As we already know, not all schools are created equal. So The Economist has put out its 9th “Which MBA?” rankings, ranking the top thirty international MBA programs in the world.
The Economist explains that it formulates its rankings after first asking students what led them to pursue an MBA, and then publishing the responses in its “Which MBA?” guide. The magazine then mixes the information gathered from the guide with salary and faculty qualifications, along with other subjective measures, to formulate its rankings.
However, the methodology of the rankings has been questioned. Poets and Quants looks at some of the surprises in the top 100 rankings and expresses skepticism at their validity in light of some unexplained, dramatic swings in ranking from year to year. While it is uneventful that Dartmouth College’s Tuck School of Business took the number one spot, and Chicago School of Business moved down to the number two spot this year. It is surprising that Harvard only took fifth place, Wharton fell seven spots and was ranked in the fifteenth place, and Britain’s Cranfield School of Management fell eight places to the twenty-third spot.
What worries Poets and Quants is the inconsistency of the rankings. How could Australia’s University of Queensland jump 35 spots in a single year? And how could Henley Business School plummet 40? It just doesn’t make sense.
However more troubling than the rankings gyrations is a little poll conducted by The Economist titled “Should a school’s ranking be a serious consideration when choosing an MBA programme?” At the time of the writing of the 1007 responses, 66% said “yes.” While online polls are not scientific, these results are disappointing. Rankings should NOT be a serious consideration when choosing where to apply or even where to attend. And rankings with this lack of consistency deserve much more than a grain of salt.
Accepted.com ~ Helping You Write Your Best
Find out which b-schools are best with MBA Rankings, our FREE special report!