Tuesday, July 31, 2018

MBA Graduates are Richer but Less Happy

mba pay 2015

The good news: Recent MBA grads are making more than previous grads. The bad news: They are also more dissatisfied with their job offers.
Let’s start with the positive. 46% of newly minted MBA grads have had job offers for $125,000 or more, according to a new survey from Training the Street, a provider of educational courses.
The main reason for the increase in salary? A strong competition for MBA talent, says Scott Rostan, founder and CEO of Training the Street.
“When you’re getting three, four offers from banks, and if you just do the math and think about that, that means a lot of firms are competing for the same people and the same talent,” Rostan tells CNBC. “If you’re a talented person, you’re going to be in high demand.”
Satisfaction rates
It gets better. More MBA students, roughly 28%, report receiving three or more job offers. When compared to last year’s 22%, it seems newly-minted MBA grads are getting more options. And more than half of students surveyed this year are “very satisfied” with their offers.
Despite the pay and offers, there are signs for worry. When compared to last year’s 45% satisfaction rate, the number of MBA students who report being satisfied with their job offers fell to 32%. Worse still, students who reported being dissatisfied with their offers has doubled from last year to 14%.
Like last year, the number of grads who report not receiving any employment offers has remained roughly the same at 17%.
So, what could these numbers mean? Well, according to Rostan, the increase in job offers means MBAs are in high demand. But that also means more competition.
“The war for talent is as strong as ever, and top candidates are in high demand, leading to higher starting salaries and multiple job offers,” Rostan tells PR Newswire. “Demand for MBAs remains strong, but firms are being more discerning in an effort to recruit those who can step in and contribute right away.”
Industry Preference
A large percentage of MBA grads reported a preference for working in consulting according to Training the Street. Roughly 31% of grads put working in consulting as their number one job choice. Last year, the number was 20%.
Part of the reason for consulting’s popularity may be the result of heavy recruitment efforts by consulting firms. 51% of respondents surveyed said consulting firms “actively recruited” them for employment. That’s up from 43% last year.
“We’ve seen a concerted effort on behalf of the big consulting firms to attract the strongest, young talent coming out of the nation’s business schools,” Rostan tells PR Newswire. “The results indicate that their efforts have paid off, as more MBAs see consulting firms as their top choice.”
Training the Street’s survey included a total of 262 students. 158 were full-time MBAs.

テッパー、スターン Short-Answer Essays

When it comes to the MBA short-answer essays, many applicants find word limits to be challenging.
Yet, experts say having tight word limits pushes applicants to effectively convey how they will contribute to an MBA class.
Ilana Kowarski, a reporter at US News, recently spoke to some experts on how applicants can pack more punch into MBA short-answer essays.
“You really do have to think about what are the must-communicates versus the nice-to-communicates,” Isser Gallogly, associate dean of MBA admissions and program innovation at New York University’s Stern School of Business, tells US News.
NYU Stern’s “Pick Six”
One example of a short-answer essay prompt is NYU’s Stern, the “Pick Six” essay. The prompt asks applicants to use six images and corresponding captions to describe themselves to the admissions committee and future classmates.
According to NYU’s website, applicants upload a PDF that includes:
  • A brief introduction or overview of your “Pick Six”
  • Six images that help illustrate who you are
  • A one-sentence caption for each of the six images that helps explain why they were selected and are significant to you.
Keep True To Yourself
The key to answering such essay prompts is being authentic and highlighting individuality, experts say. It’s also an opportunity to convey a side of yourself outside of a transcript or resume.
For instance, Stern MBA student Sebastian Hooker took a photograph of himself exploring an ice cave for his “Pick Six” essay. His intent was to convey his appreciation of nature and “Work Hard, Play Hard” mentality.
Hooker, who grew up in Utah, tells US News that he wanted to make clear to NYU that if he were to attend school in NYC, he’d continue pursuing his outdoor hobbies—a core part of his identity.
“I’m not going to move to the concrete jungle and become a 100 percent city-driven person,” he tells US News.
Ben Strickhouser, an MBA student at Carnegie Mellon’s Tepper School of Business, says it’s important to stay true to yourself when writing short-answer essays.
“You want to be authentic in the way that you answer the question, so most likely the first thing that comes to mind whenever you read this question is what you want to put, and then you just need to spend a little bit of time to make sure that it’s put in an eloquent way,” Strickhouser tells US News.
Sources: US NewsNYU Stern

Monday, July 30, 2018

2018-2019 Round 1 and Early Decision / Action MBA Deadlines

SchoolDeadlineDecision NotificationEssay Released?
IESE Early Decision9/4/201810/19/2018No
Harvard Business School9/5/201812/11/2018Yes
UVA / Darden Early Action9/7/201810/17/2018Yes
Yale SOM9/12/201812/5/2018Yes
Duke / Fuqua Early Action9/12/201810/19/2018Yes
London Business School9/14/201811/21/2018Yes
Indian School of Business9/15/2018No
HEC Paris9/15/201810/19/2018Yes
Boston College / Carroll9/17/201812/5/2018No
Stanford GSB9/18/201812/13/2018Yes
UPenn / Wharton9/18/201812/13/2018Yes
Notre Dame Early Decision9/18/201811/2/2018Yes
Northwestern / Kellogg9/19/201812/12/2018Yes
Dartmouth / Tuck9/24/201812/6/2018Yes
MIT Sloan9/25/201812/19/2018Yes
Berkeley / Haas9/27/201812/13/2018Yes
U. Chicago / Booth9/27/201812/6/2018Yes
Michigan / Ross10/1/201812/21/2018Yes
Toronto / Rotman10/1/201812/14/2018No
UMD / Smith10/1/201812/23/2018
UCLA Anderson10/2/201812/18/2018Yes
Columbia Early Decision10/3/2018Yes
CMU / Tepper10/3/201812/12/2018No
Emory / Goizueta10/5/201811/30/2018Yes
UT Austin / McCombs 10/9/201812/18/2018No
Georgetown / McDonough10/9/201812/19/2018Yes
Cornell / Johnson10/10/201812/20/2018Yes
Washington / Foster10/10/201812/21/2018No
NYU / Stern10/15/2018Yes
USC / Marshall10/15/201812/31/2018No
UNC Kenan-Flagler Early Action10/15/201812/7/2018Yes
Rice / Jones10/15/201812/14/2018Yes
SMU Cox10/15/2018No
Indiana / Kelley10/15/201812/20/2018No
Rochester / Simon10/15/201812/15/2018Yes
Vanderbilt / Owen10/19/201812/7/2018No
Babson / Olin10/22/201812/11/2018No
Minnesota / Carlson11/1/201812/15/2018No

Columbia Business School Prof Found Guilty Of Retaliation In Explosive #MeToo Case

A jury today (July 26) found that Columbia Business School Professor Geert Bekaert retaliated against an untenured female assistant professor who complained of being sexually harassed by him in a $30 million lawsuit. The federal jury of four men and four women ruled in favor of Enrichetta Ravina on retaliation by Bekaert but also found that Columbia had neither discriminated against Ravina nor retaliated against her through its actions. Ravina, who left CBS in 2017 and now is a visiting professor at the Kellogg School of Management, had sued the university and her former mentor.
The trial, which began on July 9th, now moves into a second phase for the jury to determine damages. Ravina is seeking damages in excess of $30 million, including back pay, front pay, compensatory damages, punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees. The case is brought under the New York City Human Rights Law, Title VII, and Title IX. The jury, however,  decided only Bekaert is liable for punitive damages, though New York City law holds employers liable for employee actions. As a result, Columbia University will end up being responsible for damages, along with Bekaert.
The jury deliberated for little more than 10 hours before returning the verdict in the high profile case in the courtroom of Judge ­­­­­Ronnie Abrams in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Ravina, 42, alleged that Bekaert, 53, attempted to use his position of authority and influence at Columbia University to impose a sexual relationship on her. Then, after failing in that effort, he lashed out and sabotaged her academic and professional career. Bekaert vehemently denied the charges, saying he had no romantic interest in his one-time mentee who is 11 years his junior.
Ultimately, however, jurors did not agree that she was a victim of sexual harassment or gender discrimination. Instead, the jury agreed that Bekaert engaged in retaliatory actions that damaged her academic career. Jurors did not buy into Bekaert’s defense that he did not stall their collaborative work and that his emails disparaging Ravina to colleagues all over the world were mere attempts to defend himself against her allegations.
The narrative in the courtroom was represented a classic example of a mentorship between an accomplished senior tenured faculty member and a junior assistant professor gone completely wrong. The Belgian-born Bekaert boasts a 30-page CV and joined the finance faculty at Columbia Business School in July of 1999 after receiving tenure at Stanford University’s Graduate School of Business. A promising academic, Italian-born Ravina joined Columbia in July of 2008 after a three-year stint at New York University’s Stern School of Business. Her research puts her at the cutting edge of using large sets of data to analyze personal investment decisions (see A Mentorship Goes Bad At Columbia Business School).
What brought them together was Bekaert’s access to a dataset, belonging to Financial Engines Inc., of 3.8 million investors in the U.S. who are saving for retirement. According to Ravina, it was Bekaert, a consultant for the firm and a teacher on global investments and asset management, who approached her in early 2010 and proposed that they work together. It was only after she invested hundreds of hours analyzing the data that Bekaert began his alleged advances, more than two and one-half years after the start of their collaboration.
In the courtroom, Ravina asserted that Bekaert kept hitting on her. She alleges that he slid his hand down her back to her butt in a taxi, attempted an unwanted kiss on the stoop outside her New York apartment, grabbed her hand at a mid-town bar, leered at her breasts in his office. She claims he often pursued inappropriate conversations in which he allegedly talked about his troubled marriage, asked her if  she had a live-in boyfriend, told her about an affair with a stewardess who wanted to get an MBA at Columbia Business School, and discussed pornography and prostitutes  (“They keep men out of trouble,” Ravina claimed he told her. “They are important to satisfy a man’s sex drive.”)

Enrichetta Ravina, a former assistant professor of finance and economics at Columbia Business Schoo who was denied tenure, accuses senior faculty member Professor Geert Bekaert of sexual harassment and sabotage
When Ravina resisted Bekaert’s sexual advances, she testified, Bekaert propositioned her, telling her that if she were “nicer” to him, her research would proceed faster. Instead, because of her refusals, he delayed and obstructed the work and blocked her from publishing her papers, she alleged.
“I felt trapped,” she testified. “I felt that I could not offend him because otherwise he would lash out at me and ruin my chance of publishing…At the same time, I didn’t want to sleep with him. I just wanted him to say, ‘Yes, let’s proceed with this task.’”
Ravina said she was often dumbfounded about what to do. “I felt that every time I would go to Professor’s Bekaert’s office, he was not thinking about work,” she told the court. “He was thinking about sex. And I was there to make the work go forward. I was growing basically desperate because we were already in the fall of 2013 and nothing had happened on my project despite (the fact) we were ready the spring to be analyzed and I was trying to get his approval in some way to move forward. If anything, he was stalling more. He was just sitting there, saying he was busy, he didn’t have time, he wasn’t ready, and it was as if he was sort of waiting to see if I was changing my mind, if I would sleep with him instead of like freezing when he’d hold my hand or running up the stairs when he would try to kiss me” (see Columbia Business School’s Shocking #MeToo Trial: ‘Blunt Belgium’ Calls Former Menthe ‘Evil Bitch’).
She described a classic dilemma for many women in the workplace. “I couldn’t afford to offend him,” she said. “I didn’t want to. I was walking a tightrope. I was deep in the project. I didn’t have time to move around and do something else. And at the same time I needed his support and I needed especially for him to say yes to the next step. I had been going to his office reglarly to get him to proceed. He would not proceed. He would always insist about switching the topic to something about his life, about going for dinner, about sex. I didn’t want him to be upset at me or get confrontational.”
But he did, according to her, get quite upset and quite confrontational. After Ravina filed her complaint against him, Bekeart conducted a concerted campaign to discredit Ravina and damage her academic career. He sent at more than 30 emails to more than two dozen professors all over the world, many of them in highly influential positions at top academic journals critical to her success. In those emails, he variously described his former mentee as “crazy,” “insane,” or “an evil bitch,” causing untold damage to her career and her ability to get published in the future. It was, as Ravina’s lawyer, David Sanford, put it, “a systematic, planned and intentional grotesque smear campaign.”
The emails introduced as evidence, in fact, portray Bekaert, who has been a tenured professor at CBS for 18 years, as an often emotional, angry and defensive man, eager to discredit and defame his accuser and claim that he was actually the victim in the case. “The laws in this country are screwed up and totally biased against the privileged white males,” he wrote in an email to a colleague. “If this is harassment,” Bekeart wrote another, “the Americans really are total pussies.”

The fact that many of the senior, tenured professors in their finance and economics division sided not with Bekeart but with Ravina could not have helped the defense of either Columbia University or Bekaert.  The faculty, in fact, filed three separate petitions with Columbia Business School Dean Glenn Hubbard, each one of them demonstrating considerable support for their junior colleague.
In his closing arguments, Sanford noted that support from her colleagues. “No one from Columbia besides Professor Bekaert has claimed that Professor Ravina was making this up,” he said. “In fact, Director Dunn, Columbia’s own investigator, testified that he thought Professor Ravina honestly expressed her beliefs about what was happening with Professor Bekaert. He thought Professor Ravina was deeply affected and troubled by what she had experienced. And faculty at Columbia Business School were so concerned about Professor Ravina’s situation that they repeatedly escalated their concerns all over the university. To the division chair, to the dean of the business school, to the executive commitee, to the provost of the university, and even to the president himself of Columbia University.”
Testimony in the case showed that the university’s Equal Opportunity & Affirmative Action (EOAA) conducted a shockingly superficial and incomplete review of Ravina’s charges. On the witness stand, Michael Dunn, the EEOA’s then director, conceded that he only interviewed one other person, besides Ravina and Bekeart. That person was a research assistant and graduate student who immediately admitted that she was “biased” in favor of Bekeart who she described as a “father figure” and who would serve on her dissertation committee. The student, Nancy Xu, had stopped working on the collaboration between Ravina and Bekeart in December of 2012, long before the relationship openly devolved into a bitter dispute.
Dunn, in fact, conceded there was no formal investigation, just a “preliminary fact-finding review.” Attorney Sanford called the investigation “a complete sham.” Dunn admitted on the stand that he hadn’t even prepared any questions for Ravina when he first interviewed her and that he never followed up with her on any of the 170 pages of emails between her and Bekaert that she had sent him. Even worse, Dunn said that his highly limited “investigation” was narrowly focused along the lines of sexual harassment and failed to probe Ravina’s claims of gender discrimination, retaliation or other discriminatory harassment.

Bekaert’s own emails conceded he stopped working on their collaboration for several months because of his dislike for his one-time mentee. Dunn also failed to follow up on a recommendation from Dean Hubbard that Bekaert undergo one-on-one Title IX training, even though he had initially agreed with that recommendation. Instead, Bekaert was sent at his convenience to a one-to-two hour training session on appropriate professional communications.

コーネル大学 ジョンソン・スクール “Back of the Resume” Essay

Johnson back of the resume essay
For years, applicants to Johnson have been invited to imagine themselves as the author of their Life Story and submit a corresponding Table of Contents. 
The suggestion for a “Back of the Resume” prompt to replace it came from a Cornell alumnus, Hernan Saenz (MBA/MIIR ’98), who now is a managing partner at Bain overseeing its Dallas and Mexico offices.
The essay is to learn more about candidates’ individual and interpersonal areas to them a creative way to share some of those unique, individual elements of who they are.
New Johnson Back of the Resume Essay Prompt: The front page of your resume has given us a sense of your professional experience and accomplishments as well as your academic summary and extracurricular involvement. If the back page reflects “the rest of your story,” please help us get to know you better by sharing the experiences that will give us insight into your character, values, and interests.
Johnson back of the resume essay
Judi Byers, Johnson executive director of admissions and financial aid
There are no wrong answers. Candidates should highlight the things they think help tell their story that showcases authenticity. This could mean using a second page—a literal backside of the resume—to outline different ways you are engaged with a local community organization or submitting a YouTube video elaborating on your advocacy for marginalized communities.
Applicants were invited to respond to the ToC in alternative submission formats including a slide presentation, links to pre-existing media (personal website, digital portfolio, YouTube etc.), as well as visually enhanced written submissions—and the same goes for the Back of the Resume prompt.
The school wants to give candidates a chance to showcase a broader range of interests that don’t necessarily fit into their professional experience on an individual level who are exploring passions and interests outside of the workplace.

Thursday, July 26, 2018

Eduniversal Best Masters Ranking

Eduniversal Best Masters Rankingとは、世界154ヶ国、1,000校のトップビジネススクール(経営大学院)が提供する12,000の教育プログラムを対象とした世界的なランキング調査です。「教員視点によるプログラム評価」、「卒業生の進路&収入の状況」、および「卒業生&卒業見込学生による満足度」といった多面的な視点で調査に加えて、企業の人事採用者、そして425万人の卒業生&卒業見込学生も参加する世界的なランキング調査を毎年実施しています。

Tuesday, July 24, 2018

McCombs MBA Class of 2020

UT Austin’s McCombs School of Business just released a first look at the profile of its Full-Time MBA Class of 2020. 

  • 289 students total
  • 38 percent female
  • 25 percent international students
  • 703 average GMAT score
  • 5.6 years of work experience on average
  • 28 years old on average
The experience the incoming Class of 2020 will bring to campus is equally diverse. The top four pre-MBA industries include consulting (15 percent), finance/banking (14 percent), technology (13 percent), and energy (13 percent). Other industries represented in the class are government, consumer products, media/entertainment, healthcare, real estate, manufacturing, non-profit, retail, travel, and venture capital, among others.

Part of what helped the McCombs admissions team assemble such an accomplished incoming class is the school’s increasingly strong performance in closely watched MBA rankings. The school’s MBA program was ranked #17 by U.S. News and first place in terms in the category of “Best Value.” This later accolade was influenced in great part by the strong return on investment McCombs graduates report and the support of a dedicated career management team. Some  92 percent of the Class of 2017 received job offers with an average starting salary of $116,403, along with a signing bonus of $28,280.

Apply for the McCombs Class of 2021

If you’re interested in joining McCombs’ next full-time MBA Class of 2021, applications open soon. You can prepare by taking a look at the school’s new application essay topics, attending an upcoming MBA event, or reading McCombs’ GMAT/GRE blog series.

ロス・スクール・オブ・ビジネス MBA Application Changes

The Michigan Ross School of Business MBA application for fall 2018 is now live. MBA candidates can start applying ASAP

Updated Essay Prompts

This year, there are fewer essay prompts to choose from. Instead of three prompts per group, there are now only two per group. However, each of the three answers must come in at 100 words or less, or 300 total between them.
The school’s career essay now reads, “Michigan Ross is a place where people from all backgrounds with different career goals can thrive. Please share your short-term career goal. Why is this the right choice for you?”
Current applicants are asked to focus on their short-term career goals only, unlike in past years when they were also asked to discuss long-term career goals. 
To learn more details about these small tweaks, read this earlier blog post by Kwon.

Things to Know About the Ross MBA Application

Everything else about the Michigan Ross MBA application is the same this year as last. However, that doesn’t mean that there aren’t a few things you should be aware of before you apply. Here’s a quick list of must-know information:
  • One Recommendation Letter: Michigan Ross only requires one supervisor recommendation letter. This means that it’s vital you select carefully and choose an individual who can speak about your professional performance and work style.
  • You Don’t Have to Apply Round 1: Unlike some schools, applicants to Michigan Ross won’t be at a disadvantage if they miss the Round 1 deadline. In fact, Ross admits more applicants in Round 2. So, if you can submit a great application in Round 2 but only a mediocre one in Round 1, wait!
  • Visit Michigan Ross: If you want to visit Michigan Ross before you apply, anytime is great except during the summer. Choose a time when students are on campus and class is in session. Think about scheduling a visit on the Ross website, but remember, you won’t get any extra points during the admissions process just because you visited.