Ranks and clusterings of various International b-schools

I think that's a legitimate concern. Given the importance of attending a school that your target employers network with (and recruit from) it probably only makes sense to attend a European program if (i) the particular program you are attending is well known in your target industry, or (ii) it's a top-ranked program, globally.

Why is IESE better ranked than IE?

Personally, I consider these two reasons as positives:

1. A smaller class size can mean a tighter knit group. If I was chosing my school, I would much rather pick the school with the smaller class size. I believe the alumni size is a red herring, or at least overly spun by the business schools. (It has made no difference to me whenever I've recruited staff.)

2. An MBA is supposed to be a post-experience course, in which you can learn from fellow students. I'd argue that you can learn a heck of a lot from a 32 year-old with perhaps a decade of industry experience. How much can you learn from someone who's only done two years in a MC before business school? I know whom I'd rather have as my classmate



Many people go into MC to accelerate their careers. However, people in industry may have already advanced beyond the point where a stint in MC would benefit. (This was the case in my career.) If you've already had rapid career advancement in industry, you wouldn't waste your time in management consultancy.

Finally, many older people won't tolerate an 80-90 hour week. Older people = less interest in Finance and MC.

Slightly off topic, but I write about my fears for what some MBA programs will do in 2012 in response to lower application numbers on my latest blog. I hope that it will be useful to candidates as they evaluate different MBA programs.

https://www.thecambridgembaadmissions.co ... s-in-2012/

Conrad Chua
Head MBA Admissions
University of Cambridge.

I think for some of the top schools, to compete for yield, are giving out more scholarships. From observing some GMATClub thread, it appears the # and the amount of scholarships have gone up. It's gonna be a battle of the purses. Either case, I think the quality of the students will go down. B-School need to cover overhead cost, which doesn't change much with smaller class size.

how many league table out there? which the most reliable one? thanks in advance

I want to know whether the top universities in Europe accept the students who did not clear some subjects of their undergraduate discipline in the first attempt, but did so in the second attempt. I read a similar question at some forum but was unanswered. Please share me any leads u have..

@Kansas

What do you mean by not clearing some subjects at the first attempt?

Conrad Chua
Head MBA Admissions
Cambridge

@Conrad Chua
Sir, at my college in India, we have exams at the end of each semester and then if in some of the subjects we fail to score >4/10, we are asked to reappear in a re-test for that particular subject within a mentioned time. Well, actually we get a grade card after the regular exams with the subjects having to be re-appeared on being marked 0 grade. And when we clear the re-tests for that particular subject we get a new grade card exclusive for that subjects. So this case is shown in the grade cards. I hope u understands how it happens...
So I wanted to know how and if this affects the application process.

Nice sharing man.

Support that IMD should be moved into the UE bucket.

For me personally, I think reputation-wise and in terms of the program quality it beats Cambridge. For me, the choice boils down to IMD vs. LBS. and, were it not for personal circumstances (family, immigration status, etc.), IMD would definitely be the 1st choice.

In terms of programme quality and maturity as well as quality of career service, I think Cranfield is better or at least comparable to Cambridge. The advantages of Cambridge are potentially better quality students, due to higher selectivity and the "Cambridge" brand. Having said that, I don't think Judge BS yet lives up to the brand and quality one would expect to be associated with Cambridge. I don't know about Oxford, but it may have similar problems to that of Cambridge.

@libraal

in what way would you say that "Cambridge Judge Business School does not live up to the brand and quality one would expect from Cambridge?"

I don't mean this in a defensive way. Rather at the school, we are always looking out for ways to improve. Just yesterday, we had a very good, useful session where an external consultant mapped out the brand vs what's actually happening, so I am keen to hear your views.

Conrad Chua
Head MBA Admissions
University of Cambridge

Would you be at liberty to talk about the views of the external consultant? Where in his views is the Cambridge brand excelling and lacking?
Quite curious and much appreciated!

i can't go into too many details because it was an internal presentation, and it was more of a status report of a larger piece of work, but what was encouraging to me was that we were aware of most of the things covered, but the consultant offered a useful structure to frame our thoughts. I was also encouraged that at least the MBA marketing, which I oversee, was seen as being quite progressive compared to other schools. We had moved away from trying to dictate to the market what our values are, to a more transparent form of marketing where we allow the outside world to see how we do what we do, and let them form their own opinions of our brand and values.

Conrad Chua
Head MBA Admissions
Cambridge

Conrad,

I'll try my best to give an objective feedback and observations. Nothing personal and I do hope that Cambridge (and other MBA programs, if applicable) take this on board.
- Judge, similar to Oxford, effectively leverages the Cambridge brand, location and its collegial nature. This is emphasized in all of the marketing materials and even utilized during the interview day (dinner, Cambridge tour), etc. Utilizing it, it attracts lots of people from all over the world including US where Cambridge (and even perhaps more so Oxford) brands are strong.
- By effectively leveraging the brand, Cambridge (and Oxford) have successfully competed away students from the likes of Cranfield which have longer established programs. As part of the MBA experience is interaction and learning from fellow students, having more diverse and arguably more outstanding student body works in favour of Cambridge.
- One can say Cambridge to people who are not closely familiar with the MBA world and get an instant recognition. However, in the MBA brand world taken on its own likes of LBS and IMD have stronger brands and recognition. For example, an MBA HR recruiter at my company recognizes both IMD and LBS, but doesn't recruit and has nothing much to say about the likes of Cambridge and Cranfield. Although with Cranfield, my company runs an internal academy training.
- I don't believe that students actually get to draw as much benefit from the collegial nature as Cambridge claims them to. Firstly, part of them won't simply have the time to do so because the year is so short. For example, my understanding is that the social representatives this year were so busy at the beginning, that they hardly managed to put any time into arranging proper social activities. Secondly, although my sample may not be representative, more than half of the students I talked to couldn't give me proper examples of how they are benefitting from access to Cambridge colleges. On top of that most of the MBA students choose to be housed in the same college (one of the more modern ones, I can't remember the name now), so basically the MBAs interact with MBAs in the end rather than with the non-MBA students from other colleges.
- Career Services continues to be of questionable quality. I know Cambridge is trying to do something and it has revamped its CS by firing the old team but one and hiring new folks - you can perhaps shed more light on this. During the CS pitch a question was posed if CS folks individually helped students to find their dream job to which the answer was along the lines that "we're not yet on commission to do so". Now, this may have been an awkward joke, but every joke has a hint of truth. In Cranfield, CS reps did mention that they approach placement of each student individually without even being prompted the question. I do understand that CS has a tough task on their hands, but I shall leave it to other students to investigate. One thing that one could check is the assessment of the career services by students in the various rankings.
- During the engagement with the current students, I couldn't help the feeling that the ones the prospective students go to speak with were effectively drilled to only mention the positives without ANY mention of the negatives. Now, I don't know if all schools do it, but apparently at Cambridge students are instructed not to share the negatives with external parties under the threat of damaging the school reputation/ranking and, thus, effectively ruining their own future. One perhaps gets this with other schools, but the students from other top schools I've interacted with tend to be frank enough and at least admit some shortcomings of their school. With ethics trumpeted by every school and preached at every corner, I feel like I'm being lied by a marketing without even having the luxury of the "small print". To me this borders misrepresentation and fraud!
- Finer touches may distinguish one school from another. As with people, taking rejection and formative feedback with grace sometimes distinguishes top performers from the rest. One can go through the hassle of writing a lengthy apologetic e-mail explaining the reasons for rejecting a school and then at the minimum expect a short thank you and wishing of luck in the future (INSEAD do this). Now, how about implementing this small tweak with Cambridge AdComs? A little thank you goes a long way and costs you nothing.
- Continuing on admitting mistakes and dealing with failures - a subject so close to every MBA applicant. I appreciate the Cambridge brand, etc., but there is a fine line between confidence and snobbery/haugtiness. I, therefore, found your post "What got me hopping mad on Saturday" (https://www.thecambridgembaadmissions.co ... -saturday/) and responses to disapproving feedback very disturbing. I see nothing criminal in the question "Why Cambridge?", it's an absolutely legitimate question and the same question could be asked about other schools with even longer history. MBA programs are products sold to the end customers. Now as an end customer and buyer of something expensive, would you buy something without asking "Why X and not Y"?
- A rhethoric question is "Are MBA programmes similar to vineyards?" If yes, then somethings will only come with maturity and vintage. In which case, one could argue that Cranfield with its longer established programme could be a safer bet than Cambridge. However, Cambridge does have the strong international brand going for it and perhaps in the next few decades its MBA programme indeed will have the maturity/vintage to complement rather than contradict its brand.

Best wishes!

Hi bsd_lover,

I think there have now been enough people in this thread arguing that IMD should be moved to UE and it clearly doesn't belong in the Elite bucket as it is perceived stronger than the other schools in that bucket including students matriculating there. Also, I know plenty of people including myself for whom the choice is between IMD vs. INSEAD/LBS or a top-ranking US school.

If you want your good initiative to continue reflecting the reality (and perception), I believe IMD should be moved to UE.

Thanks & best!

@libraal

You posted quite a few points and I will try to address them all.

a. We do not tell students what to say to prospective candidates, and we definitely don't tell students or alums to ignore the negatives. In fact, I have heard our students share negatives about certain classes they took with prospective candidates. And this was in my presence so our MBAs definitely do not feel pressured to respond in a certain way. I take your allegation that we have misrepresented facts and are guilty of fraud seriously so if you are unable to give concrete evidence to the contrary, you should retract your statement.

b. The college experience. It is an important part of the Cambridge experience but it is up to students to get as much as they want from it. It is true that, compared to undergrads who are here for 3 years, MBAs have to work harder to strike a balance between their activities in the school and college. And for many MBAs, they have a stronger affiliation to the Business School compared to undergrads to their respective departments, largely because MBAs have to spend a lot more time in the Business School. So in any sample, there will be some students who have decided to put in a lot more time to their colleges than others. In this year's class, there is one MBA who has participated in several college comedy performances (which is a big thing in Cambridge where the likes of Stephen Fry got their start); some row for their colleges; one sings in a college chapel choir (again a big tradition in Cambridge); and another MBA had the honour of speaking at the Cambridge Union. It was unfortunate that you did not meet these students when you were here, perhaps you were in our most recent interview round when we had a record turnout and hence it might have been difficult to meet many students.

c. Unlike Oxford, our MBAs are spread throughout the colleges. For those MBAs who prefer to spend more time with other MBAs, Hughes Hall is a good fit, but even then no more than 30% of our MBAs are in Hughes Hall. We have MBAs in historic colleges such as Queens, Downing, Pembroke, St Catherine's, St John's although the number in each college might not be large because some of these colleges are predominantly for undergrads. Then there are MBAs who choose certain colleges because they have accommodation for families. The bottomline is that there is a much larger choice of colleges at Cambridge. Again, perhaps you happened to meet a sample of students who were all from Hughes Hall.

d. Career Services do adopt an individual approach with students. There are 1-on-1s held at the beginning of the year and students are free to schedule further sessions with careers. We expect that the changes to our careers services will result in improvements in our rankings later on. Note that any assessment of career services in rankings is delayed --- what you see in the FT is the alum's assessment of the career services then.

e. My last point is an important one, which is the balance between the responsibilities of students and schools. This was the point I was making in the blog post that you mentioned, and I think it is the context behind the remark from Career Services that you quoted. At Cambridge, we believe that the school has responsibilities to provide the environment for our students to get the best education possible, and give them the tools and networks for a post-MBA job. At the same time, we expect our students to take on personal responsibility to make use of the opportunities that we provide, but they cannot expect the school to do everything for them. It is the balance that we strive for. And it is why we sometimes take students that other schools ignore because we think these are students whom we think can both benefit from, and contribute to, the educational experience here, even though post-MBA jobs might be a challenge for them. We make this clear to these students early on, so that they make the right decisions for themselves. This is why Career Services and Admissions are realistic with candidates about their post-MBA possibilities. I know other schools focus exclusively on the post-MBA employability of their students so they screen out anyone who has a whiff of uncertainty from admissions --- these schools don't have to do the same degree of expectations managing that we do.

Conrad Chua
Head MBA Admissions
Cambridge