Last Thursday Accepted.com hosted the first-ever rankings chat with Dean Paul Danos of Tuck, Della Bradshaw, the Business Education Editor of the Financial Times, and Kim Keating, Tuck’s Director of Public Relations .
Here is a tidbit from the How to Use the Rankings transcript:
Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 8:57:50 AM)
Paul, how do you feel rankings have helped or hurt MBA education?
PaulDanosTUCK (May 4, 2006 8:58:50 AM)
I’m a big believer in giving prospective students as much information as possible from as many perspectives as possible. I’m very positive on rankings but I also like to be involved with the publishers in terms of perfecting their ranking methodologies. I think that the rankings overall have prompted improvements in MBA programs. There’s also a downside; it’s costly to respond to all of the inquiries that we get. One has to balance the cost and the benefits of the prospective students.
Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 9:00:39 AM)
Della, what do you think about Dean Danos’ response?
DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:02:32 AM)
I agree with him that the more information there is out there, the better. In the US, there are now six major rankings as Kiki points out and that must be really time-consuming for schools. I think that is why there are so many moves now – which I applaud – to move towards standardized, audited data.
The dialogue between our rankings experts and MBA applicants in the audience was thoughtful. Dean Danos, Della Bradshaw, and Kim Keating all emphasized that the different rankings are sources of information and in that sense valuable. They should never be the sole criterion for choosing a school. In addition both Dean Danos and Della Bradshaw really opened a window into the thinking of those dealing with and designing rankings.