Pado
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#1
Hi guys,
i am new to the forum and looking for some opinions regarding my course choice for an MSc this year.

short background info:
1. BSc International Business from German university (2nd upper)
2. >1 year work experience in Singapore (project role in Logistics)
3. no GMAT
4. interested to go into management consulting (preferably strategy at one of MBB, but also consider "smaller" consulting firms) after graduation, either in UK or abroad in Switzerland/US.
5. intend to do MBA or Executive Programme in 4-5 years in Europe or US

=> due to unsatisfactory work situation i applied for some courses and got offers from the following:

WBS - Business Consulting (26k, 50% tuition fee scholarship)
Cranfield - Management and Economics (11k, small bursary)
MBS - Business Analysis and Strategic Management (15k, no scholarship yet)
Imperial - Economics and Strategy for Business (24k, shortlisted and interviewed but still waiting for reply)


Location doesnt play a role for me.
I want a MSc with practical focus at a school with top career service and professional development, a MSc which is highly employable and globally recognized.

Given my background and ambitions, I appreciate if you can give your opinions and advice what would be the best option.
Thanks for any feedback.
0
reply
Mr. Roxas
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#2
Report 5 years ago
#2
They all are very good choices and they all have very good career placement programme, except Imperial, I've heard as some people I know who went there have been complaining for the lack of student care and supervision. Regardless, the top employers do visit the campuses of these four schools, so you'd have a chance to prove your worth during the interviews.

Personally, I'd take the Warwick offer. It's a top target by the top employers. Warwick has a very progressive thinking -- its getting better and better. And, it helps that you're able to secure a 50% discount on tuition.
0
reply
LadyBugMery
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#3
Report 5 years ago
#3
Warwick has a better reputation than Cranfield, and the Imperial programme you mention is more technical and specialized than the business consulting msc at Warwick. It depends on your career objectives, but I would go for Imperial, despite the scholarship at Warwick
0
reply
ShafTJB
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#4
Report 5 years ago
#4
Warwick or Imperial. They are the same. No difference, therefore choose either.
0
reply
ZSK2014
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#5
Report 5 years ago
#5
Choose Imperial or Warwick
0
reply
Pado
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#6
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#6
thank you all for your opinions.
meanwhile, I declined MBS and received the offer from Imperial, and based on other recommendations I have narrowed down my choice to Imperial or Warwick.

In fact, I find the Imperial programme more specific than Warwick.
However, if i decided for warwick, would it put the top consulting firms off if i studied the msc business consulting rather than a strategy or economics course?

and in terms of my plan to work abroad (not in UK) and doing an MBA in the US in a few years time, would Imperial or Warwick be the better brand worldwide?

hope some of you can elaborate abit more. thanks a lot.
0
reply
LadyBugMery
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#7
Report 5 years ago
#7
Imperial is a significantly better brand than Warwick.
0
reply
Emma @ Cranfield
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#8
Report 5 years ago
#8
Fantastic news for on all your offers! Cranfield University has a excellent careers service, ranked no.1 Financial Times 2014. There's a dedicated team helping our students reach their future goals and ambitions. Our MSc in Management and Economics,Combines the very best in learning design consultancy with world-class faculty expertise the School creates a unique and innovative development process for each client. Cranfield is ranked by the Financial Times as one of the top 10 business schools in the world for customised executive development.

Wishing you the best of luck with your decision.
0
reply
ShafTJB
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#9
Report 5 years ago
#9
(Original post by LadyBugMery)
Imperial is a significantly better brand than Warwick.
I disagree. If you look at CUG it's only one place above Warwick. It is obviously better than Warwick, but saying it's significantly better is a hyperbolic statement. If you look at the Linkedin rankings, (which is the most reliable as it's based on the strongest investment bankers, accountants etc, and what alumni they are), Warwick shares the top 5 with Imperial. Imperial is sometimes above Warwick, Warwick is sometimes above Imperial. I think that what I get from your point is: Imperial has a bigger worldwide name, as it should have, it's in Central London.

However, I'm an undergrad so I can't give a full, extensive rebuttle. I think the most reliable ranking one should check, for such a masters, should be the LinkedIn ones.
0
reply
LadyBugMery
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#10
Report 5 years ago
#10
Another Warwick die hard...
Warwick is a 50 year old university that has only been recognized recently. CUG is mostly based on student satisfaction (at the undergrad level!) and does not reflect career opportunities at all. On the academic quality, the last REF, Imperial is ranked 2, Warwick is ranked 8. And let's not talk about international rankings, in which Warwick falls far behind.
In short, Warwick and Cranfield can be put in the same group, but they are hardly comparable to Imperial in terms of reputation.
3
reply
username738914
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#11
Report 5 years ago
#11
(Original post by LadyBugMery)
Another Warwick die hard...
Warwick is a 50 year old university that has only been recognized recently. CUG is mostly based on student satisfaction (at the undergrad level!) and does not reflect career opportunities at all. On the academic quality, the last REF, Imperial is ranked 2, Warwick is ranked 8. And let's not talk about international rankings, in which Warwick falls far behind.
In short, Warwick and Cranfield can be put in the same group, but they are hardly comparable to Imperial in terms of reputation.
Don't bother, please. There is already a massive KCL v Warwick thread where he has tested out his masturbatory technique.



Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
ShafTJB
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#12
Report 5 years ago
#12
(Original post by LadyBugMery)
Another Warwick die hard...
Warwick is a 50 year old university that has only been recognized recently. CUG is mostly based on student satisfaction (at the undergrad level!) and does not reflect career opportunities at all. On the academic quality, the last REF, Imperial is ranked 2, Warwick is ranked 8. And let's not talk about international rankings, in which Warwick falls far behind.
In short, Warwick and Cranfield can be put in the same group, but they are hardly comparable to Imperial in terms of reputation.
Completely ignoring the Linkedin rankings. And Warwick had really low student satisfaction, so it must be up 7th for another reason bar that. Cranfield cannot be compared to Warwick.
0
reply
Mr.Rojas
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#13
Report 5 years ago
#13
(Original post by Pado)
thank you all for your opinions.
meanwhile, I declined MBS and received the offer from Imperial, and based on other recommendations I have narrowed down my choice to Imperial or Warwick.

In fact, I find the Imperial programme more specific than Warwick.
However, if i decided for warwick, would it put the top consulting firms off if i studied the msc business consulting rather than a strategy or economics course?

and in terms of my plan to work abroad (not in UK) and doing an MBA in the US in a few years time, would Imperial or Warwick be the better brand worldwide?

hope some of you can elaborate abit more. thanks a lot.

I'm a Warwick grad who also have an MBA form Chicago-Booth. Ask me if you want to apply for MBA at Booth and all the top 10 business schools in the US. I also got offers from Columbia, Sloan, Kellogg, Stern, Dartmouth-Tuck and LBS (London Business School). I was wait-listed at Wharton and dinged at Berkeley-Haas, Stanford and HBS.
0
reply
iPixelBlue
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#14
Report 5 years ago
#14
Imperial is better than Warwick no doubt about that! (Especially in maths, I'd like to add). Love how the Warwick die-hards try and argue that a 50 year old uni is better than Imperial, and sometimes oxbridge....seriously. But it provides me with a good laugh
0
reply
iPixelBlue
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#15
Report 5 years ago
#15
(Original post by ShafTJB)
I disagree. If you look at CUG it's only one place above Warwick. It is obviously better than Warwick, but saying it's significantly better is a hyperbolic statement. If you look at the Linkedin rankings, (which is the most reliable as it's based on the strongest investment bankers, accountants etc, and what alumni they are), Warwick shares the top 5 with Imperial. Imperial is sometimes above Warwick, Warwick is sometimes above Imperial. I think that what I get from your point is: Imperial has a bigger worldwide name, as it should have, it's in Central London.

However, I'm an undergrad so I can't give a full, extensive rebuttle. I think the most reliable ranking one should check, for such a masters, should be the LinkedIn ones.
Correction: In CUG Imperial is 3rd/4th, Warwick is like 7th/8th. Last time i checked, that is not a difference of 'one'. Imperial has been consistently going up in ranks and always amongst the likes of Oxbridge, LSE. While warwick on the other hand has fallen, especially in subjects like maths. (Though warwick economics is very strong no doubt).

And are you seriously going to use LinkedIn rankings? xD
0
reply
Mr.Rojas
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#16
Report 5 years ago
#16
(Original post by iPixelBlue)
Imperial is better than Warwick no doubt about that! (Especially in maths, I'd like to add). Love how the Warwick die-hards try and argue that a 50 year old uni is better than Imperial, and sometimes oxbridge....seriously. But it provides me with a good laugh
You're correct, Warwick isn't superior to Imperial. As someone who graduated from Warwick, I would not make such a claim. However, for some undergraduate fields (kindly take note that I said, undergraduate), I would politely argue that Warwick can head-to-head with Imperial. For example, Warwick mathematics department is easily as competitive as Imperials', if not even more so. In addition to that, some of the things relevant to graduate education may not interest the undergraduate students.

For example, I personally would prefer to go to a university that has a very high graduation rate (which Warwick can boast to have numbers more impressive than Imperial's), so that my chances of earning a degree from that university would be very high. It would avoid me from dropping out of the programme and allowing me to leave university with a degree on time.

I would personally also prefer to attend a university that has a very caring environment. At Warwick, the undergrad students are well taken cared of. They have tutors in a small group or one-on-one, depending on the major. They have easy access to their profs for consultations and guidance. They have a learning grid open 24/7, modern sports facilities, a huge and very well-kept campus, a large student union, an active & involved student body, and a relatively affordable student housing. For many undergrad students, those factors are important. And, it was for those reasons why I turned down LSE for Warwick, which turned out to be a "blessing in disguise". My Warwick undergrad lead me to earn an MBA from one of the top 10 graduate business schools in the US.

Warwick is as much as respected as Imperial to the view of the top employers in the banking and financial world. Warwick is also as respected as Imperial, if not even more so, tot he view and sight of the top business schools in the US. For example, two of the current HBS students are from Warwick undergrad. In my class at Booth, for instance, there were 2 other guys from Warwick aside from myself, but no one was from Imperial. Oxbridge and LSE were represented, as well. Cambridge alone had 5 in our class.
So, clearly, it will not put you in a disadvantage position if you have a Warwick degree tucked under your belt. If anything, it will provide you with many advantages especially if your intended career is in line with the business community.
2
reply
Pado
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#17
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#17
(Original post by Mr.Rojas)
You're correct, Warwick isn't superior to Imperial. As someone who graduated from Warwick, I would not make such a claim. However, for some undergraduate fields (kindly take note that I said, undergraduate), I would politely argue that Warwick can head-to-head with Imperial. For example, Warwick mathematics department is easily as competitive as Imperials', if not even more so. In addition to that, some of the things relevant to graduate education may not interest the undergraduate students.

For example, I personally would prefer to go to a university that has a very high graduation rate (which Warwick can boast to have numbers more impressive than Imperial's), so that my chances of earning a degree from that university would be very high. It would avoid me from dropping out of the programme and allowing me to leave university with a degree on time.

I would personally also prefer to attend a university that has a very caring environment. At Warwick, the undergrad students are well taken cared of. They have tutors in a small group or one-on-one, depending on the major. They have easy access to their profs for consultations and guidance. They have a learning grid open 24/7, modern sports facilities, a huge and very well-kept campus, a large student union, an active & involved student body, and a relatively affordable student housing. For many undergrad students, those factors are important. And, it was for those reasons why I turned down LSE for Warwick, which turned out to be a "blessing in disguise". My Warwick undergrad lead me to earn an MBA from one of the top 10 graduate business schools in the US.

Warwick is as much as respected as Imperial to the view of the top employers in the banking and financial world. Warwick is also as respected as Imperial, if not even more so, tot he view and sight of the top business schools in the US. For example, two of the current HBS students are from Warwick undergrad. In my class at Booth, for instance, there were 2 other guys from Warwick aside from myself, but no one was from Imperial. Oxbridge and LSE were represented, as well. Cambridge alone had 5 in our class.
So, clearly, it will not put you in a disadvantage position if you have a Warwick degree tucked under your belt. If anything, it will provide you with many advantages especially if your intended career is in line with the business community.
thanks for your views guys.

mr. rojas, I appreciate your insights into warwick. find it encouraging to hear that u made to a top US business school, as I also consider doing an MBA there in a few years.
by chance, do u know about the study quality, career service and employers for postgrads in Warwick? what do postgrads think about warwick?
and do u think that it would put the top consulting firms off if I studied the msc business consulting (rather than the economics and strategy for business course at imperial)?

and last but not least, it would be helpful if someone could give first-hand info about the same aspects at Imperial?
would maybe facilitate my choice.


so far, I have a better feeling about warwick (even though this is not a KO criterion).
the communication with the staff there is good, they granted me extension of the acceptance deadline and even called me up recently to ask if I have anything to be clarified.
0
reply
Pado
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#18
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#18
any new input from a past/current postgrad at Warwick or Imperial?
the crunch time of my decision is approaching and I would appreciate any first-hand experience to my above questions..
0
reply
Pado
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#19
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#19
Hi guys,

I did not receive another scholarship I was hoping for and since I am against studying on a loan, I had to narrow my choice down to either going to Cranfield SOM for the MSc Management and Economics (11k, small bursary) or postponing my plans to next year.I have to make a decision soon so please share with me, do you think it is worth going to Cranfield (which is obviously not as prestigious globally as Imperial or Warwick) or better to save up for another year and go to my fav school in 2016? Honestly I feel abit turned off by the fact that Cranfield's curriculum includes a research thesis since I rather prefer a practical oriented programme with a consulting project such as Imperial's ESB.

Anybody knows how much quantitative content is Cranfield's MSc for someone who is not exactly a math crack?
Any alumni who can tell me more about Cranfield's connections to top firms?

Thanks for additional input soon!
0
reply
LadyBugMery
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#20
Report 5 years ago
#20
Well, the master's thesis can be a good opportunity to build an expertise for yourself. Consulting project is over rated and you won't learn much in that, although you'll get good industry contact.

On your choice itself, a 11k bursary is not too bad. I'm not certain the difference between Cranfield and the rest is big enough to postpone your plans.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you have the space and resources you need to succeed in home learning?

Yes I have everything I need (149)
62.61%
I don't have everything I need (89)
37.39%

Watched Threads

View All