MBA rankings are an integral part of the business school world, and
like them or loathe them, the chances are you’ll take a look at them.
Staff, students and alumni will be assessing the impact of their
school’s standing in the global market, while potential applicants may
over rely on these league tables to determine their shortlist of target
schools.
The full-time MBA ranking published last month by BusinessWeek brings the 2012 season of media rankings of business schools to a close, and the results were met with the usual mix of joy, despair and skepticism by the business school community.
So what happens when you take all the MBA rankings collectively? MBA50 has compiled the results of the big five MBA rankings of the last 12 months – a sort of Ranking of the MBA Rankings. A snapshot of the results appears at the end of this article.
What is striking in the 2012 results is the consistent strong performance of Harvard Business School, Chicago Booth, Stanford GSB and The Wharton School among the leading US business schools. With only a couple of exceptions, these four schools fill the first four places in every ranking.
But how much should we read into the results from Forbes, BusinessWeek and the other major rankings produced by the Financial Times, The Economist, and U.S. News? As the business education editor at The Economist admits, comparing “a one-year Danish program with a cohort of 50 students with a two-year American one with 1,000 is tricky. Some would say futile.”
Each ranking uses a different methodology and weights the use of different data to produce their league tables, so it is important for candidates to understand what is being measured. In overly simple terms:
Forbes – does a simple calculation of ROI 5 years out from business school.
Financial Times – bases 40% of the ranking on post-MBA salaries 3 years after graduation.
BusinessWeek – emphasises the satisfaction levels of two core stakeholders: students and recruiters.
U.S. News & World – includes a survey of deans and MBA directors, and uses GMAT scores as part of student selectivity.
The Economist – assesses the ability of the MBA to open new career opportunities, as well as the international make-up of the school.
For Peter Todd, dean at McGill University’s Desautels, the school’s decision to participate in all the major rankings gives applicants a broader international perspective across an aggregate of results. “For us this is not a game where we are asking ourselves where we will do best. There is some diagnostic value for ourselves, but we also ensure that we don’t fixate on what any one particular ranking is asking for. We do what we think is right, and focus on giving the students the best learning experience – the rankings will then take care of themselves.”
Critics of the MBA rankings, and there are many of them, point out that they typically only measure what is easy to count – things like post-MBA salaries, GMAT scores and the percentage of international students and faculty. The over-reliance on self-reported data is also called into question, and the absence of any meaningful indicators for teaching quality, personal development, or the impact of the alumni network.
But where can you do your best work? That is the question Bob Bruner, dean of the Darden School asks of students and applicants. “A life decision such as accepting a job offer or admission to an MBA program shouldn’t hinge just on the obvious criteria – dollars, title, location, etc.,” Bruner insists. “You must focus importantly on the work you want to do and how this choice can help you do it.“
Rankings at least have the merit of providing potential applicants with certain data that would otherwise be unavailable. Given, though, that the methodology of each ranking is subjective in its choice of criteria, and that the difference between a school ranked 25th or 35th is probably not that great, the results should never be the most influential factor when identifying the right school for you.
For HEC Paris Associate Dean, Bernard Garrette, the reality is that very little separates the top business schools as measured by the data used for the rankings. But he points out that there is a tremendous difference in terms of the student experience that rankings simply cannot capture. “A world class MBA should be a transformational experience, so it is far more important to choose a program that corresponds to the personality and objectives of the individual. Nothing will replace interacting with the school and its students and alumni to determine whether the MBA offers the right fit.”
The message is that there is no ‘best’ business school in the world… but there could be a ‘best’ business school for you.
How do the world’s top business schools perform when you combine the results of the five major rankings?
The MBA50 Premiership 2012 separates schools into into four regions (U.S., Europe, Canada and Asia-Pacific) to account for the fact that only the FT and The Economist make direct comparisons. Overall performance is calculated by looking at the ranking position within each region, and taking an average of those results based on the number of rankings in which the schools appear.
In the case of the FT and Economist rankings, if a U.S. business school ranked #16 in the overall FT ranking and #20 in the overall Economist ranking, but among U.S. business schools was #9 in the FT and #13 in The Economist, then the relative U.S. regional figure was used for the calculation.
See the next page for a snapshot of the 2012 results…
The full-time MBA ranking published last month by BusinessWeek brings the 2012 season of media rankings of business schools to a close, and the results were met with the usual mix of joy, despair and skepticism by the business school community.
So what happens when you take all the MBA rankings collectively? MBA50 has compiled the results of the big five MBA rankings of the last 12 months – a sort of Ranking of the MBA Rankings. A snapshot of the results appears at the end of this article.
What is striking in the 2012 results is the consistent strong performance of Harvard Business School, Chicago Booth, Stanford GSB and The Wharton School among the leading US business schools. With only a couple of exceptions, these four schools fill the first four places in every ranking.
But how much should we read into the results from Forbes, BusinessWeek and the other major rankings produced by the Financial Times, The Economist, and U.S. News? As the business education editor at The Economist admits, comparing “a one-year Danish program with a cohort of 50 students with a two-year American one with 1,000 is tricky. Some would say futile.”
Each ranking uses a different methodology and weights the use of different data to produce their league tables, so it is important for candidates to understand what is being measured. In overly simple terms:
Forbes – does a simple calculation of ROI 5 years out from business school.
Financial Times – bases 40% of the ranking on post-MBA salaries 3 years after graduation.
BusinessWeek – emphasises the satisfaction levels of two core stakeholders: students and recruiters.
U.S. News & World – includes a survey of deans and MBA directors, and uses GMAT scores as part of student selectivity.
The Economist – assesses the ability of the MBA to open new career opportunities, as well as the international make-up of the school.
For Peter Todd, dean at McGill University’s Desautels, the school’s decision to participate in all the major rankings gives applicants a broader international perspective across an aggregate of results. “For us this is not a game where we are asking ourselves where we will do best. There is some diagnostic value for ourselves, but we also ensure that we don’t fixate on what any one particular ranking is asking for. We do what we think is right, and focus on giving the students the best learning experience – the rankings will then take care of themselves.”
Critics of the MBA rankings, and there are many of them, point out that they typically only measure what is easy to count – things like post-MBA salaries, GMAT scores and the percentage of international students and faculty. The over-reliance on self-reported data is also called into question, and the absence of any meaningful indicators for teaching quality, personal development, or the impact of the alumni network.
But where can you do your best work? That is the question Bob Bruner, dean of the Darden School asks of students and applicants. “A life decision such as accepting a job offer or admission to an MBA program shouldn’t hinge just on the obvious criteria – dollars, title, location, etc.,” Bruner insists. “You must focus importantly on the work you want to do and how this choice can help you do it.“
Rankings at least have the merit of providing potential applicants with certain data that would otherwise be unavailable. Given, though, that the methodology of each ranking is subjective in its choice of criteria, and that the difference between a school ranked 25th or 35th is probably not that great, the results should never be the most influential factor when identifying the right school for you.
For HEC Paris Associate Dean, Bernard Garrette, the reality is that very little separates the top business schools as measured by the data used for the rankings. But he points out that there is a tremendous difference in terms of the student experience that rankings simply cannot capture. “A world class MBA should be a transformational experience, so it is far more important to choose a program that corresponds to the personality and objectives of the individual. Nothing will replace interacting with the school and its students and alumni to determine whether the MBA offers the right fit.”
The message is that there is no ‘best’ business school in the world… but there could be a ‘best’ business school for you.
How do the world’s top business schools perform when you combine the results of the five major rankings?
The MBA50 Premiership 2012 separates schools into into four regions (U.S., Europe, Canada and Asia-Pacific) to account for the fact that only the FT and The Economist make direct comparisons. Overall performance is calculated by looking at the ranking position within each region, and taking an average of those results based on the number of rankings in which the schools appear.
In the case of the FT and Economist rankings, if a U.S. business school ranked #16 in the overall FT ranking and #20 in the overall Economist ranking, but among U.S. business schools was #9 in the FT and #13 in The Economist, then the relative U.S. regional figure was used for the calculation.
See the next page for a snapshot of the 2012 results…
