I agree with this.
1 Like
I’d personally suggest being a little careful with this issue.
It is certainly true that when looking at who is in the more selective business career tracks, you will see a diversity of college programs, including lots of undergrad business programs but also people who not only did something like Econ, but humanities degrees, STEM degrees, and so on. High level, what is basically happening here is most of the specific knowledge you need to succeed in business, you learn on the job, through job-specific training and then job experience. Your higher ed is more likely to make foundational/skills contributions, but not so much specific knowledge contributions.
However, the fact that different paths worked for different individuals does not really imply that every path can work equally well for every individual. And I personally think it is still important, indeed maybe even more important than ever, for kids to really thrive in their undergrad program if possible. Ideally right from the jump, since the entry level hiring process starts SO early these days.
And so personally, I think it is a very good idea to start in the sort of undergrad program that really excites you the most–and then be prepared to pivot if it doesn’t work out well. Because obviously until you really get going, it is hard to know. But I think you can load the odds in your favor by going with what seems best to you at the time of deciding, and at the same time keeping other options open as needed.
In practical terms, this is why I personally think it would be a mistake to choose an LAC purely strategically, meaning just because that LAC had good IB placement statistics or such. That’s fine if LACs are the right sort of college for you to begin with, and you are then choosing among them. But if an LAC is not the right sort of college for you, those gaudy placement statistics may end up meaningless as applied to you, because they really only apply to the kids who thrive at those LACs. Or, alternatively, kids who are getting where they are going for family or other extraneous reasons, and so really more despite rather because of going to a college that didn’t particularly make sense for them.
OK, so again if this kid at least wants to try an undergrad business program, I would make a point of giving them that opportunity. There are some LACs which have them, but many do not. For that matter, some prominent research universities don’t have UNDERgrad business programs. And if that is something that they want to try, I would personally advise them to just cut any such colleges or universities from their application list. What would be left is still plenty to choose from.
1 Like
I think avoiding the concept of prestige and focusing instead on the more concrete characteristics of a school can often help clarify things. I often see these prestige discussions ending up framing the choice of schools as something akin to a choice between a lululemon pant or a nearly identical Kirkland knock-off. I don’t think it works that way with schools.
Factors like the academic characteristics of the student body, faculty quality, robustness of relevant academic programs, funding levels, internship placement, etc, are more concrete and relevant. (Yes, these tend to lead to prestige, but the “prestige” is not what matters to applicants or employers).
And yes, in the analytical types of fields you seem to be describing, there is benefit to being surrounded by a lot of bright students, working through challenging p sets together, guided by accomplished faculty (or even grad students), in academic programs that are well funded and a social environment that promotes intellectual and personal (and, sometimes tangentially, professional) development. Networks and connections can be made in a lot of places, but they are stronger when made within a cohort group that has similar interests; it’s not irrelevant though that the benefit of connections within a cohort group at some schools has more professional (not necessarily personal) value than at others.
I don’t want to seem like the word police but I’m not sure business really captures the student interest here. This sounds like an analytical kid who might end up applying that mindset to finance or some completely different field. I’m not sure an undergrad business program is the best place for that student.
3 Likes
As said previously, there are lots of different paths to these outcomes, which is why I asked the long term/short term question. Graduate school, for example, provides an on-ramp from a different career path. Management training rotations, which can be gotten from prety much any school if your a standout student provide an opportunity to shine and also change industries. I’m a Big 4 guy and many go from accounting to Consulting to Banking. Don’t need a fancy degree to do that. Lotta CPAs in PE. Deep indusrty expertise is valued in Consulting and Banking. They train you up regardless. And clients pick off stars and vice versa.
It’s not a straight line. The only requirement is that you do well in the first gig and keep shining. 1000 years ago I started out in high tech sales. Bouncing around is much more common (maybe expected?) now.
1 Like
I have been reading this thread and wondering what to say (if anything). I agree with a lot of the “it depends” that has been said. There is another angle that occurs to me. That is specifically the choice of major.
A degree in applied math is relatively flexible. There are a lot of things that depend upon mathematics, and a lot of math that one can learn (this goes way, way beyond calculus and linear algebra, both of which are useful). Economics is one thing that depends upon mathematics (even as a math major econometrics to me was more challenging from the math point of view than from the economics point of view, although mostly I just found it interesting). There are lots of other careers that can use math. Cybersecurity is one of them. Finance is another. Some physics research uses a lot of math. Quantitative investment, …
Thus while we might focus on the “…from a NESCAC” part of this, I think that the “applied math” part of this is also something to at least take seriously.
And there are quite a few schools that are very good for mathematics, including some of the very good LACs up here in the northeast. Wisconsin is another school that is very good for mathematics, as are several (if not most) of the famous highly selective universities.
Which leads me to the comment that it is very normal at 16 to not know what you want to do with your life, and that a degree in math does not commit a student to any one particular career.
There are some business people who are going to focus on a business degree. I remember many years ago having a job interview where I talked to pretty much an entire group of business analysts. The people doing the work were thrilled to talk to someone who knew more math than they did, and all of them had interesting and hard math problems that they had run into and could not solve on their own. Their manager said something along the lines of “well we need the math knowledge, but we are looking for someone with a business degree”. Thus you can be shut out of some jobs whether this makes sense or not. However, this is probably true whatever you major in, whatever university you attend, and whatever you try to do in life.
Regarding the computer part of this, I have worked for companies where the people managing the software engineers understood software and computers very well, and I have worked for companies where the people managing the software engineers were nearly completely clueless regarding what their software engineers actually did. This latter set of companies always ran into major problems. Several of these companies no longer exist. Thus if someone wants to get into a business career but in an industry that uses a lot of computers, then I hope that they at least understand quite a bit about computers.
1 Like
I really push back on the notion that you need to hit the ground running either in your freshman year on on the job. That’s also “it depends”.
Lots of successful people in Talent/HR for example were classic late-bloomers professionally. I’ve worked for Chief Human Resources Officers (CHRO in current parlance) who earn 7 figure salaries with bonus and stock who wandered around professionally in their 20’s. I’ve worked with senior marketing talent, investor relations, government affairs folks who did the same. The diversity of their experience- hating the first job, loving the second but feeling itchy after two years, finding their groove in the fourth job isn’t a bug- it’s a feature in some business functions.
So the notion that you HAVE to worry about a competitive internship after freshman year of college or else you’re unemployable- no. Just because a handful of banks and hedge funds and private equity firms have raised the bar and moved the clock doesn’t mean the rest of the corporate world have joined them.
Jobs in HR- psych degrees are great. Sociology is great. Anthropology is great. Government Affairs (few people understand how well compensated these people are)- major in Poli sci. Major in public health. Major in statistics. Major in “area studies”- Latin America, Southeast Asia, China, Russia.
This kid doesn’t need to decide anything right now. There are really cool careers that do not expect a 19 year old to be prepping for. Except for the obvious prep- write well. Read thoughtfully and analytically. Be able to present to a group with a coherent and terse presentation. Understand history. Have a grasp on technology and how it’s changed the world and will continue to do so. Etc. Learning to do a discounted cash flow analysis so you can impress a banking interview panel is not on this list for most people.
5 Likes
Philosophy major here, so don’t disagree. I think you just made my “There’s no straight line” argument for me.
3 Likes
I was a Classics major- who hated my first out of college job (in a well regarded executive training program with robust rotations). I was lucky enough to get moved from my first permanent assignment (it was awful in every possible way) when someone in my class quit- and I volunteered to take over his assignment which was “less prestigious” but less awful. So I was able to stick it out. Terrible boss in that job but less stress…
Imagine if we were all stuck in the industries/functions/roles we took on at 22. Moving up the ladder while we fantasized about producing organic cheese on a farm in New Zealand (which is what the guy who left the job I took over actually did…)
1 Like
I agree that “you need to” is wrong.
But “you might want to”? I think that is more defensible.
The basic difference is you can just take your best shot at a good transition to college, but not fall into existential despair if you then need to pivot.
But why not take your best shot? I mean, not if it would cost too much. But if an undergrad option you are particularly excited about is also comfortably affordable, I think you shouldn’t talk yourself into something different just because someone else thinks you could do something more “prestigious” or strategic or whatever.
1 Like
Go for the happy.
And how about “It helps to…”
1 Like
This accounts for the highly speculative nature of this entire thread. A year from now, in a “Chance Me/Match Me” thread that jumps through all the hoops, some vital questions would jump off the page. At 16, not all the answers are apparent even to the OP.
And that’s okay.
3 Likes
There are just a handful of top tier consulting firms and they run very prestige conscious in recruiting. And the expected work hours are similar to the major Ibanks.
1 Like
I don’t think the hours are the same – I heard 90-100 for banking, and 60-70 for consulting, although consulting requires travel, and if you count all the time you are out of town, it may end up being more than 60-70
And honestly, I think the process of investigation and reflection and self-discovery that can happen for kids between this point and finally choosing an offer can be very rewarding beyond just the college choice itself. This is a big decision which cuts across lots of different sorts of considerations, and as you are dealing with the college choice question you are implicitly dealing with questions about career, what sorts of relationships you value, the nature of a good life in general, and so on.
Which is daunting, but also a process which I think in some sense should be lifelong. And this is potentially a good age at which to start thinking seriously about all this, understanding again you won’t soon, or perhaps ever, arrive at your final answers.
Point being, I hope the OP’s kid is given the space to explore and reflect and even maybe change their mind back and forth, because to me that is usually how this process should look, if it is actually being done well.
2 Likes
So, when we look at other things that we know will be factors because they are important to him, things like school size, geography, specific things related to LGBT issues etc . . . the list seems to end up with lots of schools that fall into two categories. One is LAC’s that range in selectivity. Bates is an example of an LAC that he likes. The other category is small universities that are more professionally focused and offer some graduate degrees. Clark University is a school in this category that he likes. The universities seem to have majors like “accounting” or “cybersecurity” or “business analytics” that the LAC’s don’t usually have.
Once this pattern began to emerge, my thought was that the universities seemed like better choices, because they had these majors. Dad, on the other hand, feels like the LAC’s, or at least the better known ones, are a better choice, because the brand name matters.
To be clear, neither of us thinks that prestige should be the number one criteria, or that he should be pushed to a school he doesn’t love. And if he decides he loves a certain subject and wants to major in it, we’ll support that. But as we go about figuring where to visit, it’s helpful to think through what all the factors might be, and majors and prestige are two that I am still wrapping my mind around for this kid. So, I made this thread.
3 Likes
It’s quite possible I used the wrong word. I live in the greater DC area. I have a lot of friends and family members who work for the government, or government contractors, or the nonprofit world or the education/human services world. I work in one of those fields, and I know a fair amount about how things work.
My guess is this kid will want to work in the for profit sector, in a “business”, doing something that in some way uses math and computer skills to solve problems. What kind of problems? What kind of business? What major might lead to this imagined job? I don’t know.
Not sure what this means. A handful? Top Tier? Like who?
Skip it. I feel an inevitable mod-chastising rabbit hole ahead.
What does that mean?
One could argue Clark is transitioning away from being a pure LAC. I’m not saying they’re not an LAC but they cut LAC type majors, added some they feel meet the market better. They’re rebalancing their size and portfolio for the future.
But Clark vs Bates is an interesting comparison because one has the majors you’ve identified, while the other does not. There are similar schools to both.
But I would think someone with your son’s current interests (which may change over a year) he would be better off at a school with pre professional majors - like Clark vs a traditional LAC like Bates.
There will be other small schools that have accounting that may not be LACs but are in size etc.
Clark isn’t an LAC. It’s a university.
2 Likes