to improve their pedigree without leaving the workforce. Where does it say you have to be employed? You don’t as far as I can tell, though the program is geared toward the employed. Also, most people pay for most of it themselves. According to Wharton, only 39% were sponsored for half or more of the cost (http://www.wharton.upenn.edu/mbaexecutive/admissions/program-facts-and-dates.cfm). > To go the full-time MBA route, you merely need to > convince a school to let you in. This is the same for EMBA. > And I’m certain that an EMBA class would attract a > much higher calibre of student, in terms of life > success. A typical full-time MBA class is full of > 28-year-olds that have accomplished little in > their careers so far. The improved accomplishment is purely because the students are older. Everything else about the class is inferior, if you look at the stats. Even at Wharton, it’s 83% male (lol) with an average GMAT 700 (lol), come on.
I’m not sure what your point is with 73% male. I’m sorry, but upper management is mostly male and that doesn’t seem out of line (full-time is 60%). GMAT of 700 is laughable? The median full-time MBA is 720. A difference, but we’re also talking about experienced professionals who likely have significant work responsibilities and families. Not a large difference IMO. You mention the program doesn’t require employment. Somehow I seriously doubt Wharton would accept someone into the executive program that is lounging around but wants to fill up every other weekend. You’re discounting 40% of companies paying 50% or more of the program? This is a 200k program… that’s a significant cost in $$ and time allowed for your employees to be away from work. I’m not sure how much my employer would contribute. I’m sure it’s some, and possibly all, but I’d be ecstatic if they threw in 100k and I took care of the rest. The perception that Wharton EMBA students are those with free weekends and too much money is ridiculous. It’s apparent that these are top performers at quality institutions who want to continue excelling and are willing to put in the time and $$ commitment. If the average income is almost 200k without an MBA, then I don’t think these students are slouches.
They provide a good comparison of the two programs: http://www.wharton.upenn.edu/mbaexecutive/admissions/compare-wharton-programs.cfm
I don’t get it, have you been accepted into Wharton? I think this discussion will make more sense once you have a clear set of choices to decide between rather than wondering whether an EMBA at x school is valuable.