Actually, I'd argue that among the top 7 business schools, there are certain distinctions between them that will appeal to different people with different professional goals.
MIT, UChicago, and Stanford all seem to appeal more to engineering types and offer a more quantitative / scientific focus.
Wharton is known for their emphasis on finance and is usually ideal for people wanting to become IBankers.
Columbia has its roots in Benjamin Graham-style investing and you'll see a lot of students there go on to those types of hedge funds.
Harvard is more regarded for its emphasis on management and heavy use of case studies, and the people that go there tend to seek out consulting or rotational programs within the F500.
Fair point, but you have to consider where the distinctions come from. For example, at MIT I'd be willing to bet the quantitative focus comes from the fact that many engineers who go there pick us business as a second degree as an undergrad. At Chicago, the quantitative/scientific focus stems from the fact that the department truly believes in it as a method of investigation. Chicago is all about the raw data and real life case studies. It's my understanding that many other business departments differ in this respect.
Of course, this is all anecdotal evidence I've gathered from talking to Chicago alumni, so take it for what you will.
Re:Business School is a Joke
by kingkongreveng_ on Sunday February 14, 2010 @08:44PM
(#1125686)
Accounting, supply chain, and finance are fairly empirical and solid skill based everywhere. Actuarial science programs are practically straight-up math. Sure, in general undergraduate business programs are less rigorous than engineering or physics, but some are certainly based on legitimate hard skills and knowledge; you can't write them off as wishy-washy BS.
On the whole, there is still a large problem with undergraduate degrees in business.