Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
WSJ: Recruiters' pick: Top business Schools for 2005 [#permalink]
21 Sep 2005, 08:17
Today, the Wall Street Journal released its annual ranking of full-time MBA Programs offered by U.S. business schools.
It amazes me as to how these rankings differ so much from the one released by Business week recently. My suggestion to people who are just in the process of applying is not to depend too much on these rankings and only use it to get an insight into general industry trend. Bottom line, if you are in the process of short listing schools to apply, consider following things:
a) Area of concentration
b) Duration of the program
c) cost of education and expected time on ROI
d) Access to market & alumni
University of Michigan (Stephen M. Ross School of Business)
Carnegie Mellon University (David A. Tepper School of Business)
Dartmouth College (Tuck School of Business)
University of Pennsylvania (Wharton School)
University of Chicago
Northwestern University (Kellogg Graduate School of Management)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Sloan School of Management)
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (Kenan-Flagler Business School)
University of Virginia (Darden Graduate School of Business Administration)
Duke University (Fuqua School of Business)
University of California, Berkeley (Haas School of Business)
University of Texas at Austin (McCombs School of Business)
New York University (Leonard N. Stern School of Business)
Cornell University (Johnson Graduate School of Management)
University of California at Los Angeles (The Anderson School of Management)
Last edited by praveen_rao7 on 21 Sep 2005, 12:24, edited 1 time in total.
Harvard and Stanford below Yale, UNC, Darden and Michigan (no offense to current students there)....not sure which world they live in. WSJ is known for stupid rankings. Sometime back I think they put in "Princeton Univ" in the MBA rankings and Princeton doesn't even have a MBA program. I think US News / BW rankings are better, specially US News rankings are well respected.
And I believe in the 2003 edition, LBS was #45 or so. That dates back to when int'l schools were not separated from US schools but I believe 45 was a bit low... In any case, no matter how LBS is ranked, the experience is just intense and very enriching.
2005 Rank 2004 Rank University (Business School) 1 3 Dartmouth College (Tuck) 2 1 University of Michigan (Ross) 3 2 Carnegie Mellon University (Tepper) 4 7 Northwestern University (Kellogg) 5 6 Yale University 6 4 University of Pennsylvania (Wharton) 7 15 University of California, Berkeley (Haas) 8 8 Columbia University 9 11 University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (Kenan-Flagler) 10 -- University of Southern California (Marshall) 11 12 University of Virginia (Darden) 12 9 Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Sloan) 13 5 University of Chicago 14 13 Harvard University 15 10 Stanford University 16 17 New York University (Stern) 17 14 Duke University (Fuqua) 18 18 Cornell University (S.C. Johnson) 19 19 University of California, Los Angeles
I contacted WSJ on the methodology used in ranking business schools and found that WSJ surveyed ~3600 recruiters and based their rankings on the "input" received from the recruiters. For instance, if many recruiters felt that Harvard and Stanford graduates were "arrogant" and/or "rude" they (recruiters) lowered the ranking of the school the individuals graduated from. On the contrary, if the recruiters interaction with the graduates of a certain school, say Michigan, was very pleasant, they raised the ranking of that particular school.
So at best the WSJ rankings are "silly" and not intellectual. It is best to term the ranking as an output of a survey.
The WSJ rankings are not an overall rankings of best schools. In fact, there is no best school...there are only best schools for you. The WSJ rankings are just the recruiters take on which schools' graduates they have the best experience with and whom they like hiring. Basically, you are on corporate recruiters better side if you are graduating from one of these top schools...thats all. Stanford ranking lower than Michican only means that this past year, recruiters enjoyed hiring Michigan graduates more than they did with Stanford graduates. If your goal is to look best in recruiters eyes then follow these rankings, otherwise dont.
i think the FT rankings (global) are the best out there since it considers at least 20 factors into consideration - which is a wide range of measure..i wish BW would club the international schools along with the US schools in their rankings instead of 2 seperate ones.