I have found it helpful to think of management programs as a continuum with the Craft of Management and Management Science as two (somewhat exaggerated) endpoints. Somewhere in the middle we encounter the Applied Economics/Social Science tradition that combines elements of the Craft and Science archetypes.

I. Craft of Management Tradition

Intense use of case method
High level of induction
Stress on Leadership
Management viewed as an art to be learned via observation and discussion
Philosophical identification: Conceptually similar to a service academy for business leaders

II. Management Science Tradition

Intense use of formulas and mathematical abstraction
Higher use of deduction
Management viewed as a science to be learned from robust principles
Philosophical identification: Engineers of the Corporation

III. Applied Economics/Social Science Tradition

Extensive use of economic models but tempered with borrowings from other social sciences such as psychology and sociology
Business is essentially an applied version of the social sciences with an strong emphasis on economics
While the core is economics, the actions of individuals can also be important
Philosophical identification: Business leaders are economically motivated individuals acting within certain institutional constraints and incentive systems.

Hmm . . . interesting challenge. Of course, these categories are extremes but it might be a worthwhile exercise to classiy some of them.

I. Craft of Management
UVA/Darden
UWO/Ivey
HBS
INSEAD

II. Management Science Tradition

Intense use of formulas and mathematical abstraction
Higher use of deduction
Management viewed as a science to be learned from robust principles
Philosophical identification: Engineers of the Corporation

My take on II - MIT,Chicago, Tepper

Cheers

II. Management Science

I agree with Oz on MIT and Carnegie (I guess the old name Carnegie Tech kind of gave that one away).

I would would actually classify Chicago in the Economic school of thought.

Another school that appears to belong to the Craft of Management (I.) is UNC. While it is does not have the same emphasis on the case method as (say) UVA, UNC shares the emphasis on leadership that typifies this group of schools

Georgia Tech also fits in with the Management Science group.

Like its fellow "tech" schools, the idea of "industrial management" planned an important role in the early history of the school.

1934 An Industrial Management program is established at Georgia Tech to meet the need for management training in a technical environment.

1945 The Master of Science in Industrial Management is authorized as the first professional management degree in the state.

Another school for the Economics group is Rochester/Simon.

"Economics-Based Approach and Cross-Functional Curriculum. The common thread of economics allows students and faculty to share ideas and solve problems based on mutually understood methods and terminology"

Glad to see you're adding to this thread, Hjort.

Keep at it, please; very interesting.

(Though the thought of attending German business school gives me nightmares. But all those stern teutonic stereotypes would make for a very fun cartoon.)

Yes, my first thought would be to include Cornell in the Mgmt Science group.

Among these three types I would put LBS as closest to III, the Applied Economics/Social Science camp. In some ways, it reminds me of the sort of "American Omnibus" tradition of a school like Wharton that have strengths in a number of fields and a less overt stress on leadership than the type I schools.