Top Law Schools

Do any t-14 schools have joint jd/mba degrees that you can apply to during your first year at law school?

az21833 wrote:Do any t-14 schools have joint jd/mba degrees that you can apply to during your first year at law school?

During? As in, after you've started law school already?

Almost all of them allow applications during 1L year, although you are at a significant disadvantage at some (primarily the 3 year programs). I know that it is very difficult to "transfer" from the 3 year JD program to the joint JD-MBA at Northwestern.

Also, if you're thinking about being able to get in the "back door" with less work experience by applying as a 1L I think you will be disappointed.

It's significantly easier to get into HBS (though still difficult I'm sure) if you apply as a 1L than if you apply before acceptance into HLS.

bdubs wrote:Almost all of them allow applications during 1L year, although you are at a significant disadvantage at some (primarily the 3 year programs). I know that it is very difficult to "transfer" from the 3 year JD program to the joint JD-MBA at Northwestern.

Also, if you're thinking about being able to get in the "back door" with less work experience by applying as a 1L I think you will be disappointed.

At UPenn, you will not be at a disadvantage applying for the 3 yr JDMBA program during 1L.

spicyyoda17 wrote:

bdubs wrote:Almost all of them allow applications during 1L year, although you are at a significant disadvantage at some (primarily the 3 year programs). I know that it is very difficult to "transfer" from the 3 year JD program to the joint JD-MBA at Northwestern.

Also, if you're thinking about being able to get in the "back door" with less work experience by applying as a 1L I think you will be disappointed.

At UPenn, you will not be at a disadvantage applying for the 3 yr JDMBA program during 1L.

Just because they told you that doesn't make it true.

Several people in my section got into Kellog this year at NU.

Very easy at Yale to do the three year. Not sure why anyone at YLS needs to add SOM to their resume though.

i have plenty of valuable work experience i just didn't have my shit together early enough to apply to both (precisely because of the long hours of that very work experience). so pretty much every school lets you apply during 1L? And its either 3 or 4 (but not 5) years depending on the school, excluding summers?

az21833 wrote:i have plenty of valuable work experience i just didn't have my shit together early enough to apply to both (precisely because of the long hours of that very work experience). so pretty much every school lets you apply during 1L? And its either 3 or 4 (but not 5) years depending on the school, excluding summers?

All T14 offer a JD-MBA. Most are 4 years, but Northwestern, Penn, Columbia, Yale, and Cornell offer a more condensed 3 year program.

PS - It's not too late to apply to MBA programs if you have a GMAT score already.

bdubs wrote:

spicyyoda17 wrote:

bdubs wrote:Almost all of them allow applications during 1L year, although you are at a significant disadvantage at some (primarily the 3 year programs). I know that it is very difficult to "transfer" from the 3 year JD program to the joint JD-MBA at Northwestern.

Also, if you're thinking about being able to get in the "back door" with less work experience by applying as a 1L I think you will be disappointed.

At UPenn, you will not be at a disadvantage applying for the 3 yr JDMBA program during 1L.

Just because they told you that doesn't make it true.

Correct. However, I base this knowledge on the 10+ JD/MBA students I know there and what they've seen, personally experienced, etc. I was actually told by the administrative staff they prefer 0L applicants over 1L; this makes it easier for them to reserve classes for these students. But, like I said, the practice seems to be that competitive 0Ls will be just as competitive as 1Ls should they choose to wait.

Elston Gunn wrote:Very easy at Yale to do the three year. Not sure why anyone at YLS needs to add SOM to their resume though.

A) they want to teach finance law, M&A law, Contracts, or something like that
or
B) they like pissing away money

Elston Gunn wrote:Very easy at Yale to do the three year. Not sure why anyone at YLS needs to add SOM to their resume though.

I agree that it isn't as prestigious, but I could see why someone would find it worthwhile. If a YLS student wants to switch tracks but knows nothing about finance or business and needs that background, he should do it. Prestige does not automatically confer skills, and I'm sure there are plenty of Yale JDs who have been rejected from jobs in business left and right because they don't have an applicable skill set. An undergrad degree in English and a bunch of litigation oriented courses can't help you to do anything but be a lawyer, no matter where they are from.

dingbat wrote:

Elston Gunn wrote:Very easy at Yale to do the three year. Not sure why anyone at YLS needs to add SOM to their resume though.

A) they want to teach finance law, M&A law, Contracts, or something like that
or
B) they like pissing away money

C) They want to convince an employer that they actually want to practice corporate law and not go into academia or appellate ad.

There is a video on the Yale JD-MBA website interviewing an alum who is a WLRK partner about the benefits of the program. Yale people have a reputation for being overly intellectual and socially awkward, an MBA helps tone down both of those stereotypes.

bdubs wrote:

dingbat wrote:

Elston Gunn wrote:Very easy at Yale to do the three year. Not sure why anyone at YLS needs to add SOM to their resume though.

A) they want to teach finance law, M&A law, Contracts, or something like that
or
B) they like pissing away money

C) They want to convince an employer that they actually want to practice corporate law and not go into academia or appellate ad.

There is a video on the Yale JD-MBA website interviewing an alum who is a WLRK partner about the benefits of the program. Yale people have a reputation for being overly intellectual and socially awkward, an MBA helps tone down both of those stereotypes.

It's true that convincing employers you actually want to work at a firm is probably the biggest impediment to getting V10-type jobs from Yale, but do you really think it's worth adding MBA tuition onto your law degree so you can make 160 at Skadden instead of 160 at White & Case? And even that's probably an exaggeration. I just looked at permanent employment for class of 2012, and literally everyone at a New York firm is either at a V10 or Quinn/Boies, except for one person at White & Case. Granted, that's less than half the class reporting their names and jobs, so I'm sure there are plenty of people at "lower" firms, though still probably not too many. So you're really talking maybe a marginally better chance of working at WLRK rather than Debevoise.

Elston Gunn wrote:

bdubs wrote:

dingbat wrote:

Elston Gunn wrote:Very easy at Yale to do the three year. Not sure why anyone at YLS needs to add SOM to their resume though.

A) they want to teach finance law, M&A law, Contracts, or something like that
or
B) they like pissing away money

C) They want to convince an employer that they actually want to practice corporate law and not go into academia or appellate ad.

There is a video on the Yale JD-MBA website interviewing an alum who is a WLRK partner about the benefits of the program. Yale people have a reputation for being overly intellectual and socially awkward, an MBA helps tone down both of those stereotypes.

It's true that convincing employers you actually want to work at a firm is probably the biggest impediment to getting V10-type jobs from Yale, but do you really think it's worth adding MBA tuition onto your law degree so you can make 160 at Skadden instead of 160 at White & Case? And even that's probably an exaggeration. I just looked at permanent employment for class of 2012, and literally everyone at a New York firm is either at a V10 or Quinn/Boies, except for one person at White & Case. Granted, that's less than half the class reporting their names and jobs, so I'm sure there are plenty of people at "lower" firms, though still probably not too many. So you're really talking maybe a marginally better chance of working at WLRK rather than Debevoise.

No, there are actual benefits to an MBA besides the signal value. Even though you might think of SOM as a TTT compared to YLS, it's still a halfway decent b-school. MBA programs teach a lot of soft skills that have value in helping you rise through the ranks. Also, most V10s offer a second year status bump to JD-MBA that will offset a lot of the additional costs. Not to mention that b-school is just more fun than law school.

bdubs wrote:No, there are actual benefits to an MBA besides the signal value. Even though you might think of SOM as a TTT compared to YLS, it's still a halfway decent b-school. MBA programs teach a lot of soft skills that have value in helping you rise through the ranks. Also, most V10s offer a second year status bump to JD-MBA that will offset a lot of the additional costs. Not to mention that b-school is just more fun than law school.

Name them

That being said, I absolutely agree that an MBA teaches valuable skills. Unfortunately, most people forget the traditional purpose of an MBA

dingbat wrote:

bdubs wrote:No, there are actual benefits to an MBA besides the signal value. Even though you might think of SOM as a TTT compared to YLS, it's still a halfway decent b-school. MBA programs teach a lot of soft skills that have value in helping you rise through the ranks. Also, most V10s offer a second year status bump to JD-MBA that will offset a lot of the additional costs. Not to mention that b-school is just more fun than law school.

Name them

That being said, I absolutely agree that an MBA teaches valuable skills. Unfortunately, most people forget the traditional purpose of an MBA

Somewhat outdated, but publicly available.
http://www0.gsb.columbia.edu/students/o ... mbasur.htm

See also
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 3&t=180218

I'd talk about current practices at some firms via PM.

dingbat wrote:

bdubs wrote:No, there are actual benefits to an MBA besides the signal value. Even though you might think of SOM as a TTT compared to YLS, it's still a halfway decent b-school. MBA programs teach a lot of soft skills that have value in helping you rise through the ranks. Also, most V10s offer a second year status bump to JD-MBA that will offset a lot of the additional costs. Not to mention that b-school is just more fun than law school.

Name them

That being said, I absolutely agree that an MBA teaches valuable skills. Unfortunately, most people forget the traditional purpose of an MBA

I think I've learned way more applicable stuff in business school than I did in law school (both for business and legal work), and I would echo the notion that it's much more than a signaling mechanism. Modern corporate work bears almost no resemblance to most law school courses, and I also don't know how people practice without understanding something about the economic substance of underlying transactions. I also think that law school has a very lazy vibe to it in general. It allows you to just read a bunch of garbage, get a hornbook and an old outline, and then spew bullshit out on a final and get an A for having done so. Law school is the most dysfunctional academic experience I've ever had, and it's especially bad because people (specifically K-JDs) who play the game well think they've actually accomplished something meaningful.

No, there are actual benefits to an MBA besides the signal value. Even though you might think of SOM as a TTT compared to YLS, it's still a halfway decent b-school. MBA programs teach a lot of soft skills that have value in helping you rise through the ranks. Also, most V10s offer a second year status bump to JD-MBA that will offset a lot of the additional costs. Not to mention that b-school is just more fun than law school.

Okay, I guess I misunderstood. Yeah, I can believe it has substantive value. I'm just skeptical it has much value as a credential.

Borg wrote: I think I've learned way more applicable stuff in business school than I did in law school (both for business and legal work), and I would echo the notion that it's much more than a signaling mechanism. Modern corporate work bears almost no resemblance to most law school courses, and I also don't know how people practice without understanding something about the economic substance of underlying transactions. I also think that law school has a very lazy vibe to it in general. It allows you to just read a bunch of garbage, get a hornbook and an old outline, and then spew bullshit out on a final and get an A for having done so. Law school is the most dysfunctional academic experience I've ever had, and it's especially bad because people (specifically K-JDs) who play the game well think they've actually accomplished something meaningful.

Curious, what is your experience? I can't imagine many people on this fourm have had the time to complete a JD/MBA, had sufficient business experience, and sufficient legal work to make such a statement.

But obviously I am wrong.

As a bit of an aside, in my experience bankers and lawyers don't speak the same language and anyone who can translate is at a noticeable advantage

sinfiery wrote:

Borg wrote: I think I've learned way more applicable stuff in business school than I did in law school (both for business and legal work), and I would echo the notion that it's much more than a signaling mechanism. Modern corporate work bears almost no resemblance to most law school courses, and I also don't know how people practice without understanding something about the economic substance of underlying transactions. I also think that law school has a very lazy vibe to it in general. It allows you to just read a bunch of garbage, get a hornbook and an old outline, and then spew bullshit out on a final and get an A for having done so. Law school is the most dysfunctional academic experience I've ever had, and it's especially bad because people (specifically K-JDs) who play the game well think they've actually accomplished something meaningful.

Curious, what is your experience? I can't imagine many people on this fourm have had the time to complete a JD/MBA, had sufficient business experience, and sufficient legal work to make such a statement.

But obviously I am wrong.

I took a few years off before my JD/MBA. I founded a startup, and I sold that shortly into my 1L year. I'm not going into law, but I did a summer at a large firm in New York and found the MBA to be enormously valuable while there. I didn't need transactions explained to me in as much detail because I understood them from school. I also think the emphasis on group work and putting consistent energy into projects that I got from business school was very helpful in the firm environment. Law school teaches you to read at your own pace and prepare for finals on your own, which I think are bad habits for a work environment.