juvenaly

Very interesting thread. The old saw, "A Bird In The Hand, Is Worth Two In The Bush Comes To Mind". It is a tough position to be in. If I were you, I would review the faculty interests at your accepted school. You might be surprised to find that there is a faculty member there that you would love to work with and learn from. Remember a Ph.D. is primarily an apprenticeship. Check into who is publishing where, and if possible are any of the faculty reviewers, associates or editors of some of the key journals in your area. My gut feel is to go where you are wanted, not where you were an "almost" accepted candidate. Remember, almost only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades. JuVenaly

I have been spending a fair amount of time thinking about what long term type of career I desire and post Ph.D. cacademic options. I have made a few observations. I am curious what other people think as their feedback will hopefully fill in some gaps for me. These thoughts have come out of a conversation I had with a professor during a campus visit. Their perspective was that you are receiving training as a Social Scientist not a Management Guru and that you need to ensure that wherever you end up you get solid training. They emphasized the role of creating knowledge and making a scientific contribution to the field, and that this was a good lens to view an academic career. In my key area of interest I have identified two professors leading two very different academic careers. Professor A is a junior scholar (assistant professor). She received her degree from a top 10 Ph.D. program and currently works for a private top 10 business school. The professor has co-authored a book for practitioners which has received favorable reviews in the popular business press. This professor is building their reputation, has some name recognition in the public and teaches both MBA and Executive Education courses. This professor however has not published much in refereed journals. Professor B is a senior scholar (chaired professor). She also received her degree from a top 10 Ph.D. program and currently works for a public top 50 business school. This professor has co-authored two text books in the field which have received favorable reviews from students and academics. This professor does not have a strong public reputation but is very well esteemed in scholarly circles. They teach primarily Ph.D. students and MBA’s and conducts considerable research for the government. This professor has over 60 articles published in A list refereed journals and is an extremely cited academic. My observations are this. Professor A is on what I call the potential “RockStar” career path. Their name is getting out in the business press and they are getting known. However their reputation in academic circles is up for debate. The school she works for prizes case studies which they resell to other universities. She has written several but again she has not “published” widely yet or done much empirical research, although her name has appeared in the Economist, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, etc. She also has not received tenure yet although there is no reason to presume she won’t. Although Professor B’s schools (both where they graduated from and where they are currently posted) have considerable “cachet”, the department where they are posted does not necessarily match the name recognition of the school and is not particularly productive except in the area of case study creation. Professor B’s career path is quite different. They have created substantial knowledge in the field, and has served as a mentor for several people who have gone on to outstanding scholarly careers with editorial level positions on several A list journals in the field. They have conducted significant empirical research, have considerable depth in their pipeline and in current students. The school where she is based although reputable really emphasizes scholarly research and the department where they work is one of the most productive faculties in the world. Before sharing my own observations I am curious to know what other people think. Is the role of the Professor really that of a Social Scientist or is it better to become a Guru in your field? Are for profit Case Studies and books as academically valid as peer reviewed journals and publicly shared research? Is it better to leave a lasting legacy of research that may assist other colleagues or is it more important these days to get your name out there in front of the business and popular press? Looking forward to people's thoughts. JuVenaly

Haread, great idea, thanks for starting this thread! If you are part of an underrepresented group (specifically Native American, Hispanic or African-American) then you definitely need to get involved in the Ph.D. Project!. You can look them up on the Internet. They hold an annual conference in Chicago (I attended a few years ago) and it is a fantastic resource to open your eyes to what is possible. They also have a recruitment fair with multiple programs in attendance and it is a great way to build a network both before, during and after your Ph.D. They also have several doctoral students associations (DSA's) for the various disciplines (Finance, Accounting, Management, MIS) that are a great resource. Typically the DSA's hold their meetings in conjunction with the primary academy meetings for the discipline. Check out the website, lots of case studies there, and definitely go to the conference if you have a chance! JuVenaly

Good morning, I want to start playing around with some Statistical Software. I currently don't have access to SPSS and don't want to pay for it so I am looking for alternatives. There is a big list on Wikipedia and I have download PSPP to play around with. Any other suggestions would be most welcome? Thanks! Juvenaly

What discipline would you plan to pursue? Finance? Marketing? Operations? Organizational Behavior? Different foci have different requirements. Each is looking for something different and the better you can align your interests and objectives with the field the better you are likely to do. JuVenaly

This thread appears to have died off. Any new updates? Anyone accepted any more offers? It has been very quiet and we are approaching the 4/15 deadline. I am currently wait-listed (no formal offers) and am hoping that as people accept in the next week or two, some spots will open up! (Keeping my fingers crossed). It's disappointing to realize that I may not be headed back to school this fall, however I think I will be a little wiser next time around if it comes to it. I have learned a great deal from the forum and feedback from programs and hope to put it to use in the future. JuVenaly

Good discussion. Thanks for bringing up the Macro/Micro divide. I think the issue may be that some schools are considered strong in Micro with extensive labs, testing and empirical analysis, while others have a more Macro focus, which while still analytical is not as subject to intensive testing. The reason why I started the thread is the comments one professor made to me, that where you get your Ph.D. may also determine which schools are likely to interview you. His point was that many schools like to hire people who comes from schools/departments that have a similar outlook, perspective or method of training. His other point was that politically some schools prefer to hire people who come from programs with higher "name" recognition, primarily determined by the MBA ranking tables. In his case he graduated with six publications in A journals (two with first authorship) and there were several programs that wouldn't even speak to him based on where he went to school. Personally I want to get the best training I can, even if it selects me out of being offered a position at many programs. Bottom-line, his point was make sure you know what you are getting yourself into when you make your decision as there are politics, snobbishness and all kinds of games being played when it comes to placement. JuVenaly

I've been talking to several professors this past week regarding how to measure and segment different Ph.D. programs. One of the discussions that has come up is that some schools are more theory focused and others are more empirical/experimental research focused. Their point is depending on which type of school you go to, it may lead you down a certain path or exclude certain job opportunities when it comes time to like for a job. I am wondering what other people's perspectives are? Has this been a factor as you evaluate programs? Thoughts? JuVenaly

Haread, thanks for the reference. I spent yesterday reading it, fantastic information! It definitely paints a different picture than what you get from FT, BusinessWeek, etc. I especially like the point the authors make that some schools have great scholars, others produce great scholars, but only a few do both well. Have you decided where you are going yet? On another note, just got a rejection notice from Carnegie-Mellon, Tepper. They say they had over 1000 applications. JuVenaly

If you haven't done it already review the faculty profiles at the various schools as most likely one of these people will be your advisor. Check to see what streams of research they are currently pursuing and what interests you. You can also reach out to recent program graduates and ask them what their experience was like. JuVenaly

Alexis, Haread, congratulations to you both! Fantastic! Haread, I enjoyed reading your story before the board rebooted. You should consider resubmitting it so others can read it. The reason why is it shows that age is not necessarily the factor people make it out to be. Good luck to you both! JuVenaly

Short answer, yes. My undergrad GPA is below 3.0 and I still have offers. It is all a matter of what you bring to the table. Juvenaly

Welcome back everyone and congrats on recent offers/acceptances! Juvenaly