Has anyone ever heard of adding a MBA dual degree for backup Forum

[patspats]

has anyone ever heard of someone doing bad their 1L year, then, admitting defeat, decide to add a MBA in hopes of going into business instead of law and using the law degree to bolster their business resume? (I am assuming business is not as concerned about class ranking as law firms, therefore this would be a nice backup option)

[vanwinkle]

No. This is pretty dumb for a number of reasons.

[Borg]

This depends on what school you go to. If you are at a T-14 that also has a good business school, then this could work. If you aren't at a T-14 or your school doesn't have a good b school it isn't worth the money.

[dingbat]

No. This is pretty dumb for a number of reasons.

[ajr]

has anyone ever heard of someone doing bad their 1L year, then, admitting defeat, decide to add a MBA in hopes of going into business instead of law and using the law degree to bolster their business resume? (I am assuming business is not as concerned about class ranking as law firms, therefore this would be a nice backup option)

(1) How much is this going to cost you time and money wise?
(2) What school do you go to? It may be worth it if it is a top school, but if it is a top school, chances are you won't need backup options.

[PDaddy]

No. This is pretty dumb for a number of reasons.

I am intrigued...what are the reasons? My first instinct would be to tell OP to just get an MBA if he has decided not to finish the law degree, but I cannot imagine why you think it would be such a stupid move if he is willing to do the work it takes to get both.

So he winds up with Proctor & Gamble or Goldman Sachs instead of Paul Weiss or Cravath...what would be wrong with that? I agree that an MBA doesn't give a first-year legal associate an edge over other young legal associates, but the reverse isn't necessarily true. His legal education could give him an edge (possibly a huge one, depending) over other young MBA's, and influence his position and workload as well as the salary he is able to command.

[dingbat]

No. This is pretty dumb for a number of reasons.

I am intrigued...what are the reasons? My first instinct would be to tell OP to just get an MBA if he has decided not to finish the law degree, but I cannot imagine why you think it would be such a stupid move if he is willing to do the work it takes to get both.

So he winds up with Proctor & Gamble or Goldman Sachs instead of Paul Weiss or Cravath...what would be wrong with that? I agree that an MBA doesn't give a first-year associate an edge over other young legal associates, but the reverse isn't necessarily true. His legal education could give him an edge over other young MBA's and influence his position and workload as well as the salary he is able to command.

Let's start with saying that the debt load is now closer to $400k and starting salaries are probably below $100k.

[vanwinkle]

I am intrigued...what are the reasons? My first instinct would be to tell OP to just get an MBA if he has decided not to finish the law degree, but I cannot imagine why you think it would be such a stupid move if he is willing to do the work it takes to get both.

OK, lemme break this down. Reason #1:

So he winds up with Proctor & Gamble or Goldman Sachs instead of Paul Weiss or Cravath...what would be wrong with that?

LOL. There are a ton of MBA grads each year, and not all of them are going to get P&G or Goldman Sachs. You're assuming someone at the very best university getting the very best JD/MBA, and that's not an assumption that's fair to make when speaking generally about things. There are very few MBA programs that are truly valuable. If OP was talking about going to Harvard or Penn then maybe this would be realistic, but otherwise there are few schools where it makes sense, and from HLS you wouldn't need an MBA to break into business straight out of law school.

Reason #2: This whole business of deciding to do JD/MBA only after your first year means you didn't choose the right school. If you're not planning on getting an MBA for certain then you should be going to the best law school possible, not the one with the best MBA program next door. If you really want to do business instead of law then you should just get an MBA in the first place, or look at the best joint JD/MBA program from the beginning. You're making the wrong school choices at the wrong times under OP's strategy.

Reason #3: Why would you pay to finish a JD if you decide to "admit defeat" after 1L and accept that you'll never practice law? Just jettison the JD and get the MBA. You'll save two years of law school tuition and have a chance to start fresh by applying to the best MBA programs instead of just the one your current school offers.

Reason #4: The real point at which you strike out in law school isn't after 1L year, it's after OCI. Some people with good grades strike out and some people with mediocre/poor grades land job offers. By then it's too late to apply to joint JD/MBA programs; some schools require you get accepted to both law and business school before you matriculate, but even those that will let you apply after starting law school will require you get it set up by the time you're done with 1L. The timing on this is just terribly stupid. If you get a job at OCI, then you don't need the MBA as a fallback option. If you don't get a job at OCI, then it's too late to get a joint JD/MBA.

That's just what I can think of off the top of my head.

[Mad Hatter]

Reason #4: The real point at which you strike out in law school isn't after 1L year, it's after OCI. Some people with good grades strike out and some people with mediocre/poor grades land job offers. By then it's too late to apply to joint JD/MBA programs; some schools require you get accepted to both law and business school before you matriculate, but even those that will let you apply after starting law school will require you get it set up by the time you're done with 1L. The timing on this is just terribly stupid. If you get a job at OCI, then you don't need the MBA as a fallback option. If you don't get a job at OCI, then it's too late to get a joint JD/MBA.

That's just what I can think of off the top of my head.

No, no, and no.

[PDaddy]

Let's start with saying that the debt load is now closer to $400k and starting salaries are probably below $100k.

vanwinkle, dingbat...maybe you and OP should all read this:

http://www.veritasprep.com/blog/2011/02 ... t-for-you/

[PDaddy]

I am intrigued...what are the reasons? My first instinct would be to tell OP to just get an MBA if he has decided not to finish the law degree, but I cannot imagine why you think it would be such a stupid move if he is willing to do the work it takes to get both.

OK, lemme break this down. Reason #1:

So he winds up with Proctor & Gamble or Goldman Sachs instead of Paul Weiss or Cravath...what would be wrong with that?

LOL. There are a ton of MBA grads each year, and not all of them are going to get P&G or Goldman Sachs. You're assuming someone at the very best university getting the very best JD/MBA, and that's not an assumption that's fair to make when speaking generally about things. There are very few MBA programs that are truly valuable. If OP was talking about going to Harvard or Penn then maybe this would be realistic, but otherwise there are few schools where it makes sense, and from HLS you wouldn't need an MBA to break into business straight out of law school.

Reason #2: This whole business of deciding to do JD/MBA only after your first year means you didn't choose the right school. If you're not planning on getting an MBA for certain then you should be going to the best law school possible, not the one with the best MBA program next door. If you really want to do business instead of law then you should just get an MBA in the first place, or look at the best joint JD/MBA program from the beginning. You're making the wrong school choices at the wrong times under OP's strategy.

Reason #3: Why would you pay to finish a JD if you decide to "admit defeat" after 1L and accept that you'll never practice law? Just jettison the JD and get the MBA. You'll save two years of law school tuition and have a chance to start fresh by applying to the best MBA programs instead of just the one your current school offers.

Reason #4: The real point at which you strike out in law school isn't after 1L year, it's after OCI. Some people with good grades strike out and some people with mediocre/poor grades land job offers. By then it's too late to apply to joint JD/MBA programs; some schools require you get accepted to both law and business school before you matriculate, but even those that will let you apply after starting law school will require you get it set up by the time you're done with 1L. The timing on this is just terribly stupid. If you get a job at OCI, then you don't need the MBA as a fallback option. If you don't get a job at OCI, then it's too late to get a joint JD/MBA.

That's just what I can think of off the top of my head.

Responses:

Reason 1: While it is true that there's an inverse relationship between immediate value of an MBA and the prestige of the MBA program, most MBA's have some worth. The more prestigious the school, the more immediate and lucrative the tangible rewards, and the higher the likelihood that one will become a CEO/CFO/COO; that's the most accurate way of putting it. But that doesn't make MBA's from outside of the top-15 absolutely "worthless". Check out this link:

http://www.veritasprep.com/blog/2011/02 ... t-for-you/

As you move down the B-School chain, much of the MBA worth depends on individual circumstances, networks, work experience, luck, determination, timing, etc.

Reason 2: I suggested that OP just do an MBA program, so I think we are in some agreement here. That doesn't discredit my other arguments. I don't even know what school OP goes to.

Reason 3: Repetitive...and I am in complete agreement that OP should consider just going to b-school. If it is feasible for him to get a law degree and he is willing to work for it (as well as bear the cost) then he can do a JD/MBA. If similarly positioned, I would probably drop out and go to b-school. If one even suspects that he might want an MBA he should consider this in his law school calculus.

Reason 4: Your argument here is up for debate, and it depends on OP's circumstances. I got the sense that OP is jaded and may have lost his desire, or that maybe he would feel unfulfilled or incomplete with a J.D. alone. This economy is scary, and a lot of law students have re-thought their decisions to go to law school. I think the b-schools, med schools and schools of engineering are going to benefit from the bad economy in the near future.

[Borg]

Amount of misinformation and stupidity in this thread is staggering.

[jump_man]

This video explains everything you need to know about JD/MBA programs:
http://youtu.be/HnuG_ziCJwQ

[dingbat]

I started reading that article and it haas a very pie in the sky feel to it. It talks about how most top law firms give a signing bonus for JD/MBA, and many start them as second year associates, but doesn't give any examples or numbers. I looked into it a wholesale ago and only a handful of firms do either one or the other (never both)

I have an MBA, and I have friends who have made it far in life (director at IB by thirty, V5 partner, big four partner, CEO of multinational, Board of Directors at public company, etc) and firmly believe that one should only get an MBA under certain circumstances and for many people it is a waste of time and money.

If your career track requires an MBA, go for it (even then, more often than not, an eMBA is the better option). If you need the knowledge, go for it (part-time or eMBA often makes more sense). But if you are just starting out and already acquitting a professional degree, don't do it. (although I will grudgingly agree with the opinion expressed earlier to switch to MBA and drop the JD)