MBA Rankings: All 2024 Rankings

I am a little new to this forum.
Could you please tell me what R's stand for? I mean R1, R2 etc.

All these rankings are pretty debatable. I would put this way:

1 - Harvard - no question about it, will open doors anywhere in the world.
2 - Stanford - (I personally would attend Stanford rather than Harvard).
3 - Wharton - Most of the class was dinged by H/S.
4,5,6 - MIT / Kellogg / Chicago - not in any particular order, depends much on your future career goals.
7 - Columbia - the "M7".
8 - Tuck
9 - Berkeley
10 - [Choose one]

I tend to share this view, with the exception that I would probably give H/S at a tie at #1 and Tuck/Haas a tie at #8. Most people will go to Harvard over Stanford, and Tuck over Haas, but these schools each have their own unique strengths. In today's environment, I'd probably put Michigan at #10, largely due to the very well-rounded career placement of Ross graduates.

Can't wait till I can find out how many places my school fell below Southern Methodist University.

My prediction is that YSOM will fall further in the ranking and schools like U of Phoenix and DeVry will be above YSOM....

This is what makes little sense to me. According to Businessweek, SMU was the WORST bschool for recession placement. So why on earth would that school have a large increase in rankings and how on earth would that lead to large student satisfaction? Doesn't matter how great my professors are; if I don't get a job, I will be angry as hell. Seems like businessweek's rankings are absolutely nonsensical. So ignore them altogether.

Attached is a average of rankings from multiple full time programs. Not all inclusive but still may help in your research.

LOL!! +1

I agree completely - fun analysis

I have to disagree with what you said a bit.

The student body doesn't lose that much if the class has an avg of 3-4 years of experience; after 2 good years of experience, you are not bringing much in an MBA setting. You may want to look for an Executive MBA then. MBA is positioning you in a leadership position, and the schools are picking those who have shown skills, interest, and desire to do so. Harvard and Stanford get the best applicants with 3-4 years of experience (usually the "best" work experience), therein the average of their class. In visits at multiple schools- Harvard, MIT and Tuck- the admission person would often say that after 2 years, it really does not matter, they can see the picture: you are either interested and capable at being a leader or you are not.

The reality is, most applicants, would show their interest and capabilities at being a leader -aka taking leadership positions after 3-4 years of experience at your job usually. Because of that most schools have a higher average.

Hi,

I have a question. Is the age, the age when you begin your MBA, or it is the age when you are admitted ?

This should be the age at matriculation. Guys, correct me if I'm wrong.

Thanks dzyubam.

Forgive me for the further inconvenience, but the matriculation age is then your age when you begin your classes, not the age when you are admitted or when you applied ?

PS: I am non-US, therefore I am unfamiliar with some notions natural to you

It's age at matriculation.

Great stuff man!

Sorry

for me Tuck, placed 18th is way ahead of IE (spain) placed 8th.

Haas really 25th?

I would place it above Tuck or about same ranking if not better

I wonder how FT comes up with these rankings. So subjective

Your BW ranking is wrong. I think you have Kellogg and Wharton mixed up!

No, I double checked the input and that is what was published over a ten year period with BW.