The FT's new executive education rankings came out today. They have a combined ranking to show the winners in both the open and custom programme categories. You can download the top 50 at: http://on.ft.com/J53SJT
The top 25 are: Harvard; HEC; IMD; CL; IESE; FDC; Easde; Thunderbird; Insead; Essec; Pennsylvania; LBS; Northwestern; IE; Oxford; Cranfield; Western Ontario; Chicago; Virginia; MIT; Columbia; Ipade; Stanford; Bocconi and Ashridge.
It's an interesting ranking, and it's one way to see which schools have a extra form of leverage with employers. Schools that employers turn to for training their own people have a good chance of being the go-to schools for MBAs as well.
Of course there are many things are work in this ranking. Many of the schools are national leaders in countries where there is a strong commitment to developing leaders: CCL; FDC; ESSEC; LBS and so on. But, it suggests to me that schools that well do well in this ranking should have MBA programmes on the way up (especially, I am thinking of European school like Essec, HEC, Esade, Cranfield, Bocconi and Ashridge) when the recession eases. Some of the strong performers in the top 50 have launched or relaunched their MBA in the last several years (Essec, Ashridge, ESMT, Henley, Catolica) and those schools which are part of universities but don't have a full-time MBA (like ESCP, Helsinki and SSE) must be tempted to launch them, perhaps in joint ventures with schools in other regions.
New FT ranking out today
Posted May 14, 2012 22:47
The top 25 are: Harvard; HEC; IMD; CL; IESE; FDC; Easde; Thunderbird; Insead; Essec; Pennsylvania; LBS; Northwestern; IE; Oxford; Cranfield; Western Ontario; Chicago; Virginia; MIT; Columbia; Ipade; Stanford; Bocconi and Ashridge.
It's an interesting ranking, and it's one way to see which schools have a extra form of leverage with employers. Schools that employers turn to for training their own people have a good chance of being the go-to schools for MBAs as well.
Of course there are many things are work in this ranking. Many of the schools are national leaders in countries where there is a strong commitment to developing leaders: CCL; FDC; ESSEC; LBS and so on. But, it suggests to me that schools that well do well in this ranking should have MBA programmes on the way up (especially, I am thinking of European school like Essec, HEC, Esade, Cranfield, Bocconi and Ashridge) when the recession eases. Some of the strong performers in the top 50 have launched or relaunched their MBA in the last several years (Essec, Ashridge, ESMT, Henley, Catolica) and those schools which are part of universities but don't have a full-time MBA (like ESCP, Helsinki and SSE) must be tempted to launch them, perhaps in joint ventures with schools in other regions.
Posted May 15, 2012 12:06
Thanks, Duncan - your comments on this ranking are really interesting.
Schools that employers turn to for training their own people have a good chance of being the go-to schools for MBAs as well.
This is true, and something that MBA potentials should pay attention to. For example, some of IESE's top executive education clients include Nestlé, Abbott, Airbus, and Novartis. It's no coincidence that IESE also hosts recruiting events with these companies in attendance. Darden has similar relationships with companies like AES Corp, Bank of America, and Intel, among others.
Many of the schools are national leaders in countries where there is a strong commitment to developing leaders: CCL; FDC; ESSEC; LBS and so on.
And also I'd note that schools in developing countries (or those who have partnerships with schools in developing countries,) are starting to rise: Harvard's exec ed program has a solid foothold in China; there are two schools from Brazil now (FDC and Insper,) etc. I have a feeling there will be more next year as well.
...those schools which are part of universities but don't have a full-time MBA (like ESCP, Helsinki and SSE) must be tempted to launch them, perhaps in joint ventures with schools in other regions.
It's really strange that ESCP doesn't have a full-time program. I'm sure they could fill cohorts without even trying.
<blockquote>Schools that employers turn to for training their own people have a good chance of being the go-to schools for MBAs as well.</blockquote>
This is true, and something that MBA potentials should pay attention to. For example, some of IESE's top executive education clients include Nestlé, Abbott, Airbus, and Novartis. It's no coincidence that IESE also hosts recruiting events with these companies in attendance. Darden has similar relationships with companies like AES Corp, Bank of America, and Intel, among others.
<blockquote>Many of the schools are national leaders in countries where there is a strong commitment to developing leaders: CCL; FDC; ESSEC; LBS and so on.</blockquote>
And also I'd note that schools in developing countries (or those who have partnerships with schools in developing countries,) are starting to rise: Harvard's exec ed program has a solid foothold in China; there are two schools from Brazil now (FDC and Insper,) etc. I have a feeling there will be more next year as well.
<blockquote>...those schools which are part of universities but don't have a full-time MBA (like ESCP, Helsinki and SSE) must be tempted to launch them, perhaps in joint ventures with schools in other regions.</blockquote>
It's really strange that ESCP doesn't have a full-time program. I'm sure they could fill cohorts without even trying.
Posted May 15, 2012 22:20
I think the challenge is to fit it into the labour markets they focus on. What ESCP has done very well, since closing the full-time EAP MBA, is cornered the market for post-MSc advanced masters. I wonder if they could wrap those up into an MBA in some way?
Posted May 16, 2012 14:18
I wonder if they could wrap those up into an MBA in some way?
I'm sure they could. The key would be to develop curriculum that fits in the niche between the MEB program and the EMBA, and includes an internship or hands-on project component. They certainly have the faculty to do it - and with their connections to employers through their executive education program, they'd have a recruitment base. I'd probably bump up the required experience for their EMBA program to 7 or 8 years to further distinguish that program from the standard MBA.
I'm sure they could. The key would be to develop curriculum that fits in the niche between the MEB program and the EMBA, and includes an internship or hands-on project component. They certainly have the faculty to do it - and with their connections to employers through their executive education program, they'd have a recruitment base. I'd probably bump up the required experience for their EMBA program to 7 or 8 years to further distinguish that program from the standard MBA.
Related Business Schools
Other Related Content
LinkedIn Launches MBA Rankings of US Business Schools
News Jan 11, 2024
Hot Discussions
-
UPF-BSM vs EAE Business School vs UAB, seeking insights over potential business schools in Barcelona, Spain.
Nov 07, 2024 147 12 -
"Late Bloomer" with average academics/experience, but 720 GMAT and Polyglot
Nov 07, 2024 96 4 -
Gut check
Nov 11 05:12 PM 95 4 -
Are executive short courses that bad? Any alternatives if employer pays?
Nov 13 05:10 PM 77 4 -
Why do US schools like to hide their tuition fees?
Nov 09, 2024 90 4 -
Europe vs US - Opportunities/ROI
Nov 02, 2024 87 4 -
OHM MBA in Germany
Nov 06, 2024 75 4 -
eMBA or executive MSc Finance - Dilemma
Nov 12 02:44 PM 57 3