JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
Zeile
Posts: 132
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2010 2:15 am

JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby Zeile » Tue Mar 23, 2010 12:02 am

Does adding a MBA really open up anymore opportunities? Obviously, it adds a fallback option if one hates law, but what else? Anyone know of any interesting articles relating to this?

starsong
Posts: 421
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2009 2:35 pm

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby starsong » Tue Mar 23, 2010 12:07 am

Zeile wrote:Does adding a MBA really open up anymore opportunities? Obviously, it adds a fallback option if one hates law, but what else? Anyone know of any interesting articles relating to this?


The problem with a JD/MBA is this: if you want to practice law, the MBA doesn't help, and can likely hurt, since it may suggest a lack of focus/commitment to law. If you want to work in business, the JD is largely irrelevant. So you're paying for an additional year of debt with no clear career advantage.

OTOH, taking a business class or two may help you understand how your client thinks, which can be helpful as it is usually very different from how a lawyer thinks.

User avatar
onthecusp
Posts: 218
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 4:08 pm

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby onthecusp » Tue Mar 23, 2010 4:17 am

starsong wrote:
Zeile wrote:Does adding a MBA really open up anymore opportunities? Obviously, it adds a fallback option if one hates law, but what else? Anyone know of any interesting articles relating to this?


The problem with a JD/MBA is this: if you want to practice law, the MBA doesn't help, and can likely hurt, since it may suggest a lack of focus/commitment to law. If you want to work in business, the JD is largely irrelevant. So you're paying for an additional year of debt with no clear career advantage.

OTOH, taking a business class or two may help you understand how your client thinks, which can be helpful as it is usually very different from how a lawyer thinks.


That is horrible logic. How could one extra qualification hurt anyone, however irrelevant, in their search for legal employment. A JD/MBA basically means you're not putting all your eggs in one basket, and should you choose to go in a different direction later in life....you can. Having an MBA on your resume won't hinder your effort to find a job in Law, and having a JD won't hurt your prospects of finding a non law related job.

If you're unsure if you want to be a lawyer for the rest of your life, an extra year of debt might be worth it to provide yourself an out.

User avatar
vexion
Posts: 490
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 2:29 am

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby vexion » Tue Mar 23, 2010 6:36 am

onthecusp wrote:That is horrible logic. How could one extra qualification hurt anyone, however irrelevant, in their search for legal employment. A JD/MBA basically means you're not putting all your eggs in one basket, and should you choose to go in a different direction later in life....you can. Having an MBA on your resume won't hinder your effort to find a job in Law, and having a JD won't hurt your prospects of finding a non law related job.

If you're unsure if you want to be a lawyer for the rest of your life, an extra year of debt might be worth it to provide yourself an out.

Law firms have a documented history of refusing to hire JD/MBAs over equally-qualified candidates who only have a JD. As Starsong wrote, it generally shows a lack of focus. As well, an MBA isn't necessary to provide a "backup." You already have a UG degree, a JD, and work experience. With those, you can get into all sorts of jobs in all sorts of fields, excluding maybe the hard sciences and education. That late in the game, getting the job you want is more of a networking thing then how many letters you have after your name.

imchuckbass58
Posts: 1245
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:24 pm

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby imchuckbass58 » Tue Mar 23, 2010 7:23 am

vexion wrote:Law firms have a documented history of refusing to hire JD/MBAs over equally-qualified candidates who only have a JD. As Starsong wrote, it generally shows a lack of focus. As well, an MBA isn't necessary to provide a "backup." You already have a UG degree, a JD, and work experience. With those, you can get into all sorts of jobs in all sorts of fields, excluding maybe the hard sciences and education. That late in the game, getting the job you want is more of a networking thing then how many letters you have after your name.


Really? Where's the documentation?

At least at top schools, this is not the case. In fact, the consensus among both career services and students at the school I am at and those I was considering (and borne out anecdotally by the jobs of JD/MBA students whose grades I know) is that JD/MBA students do better all other things equal than their normal JD or normal MBA counterparts. This doesn't necessarily make it worth it, but it certainly doesn't hurt you (though it does restrict you somewhat to transactional law or business).

OP, if you're interested in reading more, this is the best article I've found (http://blog.veritasprep.com/2009/07/pro ... jdmba.html). Obviously it's commercial in nature, but it's pretty spot on in terms of what I've found.

rando
Posts: 908
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 1:57 pm

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby rando » Tue Mar 23, 2010 7:30 am

vexion wrote:
onthecusp wrote:That is horrible logic. How could one extra qualification hurt anyone, however irrelevant, in their search for legal employment. A JD/MBA basically means you're not putting all your eggs in one basket, and should you choose to go in a different direction later in life....you can. Having an MBA on your resume won't hinder your effort to find a job in Law, and having a JD won't hurt your prospects of finding a non law related job.

If you're unsure if you want to be a lawyer for the rest of your life, an extra year of debt might be worth it to provide yourself an out.

Law firms have a documented history of refusing to hire JD/MBAs over equally-qualified candidates who only have a JD. As Starsong wrote, it generally shows a lack of focus. As well, an MBA isn't necessary to provide a "backup." You already have a UG degree, a JD, and work experience. With those, you can get into all sorts of jobs in all sorts of fields, excluding maybe the hard sciences and education. That late in the game, getting the job you want is more of a networking thing then how many letters you have after your name.


There are some huge leaps made in all of the posts in this thread. A JD/MBA can hurt you. As has been mentioned, law firms may be unsure that you actually want to practice law. That being said, the first post about how a JD doesn't help in business and an MBA doesn't help in law is the silliest shit I have ever seen. M&A, contracts, finance deals all require some knowledge of the financial sector. An MBA can certainly help you head in that direction. While it may not be necessary, it will certainly help.
The other nice thing is that you get an extra year to look for a job.
Best of luck.

starsong
Posts: 421
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2009 2:35 pm

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby starsong » Tue Mar 23, 2010 9:00 am

rando wrote:
vexion wrote:That is horrible logic. How could one extra qualification hurt anyone, however irrelevant, in their search for legal employment. A JD/MBA basically means you're not putting all your eggs in one basket, and should you choose to go in a different direction later in life....you can. Having an MBA on your resume won't hinder your effort to find a job in Law, and having a JD won't hurt your prospects of finding a non law related job.

If you're unsure if you want to be a lawyer for the rest of your life, an extra year of debt might be worth it to provide yourself an out.

Law firms have a documented history of refusing to hire JD/MBAs over equally-qualified candidates who only have a JD. As Starsong wrote, it generally shows a lack of focus. As well, an MBA isn't necessary to provide a "backup." You already have a UG degree, a JD, and work experience. With those, you can get into all sorts of jobs in all sorts of fields, excluding maybe the hard sciences and education. That late in the game, getting the job you want is more of a networking thing then how many letters you have after your name.

+1. Law and business are two very different things. It boils down to the difference between analysis and judgment (see this post from the Harvard Association for Law and Business, although I disagree with the latter part of the article: --LinkRemoved--). Law firms look for people very strong in analysis, specifically legal analysis, a kind of argument-centered thinking that revolves around literal interpretation of words, purposes, policies, etc.--very different from business thinking, which is about making the right decision with limited information, usually under time pressure, etc. A J.D. trains you for the former, an MBA for the latter. So if you have an MBA, firms see that you are possibly good at making business decisions--what does that have to do with the kind of legal analysis work they are hiring you for? You spent a whole year refining skills largely irrelevant to a Junior Associate position, this may hurt you come interview-time.

onthecusp wrote:There are some huge leaps made in all of the posts in this thread. A JD/MBA can hurt you. As has been mentioned, law firms may be unsure that you actually want to practice law. That being said, the first post about how a JD doesn't help in business and an MBA doesn't help in law is the silliest shit I have ever seen. M&A, contracts, finance deals all require some knowledge of the financial sector. An MBA can certainly help you head in that direction. While it may not be necessary, it will certainly help.
The other nice thing is that you get an extra year to look for a job.
Best of luck.

There are plenty of courses that deal with M&A, contracts, and finance deals from the perspective of the lawyer, which is very different from that of the deal-maker. A junior associate at a law firm will not be building Excel spreadsheets to analyze the potential profitability of a merger. He/she will need to understand the economic substance of the deal, which is exactly what those law courses teach (in addition to the legal doctrine).

Now, you also ignored the latter part of my post, in which I recommended cross-registering for some business courses. It can help on the margins to have at least a rudimentary understanding of the quantitative aspects of a deal, but you don't need an MBA for that. In fact, most MBAs feature only a handful of quantitative finance classes. Regardless, it is those classes--not the MBA degree itself--that give you that knowledge.

Cestjustemoi
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 4:35 pm

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby Cestjustemoi » Tue Mar 23, 2010 9:43 am

Ehhhh wrong to the above posting. Many MBA's already come from business undergrads where they have taken finance classes and they will continue this through their MBA. Furthermore you can choose to concentrate in finance or accounting. Additionally I would like someone to explain to me how one is suppose to understand the "economic" impact of a merger if they have not had proper training. I agree that many people do not need a MBA to practice law but there are cases where it is absolutely needed. For instance I have a professor who represents CPA firms and in order for him to defend his client he absolutely needs specilaized educuation in auditing provided from an MS accounting or a MBA with an accounting concentration. In fact he is even a CPA himself. There are cases where a MBA is useful. As far as not getting hired because you have a MBA, this is stupid, you are just as likely to not get hired because you wore the wrong color tie. A MBA is just another form of specilization one can use to work themselves into a market niche. It may be worth if for an individual entering law school with a business UG. In the end it's o ly one more year of schooling on top of the minimum of 20 years most JDs already have.

Flanker1067
Posts: 658
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 12:47 pm

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby Flanker1067 » Tue Mar 23, 2010 9:54 am

I will not enter the existing arguments in this thread, but I did see a sweet job at the SEC not too long ago specifically for JD/MBA grads. Obviously, opening up these opportunities to the detriment of others may not be your thing, but if I was qualified for an MBA at a top school I definately would consider the JD/MBA.

Disclaimer: I did UG in finance, and have a pretty strong interest in pursuing it one way or another.

rando
Posts: 908
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 1:57 pm

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby rando » Tue Mar 23, 2010 9:58 am

starsong wrote:
rando wrote:
vexion wrote:That is horrible logic. How could one extra qualification hurt anyone, however irrelevant, in their search for legal employment. A JD/MBA basically means you're not putting all your eggs in one basket, and should you choose to go in a different direction later in life....you can. Having an MBA on your resume won't hinder your effort to find a job in Law, and having a JD won't hurt your prospects of finding a non law related job.

If you're unsure if you want to be a lawyer for the rest of your life, an extra year of debt might be worth it to provide yourself an out.

Law firms have a documented history of refusing to hire JD/MBAs over equally-qualified candidates who only have a JD. As Starsong wrote, it generally shows a lack of focus. As well, an MBA isn't necessary to provide a "backup." You already have a UG degree, a JD, and work experience. With those, you can get into all sorts of jobs in all sorts of fields, excluding maybe the hard sciences and education. That late in the game, getting the job you want is more of a networking thing then how many letters you have after your name.

+1. Law and business are two very different things. It boils down to the difference between analysis and judgment (see this post from the Harvard Association for Law and Business, although I disagree with the latter part of the article: --LinkRemoved--). Law firms look for people very strong in analysis, specifically legal analysis, a kind of argument-centered thinking that revolves around literal interpretation of words, purposes, policies, etc.--very different from business thinking, which is about making the right decision with limited information, usually under time pressure, etc. A J.D. trains you for the former, an MBA for the latter. So if you have an MBA, firms see that you are possibly good at making business decisions--what does that have to do with the kind of legal analysis work they are hiring you for? You spent a whole year refining skills largely irrelevant to a Junior Associate position, this may hurt you come interview-time.

onthecusp wrote:There are some huge leaps made in all of the posts in this thread. A JD/MBA can hurt you. As has been mentioned, law firms may be unsure that you actually want to practice law. That being said, the first post about how a JD doesn't help in business and an MBA doesn't help in law is the silliest shit I have ever seen. M&A, contracts, finance deals all require some knowledge of the financial sector. An MBA can certainly help you head in that direction. While it may not be necessary, it will certainly help.
The other nice thing is that you get an extra year to look for a job.
Best of luck.

There are plenty of courses that deal with M&A, contracts, and finance deals from the perspective of the lawyer, which is very different from that of the deal-maker. A junior associate at a law firm will not be building Excel spreadsheets to analyze the potential profitability of a merger. He/she will need to understand the economic substance of the deal, which is exactly what those law courses teach (in addition to the legal doctrine).

Now, you also ignored the latter part of my post, in which I recommended cross-registering for some business courses. It can help on the margins to have at least a rudimentary understanding of the quantitative aspects of a deal, but you don't need an MBA for that. In fact, most MBAs feature only a handful of quantitative finance classes. Regardless, it is those classes--not the MBA degree itself--that give you that knowledge.


Not to get too off topic, and i'm not overtly advocating for a JD/MBA, but law firms are a business. They hire JD/MBA's all the time. Don't forget how much legal work being done in large firms is oriented around savvy deal-making. Whether it is taking on clients, leveraging associates to partners, or working an M&A deal.
And taking the law classes on finance and M&A are great, but don't kid yourself into thinking that law firms look at your transcripts and think you will be set for M&A because you took the law course.

Rory1987
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 6:37 pm

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby Rory1987 » Tue Mar 23, 2010 10:11 am

Does anyone know how difficult it may be to transition back into the business world after working as a lawyer for a few years, even if you have a MBA? I know that lawyers are dead to firms if they take any significant time off, but what about MBAs to corporations? I’m asking because I think a MBA could be a great fallback option, if one ends up hating law.

Cestjustemoi
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 4:35 pm

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby Cestjustemoi » Tue Mar 23, 2010 10:23 am

Rory1987 wrote:Does anyone know how difficult it may be to transition back into the business world after working as a lawyer for a few years, even if you have a MBA? I know that lawyers are dead to firms if they take any significant time off, but what about MBAs to corporations? I’m asking because I think a MBA could be a great fallback option, if one ends up hating law.


Not sure in general about other corporaions but I know for the health admin Corp I work for we hire JD/MBAs all the time and many of them have only worked in law firms previously. However, I can't speak for corps as a whole considering we much prefer jd and health masters canidates

ughOSU
Posts: 444
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:42 pm

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby ughOSU » Tue Mar 23, 2010 10:33 am

There is an absurd amount of conjecture in this thread. Please back up assertions such as:
vexion wrote:Law firms have a documented history of refusing to hire JD/MBAs over equally-qualified candidates who only have a JD.

...with citing sources of said "documented history".

I myself am interested in a JD/MBA, have done quite a bit of research on the dual degree, and have seen nothing that suggests that the assertion above holds true unless you're in a somewhat special circumstance where you're a good candidate for an IB/PE post-MBA job (i.e., have IB/PE background). Please enlighten.

User avatar
MURPH
Posts: 854
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:20 am

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby MURPH » Tue Mar 23, 2010 10:40 am

on TLS the mantra is get into the highest ranked school then get a job in big law or die in wretched poverty and misery.
If you are interested in business then do it. If you are really facinated by the subject then finding a way to make a career out of it will be pretty easy. It won't be a typical career and it might be a struggle. It is your life. Don't settle for taking the path of least resistance.

starsong
Posts: 421
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2009 2:35 pm

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby starsong » Tue Mar 23, 2010 11:00 am

OK, so I think most of us are talking about different things. I understood the OP as asking in the context of the traditional biglaw career path. As a junior associate, you're doing doc review, writing memos, doing legal research, etc. for the first 2-3 years. This is 99.9% pure legal work--I mean, there's always exceptions, but spreadsheet skills do not matter for this kind of work.

Down the road (senior associate timeframe), the MBA may give you a very slight advantage in bringing in clients b/c it sets you apart. In my opinion, this advantage is miniscule, b/c people hire experienced lawyers based on their legal track record, not b/c they know how to price a marketing budget. And it is certainly outweighed by the "are you serious about being a lawyer?" you'll likely get at OCI.

Now, you all raised all kinds of other scenarios. Like specialized finance knowledge for very specialized transactions--fine, agreed. But you don't need an MBA for that, have any of you ever looked at the typical MBA curriculum? You take a handful of finance classes. Any MBA will tell you, it's not about academic knowledge, it's about learning from others' business experience and networking. If you want to handle super-complex finance/accounting transactions, go become a CFA, CPA, etc. But an MBA? You're joking right?

OTOH, if you're not looking for the typical biglaw career path, obviously it can help you, maybe in a smaller firm that offers business consulting along with legal services. And if you don't want to practice law altogether--either upon graduation or sometime down the line--an MBA is excellent. But, again, you don't need a J.D. then, right? (I understand the "getting multiple degrees for the sake of backup options" idea, but just think how that looks to an employer--unfocused).

ArmyVet07
Posts: 76
Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 6:11 am

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby ArmyVet07 » Tue Mar 23, 2010 11:13 am

Plenty of JD programs offer concentrations in Business Law. Might this be sufficient for your needs?

starsong
Posts: 421
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2009 2:35 pm

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby starsong » Tue Mar 23, 2010 11:13 am

ArmyVet07 wrote:Plenty of JD programs offer concentrations in Business Law. Might this be sufficient for your needs?

+1.

User avatar
englawyer
Posts: 1270
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:57 pm

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby englawyer » Tue Mar 23, 2010 11:26 am

depends on the school. a jd/mba from fordham might be a terrible choice, because outside of the elite schools , you are fighting for whatever legal/biglaw job you can get. you would probably be considered blackballed from litigation for example, so you could be limiting your options when you shouldn't be. however, from an elite law school, i think its a great idea personally.

first, many lawyers try to switch into business because they realize that law is more of a support role. IE bankers wheel and deal, the lawyers dot the i's and cross the t's. you might think you want to do law but the mba can be a hedge for you to switch later.

second, jd/mba specifically has their own separate alumni network. at H for example, there have been less than 400 graduates. they probably look favorably on those that followed their academic footsteps and would be willing to "meet for coffee" and network.

third, it is easier to get into jd/mba than mba alone, specifically for younger candidates with less work experience. this is more true at some schools than others, but it is true for some schools. thus the choice becomes at age 23 to work for a few more years and then mba, or do jd/mba now.

fourth, a jd/mba looks better than mba alone because everyone knows the academics of an mba are a joke. thus you provide credibility that you are actually smart by getting a top jd. even if you don't use your "legal knowledge" you have the brand of a smart person.

Rory1987
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 6:37 pm

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby Rory1987 » Tue Mar 23, 2010 11:55 am

You say a MBA from Fordham might be a bad choice, but wouldn’t it also give you a fallback option if you can’t find that legal job? If a legal job is guaranteed at a T10 school, then you really wouldn’t need a MBA. But at a lower ranked school, wouldn’t a MBA be even a better idea because you could always go into business if you can’t find decent legal work? It gives you some more security in a sense.

MJMD
Posts: 148
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 7:26 pm

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby MJMD » Tue Mar 23, 2010 11:59 am

a jd/mba from fordham might be a terrible choice, because outside of the elite schools , you are fighting for whatever legal/biglaw job you can get. you would probably be considered blackballed from litigation for example, so you could be limiting your options when you shouldn't be.


What nonsense is this? Why would you be "blackballed" from litigation because you have an MBA?

I think that's rubbish: if you graduated in the top of your J.D. class from Fordham, I highly doubt that you would be desperately "fighting for whatever legal/biglaw job you can get" in New York. That having been said, though, I might agree with holding off on one's MBA if not attending a super-elite school. Fetishization of the Ivy League and the other T14 schools on TLS has been taken to a ridiculous extreme, I think, in terms of their perceived relative advantage over the schools ranked 15-50 in the legal field: but I suspect that that level of extreme elitism is actually appropriate when considering business schools. An MBA from anyplace other than one of the very top schools just seems like a waste of time to me.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby 09042014 » Tue Mar 23, 2010 12:04 pm

Rory1987 wrote:You say a MBA from Fordham might be a bad choice, but wouldn’t it also give you a fallback option if you can’t find that legal job? If a legal job is guaranteed at a T10 school, then you really wouldn’t need a MBA. But at a lower ranked school, wouldn’t a MBA be even a better idea because you could always go into business if you can’t find decent legal work? It gives you some more security in a sense.


That is a lot of money to spend on a backup. We are talking over 300K for both right?

User avatar
englawyer
Posts: 1270
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:57 pm

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby englawyer » Tue Mar 23, 2010 12:07 pm

Rory1987 wrote:You say a MBA from Fordham might be a bad choice, but wouldn’t it also give you a fallback option if you can’t find that legal job? If a legal job is guaranteed at a T10 school, then you really wouldn’t need a MBA. But at a lower ranked school, wouldn’t a MBA be even a better idea because you could always go into business if you can’t find decent legal work? It gives you some more security in a sense.


in that scenario, i would say to just do the fordham MBA or the JD alone. a fordham mba doesn't have the recruiting power to bring premier business employers to campus so the legal options are far superior, whereas at the elite schools business opps are better than legal opps (in general). to go four years in debt (say 200k) you want to have a VERY GOOD shot at a job paying 150k+.

if you strike out at biglaw, the fordham mba is not going to get a comparable opportunity for you (avg graduating salary of 70k). is it better than shitlaw? sure. but you are still royally f'ed and would have been better working. the fordham jd also has less of a "smart person" brand than an elite JD, so business employers would be more skeptical of "why jd" (in my opinion).

if this is more than a hypothetical, i think if you can get the LSAT for fordham JD you could test well enough to get a gmat that will get you into a much better mba program than fordham, so i would work for a while and then shoot for a better MBA.

User avatar
Muckduck
Posts: 110
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 12:51 pm

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby Muckduck » Tue Mar 23, 2010 12:09 pm

vexion wrote:
onthecusp wrote:That is horrible logic. How could one extra qualification hurt anyone, however irrelevant, in their search for legal employment. A JD/MBA basically means you're not putting all your eggs in one basket, and should you choose to go in a different direction later in life....you can. Having an MBA on your resume won't hinder your effort to find a job in Law, and having a JD won't hurt your prospects of finding a non law related job.

If you're unsure if you want to be a lawyer for the rest of your life, an extra year of debt might be worth it to provide yourself an out.

Law firms have a documented history of refusing to hire JD/MBAs over equally-qualified candidates who only have a JD. As Starsong wrote, it generally shows a lack of focus. As well, an MBA isn't necessary to provide a "backup." You already have a UG degree, a JD, and work experience. With those, you can get into all sorts of jobs in all sorts of fields, excluding maybe the hard sciences and education. That late in the game, getting the job you want is more of a networking thing then how many letters you have after your name.


+1.

User avatar
englawyer
Posts: 1270
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:57 pm

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby englawyer » Tue Mar 23, 2010 12:11 pm

MJMD wrote:
a jd/mba from fordham might be a terrible choice, because outside of the elite schools , you are fighting for whatever legal/biglaw job you can get. you would probably be considered blackballed from litigation for example, so you could be limiting your options when you shouldn't be.


What nonsense is this? Why would you be "blackballed" from litigation because you have an MBA?

I think that's rubbish: if you graduated in the top of your J.D. class from Fordham, I highly doubt that you would be desperately "fighting for whatever legal/biglaw job you can get" in New York. That having been said, though, I might agree with holding off on one's MBA if not attending a super-elite school. Fetishization of the Ivy League and the other T14 schools on TLS has been taken to a ridiculous extreme, I think, in terms of their perceived relative advantage over the schools ranked 15-50 in the legal field: but I suspect that that level of extreme elitism is actually appropriate when considering business schools. An MBA from anyplace other than one of the very top schools just seems like a waste of time to me.


well i was just trying to come up with a way where the legal employers might frown upon a jd/mba. look, in general people want to see that you are enthusiastic about the practice area you are about to enter (i would think!). why would you want to give them any reason to question your motivations? most people are not #1 at fordham, so i was talking more about the top 30% student who is basically trying to get whatever biglaw gig they can. the MBA could hypothetically raise some eyebrows for certain practice areas, and your goal should be to minimize eyebrow raising if at all possible.

User avatar
beesknees
Posts: 458
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 10:46 am

Re: JD/MBA - Is it worth the extra year of debt?

Postby beesknees » Tue Mar 23, 2010 12:14 pm

.
Last edited by beesknees on Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:14 am, edited 1 time in total.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: joeytribbiani and 6 guests