JourneyMan

This is a great suggestion. From my vantage point, I think I am quant- oriented and inclined, but, I've immensely enjoyed some Qual theories/tools - eg Ethnography, Grounded Theory, and the ubiquitous focus group method.

You're welcome Indus, truly. I appreciate the thought and the effort you've put in. Respect! You're right. This isn't detailed enough, and 1] I need to work on refining this; 2] I need to research the different types of groups - management, entrepreneurship/ marketing , better This is precious. Thanks for sharing. I tend to have a "let's find a wholesome answer" approach. What you're suggesting here, is a segmented approach. This is a really interesting suggestion and I need to think a lot more now. Thanks! These are the right next steps for me. I think this needs work, and requires a lot more thought to be 'spared' for the next level of detail for the research area. Lastly, on a separate note, it's sad to hear that the marketing strategy topic has been sidelined a bit. I think we should continue the dialog here, and through the efforts of members with an interest in the marketing strategy area, we can certainly compile useful tips, lists of topics, names of professors working in this area, etc. Indus - thanks again for your detailed commentary. All in good spirit, and very welcome. Thanks!

In my line of work, we don't really distinguish between different approaches. And, we use the approach that works best. So, I agree with you that a person should know both types of tools/techniques, and should use the best set of techniques available to address a particular problem. However, given the way most research work is structured, my wishful thinking might remain wishful, barring some occasional overlaps. :)

Thank you. This sure helps. So, my understanding is that the tools/methods are applied in reasonably distinct ways, and that distinction (or say, minimal overlap) ensures that the tool/method used, by itself, can act as the identifier of the types of problems to address. Hence, a separate, outcome based classification is not needed.

It's the lull before the storm. If one compares with past data at gradcafe, we can reach 3 different conclusions: 1] Several people applying for Business PhDs are not on gradcafe this year, especially for Marketing, Operations, Strategy and OB areas 2] Several people applying for Business PhDs are neither active on gradcafe nor on TM forums If 1] and 2] are false (ie people are active on both websites) then, 3] most schools are a little late this year in sending out invitations for interviews.

My observation: Sub-areas described within the marketing area. Most schools split the marketing area into 1] Qualitative/ Quantitative OR into 2] Consumer+Behavioral / Quantitative [ this second classification appears faulty, but we'll discuss this side- topic some other day] This appears to be a "methods used' based approach (first) or a "original training/subject" based approach (second). (The para below is an illustration, and could be incomplete and/or faulty. I request you to respond to the thought, and not to the 4 specific suggestions used to illustrate the thought] Is there a reason why schools don't have sub-areas such as the following 1] Sales and Distribution, including channel management 2] Brand management 3] Market, Competition and Consumer research 4] Marketing strategy (assuming corporate and business strategy as a 'given') - so essentially product level strategy; etc (The para above is an illustration, and could be incomplete and/or faulty. I request you to respond to the thought, and not to the 4 specific suggestions used to illustrate the thought]

This suggestion is close to the sub-area that I have in mind - marketing strategy + product design. Boatwright (CMU), Venkat (Darden) - both suggestions are valuable. I hope that through the guidance of the forum members, I can find some more names in this sub-area, so that a meaningful list can be compiled. Thank you!

Top 20 schools list - great set of suggestions. Spotted two themes - overall school rankings/ratings don't matter AND make your own Top 20 list Rankings - Rankings actually don't matter, I agree. For example, if we were medical students looking for internships or residencies, and say I was focused on neurosurgery, then, I'd apply to the best neurosurgery med schools - and I wouldn't have more than passing interest in how the orthopedic or cardiology sections of those schools were rated, or, for that matter, how was the med school rated overall. Again, every mathematically oriented person knows, averages of any kind, including reputation rating averages are fairly meaningless descriptors of the underlying population, and possibly the least useful statistic to examine or describe a given population. So, we're done with school ranking averages. Personal Top 20 schools - This is where I personally struggle. The data are best available at a program or area level. At a sub-area/ specific interest level, the data aren't quite there to create any meaningful ranking, at least in the topics that interest me. In my situation, I think the members of this forum can be particularly helpful with their suggestions - specific professors and/or specific groups within departments in some schools. Indeed, I have already received 5+ great suggestions from people here. Thank you so much!

Consumer Culture Theory "CCT" - CCT is a really nice suggestion, possible_phd, thank you. I was summarizing the opinions expressed on this thread and the opinions seemed to suggest that Qualitative Marketing or some other area with a qualitative component, would be the right choice for me. Responding to some other points made on this thread On my fit with CCT - I don't think I can do justice to CCT. Several useful suggestions have emerged regarding CCT and its future prospects. Thank you for sharing, possible_phd and Behavioral!

Thanks Jacques! I read up on Peter Boatwright tonight, and yes, he does appear to be a great match.

Rsaylors - thanks! The emerging view on the board seems to be that Marketing - Qualitative might be a good fit, in addition to the Strategy program ....

This is a great suggestion, sombaner, Thanks! On a related note, kudos to you and to rsaylors - you've not just made helpful suggestions, you've even shared detailed faculty profiles. Just amazing. Hats off to both of you, and to other such people on this forum!

I've been up for the past 20 hours or so - conflicting schedules. With that caveat, my first reaction is: Venkat looks good, but, Darden admits only once in 4 years - that method doesn't seem that appealing. Aldrich - is great. I don't think I fit in that well with his interests though.

Update on Strategy / Management / Marketing program concentrations: Source: My analysis of the program descriptions shared by roughly Top 20 US B-schools Stand alone Strategy programs are necessarily inter-disciplinary, and few in number. Several strategy programs are 'sub-areas' within a larger area: Management (OB, Org Design, Applied Micro-Economics and Applied Econometrics), Policy (public policy, regulation, government sector, at times, also entrepreneurship and Technology related innovation) Some strategy type programs are also 'sub-areas' within the Marketing area ( competitive strategy, marketing strategy) As such, my conclusion is that my chosen research area could be addressed by the Management, Policy or Marketing areas, depending on the specific school faculty's interests. Overall, marketing seems to come closest. As before, I look forward to your feedback!

Update on Research area: My desired area has to do with product design. Broadly speaking - How do you design a new product or a service taking into account your competition, the appetite, interest, and ability to pay - of your target market, the state of the economy etc. As such, to me, it seems to be an intersection of marketing and strategy (and it's also not quite innovation, strictly speaking). If we approach it purely from the marketing stand point, we can miss out several strategic considerations - for example regulation, government influence etc. If we approach from a policy / strategy side, we'll stay at perhaps a sectoral response level and will miss out on the elements of product design, introduction, testing and sampling. Hence, both elements (marketing and strategy) need to be addressed. Awaiting feedback from forum members. Thank you!

Quick note: The moderator deleted the summary that I was updating on this thread. I am used to summarizing and quoting sources, that's just how I keep myself organized but, it seems that we are not supposed to do that here, so my sincere apologies.

Quick Read - Summary of several excellent points made by ffsmaster, yangyang2000, rsaylors, phdhope, indus, frayed, sombaner Marketing programs that might focus on strategy related research HBS, PSU, TAMU, Emory, UT Austin Q: How to find other such programs? A: Use Journal of Marketing -> Authors -> Schools; Likewise, Academy of Management has a division titled Business Policy and Strategy Some marketing programs allow Strategy work under the Behavioral track GMAT Scores 720 /800 appears to be threshold score; Caveat: 720 is not 'sufficient' by itself. Economics, other similar subjects may want to see a higher Quant score Really Old Candidates “ROCs Use work experience as the plank for research work and not Undergrad/ Masters coursework. Answer the questions: Why PhD? Why now? How have your research interests developed over time? Do you understand that career related implications? Do you understand the financial implications Apply early/ try to get some committee members to read your profile and research statement Several books available on the theme – how to get into a PhD program of your choice. Show how to contact, how to seek feedback, how to leave an impression, how to craft research statement. Advice is generic, however, this point is supposedly important for ROCs. If applying to a Top 15 school, answer the question that, why you should be the #1 choice of that school. Use the work-experience plan to answer that question Find schools that welcome age 30+years candidates. Some schools don't welcome ROCs (names quoted Columbia, others. Disclaimer -> assertion not verifiable) High likelihood of getting tenure only around age 50+ years and full professorship around age 60+ year Expect family commitments to impact mobility and therefore, your realistic school options. Great if your family is willing to move. However, your entire social network won't move with you Take 'refresher' courses, or, take on new coursework, if the 20 year old UG grades are not passing muster Overall, expect the PhD application process to take 1.5 years or more (inference) given the various limitations and constraints that ROCs face Sources: http://www.www.urch.com/forums/phd-business/119265-non-traditional-applicant-older-underrepresented-groups-diversity-suggestions.html More Eco focused, but several great points that are generic : http://www.www.urch.com/forums/phd-economics/117974-advice-older-applicants.html http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2006/06/age-and-academia.html http://www.www.urch.com/forums/graduate-admissions/46472-how-old-too-old-phd.html http://www.www.urch.com/forums/phd-economics/53999-30-years-old-candidates-interest-economics-what-my-chances.html http://www.www.urch.com/forums/phd-economics/67495-age-aint-nothing-but-number.html Aid Is a non-issue. Should not be mentioned in the SOP Some schools offer fellowship (ie no work commitment expected in return). Other schools offer TA and RA positions in return for financial aid. TA focus on Undergrad BBA classes, and may not be useful. RA positions are quite useful for the candidate's own research work Research interests Setting research goals requires flexibility and consultation with the faculty Sign of trouble – research goals that are so rigid that they can't be influenced SOP should point out 2-3 possible themes w.r.t your research interest Do research work with faculty that writes your Recommendations

Thank you yangyang2000 and rsaylors! To your questions (similar), my research interest would be best described as one at the intersection of marketing and strategy. Strategy by itself tends to include sub-areas such as theory of the firm, competition, dynamic (systemic) models etc, corporate level strategy/ performance discourse, financial analysis/M&A related stuff - all of which I don't intend to focus on. So, my take is that the Management - Strategy realm has a broader/higher level focus, often based on a strong Microeconomics foundation - and that is quite different from my pin-pointed research interest that is on the cusp of marketing and strategy fields. Aid: great point, noted. Purpose: Is essentially to apply corporate experience for theory-building. Larger goal is to give back to society through teaching and research - so, tenure at 50 or 60 doesn't really matter. What matters is the opportunity to work in my area of interest, build theory and frameworks, and guide and coach other people with similar interests.

ffsmaster - just read your post regarding your own profile. I think you deserve to get into a top program. Good luck!

Thank you for your prompt feedback, ffsmaster. Your suggestion, actually leads to my next question on the forum ( that I was planning to hold back, and post only after receiving feedback to my profile, to start with) That 'next' question is: I can't seem to find that many strategy/policy schools that are independent of a focus on microeconomics/econometrics OR org behavior/ 'management'. And if I look at marketing programs, quite a few are dichotomous (Quali OR Quanti; Behavior/ Consumer OR Models/analytics). So, if my interests - which are solid, and backed by many years of consulting project work - are perhaps somewhat inter-disciplinary (ie not driven by micro-economics, nor by econometrics nor by consumer behavior study nor by marketing models), then where should I go? For now, I would like to park my second question and focus only on seeking overall fit - feedback on my profile, to start with and I'd like to sound you out in a few weeks to discuss this second level question. Let me leave you with a teaser - to me, the lack of a program that directly fits my interests, actually sounds like a great new opportunity to create a niche study area in a business school.

Request: I seem to have a reasonably different 'profile' compared to most applicants, and therefore, I would like to seek feedback from fellow forum members. Your advice is solicited and any suggestion is welcome. Thank you! The 'Usual' Stuff: Indian, Male, BE - EE ( One of Top UG Engineering schools in India, Merit scholarships, Top 10% of Class approx. Overall GPA 3.8), MBA (One of the Top MBA schools -top rank IIM - Graduated top 10-15% of Class, 10 odd marketing related courses, all grades A or A+ . Overall GPA 3.6+ Marketing/ Strategy GPA - near perfect score. Please note, this school does not have grade inflation) The somewhat 'Unusual' Stuff: 15 Years of work experience, including 10 years in management consulting ( brand name consulting firm, but not the usual 2-3 strategy boutiques). Mostly focus on strategy problems. Would have worked on 75+ projects for several clients. Worked with teams across the globe. Lots of dedicated work in US since 2000. Senior level person now, handling several projects in parallel. Age is close to 40. Test Scores (recent, GMAT 730 (V 40, Q 49), AWA 5.5 TOEFL iBT R: 30 L: 30 S: 30 W: 29 Total 119 GMAT could have been better had I had some free time to prepare properly for the test. Applying: PhD programs of roughly Top 15 US B-schools. Considering Strategy, Policy or Marketing areas. Not pursuing: Statistics, Decision Sciences, Economics, Finance, OM, OB Area: Have a specific area identified, and will only focus on that (ie while applying I will not change research area to suit a specific school or department) Aid: Need limited aid - tuition waiver is all that I am looking for. Is there a different category for students requiring limited aid? Also, I can teach some MBA classes, so I can, in effect, pay for tuition as well, part in kind and part in money. Future Plans: Research and teach Dilemma: Not sure whether I stand a chance. The PhD admission appears to be extremely selective, across all schools