Another MBA ranking - just what we needed?


Duncan
Business Insider has launched a new ranking: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-worlds-best-business-schools-2012-6?op=1

It's based on a survey of 1000 of their readers, and so cannot be taken too seriously. They write:

"Besides the usual top American contenders, more international schools ranked in the top 10 category this year, with London Business School coming in at #5 and INSEAD ranking at #10. Respondents also suggested that we include other international schools next year, like Cambridge (Judge Business School), the Rotterdam School of Management at Erasmus University, the Indian Institute of Management, the Indian School of Business and The University of Hong Kong (HKU).

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-worlds-best-business-schools-2012-6?op=1#ixzz247XNcHEx"
Business Insider has launched a new ranking: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-worlds-best-business-schools-2012-6?op=1

It's based on a survey of 1000 of their readers, and so cannot be taken too seriously. They write:

"Besides the usual top American contenders, more international schools ranked in the top 10 category this year, with London Business School coming in at #5 and INSEAD ranking at #10. Respondents also suggested that we include other international schools next year, like Cambridge (Judge Business School), the Rotterdam School of Management at Erasmus University, the Indian Institute of Management, the Indian School of Business and The University of Hong Kong (HKU).

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-worlds-best-business-schools-2012-6?op=1#ixzz247XNcHEx"
quote
BigD
..with LSE at number 11. If you are looking to this as an MBA ranking then you will be disappointed as LSE don't offer one.

BigD
..with LSE at number 11. If you are looking to this as an MBA ranking then you will be disappointed as LSE don't offer one.

BigD
quote
Duncan
They make that point in the ranking, that the LSE's full time programme is a masters in management. The LSE runs a part-time MBA though.
They make that point in the ranking, that the LSE's full time programme is a masters in management. The LSE runs a part-time MBA though.
quote
BigD
I stand corrected: I had forgotten about the eye-wateringly expensive Trium MBA of which LSE is a part.

I thinking additional rankings are good if they offer new insight (different emphasis on what is considered the key factors may tease-out additional elements that make assessment easier) , but of course they can also be misleading, depending how they are compiled.

BigD

They make that point in the ranking, that the LSE's full time programme is a masters in management. The LSE runs a part-time MBA though.
I stand corrected: I had forgotten about the eye-wateringly expensive Trium MBA of which LSE is a part.

I thinking additional rankings are good if they offer new insight (different emphasis on what is considered the key factors may tease-out additional elements that make assessment easier) , but of course they can also be misleading, depending how they are compiled.

BigD

<blockquote>They make that point in the ranking, that the LSE's full time programme is a masters in management. The LSE runs a part-time MBA though. </blockquote>
quote
mba hipste...
It's based on a survey of 1000 of their readers, and so cannot be taken too seriously.


This is ridiculous. Their methodology is literarily two sentences:
Our results are based on an extensive survey of the people who matter most to your future: real professionals. Over one thousand of our readers responded, of which 87 percent had attended business school and 71 percent had hiring experience.

Whereas the FT uses over 20 different criteria, including objective factors like salary increase and diversity statistics.

Do we really need another ranking that just re-lists the same schools as other rankings, albeit in a marginally different order? I say no, and that this ranking is just an easy way for Business Insider to sell more advertisements.
<blockquote>It's based on a survey of 1000 of their readers, and so cannot be taken too seriously.</blockquote>

This is ridiculous. Their methodology is literarily two sentences:
<blockquote>Our results are based on an extensive survey of the people who matter most to your future: real professionals. Over one thousand of our readers responded, of which 87 percent had attended business school and 71 percent had hiring experience.</blockquote>
Whereas the FT uses over 20 different criteria, including objective factors like salary increase and diversity statistics.

Do we really need another ranking that just re-lists the same schools as other rankings, albeit in a marginally different order? I say no, and that this ranking is just an easy way for Business Insider to sell more advertisements.
quote

Reply to Post

Related Business Schools

London, United Kingdom 135 Followers 416 Discussions
Cambridge, United Kingdom 38 Followers 242 Discussions
Fontainebleau, France 60 Followers 277 Discussions
Hyderabad, India 21 Followers 84 Discussions
Ahmedabad, India 11 Followers 76 Discussions
Rotterdam, Netherlands 70 Followers 202 Discussions
London, United Kingdom 11 Followers 112 Discussions
Hong Kong, Hong Kong (PRC) 40 Followers 79 Discussions

Related Articles

MBA Rankings: Finding the Best Business Schools

Jul 24, 2012

From the FT to Businessweek, we discuss the importance of rankings and how they work

Rankings: What They Can and Can't Tell You About a Business School

Aug 15, 2010

MBA rankings aren't everything, but they can be a useful tool if you know what they measure and what their limitations are

More Articles