WMBA 07 Exec summ1 - WordPress.comConsumer, retail 84.9 Non-profit, public sector 84.9...

Which MBA?Making the right choiceof executive education

George Bickerstaffe

The following is extracted from the 19th edition of Which MBA? The full version includes details

on different delivery methods, such as part-time, distance-learning and executive MBAs.

It also provides in-depth profi les of 120 major business schools, including a full breakdown

of schools’ rankings.

The book is available from the Economist bookshop at:http://www.which-mba.com/

Pearson Education LimitedEdinburgh Gate, Harlow, Essex CM20 2JEWebsite: http://www.pearsoned.co.uk

The Economist Intelligence UnitThe Economist Intelligence Unit is a specialist publisher serving companies establishing and managing operations across national borders. For over 50 years it has been a source of information on business developments, economic and political trends, government regulations and corporate practice worldwide.The EIU delivers its information in four ways: through our digital portfolio, where our latest analysis is updated daily; through printed subscription products ranging from newsletters to annual reference works; through research reports; and by organising conferences and roundtables. The firm is a member of The Economist Group.

London New York Hong KongThe Economist Intelligence Unit The Economist Intelligence Unit The Economist Intelligence Unit26 Red Lion Square The Economist Building 6001, Central PlazaLondon 111 West 57th Street 18 Harbour RoadSW1R 4HQ New York WanchaiUnited Kingdom NY 10019, US Hong Kong

Tel: (44.20) 7576 8000 Tel: (1.212) 554 0600 Tel: (852) 2585 3888Fax: (44.20) 7576 8476 Fax: (1.212) 586 1181/2 Fax: (852) 2802 7638E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected]

Website: http://www.eiu.com

Electronic deliveryThis publication can be viewed by subscribing online at http://store.eiu.com

Copyright© 2007 The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited. All rights reserved. Neither this publication nor any part of it may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the Economist Intelligence Unit Limited.ISBN-13: 978-0-273-71441-5British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data.A catalogue of this publication is available from the British Library.The authors of EIU Research Reports are drawn from a wide range of professional and academic disciplines. All the information in the reports is verified to the best of the authors’ and the publisher’s ability, but neither can accept responsibility for loss arising from decisions based on these reports. Where opinion is expressed, it is that of the authors, which does not necessarily coincide with the editorial views of the Economist Intelligence Unit Limited or of The Economist Newspaper Limited.10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 111 10 09 08 07 Printed and bound in Great Britain by Ashford Colour Press Ltd., Gosport.

4Which MBA? © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2007


Contents

The MBA: a degree in transition 9

What you’ll learn—core and elective subjects 17

What you’ll learn—soft skills 23

Full-time rankings 28


Extracted from the 19th edition of Which MBA? The MBA: a degree in transition

The MBA: a degree in transition

Though often thought of as a “modern” phenomenon and frequently associated with the heady days of the 1980s boom and the dotcom crash of the late 1990s, the MBA is in fact an old qualification.

It first appeared in the US over 100 years ago, developing from the accounting and book-keeping courses introduced as the country lost its frontier image and began to industrialise. It was modelled on the standard American two-year postgraduate academic programme and most students enrolled straight after taking a first degree. This model won rapid acceptance and spread quickly.

However, half a century later, MBA programmes were being attacked for alleged lack of aca-demic rigour and poor relevance to business issues. Two damning reports appeared in 1959, condemning American graduate management education as little more than vocational col-leges filled with second-rate students taught by second-rate professors who did not under-stand their fields, did little research and were out of touch with business.

Business schools responded rapidly, raising both their admissions and teaching standards and establishing the now well-known American emphasis on academic research. The overall effect was the creation of the classic American MBA model: a first year of required “core” courses to provide a grounding in the basics of management, and a second year of electives to allow specialisation or deeper study.

At the same time, interest in management education was growing in Europe, especially in the UK, which was looking for an antidote to its economic and industrial decline. Business schools, intended as “centres of excellence” and modelled closely on American schools, par-ticularly Harvard, were created within the universities of London and Manchester. The result was not greeted with enthusiasm. It has long been argued that the UK was wrong to copy a system that was then fairly new and was itself a response to particularly American prob-lems. The insistence on an academic regime meant that business schools might ignore the con tribution that business itself could make. This division of opinion between academic and industry-leaning business schools continues today.

Not all institutions in Europe copied the American model. IMD, INSEAD, Henley and Ashridge were all started by groups of companies to provide management training. In France, the local and regional chambers of commerce played a big part in establishing and supporting busi-ness schools.

The early 1990s saw a new wave of criticism of MBA programmes, this time focused on a supposed lack of relevance to modern business. The MBA was said to be too academic, too theoretical and divorced from real-life business practice. MBA graduates were criticised for adopting an analytical and quantitative approach to business issues when companies need-ed managers with more diffuse skills, such as leadership. Faculty were said to lack business experience and to be more interested in research than in providing business solutions.



This criticism has, if anything, intensified during the first years of the 21st century. It has led schools to make further changes to the MBA curriculum and programme design, particularly in North America, with schools adding courses on so-called “soft skills” such as communica-tions, leadership and interpersonal relations.

Other factors are also driving change. Recruitment of MBA graduates by management con-sultants and financial services has been in decline for some years and there has been a need to develop other job markets. The globalisation of business was making many of the MBA pro-grammes in the US (where business schools were busy satisfying a huge domestic demand) look increasingly parochial. US schools were also facing increased competition from their European counterparts, which, because of the international nature of European society and the closeness of most schools to industry, were already meeting some of the criticisms.

The state of the MBA marketRecruiting and salaries go up

After a period of turbulence following the dotcom boom and bust at the turn of the century, the market for MBA graduates has returned to something like normality and stability, though there is plenty of uncertainty remaining.

One of the best guides to the job market for MBA graduates is the annual survey of corporate recruiters carried out by the Graduate Management Admissions Council (GMAC). This shows that companies expect on average to hire 18% more employees with MBAs and other grad-uate business degrees in 2007 compared with 2006 (when there was also an 18% increase compared with 2005).

The GMAC also says that those with a postgraduate business degree can expect starting sala-ries 27% higher than postgraduates in other subjects, and 76% higher than new hires with only a first degree. Furthermore, employers that actively recruit business graduates expect to offer starting salaries that are on average 24% higher than those offered by other employers.

The Economist Intelligence Unit’s survey of business schools included in this book found that the average salary for an MBA graduate from a North American school in 2006 was US$83,524; in Europe it was US$99,002 and in Asia and Australasia US$61,785. On average, MBA students can expect to earn a salary 70% higher when they graduate compared with their pre-MBA salary.



Average starting salaries of recent graduates from selected schools

School Salary (US$) % increase on pre-MBA salary

Europe

Ashridge 244,444 97

Henley 143,519 25

IMD 120,000 55

Warwick 119,814 58

Oxford (Saïd) 118,519 52

HEC Paris 118,011 92

Bath 113,358 31

IE 111,111 65

Manchester 108,615 39

London 105,702 69

North America

Stanford 111,956 104

Pennsylvania (Wharton) 105,684 57

Harvard 105,000 82

MIT (Sloan) 101,988 52

Columbia 101,428 45

Dartmouth (Tuck) 100,220 62

Northwestern (Kellogg) 99,132 42

California at Berkeley (Haas) 98,977 56

Chicago 98,289 41

Virginia (Darden) 95,706 53

Asia & Australasia

Monash 103,759 65

Macquarie 88,722 22

Curtin 78,117 35

Hong Kong UST 67,382 118

Otago 64,867 38

International University of Japan 64,488 36

Hong Kong SB 58,310 127

Indian Institute (Ahmedabad) 55,141 n/a

Nanyang 50,015 74

Singapore 42,457 126Note: Local currencies converted using average exchange rates for 2007: US$1 = A$1.33, €0.80, HK$7.77, £0.54, NZ$1.54, Rs45.4, S$1.59, ¥116.3.



Where the jobs are and where graduates want to go

Not that salary is the be-all and end-all for MBA graduates. They are typically more likely to consider things such as career or personal development than merely remuneration. Further-more, in the GMAC’s study “Millennials” (that is, more recent graduates—see box) were more likely than older respondents to consider location, physical surroundings, the opinion of others, work-life balance, company stability, and an emphasis on community and inclusion as important criteria in the job search.

Demand for MBA and other business graduates is strongest in marketing and sales and in the financial sector (with the exception of investment banking); fewer MBA graduates are being recruited in human resources and organisational management. However, when it comes to graduates looking at employers, the greatest increase in interest—which has risen by 88% compared with 2006 figures—is in consulting.

Industry sectors recruiting graduates from the most recent graduating full-time MBA class

Sector %

Banking, finance 96.6

Consulting, professional services 96.6

Industry, engineering, manufacturing 93.3

Technology, media, telecoms 93.3

Consumer, retail 84.9

Non-profit, public sector 84.9

Pharmaceuticals, healthcare 82.4

Entertainment, publishing 66.4

Least interesting to graduates were technology (down 32%) and the not-for-profit sector (down 54%). This last point is interesting given the scale of anecdotal suggestions from business schools that recent intakes of MBA students have expressed a strong desire to work in areas such as not-for-profit, non-governmental organisations and the corporate social responsibility (CSR) function. This may suggest that what applicants are telling schools is different from what they are telling the anonymous GMAC survey.

Are recruiters happy hirers?

Most recruiters agree that MBA graduates have excellent skills in areas such as strategy, innovation and knowledge of general business functions, but unfortunately this is not always what they want. To be successful employees, MBA graduates are advised to develop their conscientiousness, interpersonal skills and capacity to manage human capital. Compa-ny recruiters look first at a graduate’s interpersonal skills, compatibility with the company’s culture, track record in business and leadership attributes such as motivation, initiative and adaptability (see Chapter 3).

According to the GMAC, most employers believe that MBA graduates are much more profi-cient than other potential recruits in terms of managing strategy and innovation, knowledge of general business functions, and strategic and system skills. Unfortunately, they also say that these are not always the talents they first look for when they are hiring new recruits. Their main focus is on candidates’ interpersonal skills, fit with a company’s culture, track



record of performance and leadership skills, such as motivation, initiative and adaptability. These are not necessarily always prominent on an MBA curriculum.

Business schools are therefore changing their curricula to reflect the need for students to acquire soft skills as well as purely academic and functional knowledge. The rest of this guide is devoted to exploring and chronicling how business schools, employers and students are reacting to and interacting with these changes and making the MBA, as ever, a degree in transition.

The “Millennials” are comingOne of the greatest challenges to business schools might come from the very people they are most dependent on: their own students.

Demographers have cited a new phenomenon of “Millennials” or “Generation Y”: people born between 1982 (or 1976 in some studies) and 2001. Now in their mid-20s to early 30s, they are prime MBA targets and business schools are a bit wary of them.

Daphne Atkinson, vice-president, industry relations, at the GMAC, has described some of the characteristics of Millennials and the implications for business schools:

● Millennials don’t remember a time when the internet did not exist, have never had a computer that could not fit into a backpack and view technology as an extension of who they are—like having another hand or an extra sense.

● Millennials have high expectations for schools’ use of technology; after all, they have never known anything else.

● Technology means that Millennials are wired 24/7 into an extensive network that includes parents, peers, teachers, coaches, counsellors, tutors and anyone else associated with ensuring success.

For business schools this means that all players in the Millennials’ network must be taken into account in areas such as admissions. Schools overlooking the role and importance of key influencers—parents in particular—will be at a disadvantage.

“If you thought the ‘helicopter parents’ [mostly baby boomers] were challenging,” says Ms Atkinson, “are you ready for the ‘stealth bombers’ [Generation X parents, the generation between the baby boomers and the Millennials]? These parents are savvy investors who demand bottom-line accountability and a calculable return on investment.”

She also claims that Millennials expect everything to be subject to negotiation, perceive schedules as artificial and assume everything will be available on demand.

“The Millennial experience has suggested that anything can be negotiated and if you don’t ask for accommodations, you’ll never receive them. They are an ‘accommodated’ generation—from exam rescheduling for family vacations to extensions (or resubmissions) on papers and projects. They (or, on occasion and if the situation warrants it, their parents) will expect and demand them. If scheduling is at the convenience of someone else, why can’t it be changed to accommodate others’ schedules? The bottom-line expectation for Millennials is that everything must be available on demand—and they do mean everything.”


Extracted from the 19th edition of Which MBA? What you’ll learn—core and elective subjects

What you’ll learn—core and elective subjects

MBA programmes generally break down into “hard” and “soft” skill sets. Chapter 3 looks at how such soft skills as negotiation, communication and leadership are taught. This chapter examines the “harder” topics such as functional subjects and analytical tools.

Most MBA programmes split these “hard” topics into two groups: “required” courses, usually known as the core, that all students must take (though some schools allow students with previous knowledge or experience to waive them); and elective, or optional, subjects that students can follow because they have a particular interest or career ambitions. The core is studied early in the programme and electives later.

However, it should be noted that the traditional core is under pressure. As outlined in more detail in Chapter 3, recruiters assume that the “hard” subjects are well taught and their real interest is in students’ competence in the more hard-to-define “soft skills”. As a result there are now almost as many soft skill subjects included in the core. Harvard Business School, for example, includes leadership and corporate accountability, and negotiations in its required core.

Core subjectsSo the core is not a definitive list of subjects. However, there is a general consensus on what it should contain in terms of hard subject matter. It is based on the original aim of the MBA degree, which was to give students an overall understanding of the many functional areas of a business so they would become good general managers. Although they may have different names and some may be bundled together, the subjects are generally those described below.

Financial accounting

Provides students with the technical skills needed to obtain relevant economic and finan-cial information on a company from publicly available sources such as annual accounts. The aim is to process this information and act accordingly. Generally, the subject is taught from the perspective of users of the information, not its preparation by qualified accountants and auditors.

Managerial accounting

Covers the use of accounting data for management decision-making. This includes areas such as budgeting, product costing, performance evaluation and transfer pricing (the costs attributed to goods and services sold within a multinational organisation, particularly across borders). There is also usually a special emphasis on incentives such as executive bonuses and the tax implications of various actions.

Finance

This really is the core of the core. The main aim is to teach the various financial tools that are available to monitor, control and project a firm’s performance. Areas covered include



forecasting techniques based on financial statement and ratio analysis, debt levels, capital structures, discounted cash flow and the cost of capital.

Human resource management

Covers the role of human resource policy as part of the strategic planning framework of a company. Specific topics include recruitment and selection, promotion, career development, performance-based evaluation and compensation policies.

Information management

Information technology plays a key role in many business functions. This course generally looks at the issues involved in managing IT, particularly choosing the right technologies for particular applications and business needs.

Macroeconomics and microeconomics

Now often called managerial economics, this course deals with the interaction of a company and its economic environment. Topics covered include supply and demand theory, market environments and the structure of markets.

Marketing

Covers the basic principles of marketing. Topics usually include marketing planning, situa-tion analysis, segmentation, targeting, positioning, the marketing mix and relationship marketing.

Organisational behaviour

Provides an understanding of how an organisation works and the behaviour of groups and individuals within it. Topics covered include group culture, managing performance, develop-ing a corporate vision and designing effective organisations.

Operations management

Covers the establishment of processes that create the products and/or services for a com-pany’s markets and at the same time increase its competitiveness in terms of cost, speed, quality, innovation, flexibility and dependability.

Strategy

Covers the development of the analytical tools needed to create successful strategies. These include analysing an organisation’s competitive environment and learning how firms develop and sustain competitive advantage over time.

Elective subjectsAt some business schools, particularly in Europe, core courses make up the whole programme (though it usually includes an in-company project or research dissertation). But in many, particularly in the longer two-year programmes and especially in the US, elective, or option-al, courses are an integral part of the programme that students must complete.

In the past, elective courses made up the second year of a two-year programme. But now they are increasingly being brought forward into the first year (another pressure on the tra-ditional core programme), mainly so that students who want to change their careers can



have some knowledge of their preferred subject before beginning the all-important intern-ship between the first and second years, when most permanent job offers are made.

Some schools such as Fisher College of Business at Ohio State University in the US require students to choose their elective courses from predetermined concentrations, sometimes also known as specialisations or majors, such as strategy or marketing. Sometimes these are also offered as much more career-specific options such as management consulting.

At others, though, like Kenan-Flagler Business School at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, also in the US, concentrations are available but are not mandatory—students can choose from a wide range of electives. In any case almost all schools include a general management concentration, which is in effect a broad range of non-specific courses.

The ability to take an in-depth specialisation means that MBA programmes of this sort can be heavily customised to a student’s own interests. However, students should be aware that business schools can sometimes be fickle about their elective offerings. The subjects offered may vary from year to year (elective courses are often used to try out new ideas or reflect the interest of a particular faculty member). Some electives may only be offered if there is enough student demand and popular electives may be oversubscribed. Some schools, espe-cially in the US, have a bidding system to allocate places on as fair a basis as possible.

You should make sure you know what a school’s policy on electives is since these courses can have an important impact on career prospects. Whether you want to take a wide range of electives or to specialise in one area, both the extent and the number of electives offered are important, as is a school’s willingness to add extra classes if a particular subject becomes oversubscribed.

Generally, the smaller the number of faculty and students on an MBA programme the small-er will be the choice of electives. Schools that are part of a university usually offer a wider choice of subjects outside the school itself. Most schools in this situation allow and encour-age students to take these external subjects.

Employers and core and elective subjectsThe design of the core and the electives and concentrations offered by business schools is closely linked to the needs of MBA recruiters. This is one reason why so-called soft skills have come to dominate the core of most MBA programmes. Recruiters increasingly accept the excellence of teaching the functional subjects as a “given” and they expect students to be very well grounded in them. What they want is the added polish of good communications skills, leadership potential and so on.

That said, business schools still have to deliver excellence in the harder subjects. The box on page 12 shows some of the ways they go about this.

According to the 2007 Corporate Recruiters Survey by the Graduate Management Admissions Council, academic achievement—acquired technical or quantitative skills, strong academic success and specialisations or concentrations of study—is one of the three key factors in hiring recent MBA graduates. The other two are leadership potential—as shown by an appli-cant’s years of work experience, taking on increased job responsibilities, leading teams and managing people—and the prior work experience.

Employers say that an “ideal” hire with a graduate business degree should have on average



five years of work experience, be ready to accept an entry-level position, and grow their way up in the company through deepening their understanding of the business and proving man-agerial competency. In other words, the “dream job” might better serve as a long-term goal to be reached gradually by making and implementing daily decisions (rather than throwing out big ideas); effectively managing a small team (rather than developing company-wide principles of workforce management); and, finally, through getting the work done and posi-tively affecting the company’s bottom line.

In addition, according to the survey, employers look for candidates with good job-hunting skills. “MBA degrees do not exempt applicants from proper résumé preparation, email fol-low-ups using perfect grammar and thorough research about the hiring companies before their interviews.”

Teaching methods

The MBA is different from other academic qualifications. It is part academic and part vocational. It is also covers a wide range of different subjects. The method of working is also different, a mix of noisy classroom debate, intense individual reading and close group working. All this takes place in an atmosphere of high pressure caused by heavy workloads.

Three main methods of teaching are used in addition to traditional lectures: case studies (the method was adopted from law schools, hence the name); project work (undertaken outside the school); and group work (usually in sets of 3–6 people). Some schools use a mixture of all methods, some use only one or two and a few rely exclusively on the case method. But whatever the mix there will be a lot of group working. Other common activities include computer simulations, business games and role-playing.

Case studiesIn the case-study method, all subjects, from accountancy and statistics to marketing and corporate strategy, are taught using examples drawn from actual companies’ experiences (occasionally cases may be fictitious, but they are always based on real-life events). These are usually framed as narratives, some of which are well written. Some have a mass of supporting data, relevant and otherwise, and others have little. Students, like managers, are expected to respond based on what information is available.

Often the case will end with the central manager figure facing a dilemma that students must analyse; they are then required to recommend and justify a course of action. The virtue of this method is that it reflects the messy, cross-functional nature of business life, where problems are not clear-cut and there are no right or wrong answers. Schools that use the case method exclusively say that subjects such as accountancy can be taught via this method; others argue that it is best suited to broader areas such as marketing or strategy. In a number of schools, cases are used more in elective subjects than in the core curriculum.

The case method involves calling on a single student, or sometimes a group, to present to the class an analysis of the dilemma contained in the case and the recommended action. The subject is then thrown open to discussion in which objections are made, alternatives are offered and so on. Often the teacher will take only a minor, facilitating role in the discussion. Many schools use “cold calling”, which means that none of the students know who will be selected to give the initial presentation. Since an inarticulate or poorly prepared response is likely to lead to embarrassment and low grades, all students prepare the case meticulously.



Cases take a lot of time and resources to find, study and write. Few schools could write all their own cases even if they wanted to, and most use cases prepared by other schools as well as their own. Harvard Business School, an almost exclusively case-method school, is probably the most prolific source. The predominance of American cases from this and other US schools provokes criticism elsewhere that the case method results in an inappropriate cultural bias. For economic reasons, schools often use old cases that do not reflect current problems and issues. Another criticism, especially from employers, is that the case method develops a habit of concentrating on the overview of management problems rather than the detail of how to solve them.

Nevertheless, case studies remain a stalwart part of MBA programmes throughout the world, if only because they stimulate class discussion and force students to think for themselves (and fast) about real business problems.

Group workingYou do not take an MBA by yourself—you take it as part of a group. Since real work increasingly involves multidisciplinary task-forces or teams, the schools want to emulate this. They also want to put students in situations where competing demands have to be resolved to get the job done. Some schools observe how students behave in groups and assess them accordingly, frequently awarding grades on a group basis.

Groups work together on cases, presentations and projects. They are formed in the first term or semester and generally consist of up to six individuals, either assigned by the programme director or self-selected by the students. Assigned groups are deliberately designed to reflect diversity of background, experience, academic ability and even character. Groups may be rotated at set intervals to allow individuals to work with as many of their classmates as possible. Some schools use a mixture of approaches, allowing self-selection in some areas but assigning in others. Schools that used only self-selection in the past are rapidly moving towards assigned groups to prevent individual students from being marginalised.

Although many students see group working as a useful and relevant experience, some complain vigorously about other group members, dislike the extra effort that group work involves and question its validity. In the busy schedule of an MBA programme, simply finding a time and place for all to meet can be difficult. In some schools, students may simply freeze out an unco-operative or difficult group member; at others they may help him or her solve any problems.

GradesStudents at US business schools usually have to achieve a required standard in each subject studied, typically a grade B or about 70%. Often this must be achieved as an average across all subjects. Grades can be awarded for course work, assignments, class participation, group work (where each student’s mark depends on others in the group) and formal examinations. Some schools use a forced grading system, which means that, typically, 10% of students must get the lowest grade. Students with 45% of all their results in the lowest grade are in trouble. Schools in other parts of the world use a similar system, but with slightly more emphasis on examinations. Forced grading is particularly unpopular, mainly because students say it encourages a highly competitive, unco-operative atmosphere.

Even so, few students fail MBA programmes or are asked to leave. The admissions procedure in the best schools is tough because it is designed to ensure that only students who are likely to survive will be admitted. Unless you really cannot handle the work (and fellow students and faculty are usual very supportive in such situations), you should emerge with an MBA.


Extracted from the 19th edition of Which MBA? What you’ll learn—soft skills

What you’ll learn—soft skills

“Soft skills”—communications, teamwork, leadership and so on—are the new buzz words of MBA programmes. As was once the case with business ethics, business schools are now insisting that students add such courses to an already overcrowded curriculum because this is what recruiters say they want. In a recent Economist Intelligence Unit study, soft skills—honesty, communication and people skills—topped the list of characteristics executives were looking for in their most talented young managers. The GMAC says that the top three attributes recruiters look for in recruiting MBA graduates are interpersonal skills, cultural fit with the company and leadership skills.

One reason for this is that many recruiters (and business schools) believe that the main func-tional core courses taught at business school (see Chapter 2) are now virtually a “commod-ity”, with little difference in content or teaching methods between schools. Adding soft skills to the curriculum is becoming a way for a school to differentiate itself from its competitors and attract the attention of recruiters.

Approaches to soft skills teachingOf course, attributes such as leadership are not easy to teach. One of the first business schools to take this kind of training seriously was Chicago Graduate School of Business. In 1989 it created the LEAD (Leadership Effectiveness and Development) programme as a required first-year MBA course. LEAD now takes up over 125 hours of a first-year student’s time. According to Chicago, the aim of LEAD is to improve students’ abilities to motivate peo-ple, build relationships and influence outcomes through role play, team building and other creative activities and experiences. Interestingly, LEAD also offers a learning opportunity for some second-year students, who serve as course facilitators, presenting course material and coaching and mentoring first-year participants.

IMD in Lausanne, Switzerland, runs a similar course called Leadership and Personal Devel-opment, which combines outdoor activities, personal leadership development and study of organisational behaviour. IMD argues that outdoor exercises provide an effective method for developing leadership in that they allow the exploration of the deeper determinants of individual, interpersonal and group behaviour and offer the chance to explore openly behav-ioural factors which otherwise operate only in the shadows: “the more you step out of your comfort zone, the more you will learn”. Another element of the course involves students understanding their personal leadership style, how they interact with others and in what situations their strengths are most effective. This is done through in-depth self-analysis, with the use of personal coaching by a trained psychologist, personality tests, team-build-ing exercises, study group feedback on individual strengths and weaknesses and leadership style, and group exploration of what makes effective leaders. This is then combined with the study of individuals and social systems through organisational behaviour to refine a leader-ship style.



Similarly, the planned new MBA curriculum at Stanford (see page 402) places a heavy empha-sis on teaching leadership and other soft skills. The curriculum will bring executives into the classroom to relate their experiences and students will undergo leadership simulations and other exercises, including assuming executive roles and being assessed by senior alumni.

As this makes clear, not all soft skills can be imparted purely by business schools themselves. There is also a role for business in helping to inculcate the values, attributes and compe-tencies it so loudly says that it is looking for. Business executives and recruiters need to be involved in management education themselves. There are many ways business schools are helping them to do this, including bringing in executives as adjunct faculty, student mentors or executives in residence.

In-company projectsHowever, perhaps the most important is the in-company project. This is a compulsory com-ponent of almost all MBA programmes, though the emphasis placed on them can vary. Some schools, especially in Europe, such as Trinity College at the University of Dublin and Ashridge in the UK, build almost the whole programme around projects. At Manchester Business School the so-called “Manchester Method” reflects the school’s dedication to project work. Projects can help to instil some of the softer business skills, such as leadership and interper-sonal relations.

Elsewhere in Europe, the project often follows on from the taught part of the programme (and may well take place with little input from the school) and concludes with a lengthy dissertation, reflecting the academic model of masters’ degrees in other subjects. Usually, students undertake such projects individually. In part-time and executive programmes, the project is often carried out within a student’s own organisation and is promoted as a key value to sponsoring companies.

Other schools, including many in the US, build smaller and shorter projects into the struc-ture of the programme. This type of project normally consists of a consultancy-like task and is ideally of real value to the organisation in which it is undertaken. Students are divided into groups of 2–4 and conduct research both within and outside the company. They prepare a report and recommendations for action, which are often formally presented to corporate executives as well as to business school faculty.

As part of their project work, students at London Business School (LBS) in the UK spend a week observing (“shadowing”) a manager at work and attempting to build an objective pro-file of his management style. LBS says the shadowing project allows students to observe the challenges faced by managers, appreciate the real world of managerial work by testing aca-demic theories against observed data, develop a deeper understanding of the relationship between managerial style and organisational context, and reflect on leadership values.

Using practising executivesMany business schools are assiduous users of executives not just as objects of research but as adjunct faculty or at the very least as visiting speakers to address MBA students. In part their success in doing so depends on their location. Schools based in large financial centres such as London, New York and Shanghai usually have the most resources available.

Columbia Business School in New York is a good example. As the school is not slow to point



out, New York City acts as “a living laboratory”. Corporate stars are regular visitors on cam-pus to meet students and often work with faculty on research and teaching.

At Southern Methodist University (Cox) in the US, more than 200 executives and managers act as mentors to students on the MBA and other programmes. Students can view the men-tors’ professional biographies online and then nominate them as potential mentors. Once they meet, the student and mentor can decide how often they wish to meet and how the rela-tionship should be structured.

Executives in residence, who regularly teach courses or advise students, are particularly popu-lar in North America. Mainly they serve for about year but it can be longer. The University of British Colombia (Sauder) in Canada lists no fewer than 13 executives in residence.

More typical is Hult International Business School in the US, which has just begun an execu-tive in residence programme, inviting one senior business leader, entrepreneur or executive to participate as a faculty member and student adviser and teach courses.

Is it worth the effort?Are MBA graduates now emerging with the leadership, communication skills and general business “nous” that employers say (and have been saying for a decade or so) they want?

The evidence is mixed. The 2007 GMAC survey of recruiters mentioned in Chapter 1 shows that MBA recruiters still put interpersonal skills, cultural fit and leadership attributes at the top of their wish list. But since they also say they are planning to increase their hiring of MBA graduates in 2007, presumably they are finding more or less what they are looking for.

In a 2006 survey, the GMAC asked MBA alumni in what areas they wished they had received more education or training during their degree. Among a number of areas mentioned, 28% said recruiting, managing and retaining staff, and 24% added leadership skills. Although these figures are high, they do suggest that the majority of MBA graduates feel these areas are adequately covered.

In any case, as the GMAC points out, recruiters may rate “conscientiousness” (dependability, attention to detail, integrity) highly and at the same time see it as one of the least developed attributes among MBA graduates and other business degree holders, but conscientiousness reflects personal traits rather than “taught” skills and is “impossible” to incorporate into the MBA curriculum.

Extracted from the 19th edition of Which MBA?Full-time rankings


Full-time rankings

Why rank?The Which MBA? ranking of full-time MBA programmes is now in its sixth year. The reason we rank schools is straightforward: students demand it. If you are to pay tens of thousands of dollars for your tuition, it is only natural to seek some impartial judgement on the quality of the schools you are considering. Business schools themselves are slowly coming around to the idea of rankings too. It is fair to say that at first they were antipathetic to them—after all, no one really likes to be graded by outsiders—but now many recognise rankings as a legitimate tool for prospective students. (Many have come to see the rankings as an effective marketing tool as well.)

This is not to say that rankings are perfect. The rankings should form only part of a student’s selection process. It is equally important to look at issues such as school culture, employ-ment prospects and areas of speciality. Although the Which MBA? rankings do not seek to measure a school’s reputation, this can also be important.

To gain a rounded picture, it is essential to look at several different rankings. No two rank-ings will seek to measure exactly the same things, so be sure you understand the methodol-ogy of the survey and whether or not what is being measured is an important consideration for you.

How is the Economist Intelligence Unit ranking different?The ethos behind our ranking is simple. For well over a decade the Economist Intelligence Unit has been surveying students about why they decided to take an MBA. Four factors con-sistently emerge:

● to open new career opportunities and/or further current career;

● personal development and educational experience;

● to increase salary;

● the potential to network

These are the basis of our ranking. The Economist Intelligence Unit ranks full-time pro-grammes on their ability to deliver to students the things that they themselves cite as most important. It weights each element according to the average importance given to it by students surveyed over the past five years. The criteria used to measure each of these four factors are detailed in Table 9.8.


Extracted from the 19th edition of Which MBA? Full-time rankings

Other rankingsIt is essential to look at several rankings when choosing a school and to understand the methodologies behind them. There are countless rankings on the market, often concentrating on a specific country or region. However, alongside the Economist Intelligence Unit’s, there are three other major global rankings.

Business Week. This is probably the most influential ranking, especially in North America. It surveys MBA graduates and MBA recruiters on a wide range of issues. Perhaps mindful of the Financial Times, it has introduced a measure of “intellectual capital”, which it describes as “a school’s influence on the realm of ideas.” This makes up 10% of the ranking; the remaining 90% is split between students and recruiters.

Top ranked schools (US): 1. Chicago; 2. Pennsylvania (Wharton); 3. Northwestern (Kellogg); 4. Harvard; 5. Michigan (Ross).

Top ranked schools (non-US): 1. Queen’s; 2. Western Ontario (Ivey); 3. Toronto (Rotman); 4. IMD; 5. London

Financial Times. This ranking is based on three main criteria: the career progression obtained from the MBA (particularly its purchasing power in the marketplace); diversity of experience; and the school’s research qualities.

Top ranked schools: 1. Pennsylvania (Wharton); 2. Columbia; 3=. Harvard; 3=. Stanford; 5. London

Wall Street Journal. This ranking is based on a survey of recruiters on their perceptions of the attributes of schools and students.

Top ranked schools: 1. Dartmouth (Tuck); 2. Michigan (Ross); 3. Carnegie Mellon (Tepper); 4. Northwestern (Kellogg); 5. Pennsylvania (Wharton)

All MBA programme rankings depend on surveys of interested parties: the business schools; the students or graduates; and recruiters. The Economist Intelligence Unit ranking follows this pattern but differs from the rest in several important areas:

● More student-centric (continuing Which MBA?’s tradition of appealing to a student audi-ence). It measures the way schools meet the demands students have of an MBA programme.

● All-embracing. It is based on detailed questionnaires completed by business schools and around 20,000 current MBA students and graduates around the world. Key numerical data (such as average GMAT scores) are combined with subjective views from students and graduates (such as their assessment of a business school’s faculty).

● Global. It allows direct comparison of MBA programmes around the world.

● Regional. It compares MBA programmes in three regions: North America; Europe; and Asia and Australasia.

● Flexible. Programmes may be ranked in many ways, producing, for example, tables of the top ten US or Asian and Australasian schools by GMAT score or the top ten US and Euro-pean schools by percentage of foreign students.

● Transparent. All the data used to rank schools are published as part of the school’s profile in the directory section of this book.

Other rankings have some, but not all, of the above features.



How did we choose which schools to rank?The Economist Intelligence Unit ranking of full-time MBA programmes was based on an initial selection of 135 leading business schools around the world. All 135 schools were invited to take part in our two-stage survey, which requires input from schools and the students/alumni of each school. Of these, 15 failed to respond or were unwilling to take part and eight could not be ranked for other reasons (see Table 9.1). The global top 100 schools were gleaned from the remaining 112. Schools outside the top 100 were given a regional ranking only.

Why schools could not be ranked

Failed to respond/unwilling to take part

Australian Graduate School of Management

Babson College—Franklin W Olin Graduate School of Business

University of Calgary—Haskayne School of Business

UCLA—The Anderson School

ENPC School of International Management

ESCP–EAP European School of Management

Helsinki School of Economics

Maastricht School of Management

Melbourne Business School—University of Melbourne

University of Minnesota—Carlson School of Management

Queen’s School of Business—Queen’s University

Rice University—Jesse H Jones Graduate School of Management

University of Toronto—Joseph L Rotman School of Management

University of Queensland—Business School

University of Western Ontario—Richard Ivey School of Business

Insufficient data

Concordia University—John Molson School of Business

Heriot-Watt University—Edinburgh Business School

Indiana University—Kelley School of Business

Kingston University—Kingston Business School

McGill University—Desautels Faculty of Management

Royal Holloway School of Management—University of London

University of the Witwatersrand —Wits Business School

No full-time programme

Open University Business School

Given that 448 schools in the US have AACSB International accreditation and there are many more that are not accredited, it could be argued that, with 57 North American schools, the Economist Intelligence Unit ranking under-represents this important MBA market. However, one of the main objectives of the survey is to provide global comparisons and it was limited to leading schools throughout the world (so even schools at the bottom of our rankings are among the world’s best). In common with all other rankings, there was an element of selec-tivity before the ranking process began.



ResultsRankings are little more than an indication of the MBA market at a particular time. They reflect the prevailing conditions such as salaries, jobs available and the situation at a school at the time the survey was carried out. Results of rankings can be notoriously volatile, so they should be treated with caution. However, the Economist Intelligence Unit survey looks at data over a three-year period, which helps provide a more rounded picture. Table 9.2 is a listing of schools in rank order.

Global ranking, 2007

Rank School Country(last year’s position in brackets)

1 (4) University of Chicago—Graduate School of Business US

2 (3) Stanford Graduate School of Business US

3 (1) IESE Business School—University of Navarra Spain

4 (2) Dartmouth College—Tuck School of Business US

5 (5) IMD—International Institute for Management Development Switzerland

6 (10) University of California at Berkeley—Haas School of Business US

7 (11) University of Cambridge—Judge Business School UK

8 (8) New York University—Leonard N Stern School of Business US

9 (16) IE—Instituto de Empresa Spain

10 (14) Henley Management College UK

11 (19) Cranfield School of Management UK

12 (9) University of Michigan—Stephen M Ross School of Business US

13 (7) Harvard Business School US

14 (6) Northwestern University—Kellogg School of Management US

15 (20) London Business School UK

16 (18) Massachusetts Institute of Technology—MIT Sloan School of Management US

17 (22) INSEAD France/Singapore

18 (12) Columbia Business School US

19 (21) Ashridge UK

20 (37) Hong Kong University of Science and Technology— Hong Kong School of Business and Management

21 (17) University of Pennsylvania—Wharton School US

22 (26) Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School Belgium

23 (13) University of Virginia—Darden Graduate School of Business Administration US

24 (30) York University—Schulich School of Business Canada

25 (24) Yale School of Management US

26 (27) University of Washington Business School US

27 (31) Warwick Business School UK

28 (23) Cornell University—Johnson Graduate School of Management US

29 (29) Duke University—Fuqua School of Business US

30 (25) Emory University—Goizueta Business School US

31 (36) University of Oxford—Saïd Business School UK




32 (32) University of Notre Dame—Mendoza College of Business US

33 (28) Carnegie Mellon University—Tepper School of Business US

34 (34) Ohio State University—Fisher College of Business US

35 (75) International University of Monaco Monaco

36 (44) HEC School of Management, Paris France

37 (39) University of Hong Kong—School of Business Hong Kong

38 (43) City University—Cass Business School UK

39 (33) Hult International Business School US

40 (48) Pennsylvania State University—Smeal College of Business US

41 (54) University of Southern California—Marshall School of Business US

42 (47) University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill—Kenan-Flagler Business School US

43 (49) Monash University—Graduate School of Business Australia

44 (38) University College Dublin—Michael Smurfit Graduate School of Business Ireland

45 (55) University of Texas at Austin—McCombs School of Business US

46 (83) RSM Erasmus University Netherlands

47 (35) ESADE Business School Spain

48 (60) University of Wisconsin-Madison—Graduate School of Business US

49 (41) Washington University in St Louis—Olin School of Business US

50 (45) Lancaster University Management School UK

51 (52) University of Maryland–Robert H Smith School of Business US

52 (40) Leeds University Business School UK

53 (53) Georgetown University—McDonough School of Business US

54 (56) Aston Business School UK

55 (51) Vanderbilt University—Owen Graduate School of Management US

56 (58) The University of Edinburgh Management School UK

57 (59) Manchester Business School UK

58 (90) Imperial College London—Tanaka Business School UK

59 (57) University of Durham—Durham Business School UK

60 (87) Brandeis International Business School US

61 (79) University of Iowa—Henry B Tippie School of Management US

62 (68) Nottingham University Business School UK

63 (61) University of Birmingham—Birmingham Business School UK

64 (65) University of Strathclyde Graduate School of Business UK

65 (42) University of Bath School of Management UK

66 (62) E.M. Lyon France

67 (94) University of South Carolina—Moore School of Business US

68 (72) Purdue University—Krannert Graduate School of Management US

69 (64) University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign—College of Business US

70 (73) University of Pittsburgh—Joseph M Katz Graduate School of Business US

71 (80) University of California at Davis—Graduate School of Management US

72 (77) Nanyang Technological University—Nanyang Business School Singapore




73 (63) TiasNimbas Business School Netherlands

74 (n/a) Boston University School of Management US

75 (67) University of Glasgow Business School UK

76 (n/a) EDHEC France

77 (85) International University of Japan—Graduate School of International Management Japan

78 (86) Audencia School of Management Nantes France

79 (78) University of Florida—Warrington College of Business US

80 (91) Curtin University Graduate School of Business Australia

81 (70) Wake Forest University—Babcock Graduate School of Management US

82 (66) University of Rochester—William E Simon Graduate School of Business US

83 (74) Southern Methodist University—Cox School of Business US

84 (81) Macquarie Graduate School of Management Australia

85 (88) University of Georgia—Terry College of Business US

86 (95) Bocconi University—SDA Bocconi School of Management Italy

87 (100) EADA—Escuela de Alta Dirección y Administración Spain

88 (n/a) Sheffield University Management School UK

89 (82) University of British Columbia— Sauder School of Business Canada

90 (n/a) China Europe International Business School (CEIBS) China

91 (n/a) Chinese University of Hong Kong Hong Kong

92 (98) Indian Institute of Management—Ahmedabad India

93 (71) Bradford School of Management UK

94 (99) National University of Singapore—The NUS Business School Singapore

95 (n/a) Temple University—Fox School of Business US

96 (89) Universiteit Nyenrode—The Netherlands Business School Netherlands

97 (n/a) Case Western Reserve University—Weatherhead School of Management US

98 (92) University of Newcastle upon Tyne Business School UK

99 (93) College of William & Mary—Mason School of Business US

100 (n/a) Thunderbird School of Global Management US

Given the emphasis that full-time students put on schools’ careers services it is no surprise to find that this is one of the strong points of most of the top schools in the ranking. It is perhaps the area that receives the most vocal criticism from students when it does not meet their high expectations, but when managed well it can set a school apart. Chicago, first over-all in the ranking, was rated as having the best careers services by its students. It attracts a broad range of recruiters to its campus and virtually all its students are placed in jobs within three months of graduation. It is a similar story at the other top rated schools.

One reason that schools such as Chicago, Stanford and IESE have impressive careers sta-tistics is that they are well-resourced. However, it is also true that the students from the schools with the highest academic standard will automatically draw the attention of the best employers. What sets the top-rated schools apart is that they do not rely merely on their rep-utation to place students, but couple this with a tireless quest to bring the best employers to the school.



Bringing together the top companies with the brightest students inevitably leads to some impressive salaries. European schools have recently had the upper hand when it comes to the salaries of their graduates. This is partly because their students are generally older with more work experience. It can also be attributed to a buoyant employment market—particu-larly in the areas which pay MBAs the largest salaries, such as the UK’s financial services sec-tor. Furthermore, Europe has to some extent benefited from the weak dollar. Nevertheless, many US schools have seen an increase in the salaries of their graduates. Five can now boast average salaries over US$100,000, with Stanford leading North America at US$112,000.

This year’s survey shows that students from European schools still attract the highest sal-aries. Only one school, Ashridge, has so far broken the US$200,000 barrier, but of the 26 schools whose students earn an average of US$100,000 or more, 19 are European.

Top ten schools by category

Open new Personal Increase Potential career development salary to network opportunities and educational experience

1 Chicago Henley Ashridge Henley

2 Indian Institute (Ahmedabad) Monash Henley EDHEC

3 California at Berkeley (Haas) Hong Kong UST Hult E.M. Lyon

4 IE Hong Kong SB IESE Thunderbird

5 IESE Cambridge (Judge) IMD Notre Dame (Mendoza)

6 New York (Stern) Curtin Oxford (Saïd) Vlerick Leuven Gent

7 Virginia (Darden) Bath HEC Paris Cambridge (Judge)

8 Dartmouth (Tuck) INSEAD Strathclyde HEC Paris

9 Stanford Yale Stanford New York (Stern)

10 Hong Kong UST York (Schulich) London Northwestern (Kellogg)

European schools also do well in the networking stakes, often because their alumni are more international. Henley, for example, has alumni associations in 27 countries—not bad for a school with a full-time intake of under 20. Even relatively young European schools, such as Cambridge, already have an impressive reach across the world. In contrast, many US schools’ alumni are yet to open a single overseas branch.

What the US schools tend to be much better at, though, is keeping their alumni active once they have left the programme. In this they are helped to some extent by having graduated more MBAs each year for a longer time, meaning they have a bigger alumni base. But it is still an impressive achievement to keep so many involved. Wharton, for example has over 80,000 active MBA alumni and Kellogg has over 50,000.



Regional round-upNorth America

Despite some signs that the rest of the world is closing the gap, the US is still the world leader in business education. Few schools outside the country can match the influence, reputation and sheer size of the leading US schools, such as Chicago, Stanford, Harvard and Wharton. The best schools have several advantages. For a start, their prestige is such that they can cherry-pick the best students and faculty. The average GMAT score of a student at Dartmouth is 711. Wharton may have over 200 faculty teaching on its MBA programme, but every one of them has a PhD; Chicago is not far behind and can also boast several Nobel Prize winners among its faculty.

North American schools by rank


1 (3) University of Chicago—Graduate School of Business US

2 (2) Stanford Graduate School of Business US

3 (1) Dartmouth College—Tuck School of Business US

4 (8) University of California at Berkeley—Haas School of Business US

5 (6) New York University—Leonard N Stern School of Business US

6 (7) University of Michigan—Stephen M Ross School of Business US

7 (5) Harvard Business School US

8 (4) Northwestern University—Kellogg School of Management US

9 (13) Massachusetts Institute of Technology—MIT Sloan School of Management US

10 (9) Columbia Business School US

11 (12) University of Pennsylvania—Wharton School US

12 (10) University of Virginia—Darden Graduate School of Business Administration US

13 (20) York University—Schulich School of Business Canada

14 (15) Yale School of Management US

15 (17) University of Washington—Business School US

16 (14) Cornell University—Johnson Graduate School of Management US

17 (19) Duke University—Fuqua School of Business US

18 (16) Emory University—Goizueta Business School US

19 (21) University of Notre Dame—Mendoza College of Business US

20 (18) Carnegie Mellon University—Tepper School of Business US

21 (23) Ohio State University—Fisher College of Business US

22 (22) Hult International Business School US

23 (27) Pennsylvania State University—Smeal College of Business US

24 (32) University of Southern California—Marshall School of Business US

25 (26) University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill—Kenan-Flagler Business School US

26 (33) University of Texas at Austin—McCombs School of Business US

27 (34) University of Wisconsin-Madison—Graduate School of Business US

28 (24) Washington University in St Louis—Olin School of Business US




29 (30) University of Maryland—Robert H Smith School of Business US

30 (31) Georgetown University—McDonough School of Business US

31 (29) Vanderbilt University—Owen Graduate School of Management US

32 (46) Brandeis International Business School US

33 (43) University of Iowa—Henry B Tippie School of Management US

34 (49) University of South Carolina—Moore School of Business US

35 (39) Purdue University—Krannert Graduate School of Management US

36 (35) University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign—College of Business US

37 (40) University of Pittsburgh—Joseph M Katz Graduate School of Business US

38 (44) University of California at Davis—Graduate School of Management US

39 (n/a) Boston University School of Management US

40 (42) University of Florida—Warrington College of Business US

41 (38) Wake Forest University—Babcock Graduate School of Management US

42 (36) University of Rochester—William E Simon Graduate School of Business US

43 (41) Southern Methodist University—Cox School of Business US

44 (47) University of Georgia—Terry College of Business US

45 (45) University of British Columbia—Sauder School of Business Canada

46 (n/a) Temple University—Fox School of Business US

47 (52) Case Western Reserve University—Weatherhead School of Management US

48 (48) College of William & Mary—Mason School of Business US

49 (54) Thunderbird School of Global Management US

50 (53) EGADE—Tec de Monterrey Mexico

51 (50) HEC Montréal Canada

52 (56) University of Arizona—Eller School of Management US

53 (57) American University—Kogod School of Business US

One of the reasons US schools maintain such high standards is that they have the econom-ic resources to do so. This is not just as a result of their size; it also reflects the tradition of alumni donating large amounts of money to their alma mater. This is a peculiarly North American phenomenon. For example, Phil Knight, the founder of Nike, recently bequeathed his old school, Stanford, US$105m, with which it will build new facilities and completely revamp its curriculum. In total, Stanford has US$835m in endowments on which it can draw. But even this is dwarfed by the US$2.3bn that Harvard has in its coffers.

Europe

Such huge bequests are rarely found in Europe. (Indeed, when million-dollar gifts are given they often come from American alumni, as happened when Gary Tanaka donated £25m (US$46.3m) to Imperial College’s business school.) But that is not to say that they don’t have their own, unique advantages. First among these is an unparalleled internationalism, among the student body, the faculty and the curriculum. This can make the European MBA an exciting cultural experience. Furthermore, the programmes are generally shorter and the students older and with more work experience. A widely held view is that you learn as much from your cohort



as your professors, so this can make many European schools very appealing. Ashridge students, for example, might not be able to hold a candle to their prestigious American counterparts when it comes to GMAT scores, but they do boast an average of 12 years’ business experience, more double that of, say, Harvard or the University of California at Berkeley (Haas).

European schools by rank


1 (1) IESE Business School—University of Navarra Spain

2 (2) IMD—International Institute for Management Development Switzerland

3 (3) University of Cambridge—Judge Business School UK

4 (5) IE—Instituto de Empresa Spain

5 (4) Henley Management College UK

6 (6) Cranfield School of Management UK

7 (7) London Business School UK

8 (9) INSEAD France/Singapore

9 (8) Ashridge UK

10 (10) Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School Belgium

11 (11) Warwick Business School UK

12 (13) University of Oxford—Saïd Business School UK

13 (31) International University of Monaco Monaco

14 (18) HEC School of Management, Paris France

15 (17) City University—Cass Business School UK

16 (14) University College Dublin—Michael Smurfit Graduate School of Business Ireland

17 (33) RSM Erasmus University Netherlands

18 (12) ESADE Business School Spain

19 (19) Lancaster University Management School UK

20 (15) Leeds University Business School UK

21 (20) Aston Business School UK

22 (22) The University of Edinburgh Management School UK

23 (23) Manchester Business School UK

24 (36) Imperial College London—Tanaka Business School UK

25 (21) University of Durham—Durham Business School UK

26 (29) Nottingham University Business School UK

27 (24) University of Birmingham—Birmingham Business School UK

28 (27) University of Strathclyde Graduate School of Business UK

29 (16) University of Bath School of Management UK

30 (25) E.M. Lyon France

31 (26) TiasNimbas Business School Netherlands

32 (28) University of Glasgow Business School UK

33 (40) EDHEC France

34 (34) Audencia School of Management Nantes France

35 (38) Bocconi University—SDA Bocconi School of Management Italy

36 (39) EADA—Escuela de Alta Dirección y Administración Spain



37 (n/a) Sheffield University Management School UK

38 (30) Bradford School of Management UK

39 (35) Universiteit Nyenrode—The Netherlands Business School Netherlands

40 (37) University of Newcastle upon Tyne Business School UK

41 (41) University of Southampton—School of Management UK

42 (44) Solvay Business School—Université Libre de Bruxelles Belgium

43 (45) Institut d’Etudes Politiques de Paris—MBA Sciences Po France

44 (47) Grenoble Ecole de Management—Graduate School of Business France

The UK is the hub of the European MBA market, with more top-ranked schools than the rest of Europe put together. Spain has a handful of high-quality schools, including IESE, which tops the European ranking. France, too, is a significant player. One country that is still lag-ging behind in western Europe is, perhaps surprisingly, Germany—its largest economy. Until recently, the MBA in that country did not have the visibility it had elsewhere. However, that is changing slowly and some good schools are emerging. One thing that may accelerate this process, and indeed will have a profound effect on all European business education over the next few years, will be the Bologna process (see box on page 52), which will standardise higher education across the Continent and is likely to lead to an explosion of new master’s level management programmes.

Asia and Australasia

The MBA market in Asia is growing in terms of both size and, among the top schools at least, quality. Heavy investment in programmes is bringing the levels up to Western standards—something that could not have been claimed a few years ago. At the top-ranked Asian school, the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, for example, there are now 80 full-time faculty teaching on the MBA programme, all of whom have PhDs. Facilities are often excellent and, with easy access to markets such as China, employment prospects for students from the top schools are burgeoning.

Asian and Australian schools by rank


1 (1) Hong Kong University of Science and Technology— Hong Kong School of Business and Management

2 (2) University of Hong Kong—School of Business Hong Kong

3 (3) Monash University—Graduate School of Business Australia

4 (4) Nanyang Technological University—Nanyang Business School Singapore

5 (7) International University of Japan—Graduate School of International Management Japan

6 (8) Curtin University Graduate School of Business Australia

7 (5) Macquarie Graduate School of Management Australia

8 (12) China Europe International Business School (CEIBS) China

9 (13) Chinese University of Hong Kong Hong Kong





10 (10) Indian Institute of Management—Ahmedabad India

11 (11) National University of Singapore—The NUS Business School Singapore

12 (9) University of Otago—School of Business New Zealand

However, the increasing interest in Asian business education is a boon and a potential stum-bling block. The sheer number of programmes that are setting up, particularly in China but also in India, could see resources stretched in the coming years. In particular, there is a concern about whether there are enough top-quality faculty to service such a large number of schools.

Questions will also be asked about the academic rigour of such programmes. This is where the international accrediting bodies, such as AACSB International, AMBA and EQUIS will have a huge part to play. (The China Europe International Business School, for example, has EQUIS accreditation.) It may also encourage more Western schools to set up a campus in the region, such as INSEAD has done in Singapore and Northwestern (Kellogg) in Hong Kong.



Methodology: full-time MBA rankingTo qualify for inclusion in the Economist Intelligence Unit rankings, the schools with full-time MBA programmes that responded to our survey had to meet various thresholds of data provision, as well as attaining a minimum number of responses to a survey gauging the opin-ion of current students and alumni who graduated within the last three years. These were set as a proportion of the annual intake of students to the programme as shown in Table 9.7.

Proportion of responses required from students and recent graduates

Student intake Minimum responses required

Up to 43 10

44–200 25% of intake

More than 200 50

Data were collected during spring 2007 using two web-based questionnaires, one for busi-ness schools and one for students and recent graduates. Schools distributed the web address of the latter questionnaire to their own students and graduates. Around 20,000 students and graduates participated. All data received from schools were subject to verification checks, including, where possible, comparison with historical data, peer schools and other published sources. Student and graduate questionnaires were audited for multiple or false entries.

Memory has been built into the rankings by taking a weighted average of 2007 (50%), 2006 (30%) and 2005 (20%) data to provide a rounded picture of the school. Sudden movements in data, which might not produce an immediate increase in quality, are thus reflected gradu-ally, much as the improvement would affect students.

Table 9.8 summarises the measures used to calculate the rankings together with their respec-tive weightings. Student and alumni ratings make up 20% of the total ranking and 80% is based on data provided by schools. The statistical methodology adopted for the ranking gives each business school a unique score (known to statisticians as a z-score). Unlike some other rankings, the Economist Intelligence Unit does not include any “equal” schools (for example, four schools ranked equal sixth followed by one ranked tenth). However, it should be noted that differences between some schools might be very slight.



Summary of ranking criteria and weightingsa

Measure Indicators Weighting as percentage of category

A. Open new career opportunities (35%)

1. Diversity of recruiters Number of industry sectors 25.00

2. Assessment of careers services Percentage of graduates in jobs three months after graduation 25.00

3. Jobs found through the Percentage of graduates finding jobs through careers service 25.00 careers service

4. Student assessment Meeting expectations and needs 25.00

B. Personal development/education experience (35%)

1. Faculty quality Ratio of faculty to studentsb 8.33

Percentage of faculty with PhD (full-time only) 8.33

Faculty rating by students 8.33

2. Student quality Average GMAT score 12.50

Average length of work experience 12.50

3. Student diversity Percentage of foreign students 8.33

Percentage of women students 8.33

Student rating of culture and classmates 8.33

4. Education experience Student rating of programme content and range of electives 6.25

Range of overseas exchange programmes 6.25

Number of languages on offer 6.25

Student assessment of facilities and other services 6.25

C. Increase salary (20%)

1. How much did your salary Salary change from pre-MBA to post-MBA (excluding bonuses) 25.00 increase after graduating?

2. Leaving salary Post-MBA salary (excluding bonuses) 75.00

D. Potential to network (10%)

1. Breadth of alumni network Ratio of registered alumni to current students 33.33

2. Internationalism of alumni Number of official overseas alumni branches 33.33

3. Alumni effectiveness Student assessment of alumni network 33.33a A minimum threshold of data was required for each category. Weightings for schools meeting the category threshold but not providing all data were distributed evenly within the category. b Faculty were weighted as follows: full-time 100%; part-time 50%; visiting 25%.

It is essential that all rankings are open and transparent about data collection and the prob-lems encountered. This ensures that students and business schools can interpret the results correctly and take account of the caveats that inevitably surround such undertakings. Below are some of the important considerations that should be observed in using the data and ranking numbers in each of the four main categories surveyed.

Open new career opportunities

To gauge the effectiveness with which a school was able to open new career opportunities for graduating students, this category measured the diversity of recruiters (by number of indus-try sectors); the percentage of graduates in jobs three months after graduation; the percent-age of graduates finding jobs through the careers service; and students’ reports on whether a school’s careers services department met their needs and expectations.



Ideally, we would also have liked to measure the volume of recruiters that visit a school, but it has been difficult to come up with a suitable and acceptable way of doing this. In particular, many of the business schools surveyed are members of the US-based MBA Career Services Coun-cil (CSC), a body founded in 1994 with the purpose, among other things, of developing and promoting standard and ethical operating procedures, including the reporting of salary and employment data. The CSC does not regard the number of companies either recruiting on cam-pus or contacting a business school as a good indicator of careers services and advises against schools revealing such data. One business school in the US said that, according to the CSC:

● It should not be perceived as negative if a student is able to obtain a job with a company that does not come on campus.

● To be a good measurement, there should be a way to count recruiters accurately and com-pare schools fairly. Differentiating between companies and their various divisions, busi-nesses or locations can be complicated. For example, should different GE businesses be counted as one or more than one?

● Some careers services offices support undergraduate as well as MBA students and there-fore may automatically have access to more companies.

Personal development and educational experience

This category measured factors such as the ratio of faculty to students, the percentage of fac-ulty with a PhD, the percentage of foreign and women students, and students’ perceptions of the quality of their programme and of their school’s facilities and other services. Much of this information was simple to collect and analyse.

One factor included was average GMAT scores. Not every business school requires the GMAT (although most do), and where this was the case the GMAT score weighting was redistributed within the category.

Increase salary

The Economist Intelligence Unit does not assign as great an importance to salary as some other rankings do, but it is obviously a significant indicator. Our survey attempts to meas-ure the increase in remuneration delivered by an MBA as well as the absolute salary level at graduation. Schools were asked to provide both the average salary of incoming students and the average salary they received after graduation. A number of schools were unable to pro-vide all this information, and in these cases the Economist Intelligence Unit has included an estimate based on our survey of students, our own research and other published data.

Potential to network

This category measures the extent to which students benefit from a business school’s net-work of alumni. It does this by measuring the ratio of alumni to current students and the number of overseas alumni branches, and students’ and graduates’ own assessment of how their school performed in this area.

Data from North American schools were widely available. Some schools outside that region, however, had few or little-developed alumni branches, although almost all said they were actively working to develop their alumni network and many had set up additional branches since last year. Where there were no overseas alumni branches schools were rated at zero, which will have affected their ranking position.



Methodology: distance-learning MBA rankingFor the first time, the Economist Intelligence Unit has included a ranking of distance-learn-ing MBAs. Despite their name, most of these programmes involve students getting together for workshops or lectures. To qualify for the ranking, therefore, programmes must be taught at least 70% remotely.

Ranking distance-learning programmes is not straightforward, and many of the quantitative data used to rank full-time MBAs are of little use. Salary data, for example, are less important because students generally do not use a distance-learning MBA as a career break—many will continue in their pre-MBA employment. Equally, networking cannot play such a prominent role.

However, if you are to study much of the programme in isolation, a sense of connection to the school and decent virtual learning materials are essential, and many of these are best judged subjectively. The weighting was therefore more heavily based on student responses than the full-time ranking—around half of the total. The ranking took into account three basic criteria to judge the schools: programme content, the quality of fellow students and distance-learning elements:

Summary of ranking criteria and weightings

Measure Indicators Weighting as percentage of category

A. Programme content (33%)

Faculty ratio Ratio of faculty to studentsa 25%

Faculty with PhD Percentage of faculty with PhD 25%

Faculty rating Faculty rating by students 25%

Programme content Student rating of programme content and range of electives 25%

B. Quality of fellow students (33%)

Completion rate Percentage of students who enrol on the course who complete it 33%

Work experience Average number of years of students’ work experience 33%

Culture and classmates Student rating of culture and classmates 33%

C. Distance-learning elements

Effectiveness of distance-learning Student rating of the quality of distance-learning materials 33%materials

Sense of connection Student rating of the sense of connection to the school 33%

Value for money Student assessment of value for money 33%a Faculty were weighted as follows: full-time 100%; part-time 50%; visiting 25%

As with the full-time ranking, data were collected during spring 2007 using two web-based questionnaires, one for business schools and one for students and recent graduates. Schools distributed the web address of the latter questionnaire to their own students and graduates. Again, all data received from schools were subject to verification checks. Student and gradu-ate questionnaires were audited for multiple or false entries.

WMBA 07 Exec summ1 - WordPress.comConsumer, retail 84.9 Non-profit, public sector 84.9...

Documents

Transcript of WMBA 07 Exec summ1 - WordPress.comConsumer, retail 84.9 Non-profit, public sector 84.9...