
When you go to fill your prescriptions one of the first decisions you have to make is whether to go for the name brand or generic drug. While most may say that their is a huge difference, if you ask a doctor if their is, they will tell you their really isn’t. Just like with medicine, everyday brings new choices, and among those choices is whether to choose the name brand, or the run of the mill generics.
Currently, we are recruiting talent college students to be pa
That depends. Albert Wong, the A of AST Research went to Cal State Fullerton. Linus Pauling, 2 time Nobel winner, went to and taught at Oregon State. Marc Andreesen went to U of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana. There are a whole host of people who have done well, both in large companies and as startups who went to "generic schools". More than which school you went to, is what you did there.
A "name-brand" school can get you looked at, but if you didn't learn much there, you're gone when you have to produce something.
Thanks for the comment! You bring up a very good point which is that you can accomplish great things no matter where you go to school. One of the downsides of going to a school that wasn't 'well known' was that their were fewer opportunities such as on-campus recruiting/interviews for big corporations.
As you mentioned, a "name-brand" school can get you looked at. Especially right now where we have such a competitive job market, just getting your foot through the door can be the hardest part.
Sometimes the brand-name is better, at least when it comes to drugs :-) Those pesky "inactive ingredients" can make a difference for some patience. But enough with that analogy - that analogy is over.
As far as college go, I tell people to look at who is teaching what and who they would like to study under. brand-name or no-brand-name doesn't make a difference. We've had a ton of recruiters come to my neck of the woods. Some people get hired, others not. At the end of the day students need to make their own fortune. They need to promote themselves. Yes, recruiters can be helpful, but this takes some of the responsibility away from the students. Later on in life, whether switching jobs or careers, they will need to have at it themselves without any help.
Having graduated from a name brand school, I would definitely say it has got my foot in the door a few places that I might not have gotten into otherwise. On the other hand, there are also companies inundated with "name brand school" applicants where the school name has very little impact. Your ability to interview is more a reflection of your social skills than anything else, and merely graduating from a name brand school is no guarantee of sociability.
I think the reason why people find interviews so difficult to grapple with is that they involve their own unique set of skills that are different from the skills that you have and may have nothing to do with the job that you are applying for. People applying for primarily analytical or technical roles will tend to be less sociable than people applying for sales and marketing roles.
Counterintuitively, people who are naturally very good at what they do have a more difficult time systematically explaining what exactly it is they do and how they do it because their ability set is in the unconscious competence range. Which leads to another point, bad interviewing goes both ways. A poorly skilled interviewer is likely to poorly match candidates to positions.

Large companies often have financial relationships with name brand schools, and that drives some of the hiring for sure. However, I've worked for name brand companies, and at the end of the day, it's personality and results that trump everything else.
@Jimmy - You bring up a great point. If corporations have financial ties to certain schools, how does that affect choosing between a qualified candidate and a candidate that just has the name of the school. Does that mean that corporations will take candidates even though they don't have as stellar qualifications as another just because of the name of their school?

I just transferred from a "name brand" school to a possible (not sure how many employers know of this school in my desired field) lesser known school and I am very happy I did so. I didn't really care for the curriculum at the "name brand" school and found myself uninterested and unmotivated very quickly. The curriculum at my current school is much more exciting and way more than I could've asked for yet need. I go to college for my knowledge base and enjoyment of learning what I believe to be my passion. I don't go just to get into some big company b/c with this economy those big companies are not as ideal or safe as they used to be. My whole thing is that if you're going to go to any college make sure you're going for you and it has all you need to succeed.
Nice post by the way.

First, I've never seen an ugly Ferrari.
Second, choosing between colleges and choosing between cars or generic drugs aren't great analogies, because it leaves out one major factor: you.
Which is better, to go to a respectable but not "name brand" college or state university and distinguish yourself, or go to Harvard or Yale and be mediocre. Or worse, wipe out.
On the other hand, if you are a stellar genius and can distinguish yourself at a big name school, then by all means go for it.
On the other other hand, you can maybe wiggle your way into Harvard somehow, barely escape with a diploma and an academic record so bad it needs to be sealed, and still end up as President, so anything can happen!
BTW, please learn the difference between "their" and "there". Might make a difference getting into a "name brand" school if you so decide.