Danny Boy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > They provide a good comparison of the two > programs: > > http://www.wharton.upenn.edu/mbaexecutive/admissio > ns/compare-wharton-programs.cfm Please read your own thread…
Danny Boy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 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%). There’s a big difference between 73% male and 83% male. It’s the latter; there’s a big difference between 27% female and 17% female. EMBA is people on track for upper management, but not yet there. > 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. OK, I’m probably being a bit judgmental here. Assuming mu = 500, sigma = 100, Phi(720)/Phi(700) = 0.6, so it is a fair bit more selective, but not incredibly so. > 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. They explicitly state that. “Job search services for self-sponsored students…” etc. What if you’re a 30-something on garden leave? The full-time program isn’t a great fit. > You’re discounting 40% of companies paying 50% or > more of the program? This is a 200k program… > that’s a significant cost in $$ and time allowed > for your employees to be away from work. I’m not > sure how much my employer would contribute. I’m > sure it’s some, and possibly all, but I’d be > ecstatic if they threw in 100k and I took care of > the rest. No I’m not, I was adding color to Wendy’s blanket statement “they’re [your company’s] willing to sponsor you for a very expensive education.” > The perception that Wharton EMBA students are > those with free weekends and too much money is > ridiculous. It’s apparent that these are top > performers at quality institutions who want to > continue excelling and are willing to put in the > time and $$ commitment. If the average income is > almost 200k without an MBA, then I don’t think > these students are slouches. $200k is no slouch, it’s a moderately successful 30-something middle manager. Let’s agree to disagree.
Palantir Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 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. That’s an interesting way to approach things. Maybe I should spend time studying for the GMAT, producing long essay question answers, and using political capital to get letters of recommendation to get accepted and THEN deide where it would be something that I’d like to pursue.
I’m a columbia mba via their emba program. It competes directly with wharton and stern; they’re all essentially identical in the way the program is set up, how they recruit, etc. The Wharton program will be great for you. Definitely go for it if you have a chance. If you’d like to chat more, post an email and I’ll give you a shout. Ignore justin.
justin88 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Assuming mu = 500, sigma = 100, Phi(720)/Phi(700) > = 0.6, Excuse my ignorance but can you interpret above to English? I am interested in learning what mu and sigma are, and how they play a role in above formula and what phi(x)/phi(x) represent. At mid 30’s, performing 90+ percentile on GMAT is not an easy task. Even without an age consideration, that’s a good score. IMO
I got what mu and sigma are. I typically see those in a symbol and read it as ‘population’ and ‘standard deviation’ There was my confusion.
To the original author – At the end of the day, it sounds like you want to apply for the Wharton EMBA – then go for it. Do what’s best for your career and don’t fret about what anyone else thinks. However (perhaps unbeknownst to you but likely not), you are getting very defensive about your interest in the EMBA program, and that fact reveals that (1) you are leaning directionally towards applying and (2) you have some confirmation bias preventing you from helping to understand the “downside” to your thesis that others here including myself have pointed out. Confirmation biases often inhibit people from seeing the full picture, making the best decision based on all the available and informative elements, etc. Now, if you want to know what I REALLY think…if I wasn’t clear enough already, there really isn’t any overlap between EMBA and full-time MBA program. For better or for worse, the people belonging to the different programs are in different places of their lives and have completely different motivations to attend a program. This is reflected in the total number of applicants, admissions rates, and even general quality of application. People in the full-time program may be “less experienced” on average, but they’ve distinguished themselves the best they can in the few years (on average) that they’ve been out in the workforce. Also that is a broad generalization because I have classmates that have 6-10+ years of experience in the full-time program. I think the biggest thing any applicant (for any MBA program) should understand is the value of the network. Of course if I feel you have potential value to add to my career, then I will contact you if you are in my network. Everyone wants to get ahead. But the very fact that there is no overlap in classes, recruiting, on-campus events, etc. between EMBA and full-time program should give you a practical indication of just how irrelevant the connections are aside from the fact that they have the same name. Yes, there is a certain sense of elitism involved that not everyone in the full-time program will harbor – and most students in the full-time program are very down to earth if you get to know them – but we know what we had to do to get to this point and there is a reason why the schools do such a good job creating sections/cohorts/clusters for us to fraternize and share ideas within our full-time program, and the “barriers to entry” into the full-time program are much higher. Anyway, I don’t want to keep discussing this same point ad nauseam because I think people understand my position on this…and I’m not going to comment any more on this thread at least as it relates to the original post. I’ve never been in the business of trying to confirm what people already know…I’m here to give practical feedback based on my own observations and experiences. Different people will have different opinions, but you can probably consider mine as relevant a data point as any seeing as how I am a H/S/W guy and in a full-time MBA program.
What about Global EMBAs which are very costly? Are they more prestigious than MBA? Say, the Columbia-LBS combo?
Valores Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What about Global EMBAs which are very costly? Are > they more prestigious than MBA? Say, the > Columbia-LBS combo? Those are more costly because those are for cash cows, and usually cash rich companies has fascination to send their execs for that thing, at the same time those programs are mostly fun. Simple rule of business, applies in education too, i.e. charge proportional to your client’s wealth and provide service proportional to their minimum needs.
Valores Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What about Global EMBAs which are very costly? Last I checked, they cost around the same as the school’s regular EMBA. (Which is about 2x the full-time MBA.) > Are they more prestigious than MBA? As stated elsewhere, all of these programs produce the same degree. You can get a good or bad education in any of these programs, it all depends on how much effort you put in. > Say, the Columbia-LBS combo? The main difference is that Global’s (a) can control their schedule enough to take a week off every month, (b) can afford to fly across oceans every other month. You can probably do the math. For networking starpower, global > emba > mba. (For example, while I was in school, a Sony president was in the global program. We had no Sony presidents in the emba program.)
Hey guys in reading my my previous post, I just want to say that I probably came across more heavy-handed than I had planned. I try to write a lot more directly these days and my comments frankly were not about the merits or de-merits of the EMBA program vs other programs, nor the people that apply – simply commenting on what it is versus what it’s not especially with respect to potential overlaps with full-time programs. Also I think people have different aspirations/definitions of what networks are – and like most people, all of my best professional contacts are people with whom I have the most similarities career-wise, or whom I just respect as great business leaders whether they come from my MBA school or not. Yes a good network does give you access to many people and increases the likelihood that you’ll find a potential “match” as part of the program, but hopefully nobody here thinks that just because I go to a school that someone else does (or has attended in the past) means anything special. There are plenty of people at my school that I haven’t met and probably won’t cross paths with this year or next simply because we don’t have any common career goals…so I guess you could say they’re part of my “network” because we go to the same school, but it’s not like I’ll be calling on them all the time just because they go to school with me since I don’t have any real purpose to do so.
DarienHacker In Europe Globals are more expensive than EMBAs, for example in LBS. But I think they would put Global in the certificate. All in all, I think Global is more prestigious. Of course, we’ll have to compare two guys with the same experience, one with recent Global, another with full-time MBA 20 years ago, both from Columbia.
Valores Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > In Europe Globals are more expensive than EMBAs, for example in LBS. Ok sorry – I took a bit of a stab – couldn’t believe anything can be more expensive than a regular EMBA. 
Does the Global tuition/fees include housing? I think it excludes airfare at least. > But I think they would put Global in the certificate. No. Columbia-LBS Global EMBA program, for example, gives an MBA degree. (There’s no such thing as an EMBA degree, and I’ve never heard of the word “global” showing up on any degree granted by an american institution.) There’s no certificate involved. If you’re talking about the piece of paper you put on the wall, all programs give the same thing: an MBA diploma. (Somehow a lot of people on this forum got confused about that. They’re thinking “executive education” when they ponder weekend/part time MBA programs.) > All in all, I think Global is more prestigious. Of > course, we’ll have to compare two guys with the > same experience, one with recent Global, another > with full-time MBA 20 years ago, both from > Columbia. Cage match! Global programs definitely attract a student population even higher up the career ladder than emba programs. I’d estimate that the mba->emba->global age differences are around 5y for each step up.
Yep, I even think that these programs, especially Global and full-time are so different in nature, and there is 10-20, or even 30 years age difference, that it’s no problem if someone does both.