Why banks should hire from second rate schools
Banks are notoriously choosy about where they find MBAs. In Europe, their hunting grounds are restricted to LBS, INSEAD, IESE, and Bocconi. MBA students from other institutions are usually overlooked.
However, the Wall Street Journal's law blog offers an interesting perspective on why banks should think about broadening their MBA intakes to include students from the likes of the University of Leicester's School of Management.
It cites an academic study published in the American Lawyer, which showed that students taken from elite law schools tend to be comparatively dissatisfied with their jobs:
' Interviews with lawyers in this group reveal that they do not want to work the long hours generally required at law firms, and they especially do not want to put in those hours patiently for ten years to compete for the partnership prize. This is a relatively privileged group that expects to do well in life.'
By comparison, the study found law students from second tier schools diligent and delighted to be given a chance to get ahead.
The same argument could surely be applied to top tier MBAs, who also tend to be a relatively privileged group with high expectations?
Even if it does, the head of recruitment at one international bank says it wouldn't make a difference to hiring policies. "The real value of an MBA is the people they made relationships with at school," he says. "If you hire from a second tier school, the relationships will be a lower calibre."
However, he says it makes sense to take students from second tier schools at undergraduate level. "If you take the top tier from the likes of Rutgers or Cornell in the US, they're still very, very bright. They're also very grateful and willing to work their ars*s off."
