Question
For those who went to top-tier schools, is it more rude to answer directly when asked "What school did you go to/Where did you go to school?", or to instead name the city where the school is located? Why?
Answer
People who are answering "it is a simple question, just give a straight answer" are missing the social psychological subtleties. "Where did you go to school" rarely comes up as a direct question except for very recent grads, so it is more useful to consider the broader array of situations where revealing/not revealing your school is a decision to be made. Even for the straight "where did you go to school" question, the context may change the intent. If the question is party schools/football culture, something like "well, definitely not a football school, ha ha" may sometimes be appropriate. Or it may be an east vs. west coast debate and what type of jobs are on each coast for new grads etc.
The right answer is: it depends on the context and the people you are around, and how you are trying to play (or being forced to play) the MIT card.
I don't know of research on this school thing, but Dorian Taylor pointed me to research on a very similar question: whether or not faculty at a university use the title "Dr." on their voicemail messages.
The paper title is revealing: "False Modesty: when revealing good news looks bad."
http://www.bus.indiana.edu/rihar...
The takeaway: if you are a PhD professor in a university with very few PhDs, you are more likely to call out the title in your VM. If you are somewhere where everybody has a PhD, you will be less likely to call it out. The reason is obvious. In the first case, not calling it out will have people assuming you don't have one. In the second case, it will make you look over-anxious about your credentials and actually invite suspicion: "everybody in the department has a PhD, so why is this guy being particularly loud about it? Does he have something to hide?"
There are curious related effects: I know of one analyst firm with few PhDs but lots of ABDs. The ABDs there go out of their way to call out their "qualification," which would look ridiculous in other places, but apparently works for them.
Now, extrapolating the results to the question of top-pedigree university affiliations: if everyone around you went to a top school, calling it out can backfire on you. Unless something specific about the university is up for discussion, it pays to wear your credential lightly.
if the question is about the strengths of the Sloan MBA program, revealing your MIT affiliation makes sense. If the question is about the weather in Boston, you don't need to. In other cases, it is a judgment call.
If you are the only MIT grad in a place full of Podunk U. grads, you MAY want to tastefully highlight the fact and milk it for whatever its worth (but ONLY if you can adequately explain why you are hanging around Podunk U. people... for example, you've moved to the town of Podunk despite its overall crappiness because you are really into nature and the place is next to a great National Park, or you're being counter-cultural etc.).
Make no mistake. Played well, the MIT card is a high-value card. If you are the only MIT-trained professor in a place full of Podunk U. professors, you'll get the best students working for you, for instance.
But you have to play the card WELL. Andy Bernard on The Office is an example of how NOT to play the Cornell card.
A bridge analogy may help: in status games, a brand-name degree is like (say) a Jack. The best use is to play it to win a trick where the next highest card is a 10. Using a Jack to win a trick where the other cards are 2, 3 and 5 makes you look stupid. Playing it where the others are playing Q, K, Ace is also silly.
The Q, K, Ace cards that can beat a brand-name degree in status games are things like a higher brand name degree (Harvard beats Yale for example), actual achievement (having founded a successful company beats being an MIT grad who has done nothing since graduating) , being a celebrity, a war veteran fighter pilot, someone with a scar from a knife fight ("most bad-ass" is always the trump ace card) etc.
Final point to note: keeping a big-brand-name degree too quiet can also backfire. This is similar to trustafarians keeping their wealth a secret, dressing cheaply and hanging around underclass types. If they are outed as being wealthy, they lose face. It is a grim truth in our world that the brand name on the degree matters. An MIT or Stanford degree opens certain doors that remain closed when a Podunk U. grad comes knocking (even if s/he is a genius and the name-brand person is an idiot). It's a privilege, deserved or not, and hiding it can lead people to not trust you. So while you needn't fall over yourself to reveal it at every opportunity, don't hide it either. Your educational credentials should be openly visible to anyone who looks you up on LinkedIn for instance.
The right answer is: it depends on the context and the people you are around, and how you are trying to play (or being forced to play) the MIT card.
I don't know of research on this school thing, but Dorian Taylor pointed me to research on a very similar question: whether or not faculty at a university use the title "Dr." on their voicemail messages.
The paper title is revealing: "False Modesty: when revealing good news looks bad."
http://www.bus.indiana.edu/rihar...
The takeaway: if you are a PhD professor in a university with very few PhDs, you are more likely to call out the title in your VM. If you are somewhere where everybody has a PhD, you will be less likely to call it out. The reason is obvious. In the first case, not calling it out will have people assuming you don't have one. In the second case, it will make you look over-anxious about your credentials and actually invite suspicion: "everybody in the department has a PhD, so why is this guy being particularly loud about it? Does he have something to hide?"
There are curious related effects: I know of one analyst firm with few PhDs but lots of ABDs. The ABDs there go out of their way to call out their "qualification," which would look ridiculous in other places, but apparently works for them.
Now, extrapolating the results to the question of top-pedigree university affiliations: if everyone around you went to a top school, calling it out can backfire on you. Unless something specific about the university is up for discussion, it pays to wear your credential lightly.
if the question is about the strengths of the Sloan MBA program, revealing your MIT affiliation makes sense. If the question is about the weather in Boston, you don't need to. In other cases, it is a judgment call.
If you are the only MIT grad in a place full of Podunk U. grads, you MAY want to tastefully highlight the fact and milk it for whatever its worth (but ONLY if you can adequately explain why you are hanging around Podunk U. people... for example, you've moved to the town of Podunk despite its overall crappiness because you are really into nature and the place is next to a great National Park, or you're being counter-cultural etc.).
Make no mistake. Played well, the MIT card is a high-value card. If you are the only MIT-trained professor in a place full of Podunk U. professors, you'll get the best students working for you, for instance.
But you have to play the card WELL. Andy Bernard on The Office is an example of how NOT to play the Cornell card.
A bridge analogy may help: in status games, a brand-name degree is like (say) a Jack. The best use is to play it to win a trick where the next highest card is a 10. Using a Jack to win a trick where the other cards are 2, 3 and 5 makes you look stupid. Playing it where the others are playing Q, K, Ace is also silly.
The Q, K, Ace cards that can beat a brand-name degree in status games are things like a higher brand name degree (Harvard beats Yale for example), actual achievement (having founded a successful company beats being an MIT grad who has done nothing since graduating) , being a celebrity, a war veteran fighter pilot, someone with a scar from a knife fight ("most bad-ass" is always the trump ace card) etc.
Final point to note: keeping a big-brand-name degree too quiet can also backfire. This is similar to trustafarians keeping their wealth a secret, dressing cheaply and hanging around underclass types. If they are outed as being wealthy, they lose face. It is a grim truth in our world that the brand name on the degree matters. An MIT or Stanford degree opens certain doors that remain closed when a Podunk U. grad comes knocking (even if s/he is a genius and the name-brand person is an idiot). It's a privilege, deserved or not, and hiding it can lead people to not trust you. So while you needn't fall over yourself to reveal it at every opportunity, don't hide it either. Your educational credentials should be openly visible to anyone who looks you up on LinkedIn for instance.