Economist ranking forgets most top 20 schools

StuartHE

1.193 706

Posted Jun 30, 2020 17:42

Really weird EMBA ranking: most of the FT's top 20 schools are missing from The Economist's top 70. So, no HEC (#1 in the FT ranking); Trium (3); EMBA-Global (4 & 6); LBS (8); Insead/Tsinghua (9); Antai (11), ESCP (14); MIT (15); Cambridge (18); Insead (19).

Why does this happen?

Economist: https://www.economist.com/whichmba/executive-mba-ranking-2020

FT: http://rankings.ft.com/businessschoolrankings/executive-mba-ranking-2019

quote

Inactive User

2.941 1.801

Posted Jul 02, 2020 16:06

Some of this might have to do with how the FT calculates salaries based on price purchasing parity. A lot of these programs (HEC, Trium, Insead / Tsinghau, Antai) recruit many students from places like China, who after the program report large salaries (comparatively).

I guess the Economist probably doesn't implement PPP in the exact same way.

Some of this might have to do with how the FT calculates salaries based on price purchasing parity. A lot of these programs (HEC, Trium, Insead / Tsinghau, Antai) recruit many students from places like China, who after the program report large salaries (comparatively).<br><br>I guess the Economist probably doesn't  implement PPP in the exact same way. 

quote

blibot

30 19

Posted Jul 04, 2020 14:07

I understood from some business schools that they have have decided to leave the Economist ranking, because they didn't find they way of ranking fair. they prefer not being listed in the ranking than being badly ranked. if the Economist stays with this philosophy, all famous schools will leave the ranking.

[Edited by blibot on Jul 04, 2020]

quote