Hamilton College. Virginia Military Institute. Knox College. Lausanne University. Quinnipiac University. CUNY. Baylor. Augustana. Bates. Kettering. Bowdoin. Duke. Rollins.

That isn't a list of backup colleges for a high school senior whose chief extracurricular activity was "pep squad." No, it's a list of the alma maters of the CEOs of the top 500 companies in the U.S., in terms of revenue. And the big finding here?

It doesn't matter where you go to college.

Although, as the Wall Street Journal points out, Harvard helps (nine of the 500 chief executives graduated there), there's no overwhelming trend. CEOs went to public colleges, technical schools, and not-very-well-known universities all over the planet. If you went to a college or university more prestigious than ITT Tech? Chances are, it's on the list. My alma mater, Washington and Lee University, is there, as well as several schools I rejected in my quest for a good ranking in U.S. News & World Report.

In my analysis of leaders great and not-so-great, the college you attend can open doors, it can get you a job in the first place. But becoming a CEO isn't about getting a job (you'll find precious few results for "CEO" in a Hotjobs search), but about keeping it, and really? College doesn't teach you that. I'd be more interested in a work history study of the top few hundred CEOs; do they come from management consultants? Famous management training programs like those at GM, Procter & Gamble, Coca-Cola, Intel? In my opinion, college is a wonderful experience and (should you be a high school senior) you should go to the best one you can convince to take you. But Harvard does not make the CEO.