Penn State 2-year resident MBA program ending this fall
- Thread starter Sharkies
- Start date
On line MBAs are the way to go. My daughter was impressed by the Indiana program that stresses digital marketing. Northwestern too, but they are more expensive.
Getting your masters degree while keeping your career on track appeals to most people.
With the World Campus Penn State can overcome their weakness of being so isolated from major employers and job opportunities. Of course the trick is providing a broad range of degrees wanted today and at a cost competitive with smaller schools or peers.
Getting your masters degree while keeping your career on track appeals to most people.
With the World Campus Penn State can overcome their weakness of being so isolated from major employers and job opportunities. Of course the trick is providing a broad range of degrees wanted today and at a cost competitive with smaller schools or peers.
When I entered the PSU MBA program, it was ranked in the top 20 by USNWR. Sad to see how far it fell and sadder to see it go.
To an extent. Top MBA professors are what drives program value.
And trying to hire enough of them away from the big programs to compete seems hard for a number of reasons.
Having gone to a two-year program in person, I’m curious to see how these program changes play out.
Based on your comment I was expecting something much worse than #33 in the 2023 USNWR rankings.
Last edited:
Wow…the two year program is one reason I chose Smeal over Katz’s 1 year program. Can’t say that I am shocked though.
Back in the day I worked until 6:00pm, ate at the drive thru, then proceeded to my 7:00 pm MBA class. Kids these days have it so easy.
Now get off my lawn.
I remember when PSU was the top undergrad accounting school as ranked by the BiG 8 accounting firms. Now it might not be top 5 in the Big Ten.
It has been ranked much lower since I graduated. I guess it managed to bounce back at some point.
This makes a lot of sense and I give PSU some credit for recognizing brand on this one. Here's my perspective:
For context, I graduated from one of the top MBA programs. Once you get outside of the Top 15 Full Time 2 Year MBA programs, the value starts to diminish very quickly. People go to a top school for two reasons (usually): 1. Transition to another career / role (e.g., from engineering to investment banking) or 2. Obtain a credential that is a rite of passage in Consulting, Investment Banking, etc. The Top MBA programs open doors in Investment Banking (i.e., Wall Street), Management Consulting, Private Equity, Venture Capital, Hedge Funds, and several other management careers. The firms in these spaces pay a LOT of money for graduates from the top schools. However, most schools outside the Top 15 are shut out from these lucrative careers (the firms don't recruit at them). There are exceptions, but the opportunities at lower-ranked schools are not as widespread. For example, a UNC grad (usually just outside Top 15) might make their way to Wall Street, but the number of spots for their students are limited. Once you are outside the Top 20, the opportunities and compensation drop pretty quickly. I was able to pay off my MBA debt in 1 year after graduation - this becomes almost impossible for lower-ranked schools.
Years ago, a Penn State MBA could provide a graduate with management opportunities (think: Fortune 500) that were very lucrative. However, the world has changed. The gap between technical talent salaries (read: software developers, engineers) and management salaries has shrunk. Top software developer compensation often rivals COO pay at many companies. This creates two negative forces for lower-ranked MBA programs. 1. Supply: Candidates are seeking opportunities that give them the highest pay and are not joining MBA programs at the same rate. As such, many programs see a decline in applications. 2. Competition: The rise in internal leadership programs, online platforms (Udemy, Coursera), and an overall de-valuing of the traditional MBA.
Penn State is trying to transition to a STEM focus and earlier on in the career. A shorter program reduces the cost (hopefully) and improves the ROI for students. This could (and hopefully will) unlock new opportunities in Tech companies for students. Get students in early, get a few years of success and they can start to build a powerful network for recruiting purposes. The world has changed. Goldman Sachs, McKinsey, Bain and others compete against Google, Netflix, Amazon for talent. The key here will be to constantly evaluate and tweak / pivot as they learn.
For context, I graduated from one of the top MBA programs. Once you get outside of the Top 15 Full Time 2 Year MBA programs, the value starts to diminish very quickly. People go to a top school for two reasons (usually): 1. Transition to another career / role (e.g., from engineering to investment banking) or 2. Obtain a credential that is a rite of passage in Consulting, Investment Banking, etc. The Top MBA programs open doors in Investment Banking (i.e., Wall Street), Management Consulting, Private Equity, Venture Capital, Hedge Funds, and several other management careers. The firms in these spaces pay a LOT of money for graduates from the top schools. However, most schools outside the Top 15 are shut out from these lucrative careers (the firms don't recruit at them). There are exceptions, but the opportunities at lower-ranked schools are not as widespread. For example, a UNC grad (usually just outside Top 15) might make their way to Wall Street, but the number of spots for their students are limited. Once you are outside the Top 20, the opportunities and compensation drop pretty quickly. I was able to pay off my MBA debt in 1 year after graduation - this becomes almost impossible for lower-ranked schools.
Years ago, a Penn State MBA could provide a graduate with management opportunities (think: Fortune 500) that were very lucrative. However, the world has changed. The gap between technical talent salaries (read: software developers, engineers) and management salaries has shrunk. Top software developer compensation often rivals COO pay at many companies. This creates two negative forces for lower-ranked MBA programs. 1. Supply: Candidates are seeking opportunities that give them the highest pay and are not joining MBA programs at the same rate. As such, many programs see a decline in applications. 2. Competition: The rise in internal leadership programs, online platforms (Udemy, Coursera), and an overall de-valuing of the traditional MBA.
Penn State is trying to transition to a STEM focus and earlier on in the career. A shorter program reduces the cost (hopefully) and improves the ROI for students. This could (and hopefully will) unlock new opportunities in Tech companies for students. Get students in early, get a few years of success and they can start to build a powerful network for recruiting purposes. The world has changed. Goldman Sachs, McKinsey, Bain and others compete against Google, Netflix, Amazon for talent. The key here will be to constantly evaluate and tweak / pivot as they learn.
Thanks. I’m good for one per year.
My son has a big day coming up next month, so you might see a second one soon.
Get unlimited access today.