Which Uni: Manchester vs Lancaster?

Scroll to see replies

ChemistBoy

No I haven't. Seems that making assumptions about things you know nothing about is your speciality. Of course I'm sure your years of business recruitment experience mean you are an expert, right? When did you get that experience, was that before or after finishing your first year at Nottingham?

Well, considering that LUMS has coporate clients that include very large companies such as AstraZeneca, Airbus and BAE systems to mention a few then I think that some people in business will have heard of it. It's all there on the website for all to see, clearly there are some serious links in business and that does affect graduate employability.

It was before University, and is on-going, actually. I'm currently sitting in an accountants office in Mapperley, unsurprisingly the Partners have heard of Manchester and know of it as a "good" Uni, but they have no clue about Lancaster. Perhaps I should have pursued further and asked them about the reputations of the managment schools?

What is so difficult to understand about this concept? Of course, if you want to work for the businesses that it has strong links with, then it will put you at an advantage. What about if you don't? What if you want to work for joe bloggs asset management on the high street. Do you think he will know that Lancasters management programme is better than Manchesters? Do you think he's more likely to associate quality with Manchester or Lancaster, if he's even heard of the latter, that is?

I'm not saying Lancaster is a bad University, it was actually my insurance choice for Physics, but if you want to open as many options in ALL AVENUES OF WORK then Manchester will put you at an advantage, and I doubt there will be a massive difference between what Aztrazeneca think of a Manc management grad compared to a Lanc management grad.

Reply 21

Barny

IlexAquifolium

I read this out to my boyfriend, who has worked for KPMG amongst others, and he laughed merrily (then again he's a Warwick grad, so perhaps it takes a plate glass alum to know one...). 'Most people' do not tend to be dedicated graduate employers. Simply because my Nan hasn't heard of Lancaster doesn't mean that a person working for a large firm whose job it is to assess applications won't have done.

I'm laughing merrily at you both, my dear. Did you read this bit of my post:

"I don't mean the HR department of a graduate employer here, I mean the average employer on the street and also the people who work in these businesses but don't do the recruiting" ?

Reply 22

Barny

Lothar Warlock

Thanks for negging me Barny. All I wanted to know was where you got your information from =.=

I didn't neg you.

Reply 23

Lothar Warlock

Barny

I didn't neg you.

Hmmmm well someone did... :cool:

Reply 24

Kitty Pimms

Barny

"I don't mean the HR department of a graduate employer here, I mean the average employer on the street and also the people who work in these businesses but don't do the recruiting" ?

Yes, but who is the average employer on the street? Who are we actually talking about in this situation? The problem with pursuing the 'employers only know Oxbridge' argument is that you have to define employers. Frankly, big employers will know of most universities because of the sheer number of applications they will receive - they may have favourites amongst this bunch, but that doesn't mean they won't have heard of most of them.

On the other hand, say a local solicitors' or accountants' firm is unlikely to be getting that many applications from Oxbridge grads and therefore will be forced to, if not gain familiarity with, then at least not discriminate against applicants from less renowned universities. I also tend to find that local employers have greater familiarity with universities closer to them, so on that basis it's perhaps not a surprise that a Notts-based employer would know Manchester better than Lancaster, which is as far away again.

Actually, my partner is probably a good example. He's currently working for a small finance firm, and isn't specifically a graduate recruiter by any means, although he does participate in interviews for the company. He's heard of most universities and has a definite idea of where he rates and where he doesn't; and he said he would have no pre-existing preference for a Manchester grad over a Lancaster grad, particularly in a quantitative subject.

*Shrug*

Anyway, this is all totally irrelevant since I, and presumably you and everyone else, know nothing of the strategic IT consulting recruitment processes. I'm guessing it's not possible to pursue that at the 'local' level and therefore it's probably more important that the OP is the right person for the job than that they went to a particular university,

Reply 25

ChemistBoy

Barny

Well done, a small accountancy firm in Nottingham is such a great example. What if one of the partners had happened to be a Lancaster graduate - it would have completely changed things wouldn't it? Hardly a basis for sweeping generalisations.

Against your assertion that I've been trapped in the Ivory tower I have, in fact, worked for several multi-national companies in graduate roles and once was involved in interviewing for my replacement. Also I'm involved heavily in the research/business interface at the moment and have been through a host of recruitment processes. I don't see why your experience gives you any sort of primacy over stating what graduate recruitment is about at all.

What is so difficult to understand about this concept? Of course, if you want to work for the businesses that it has strong links with, then it will put you at an advantage. What about if you don't? What if you want to work for joe bloggs asset management on the high street. Do you think he will know that Lancasters management programme is better than Manchesters? Do you think he's more likely to associate quality with Manchester or Lancaster, if he's even heard of the latter, that is?

Do you think he won't? Do you think he'll realise there is any difference between Manchester and Lancaster? Aren't you just projecting your opinions and anecdotal knowledge onto the world at large? I think you are.

I'm not saying Lancaster is a bad University, it was actually my insurance choice for Physics, but if you want to open as many options in ALL AVENUES OF WORK then Manchester will put you at an advantage, and I doubt there will be a massive difference between what Aztrazeneca think of a Manc management grad compared to a Lanc management grad.

Once again, projecting your opinions as gross fact and also contradicting yourself, well done. If large national and international employers like AstraZeneca don't give a damn then where is the clear advantage? Surely you are just basing your ideas on your small firm in Mapperley? If there isn't a big difference then why not go to the place that you think is best? Or perhaps you think it is entirely reasonable to make your choice based on the fact that there is a small possiblity that you might want to work for a small accountancy firm based in the suburbs of Nottingham?

I remember working for a small chemical trading company based on a little industrial estate out in the sticks once - the guy hadn't heard of St Andrews at all when I applied for a summer job there - does that mean it is reasonable for me to assume that graduate employers think St Andrews is crap or that they haven't heard of it?

Personally I will always advise people to go and study where they feel they will get the best education and be happy - trying to second-guess potential employers in preference to this fact is just a recipe for disaster.

Reply 26

bringme

Thanks for the discussions guys. One more question, if I want to continue to PhD level, which one will put me at the advantage?

If I go to Lancaster, due to its small size and proximity, probably faculty members will know me better and can write me stellar recommendation. But what about "reputation" among academia? Is it "easier" for Lancaster grad to go to Oxbridge instead of Manchester grad?

What about cost of living between Lancaster and Manchester?

PS: Is Lancaster as small as Bradford? (I just compare it through Google Earth)

Reply 27

River85

bringme

Thanks for the discussions guys. One more question, if I want to continue to PhD level, which one will put me at the advantage?)

Neither, as far as I'm aware.

bringme

If I go to Lancaster, due to its small size and proximity, probably faculty members will know me better and can write me stellar recommendation. But what about "reputation" among academia? Is it "easier" for Lancaster grad to go to Oxbridge instead of Manchester grad?

The uni rep will have no real role to play in where you go for a PhD. I also don't think you'll necessarly get better references from staff at Lancaster, simply becase it's smaller. There'll be a lot of opportunities for members of staff (tutors and thesis supervisor) to know you well enough at Manchester.

bringme

What about cost of living between Lancaster and Manchester?

They are both quite close to each other (in the same county, historically anyway) so there's not a great difference in cost of living.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/629/629/7061871.stm

Manchester 90.5, Lancaster slightly cheaper at 89.6.

Second time I've used that article already today.

bringme

PS: Is Lancaster as small as Bradford? (I just compare it through Google Earth)

Bradford is actually a fairly decently sized city, almost 300,000 I believe. Lancaster has a population of 45,000 so that's quite a difference. It's a small, quite historic city. Quite like Durham or Oxford in terms of size (well, Oxford's a little bigger).

The metropolitan areas of both are Bradford 493,0000 and Lancaster 133,000 so still not large.

Reply 28

davidbristol

Quoting bringme

"I’ve just luckily offered admissions from:
- MSc E-Business & Innovation, Lancaster University (unconditional)
- MSc Management, Technology & Innovation, Uni of Manchester (cond.)
- MSc Management and Information Systems, Nottingham Trent (cond.)"

The first thing I'd say is that neither of the courses seem geared towards PhD study (both are quite "applied" courses). I did my undergrad at Manchester in Economics and what I would say is that they are excellent at *each* disipline contributing to that masters course. Their business school is certainly one of the best in the country (like Lancasters) and their computer science department is top notch too. Before Manchester and UMIST merged, UMIST had one of the best management schools in the country - so there's absolutely nothing but world class departments contributing to the masters at Manchester.

It's the title of the Lancaster masters I'd think twice about "E-Business" hmmm..... not sure if that will be a bit "fluffy" compared with the Manchester course. Such applied courses aren't generally designed with PhD study in mind (more industry / work focus).

In terms of a PhD - funding is quite hard in management - you'd probably end up going down the operations research route (which Lancaster are excellent for) as they tend to have more funding and less competition for places. Personally I think the Manchester MSc will put you in a better position for further postgraduate study. You should discuss your PhD desires with the departments in question - see how many people went on to PhD's from those MSc courses.

In reality, department for department there is VERY little to seperate Manchester and Lancaster for the courses you're looking at - it's probably fair to say Manchester is better known though.

On this:

Originally Posted by bringme
"If I go to Lancaster, due to its small size and proximity, probably faculty members will know me better and can write me stellar recommendation. But what about "reputation" among academia? Is it "easier" for Lancaster grad to go to Oxbridge instead of Manchester grad? "

I'd say there is some truth here. However my reference at Manchester has been excellent and always provided me with timely references. As with ANY course make the time to get to know your supervisors / course directors so when you do ask them for a reference they can put a face to a name. Finally for PhD study the university ratings don't really matter but the subject ones DO. Here people tend to go off the RAE ratings (1-5*), almost of the PhD students (from the UK) have been to a 5 or 5* rated department elsewhere. That won't be a problem with either of Lancaster or Manchester.

There's a lot of comments akin to "People know Mancheseter is a good uni and don't know Lancaster" which to be fair is very true in reality. You can often see how good a university is by the number and quality of the employers that visit the universities to recruit graduates - and outside of top 10 universities - Manchester's "milkround" is certainly one of the best.

Good luck with it!

Reply 29

bringme

^^
Thanks for your lavish answer, David. I appreciate it much!