SOIL Institute of Management placement figures must be read by programme and graduating batch. The latest source located for the two-year Manesar PGDM is an interim report for the 2024–26 batch, issued as of March 2026. It reports that close to 80% of students had been placed two months before graduation and describes the result as in progress. It is a snapshot, not a final placement rate. A final report for the earlier 2023–25 batch gives completed outcome figures, but the two reports measure different cohorts and stages.
Latest available PGDM snapshot: 2024–26 batch
In its interim placement report, SOIL reports close to 80% of PGDM students placed two months before graduation. It lists ₹11.5L overall average salary, ₹24L highest salary, ₹14.5L average for the top 25%, and ₹13.4L average for the top 50%. The report states these amounts as annual LPA figures. Because the placement process was ongoing, these are interim outcomes and the school’s expectation that everyone would be placed by graduation is not a completed result.
The interim report also says more than 130 companies participated. Its sector distribution is led by BFSI/financial services at 37% and IT/ITES at 32%, followed by auto/manufacturing at 9%, FMCG/retail at 7%, and consulting/research at 5%. By function, sales/key account management/customer relationship management accounts for 40%, IT consulting 20%, finance 11%, analytics 7%, and HR 6%. These are shares in the report’s placement distribution; they do not show the number of students behind each percentage, and the report does not expose a clear eligible-versus-placed denominator in the extract. Use the sector and role mix to assess fit, not as a guarantee of an individual job.
Completed comparison: 2023–25 batch
The final placement report for 2024–25 covers the PGDM Class of 2023–25. It reports ₹11.17L average CTC, ₹10.9L median CTC and ₹20.7L highest CTC, with 130 participating firms. The top-quarter average is ₹14.27L and top-half average ₹12.97L. Those numbers are completed prior-batch evidence, while the 2024–26 figures above are an interim, later cohort snapshot. A direct comparison of averages would mix different stages and cohorts; it does not establish salary growth or a trend. The median in the completed report is more useful than the highest package as a middle-of-cohort reference, but the report still does not publish all denominators needed to calculate a placement rate independently.
The final 2024–25 report includes specialisation-specific highest and top-half CTC figures: Marketing ₹15L and ₹12.70L; Finance ₹20.70L and ₹14.70L; Analytics ₹16.80L and ₹12.80L; and HR ₹17.20L and ₹11.40L. These figures should not be interpreted as a ranking of specialisations: the report provides neither cohort sizes nor a common placement denominator by specialisation. It also gives function-wise averages of ₹12.65L for Finance, ₹10.18L for HR, ₹11.18L for Marketing and ₹11.07L for Analytics. These measures are different from the specialisation table’s highest and top-half figures.
How to use the numbers when comparing offers
Treat the figures as reported CTC, not monthly take-home pay. CTC can include fixed and variable components, benefits or deferred amounts, so ask the admissions and careers teams for the typical fixed-pay component and role mix before estimating a personal budget. The ₹24L highest figure is an upper endpoint for one student, while the median from the completed 2023–25 cohort describes the midpoint better; neither figure tells you the likely outcome for a particular specialisation or prior experience level.
“130 companies participated” also does not mean 130 students were placed, 130 offers were made, or that each recruiter hired from every domain. Participating firms, job offers, students placed and placement eligibility are separate counts. The interim report does not provide enough information to calculate those denominators, and the final report’s firms count cannot fill the gap for the later class. Use the stated close-to-80% only as a dated progress snapshot and revisit the official report for a final cohort result.
The report’s sector and function percentages can still help test fit. For example, a student targeting sales or account-management work should note that these functions make up the largest share listed in the interim report, while a student looking specifically for HR should examine both the 6% interim function share and the earlier report’s HR specialisation figures. Those are not direct probability estimates: the reports do not give programme-wise applicant preferences, cohort sizes or offer conversion rates. Ask for the exact role and compensation breakdown rather than inferring an individual outcome from the aggregate distribution.
Internship outcomes and what the reports leave unclear
The March 2026 interim report separately covers the PGDM summer internship cohort of 2025–27: the highest stipend is ₹80,000 for a two-month internship and 40+ companies participated. Stipend is not annual salary or CTC, and this internship group is not the graduating 2024–26 batch. The report names recruiters including Nestlé Nespresso, IKEA, S&P Global, Fidelity, Wipro, ITC and Infosys BPM. These are examples of participating employers, not proof that every student received an offer from one of them.
SOIL’s pages describe career preparation such as resume support, mock interviews, aptitude and case preparation, mentorship, industry projects and career services. Those are programme supports, not independently measured outcomes. For a decision, request the full report for the exact programme and batch, including students eligible for placement, students seeking placements, placed students, offers per student and the calculation behind the rate. The available interim report’s “close to 80%” statement should not be treated as a final percentage; the older completed cohort cannot fill that denominator gap for the newer one.