Hi all, I have been aceepted by both the Warwick MBA and the Strathclyde MBA. Both schools are doing quite well in the Financial Times ranking, but according to the Which MBA EIU ranking, the Strathclye MBA is doing much worse. Any suggestions as to which one to choose? (and the Strathclyde is relatively cheaper then the Warwick.....) Please help!

My first reaction would be to go for Warwick, assuming its not prohibitively expensive. Warwick is already probably better recognised, and is regarded as something of a programme on the up.

Thank you very much for the feedback. I know Warwick has a better reputation than Strathclyde, but I wonder if from an employer perspective, it would make a difference.. they are kinda in the same tier right.... I am still struggling, mainly cuz Strathclyde can be done in 2 years time....

Thanks again for your advice :)

Loretta, first of all congrats that you got accepted to those 2 schools, both among the top tier in Europe.
If you want to choose the better one tendency goes towards Warwick as you see. However, I think this will not be so much different from the employer perspective. It is obvious that both are a good choice and you won't do anything wrong whatever you chose.

But since you are looking for some more good reasons to go to Strathclyde, why don't you ask the career center of both schools to give you the recruitment statistics of the last years! Hard facts always help..

You mention the 2-year scheme - you must ave a reason to be looking for such a model, I guess that you want to continue in your job while doing the MBA? Doesn't that simply rule out Warwick then?

GREAT! Thanks for the advice! In either case, I will be doing the program on a online, part-time basis, and will be focusing on Marketing as I would like to change my career to marketing/ brand management. Thus, shorter the program the better. Strathclyde for 2 years and Warwick for 3 years + Strathclyde is almost 1/3 cheaper than Warwick! Funny enough though, I have been asking around recently for some advice... from a student or MBA alumni perspective (and myself), the school reputation matters the most and it points clearly to Warwick. Although from a headhunter and employer perspective, it doesn't make a huge difference between the two programs (at least in Europe), and people do wonder why I want to pay more for Warwick...so, I am kind of 50/50 now...

Thanks a lot again for the above reply!

Oh sorry Loretta, I thought Warwick has no part time MBA, but I've just seen on their website that they actually do and that the part time MBA offers a lot of flexibility!
The regular time would be 3 years, but it can go up to 8 years and also be less than 3:
"But you can often speed up your studies through careful planning and selection of elective modules, and an early start to your project." as it says on their site.
You have to check if it is possible to combine a more intense part time MBA (shorter duration) with your other activities, but I think duration should not be the first criteria.

In the end you get what you pay for: Warwick is more expensive and has a better reputation, relatively, now it will be you personal choice if this is worth the extra costs... as it says on their site: "the old adage of 'you get what you pay for' holds true..."http://www.wbs.ac.uk/students/mba/fees/index.cfm

Did you check out the funding/scholarship possibilities?

hey loretta

i m actually doing the same thing right now ,,, researching into the good distance learning MBA in UK with a strong marketing focused component

time and cost are no issues to me - my company is sponsoring me so i get to live in a beautiful (canada), continue my great job, and get paid to study more

i have shortlisted manchester (global mba) and warwick (dl mba). strathclyde is certainly not on my list as i think its reputation is not as good as manchester/warwick. i am considering the university's reputation/branding in north america as well as asia, not just in europe

so do u mind sharing with me which business school did u apply for? how was the experience so far?

thanks

Hi there,

I am planning to start applying to Univ. and would like to decide between the following:
1) Warwick
2) Manchester
3) Strathclyde
I suppose you guys have started with your MBA studies by now and your inputs will be very much appreciated.

Thanks and Regards
Anita
([email protected])

I would definitely choose Warwick, Manchester would be my second choice.

Best, JL

Guys,
A similar but slightly different question:
I have an offer from Strathclyde and Warwick. Due to my location, I can do a part time from Strathclyde (I am based out of Glasgow) but if I choose Warwick then it would need to be Distance Learning.

So the question now is 'Strathclyde Part Time' Vs. 'Warwick Distance Learning'.

Any views on this at all?
I know there isn't a straight answer to this - but any views or pointers are most welcome.

Rgds,

Hi gagagandhi, I am on an international programme in another country with Strathclyde. While I am not able to judge the level of teaching and academia as I am lacking comparison, I may say that Strathclyde is very arrogant and unresponsive to "customers' ", i.e. students' requests, and simply is not at all interested in any comment, question, or suggestion, even worse so in complaints about procedures or their tone and attitude of communication. Unfortunately this attitude is also practiced in other countries' offices or agencies where those international programmes are being hosted. If you don't need a triple accredited MBA school, you might well consider this aspect, too. As for distance learning, from my point of view, I took the right decision for attending a classroom, this is more lively and discussions and encounters with peers are very fruitious. Hope this helps and good luck!

Strathclyde or Warwick, you get the same piece of paper at the end of the day. And i suspect the content you learn will be the same at the end.

As a student at Strathclyde part time international MBA I concur - poor customer service that orIginates not from the international centres but from an overstreched university admin that is more interested in fees and research than quality dynamic course delivery and experience. and poor responsiveness to student aspirations. Be prepared to be murdered by PowerPoint. No place for that in today's environment. Indeed to the point of the SHOCKING.

The university needs a serious wake up call. It is a pity because it has the resources to stay permanently in the top 30.

Guys
Thanks you for sharing your insights. really helpful indeed.

I bet though Warwick has it no better.

Could be.

Is anybody considering networking? Warwick has very strong networks, plus a reputable name. Even if you were on their distance learning it will probably benefit you to be able to say "hey I graduated from Warwick also!" when trying to network your way into jobs.

Also - I heard their DL MBA is very effective and organized since they've been running it for >20 years.

IT is one of the strongest point that I liked about Warwick, BTW I am still haven't applied yet so I couldn't give much info.

I knew some alumni in my line of business. I asked Alumni from other schools, they thought that Warwick is a fine school. I hope it helps.