Schools that have potential

Interesting topic. I'm not a big fan of Atlanta, but D.C.'s fun and I'm going to delve deeper at Georgetown.
It's a pretty solid school as far as its college and law school are concerned.

I think UW (Foster) will rise with their new cash supply. They badly needed a new building, and now they're getting it. It doesn't make sense not to have a top 25 business school in the PNW.

My approach to the momentum stories we read about every year (applicants mentioning that a particular school seems to be on the rise in rankings, prestige or [insert other criteria]) is the following: which schools which are now arguably above the school being mentioned are going to fall?

Rankings (whether published or perceived) are a zero sum game, so regardless of a particular school's improvements, some school should "fall" for another one to rise. Based on my limited knowledge on the subject, most Ultra Elites and Elites seem to be staying put (at least in terms of perceived prestige), not only based on their history but also on their own improvements year after year.

L.

I agree ,but a school rise doesn't mean another school dropping from the list

The new schools might reach into "Elite Cluster " or the number of " Ultra Elites " might increase



In the real world, don't the top companies face challenges from the next rung - Dont we see few getting displaced? -

Just a thought

I agree with Lepium on this one. The top is pretty much solidified and while rankings may change that doesnt affect recruiting or industry perception. This is because companies often recruit at a core set of schools, these are top schools...so there are lots of alums from these schools working at the big banks, consulting companies, and large corporations. They show loyalty so even if their school falls 5 spots in the USnews rankings they are still going to recruit there.

It takes a longer time to move up in the view of the business world...this is the true measure of a school. While some people say Columbia has fallen in rankings over the last few years, to think that Wall Street banks wont be knocking on their door and instead will be beating a path to a school that managed to jump from 20 to 12 in the BW ranking is crazy.

Companies put so much into recruiting that they tend to have a pretty solid list of schools. Talk to students about how often some companies are on campus and how much money they spend on their recruiting.

Academic reputations tended to be quite "sticky" in part because it takes considerable time to turn over your stock of professors and plant as well as to spread your alumni across the region/nation/globe. Conceptually it might help to think of academic brand as a moving average process with a long memory. A few strong or weak years might move the aveage but not much. Columbia is a good example of this- even at its low point a few decades ago it is was still perceived as one of the top schools. Once schools build a strong reputation, it is quite difficult for it to disappear. A few years ago I remember looking at the "first mover" business schools, those schools that were started in the first 20 or so years of the business school movement in the late 19th/early 20th century. Many of these first schools continue to be key players including Wharton and Chicago. Of course, there have also been some relative new comers that quickly become rather well known schools such as Yale SOM.

I still see UCSD as a strong player in the long run, perhaps joined by some of the other UCs such as UCI if they can break away from the shadow of the UCLA-UCB duo.

perceived rankings take decades to change, it's not something that the yearly rankings will affect any time soon (other than short term increases in applications, like GSB). One such change is Chicago GSB specifically, hovering at the bottom of the top 10 back in the 90s, now it's a solid top 7 school.

I can only see schools "join" the top tiers, but not really displace anyone. Thus, I disagree partially with the idea that it's a "zero sum" game. In 10-20 years, the UE's might include 10 schools instead of 7, with the sub-clusters inside the top 10 (like H/S/W is right now to the M7). Schools like Foster and Emory might make the Trans Elite or even Elite, making it a bigger cluster than what it is currently. I would say Yale SOM is one example of a relatively new business school breaking into the Elite cluster without displacing anyone.

I would say the same for Oxford (Said) and Cambridge (Judge) in the UK breaking into this area. The reputation of their undergrad institutions hold high influence in the reputation of potential employers.

I could see Princeton starting a business school sometime and having it climb up into the Elite cluster pretty quickly.

The members in the different clusters pretty much will have to grow. The size of the schools are pretty set, you arent going to see any of the ultra elites adding 50% to their size. So as the global economy grows and more internationals apply and go to schools, there wont be room for a lot of super talented people at the top schools. It is pretty well known that for some international demographics it is much more difficult than for most other groups, these people also happen to come from two of the fastest growing economies on earth. As these people go to their 2nd, 3rd, or even 6th choice they will add a lot very talented and accomplished people to those schools. Some will return home and be successful and will add to the global image of those schools over time. Its definitely a slow process but overtime schools will move up. It will probably become more subclusters the super-ultra elites. The near-ultra elites...

Princeton does have the masters of finance which seems to mint people for bulge bracket banks, HF, PE, and VC. It is insanely competitive to get in, very small, and a brandname that is as close to par with Harvard and Stanford as a school can get.

I think this is a very interesting discussion...

It seems the schools that have risen into Elites/Trans Elites are schools that trade on an already very strong undergraduate/other graduate program brand name.

Take Yale for example. Part of the perception towards their SOM may be that everyone knows the undergrad program and law school are fantastic and therefore assume the SOM is on par, or close. This of course is self-fulfilling event, because if it is preceived to be better, it will attract more top applicants. Same could be said for Duke, and Emory, both who have fantastic reputations to trade on.

Overall, I agree, the rankings are a zero sum game, but there is possibility for other schools to climb into the Elite ranks... not sure about the Ultra Elites though. I suppose time will tell.

I have a friend that interviewed with their adcom a few weeks back. He says it was pretty sad. He's applying to other Top 10/Top 20 and said the experience didn't come close to the other interviews he has had with H/W/Kellogg/Duke. In fact, he said that he was so turned off, he was not going to submit his app (As he explains it to me, they have a similar Part I/Part II approach as Kellogg and interviewed before his app was in).

My friend also said the recruiting in finance was pretty weak. Considering the mad amounts of HF's in DC, that's no bueno.

Anyway, for what it's worth.

Could you expand on the specific reasons why it was bad? Especially when criticizing a school, good solid examples would make it more valid instead of a general statement.

wouldn't you think that when the financial aspects of it really start to make sense, some of these ultra big name schools that lack MBA programs like Princeton, Cal Tech, Tufts, or Brown will consider doing something? These are all the type of school that could immediately become an Elite school virtually overnight.

I don't see how this can be a "zero-sum" game. With populations constantly increasing globally and the booming of India and China and the interest individuals in those countries will have in Top US programs (as well as ones in the EU and their own countries) it would only make sense that more schools will make it to that top tier.

At the same time though, the tip-top, the H/S/W type schools will probably become increasingly difficult to get into. Maybe a better way to think about it is that there eventually will be a tier above the ultra elite, the UUE which in turn will open up doors for new UE schools.

Now, to truly address the posters original question, i think another school which is on the rise is William and Mary. They've made big strides in there program of late and have a very strong name associated with the college.

Thanks mate -- I appreciate it

Sure thing Kry,

A couple more specific examples:

From what my friend told me, G-Town brags about it's great international program, Yet they don't offer any coursework in international business lingo. If you want to go to Spain to do a deal, what good is speaking Spanish if you don't know how to say "merger" or "private equity" or "capital"? He was telling me he had a class like this in his undergrad business education. I don't recall the specifics, but my friend also said the international experience opps didn't compare to Kellogg, Stern, etc.


Additionally, he didn't think adcom was necessarily a good assessor of talent. For instance, his interviewer didn't know what the CFA was. I realize an alum in marketing probably doesn't know what it is, but c'mon, adcom? How can they find the best pool of candidates, if they don't understand qualifications? If they can't pick the best pool of talent, they won't rise any higher in the rankings.

thanks for the clarification, ryguy.