<p>A business major would have an easier time getting into a T14 law school, as most engineers have too low of a GPA to have a shot.</p>
<p>Most CEOs with college degrees have engineering degrees.</p>
<p>Do you have a source for that statement?</p>
<p>Well, never mind. I found the source for that statement. But 22% does not constitute “most CEOs”:</p>
<p><a href=“http://content.spencerstuart.com/sswebsite/pdf/lib/2005_CEO_Study_JS.pdf#nameddest=edu[/url]”>http://content.spencerstuart.com/sswebsite/pdf/lib/2005_CEO_Study_JS.pdf#nameddest=edu</a></p>
<p>It’s higher than any other background according to the graph on page 6, hence “most”</p>
<p>Well thanks for the source</p>
<p>“Most” would be 51% or greater. The correct statement would be to say that “The most common major for CEOs is engineering.” No offense, but if you wish to excel as an engineer, one certainly needs to know the difference between "most’ and “most common.”</p>
<p>Fine. But still it’s higher than any other background, including Business Administration or Accounting (3% LOL)</p>
<p>No offense, but if you wanna stop failing at life, one certainly needs to focus on getting a job rather than arguing with people that are nearly 10 years younger than you on engineering forum, which wasn’t even your major.</p>
<p>I need to stop arguing with people who are 10 years younger than me? So I am arguing with 12 year olds?</p>
<p>Oh wow for some reason I thought you’re 30 years old? sorry lol.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No offense, but who are you to tell people what they need to do to be a successful engineer? Knowing “most” from “most common” is certainly very far down the list of things that an engineer needs to know.</p>
<p>nope, I’m 22. I graduated at 21.</p>
<p>“Knowing “most” from “most common” is certainly very far down the list of things that an engineer needs to know.”</p>
<p>Because if you don’t know simple stuff like that, then you don’t know the more complex stuff. You can’t learn calculus if you don’t know 1 + 1.</p>
<p>I just want to state again 22% is higher than the percentage of any other backgrounds.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>To be fair, Homer28 is absolutely right that this is not a majority. It is a plurality, which is still notable.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yet I am sure that you agree that knowing the difference in meaning (in a definitional sense) between “most” and “most common” or “majority” and “plurality” is not an imperative skill to have for learning calculus or statics or electromagnetism or anything else that is important to an engineer. Would it be helpful for being a better communicator? Sure! But I think we all know that you don’t have to be a good communicator to be a successful engineer (though it certainly helps).</p>
<p>22% solely from Engineering!!! Only at 301-400 tier, BA is 2% higher than engineering. </p>
<p>People who did Business administration in the 1-100 was 1% lower than the engineering’s. That shows engineering dominates in the research. </p>
<p>Now let’s take a look at the “Most Common Undergraduate Universities (by S&P 500 category)”
The top 100 are from Harvard, Stanford, Yale, U. of North Carolina - 3% each
Note that Harvard didn’t have engineering school until 2005 I believe.
I will assume that the numbers of business administration and economy from Harvard is more than engineering. In fact, there should be no engineering CEO from Harvard.</p>
<p>Next we see that among the top 100, only 3% of CEOs are from Harvard. That’s being said, no engineering background from Harvard at all.</p>
<p>Although the next data shows that the top 100 earned undergraduate from IVYs (Harvard, Yale, Columbia, etc) is 9%, which is very small number, from the previous two conditions, we should conclude that the 9% includes a significant amount of engineering background CEO. If we minus the percentage of Harvard CEO (which is not shown in the study), then the rest should either be business or engineering, as liberal art and accounting are minority in the top 100.</p>
<p>If we combine accounting with business, as well as economy major, and make it as “business major”, the number is definitely higher. But don’t forget none of them beats engineering. </p>
<p>In essence, engineering is very high in percentage among the CEO.</p>
<p>Not majority, when you combine accounting, economy with BA, and make them into “business majors”.
But also consider the numbers of technical companies in the S&P 500.</p>
<p>All the business majors that always use the argument of the low engineering salary cap fail to realize that statistically, engineers out earn business majors throughout their careers. They pull the “well investment bankers make more than engineers.” I’ve seen this argument a thousand times by bitter and clueless people on here. Of course they always leave out the possibility of engineers advancing or starting a company and making very high salaries. Practically every job has a salary cap for the majority of positions. I think the most telling statistic is how many CEOs have engineering degrees. I guess they defied the “salary cap” that engineers supposedly have.</p>
<p>The fact of the matter is the entire premise of this thread is idiotic. People should do what they want to do first and foremost and not worry about doing just what is “easy”. With this attitude, it won’t matter what you do because chances are that you will not be successful. However, there is no disputing that in general, engineers do indeed out earn business majors.</p>
<p>Homer seems very young to me, at least from what he posts.</p>
<p>“Of course they always leave out the possibility of engineers advancing or starting a company and making very high salaries.”</p>
<p>And no other major can start a company? Plenty of successful companies have been founded by people with no college degree.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>He never claimed that. He said that people leave out the fact that engineers can and frequently do start companies. A lot of people just think of engineers as someone who automatically is doomed to sit in a cubical all day and make $80k when they retire, and that simply isn’t the case.</p>
<p>Homer, where did I ever say that you needed an engineering degree to do this? I didn’t. You need to learn to read what others post. I am merely using this as an example that refutes what cluless people like you always say about the so called engineering “salary cap.” There is no “salary cap” because of these possibilites that I am outlining. Business majors like you always talk about the engineering “salary cap” but then what does that say about business majors? Statistically, they have a lower salary cap than engineers, yet business majors always seem to leave this part out. And don’t even start with investment bankers making more than engineers. Only a tiny fraction of business majors will ever make what an investment banker makes.</p>
<p>The point…There is no point in bringing up engineering salary caps when you leave out the fact that statistically, engineers out earn business majors (yes accountants too) throughout their careers. Oh and saying that a business major is more broad than engineering might be true but it is not necessarily more marketable. Remember, engineers can work in business and many do (just look at the statistic of % of CEOs with engineering degrees) but business majors can not work in engineering.</p>