Hello All,

After careful consideration I have decided to choose an Executive MBA. I am 40 this year, have 2 BSc degrees from Hungary (engineer and teacher) and 15+ years working experience. I have been living in the UK for seven years now and find the companies here hardly accept your experience from another country.

Previously I used to work in sport (senior management), since I am in my new country I am in logistics. And want to go back to my previous level, I mean seniority wise, the industry does not matter, however I mostly interested in general management and business strategy. I used to be the CEO of a massive sport organisation. This is the level I want to go back and I think an Executive MBA is a good tool to help in this.

I have narrowed down my list to as many as three schools, these are as follows:
- Cass,
- Warwick,
- ESCP Europe.

Keep looking at different ranking systems, brochures, attending events and I feel that I am lost. The more I study this topic the more question I have. Could one of you help me how to make the final decision? Rankings seem to be very similar, price too, reputation too. Location is London for all which is perfect. How can one choose if these are the options?

Thanks in advance,
Andrastel

FT ranking shows better position and bigger salary for ESCP.
But it also has the smallest salary increase among the 3, which make me think that their salaries were considerably higher even before the EMBA.
However, we're talking about 3 excellent schools, : I see Cass better for finance than for what you're looking for, so I'd take either Warwick or ESCP, but I may be wrong.

ESCP is a great school but its modest brand equity in the UK makes it a weak choice is your focus is here. Cass is a great choice for logistics (it has a real strength in shipping and aviation) and City University has a strong alumni network in UK logistics, especially in Sky, Royal Mail and M&S.

Cranfield, LBS and Warwick are also valuable choices. Given Cranfield's excellent price performance, it would be high up my list although I personally benefitted massively from LBS.

Your comments make me think, the alumni network seems to be the most important factor when it comes to final decision about EMBA. Is it true? Is it not the academic skills or the brand of the school?

For Cranfield I am too late, the cohort starts in January, LBS would be the perfect choice but the cheapest EMBA is almost 4000 £/month. I have emailed to a couple of alumni students from each of the other three schools and waiting for them to get back to me.

At Cass I quite like to subjects, at Warwick the schedule would be perfect for me and ESCP has the hightest rank yes, on FT, other rankings have different views (i.e. ivyexec.com).

No, it's not that the network is most important, but the content is good at all the schools. There are differences in pedagogy, timetabling, and the balance between core and electives. I started an EMBA at one of ESCP's peer school and ended up moving to LBS for a few reasons, including the more serious assessment and the high quality of the students as students. As the modest salary bump hints, at the grandes ecoles the hard bit is getting in rather than the study effort.

Warwick has a smaller core and more convenient scheduling but for me the Cass structure would have me learning more from the core, which is what I needed.

Yes, Warwick has smaller core and more electives, probably Cass is stronger in finance. I did not find anything about the industries the graduated students work in or receive job offers from. And I hope that at the end of the day both schools are strong and provide an also strong degree that should be accepted by employers.

If I considered only the salary, I would probably choose Warwick online as it has higher salary than both Cass and Warwick executive. And this is the point where I am lost. Should I believe in any ranking system? What ranking system do the employers believe in?

I have built strategies and led companies, I am good at it and this is what I want to do again in a new country. Maybe I will do a toss...

[Edited by andrastel on Mar 20, 2018]

It seems very likely that the higher salary for the online MBA reflect PPP weightings rather than real salaries. You cannot easily compare the two series because the EMBAs are almost all in the UK and the online students are generally in poorer countries.

LinkedIn is a great tool for comparison. But also think over your own needs. If you need a stronger core, then Cass or Imperial are obvious, or maybe even the Henley flexible MBA or the Manchester Global MBA. If you, for example, you already have a management qualification and want to build a new specialisation then a compressed core and extensive electives, like Warwick.

Hello All,

I have a new (newer) list of schools for EMBA... Here we go:
- LBS,
- Cambridge,
- Warwick.

All three are triple accredited, good and strong schools, the tuition fees are 85-65-50k. I have visited these schools, they are all nice, attractive and so on. When you decide, would you consider extra things, for example life-long possibility to book a meeting room in London for free of charge? LBS does provide you this. Free of charge usage of a gym, swimming pool, meeting rooms, library, etc.

The more and more I think about it, it becomes more obvious that LBS is the best choice. But the price.... AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA... There is no guarantee at the end that you will get a good position so maybe you will be in debt for 10 years...

I can speak from my own experience, having dropped out of a good MBA to transfer to LBS. That is the best choice you could possibly make if your focus is on the UK. Visit the classes. You'll see the cohort is way better than Warwick, and the course design is far superior to Warwick and Cambridge.

PS arrange a salary sacrifice to pay off the fees as quickly as possible.

Duncan, you seem to be az LBS ambassador, I like it, thank you very much for your feedback and valuable opinion.
I think I should go and find sponsorship now... :)

Cambridge I am sure will always sound good.

But I would not consider Warwick.

Not Warrick? That is a strong school too, in the first 25 in the world.

It seems to me that the tuition fees in the last couple of years have risen sharply although the reputation of the MBA has not. I do not understand why the difference is so big. Warrick 49k, Cambridge 65k, LBS 85k. Is it really worth that money? Will I have better job when I am an LBS graduate? Not just simly better, I mean much much better, let's say the 85k is 70% higher that 49k. Will I earn 70% more if I am an LBS graduate? This is what makes me hesitate...

Hahaha. No, the investment reflects the nett present value. Obviously LBS will lead to a lifetime premium of several hundred thousands over Warwick for the average graduates. Build a model: take the average starting salaries, multiply by twice the rate of inflation and round up every year to the next thousand to reflect the LBS premium. The value of the premium is huge.

The extra £35k will have an astonishing incremental value. Sure, a Tag Heuer tells the time as well as a Patek Phillipe, but a Patek doesn't depreciate. Warwick is the Tag.

did you decide on the School ? I have similar constraints LBS is 85k, Warwick and Cass is 50k. Just cant see the higher NPV considering its an executive course (not full time that offers placement)

I think you have not done the NPV calculation. LBS EMBA graduates are on $40k to $50k more per year. Assuming they work for 30 more years, that is over $1m difference in the NPV. Speaking as someone who left a good, ranked EMBA to join the LBS EMBA, I think that is the simplest investment choice I ever had.

Skotish. No, I did not. There will be an open evening event at Warwick tomorrow, I will go there. Why are you considering the same three schools?