New WSJ Ranking of Best EMBA Programs

The world’s most expensive Executive MBA program–Wharton’s $167,250 alternating weekend program for execs–was ranked first by The Wall Street Journal today, dislodging Northwestern University’s Kellogg School’s pricey $153,900 EMBA which fell to fifth place. In its second ranking of the best EMBA programs, the Journal dinged Kellogg, rating the overall quality of its Executive MBA programs in the bottom third of the 56 schools the newspaper surveyed. The upshot: Kellogg’s EMBA offerings are now lower in rank than Wharton, Washington University in St. Louis, Thunderbird, and the University of Southern California.

Kellogg scored extremely well on one part of the methodology–its survey of company human resource and executive development officials. But it did less well on the Journal’s survey of recent graduates. The problem: Student satisfaction was inconsistent across the school’s seven programs, suggesting that Kellogg has stretched itself in EMBA offerings to a level that allowed quality to suffer. Kellogg has joint EMBA programs with Hong Kong’s University of Science and Technology in Hong Kong, WHU-Otto Beisheim School of Management in Germany, Kellogg-Recanti at Tel Aviv University in Israel, and the Schulich School of Business at York University in Toronto, Canada. Earlier this year, however, BusinessWeek still ranked Kellogg as the number one EMBA program, with Wharton in third place.

The school that has one of the largest EMBA programs didn’t fare as well as one might expect: Columbia Business School, which has 650 currently enrolled EMBA students in several programs, including joint ventures with London Business School and Berkeley’s Haas School, was ranked number nine, behind its local rival New York University, which took seventh place. Another big loser is Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business, a major player in the EMBA business, which failed to rank in the top 25 although the Journal placed Duke tenth two years earlier. BusinessWeek currently ranks Duke  in 11th place, while U.S. News puts the school fourth in EMBA programs.


The Journal’s ranking is likely to be far more consequential for the business schools because EMBA programs are highly profitable and because many of the elite schools, such as Harvard, Stanford, Dartmouth, and Yale, do not offer such programs. Wharton’s annual revenues from its two EMBA programs in Philadelphia and San Francisco alone exceed $70 million a year. Rankings tend to sway even more EMBA applicants because public perception of the quality of these programs is less formed than it is for traditional two-year MBA programs.

The Journal based its ranking on three components: how a school scored in a survey of recent EMBA graduates; how it fared in a survey of companies familiar with EMBA programs; and how well it trained students in management and leadership skills identified in the two surveys of graduates and companies. Some 3,060 graudates of 87 EMBA programs at 64 business schools with campuses in 18 countries responded to the MBA survey while 189 corporate human resources and executive development managers responded to the company survey.

Many of those corporate officials were somewhat critical of the programs that they largely subsidize (although the schools now say that 36% of EMBA students now pay the full cost of the degree). The Journal reported, for example, that many corporate respondents say “it’s hard for them to judge the return on investment of an EMBA degree. More than a quarter of surveyed employers say they see the experience as a disruption, albeit a necessary one to develop top-notch managers; one in five sees allowing managers to go as simply a perk. And some criticize EMBA programs for not focusing enough on hard-core business disciplines.”

The Journal doesn’t survey every business school with an EMBA program. To be included, a school must have accreditation by the key trade groups in either the U.S. or Europe, have a minimum of four previous graduating classes, and a program’s students must have an average of at least nine years’ work experience with at least some students traveling more than 45 miles to reach class.


Wharton, which has the most expensive MBA degree in the world with its EMBA offering, came out on top, the Journal reported, because the school had “high satisfaction ratings from students and companies, and top scores for the quality of its curriculum and faculty.” Tuition and fees for Wharton’s traditional two-year MBA program are $54,009 a year, without room and board. The least expensive of the Journal’s top 25 EMBA programs was at IE Business School which charges $73,000 and the University of Texas at Austin which charges $75,000. Wharton’s two-year, weekend residential program is offered in Philadelphia and San Francisco, and attracts students from throughout the U.S. and around the world. The 2010 entering class of 212 students has an average GMAT score of 700, 10 years of work experience each, and an average age of 34. Some 37% of Wharton’s 2010 entering class of EMBA students are international.

New York’s Stern School jumped seven places in the survey to seventh, UCLA’s Anderson School rose six spots to number 11th, Ohio State moved up four places to 17th, and the University of Texas’ McCombs School of Business rose three spots to 12th. The Journal reported that based purely on ratings for skills, the top program belonged to Thunderbird School of Global Management. “Graduates gave it high marks for instruction in strategic thinking, general leadership and the ability to work across multiple functional areas,” the newspaper reported.

Ultimately, though, the biggest winners were the eight schools out of the top 25 whose programs failed to make the Journal’s first EMBA ranking two years ago. They are number-two ranked Olin in St. Louis, 6th ranked University of Notre Dame, 13th ranked Arizona State University, 4th ranked University of Illinois, 18th place Cornell University’s program with Queen’s University, 19th ranked Rice University, 20th ranked Boston University, IE Business School in Spain which placed at 24th on the Journal ranking. Conversely, the biggest losers are the schools that completely fell off the Journal’s top 25 list. Duke University, which was ranked 10th in 2008, disappeared, along with 11th ranked Emory, 16th ranked Southern Methodist University, 18th ranked ESADE, 22nd ranked Purdue, 23rd ranked IPADE, 24th ranked IESE, 25th ranked University of Western Ontario, and Fordham University, which was ranked 26th in 2008 because the results were too close to name just 25 schools.


Rank & SchoolDifference in Ranking2010 Rank2008 Rank
Berkeley (Haas)-112312
Michigan (Ross)-9156
Chicago (Booth)-7169
North Carolina (Kenan-Flagler)-5105
Northwestern (Kellogg)-451



Rank & SchoolDifference in Ranking2010 Rank2008 Rank
New York (Stern)+7714
Los Angeles (Anderson)+61117
Ohio State (Fisher)+41721
Texas-Austin (McCombs)+31215


The Wall Street Journal ranking of EMBA programs significantly differs from the list compiled by BusinessWeek, largely as a result of metholodogy and reach. BusinessWeek’s ranking of the top 25 EMBA programs is far more international, with seven of its top 25 schools outside the U.S. The Journal lists only one non-U.S. school on its EMBA list: IE Business School in Spain. BusinessWeek’s ranking is also based on two surveys–one of EMBA grads who are asked questions on teaching quality, career services, curriculum and other aspects of their MBA experience, and another survey of EMBA directors, instead of corporate executives who are surveyed by the Wall Street Journal. The director of each of the programs participating in the ranking is asked for his or her list of the top 10 programs. Then, there is The Financial Times more global EMBA ranking which has Kellogg’s joint program with Hong Kong UST in first place. The FT bases its ranking on a survey of alumni three years out of a program along with a survey filled out by business schools that includes a range of information from the percentage of female faculty to the percentage of international students in the program. U.S. News does a very limited ranking of EMBA programs based on the opinions of deans and MBA directors, ranking just ten schools.


WSJ 2010 Rank & SchoolBW RankFT Rank*U.S. News RankWSJ 2008 Rank
1.  Pennsylvania (Wharton)3512
2.  Washington Univ. (Olin)ST12NRNR
3.  Thunderbird (Arizona)ST45NR3
4.  Southern California (Marshall)5NRNR4
5.  Northwestern (Kellogg)11721
6.  Notre Dame (Mendoza)20NRNRNR
7.  New York (Stern)1415614
8.  Cornell (Johnson)STNRNR7
9.  Columbia Business School4958
10.  UNC (Kenan-Flagler)11NR105
11.  UCLA (Anderson)828917
12.  Texas-Austin (McCombs)ST55NR15
13.  Arizona State (Carey)NR43NRNR
14.  Illinois-Urbana-ChampaignNRNRNRNR
15.  Michigan (Ross)72086
16.  Chicago (Booth)2439
17.  Ohio State (Fisher)1569NR21
18.  Cornell/Queen’s Universities25NRNRNR
19.  Rice (Jones)ST39NRNR
20.  Boston University23NRNRNR
21.  Rutgers UniversityNR46NR20
22.  Maryland (Smith)NR50NRNR
23.  Berkeley (Haas)NR13712
24.  IE Business School (Spain)77NRNR
25.  Vanderbilt (Owen)NRNRNR19



ST: The school’s program was named in the “second tier” by BusinessWeek in its latest 2010 ranking of Executive MBA programs.

NR: The schools program was not ranked.

* The Financial Times EMBA ranking was published in 2009. The 2010 survey is expected to be released in October.

  • Lai

    A lot of marriages break up before the end of the program due to infidelity. The guys end up cheating when they go on residencies abroad with program co-ordinations from International study program. The company is based in Prague

  • Robert Segredo

    Have you completed the program yet? I see this was posted two years ago. I would like to know your assessment of it the program. I’m in IT, live in south Florida and am interested in the program.

  • R Craig Coulter


    I am currently attending the MIT EMBA program and have kept a blog detailing the experience since my admission. I thought it might be a useful resource for others considering applying to the program. You can find it at: 

    Best regards,

  • Bob

    Travis! If you don’t like the program then don’t apply or enroll!! There are 100s of people enrolled or have graduated from this very well respected and prestigious program. Don’t spread  mis-information and abuse very reputed institution!

  • Birchtree


    I am sorry to hear that your impressions of the Cornell-Queen’s EMBA are so vastly different than so many others who look into the Program.  I have recently enrolled in the Cornell-Queen’s EMBA Program and find your comments to be disappointing on a great many levels. 

    Some facts about the Program that may be useful to readers, as I believe most readers on this website are more interested in facts rather than opinions:

    Graduates from this program receive two (2) MBA degrees, one from Cornell and one from Queen’s – the very same MBA degrees that all graduates from these schools achieve.  Seems to be an interesting value proposition to me to earn two highy regarded MBA degrees for the price of one – versus your “enormously expensive” suggestion.  Cornell’s Johnson School has its Ivy League heritage, which some value, and others do not, but regardless of that fact – Johnson at Cornell has been indisputably ranked as a Top 10 – 20 school accross multiple rankings over many, many years.  Additionally, BW recently ranked Queen’s as the #2 business school in the World outside of the US.   Two terrific business schools represented here…

    As the Chief Investment Officer at a publicly traded REIT, my company, who is supporting me in this endeavor, and I both, absolutely prized the schedule and logistics of this Program, which you mock.  As a recently turned 40 year old, with two kids, and a very demanding work schedule, having the ability to attend classes from a world-renowned university, in a boardroom setting (with live video conferencing) nearby to where I live (within an hour) was absolutely key to me, my Company, and my family.  It is this very flexibility that has made the Cornell-Queen’s EMBA Program such a dynamic and growing program because of how well it can accomodate busy executives.  Additionally, over 40% of the classes are in person on campus in Ithaca and Kingston.  The remainder of classes are taught through “live” video conferencing in your Boardroom with your team/cohort (and NOT online as you reference), which uniquely links the professor to all Boardrooms (5-8 students typically in each Boardroom) accross the USA, Canada, and now coming soon in Colombia and Mexico for a very unique and diverse global perspective (approx 127 total students accross all Boardrooms).  Cornell-Queen’s EMBA participants hail from some of the largest and best companies and brands from around the world – and many are supported by their companies, like me.  
    My Company was thrilled about Cornell and Queen’s and particulalrly pleased with this format.  Notre Dame now offers a similar video conference format in their EMBA program. 

    Lastly, many, if not most top tier eMBA programs do not require the GMAT for executive MBA programs any longer…these include Cornell (now), Duke, Northwestern/Kellogg, MIT, NYU Stern, Washington U, UMichigan Ross, and by waiver at many others including Chicago Booth and UVA Darden.  Many schools have concluded that the GMAT does not necessarily predict success for the 35-45 year old executives who are look into these programs. 
    But now I am rambling, and clearly your assessment indicates that you have picked up on something that so many others have missed in their assessments of both Cornell and Queen’s and this EMBA program.
    Good luck to you and in your future endeavors… 

  • Travis

    Ummm that Queens/Cornell EMBA is a joke. I attended a session and you do not even need an undergraduate degree and Queens has their ” own ”’ GMAT test for dummies. It is an online video format that is enormously expensive and prostitutes the degree basically.

  • blinky

    I have a specific question regarding the Schulich-Kellogg eMBA program that is ranked 11 in the FT rankings, and missing completely from these rankings. Instead I see the Queen / Cornell eMBA. What does this really mean for an eMBA applicant?

  • Sat

    Hi John,
    Thanks for the response. My company does tend to promote and reward people with advance degree, but I think I can go up to a certain level without the degree. What I am expecting for this degree is to enable me to seek new avenues. I am currently in the IT field in a specific application arena working on and managing the ERP systems. This experience will limit my growth prospects in the same area. I am hoping that this degree would expand my horizons and skills to move and seek new job opportunities. I wanted to know if this is possible.
    Thank You and appreciate your response.

  • Sat,

    That’s hard to say without knowing your goals in getting the degree, ie. Does the company you work for tend to promote and reward people with advanced degrees? Or do you hope to use the degree to leave your firm or your industry? On the other hand, it’s a fabulous, first-rate program and Kellogg is a superb business school. I think you will find it a very worthwhile experience.

  • Sat

    I have applied and got admitted into Kellogg EMBA program at their Miami campus. I am a mid level manager and am a little worried about the ROI of the course. I am an IT development manager currently making an annual salary in the mid 100k range. I want to know if it worth while doing the MBA. What the ROI will be. Any advice or information is appreciated.

  • Someone asked above: how is the MIT’s EMBA ranked?

    Any comments?

  • Joy,

    All very good schools. I would give a significant edge to Emory given the overal quality of the faculty, students, and MBA program.

  • Joy

    What about Emory, Georgia State University or GA Tech’s EMBA?

  • Kellogg MBA

    One important point I left out in my comments above is the high quality of networking that top tier EMBA programs offer. EMBA program participants get as much learning out of their peers as they would from their faculty. The high quality, professional connections they acquire from the EMBA program versus that of traditional MBA programs makes placing a greater emphasis on the quality of intake (seniority of positions in company, industry experience and knowledge, etc) as a criteria crucial. Hence the quality and size of alumni network and support should also be allocated significant weighting.

  • Kellogg MBA

    One observation I can’t help but notice from the above comments in general is the fact that people seem to forget that this is an EMBA ranking and not the traditional FT or part time MBA program ranking we are evaluating here. The weightings for criteria and the primary criteria itself for ranking EMBA programs should rightfully be different given the inherent nature of the programs. The candidate pool is significantly different with regards to experience, salaries earned, age, etc to begin with.

    One would expect the top B-schools with EMBA programs to emerge in the top tier of the lists/rankings (perhaps rightfully so given their reputation and strengths) but we have to realize at the same time that as EMBA programs have a relatively shorter history and and are still evolving, volatility in rankings are expected. As the executives today (who are likely applicants of these EMBA programs) global and mobile, it would be more relevant and useful for the respective ranking polls to include international EMBA programs versus US centric ones. The primary criteria for rankings should be tailored to suit EMBA programs with emphasis on salaries earned post EMBA, the quality of networking (seniority and diversity of and how international the class is), quality of faculty and feedback from graduates on their satisfaction and aims achieved, etc.

    None of the rankings from any source is complete or without flaws as expected but I have to say the FT ranking is relatively more reflective of an EMBA program ranking thus far. It includes more international programs, is better represented, and in my opinion, provides a more accurate weighting of the relevant criteria needed to evaluate EMBA programs.


  • SJ,
    Trium vs. Duke. That’s a hard one because you’re deciding between a program that is a relatively new partnership among three powerhouse institutions (LSE, NYU and HEC Paris) and a more traditional, very high quality B-school player like Duke. As you probably know, the Financial Times ranks the Trium program third but no other ranking organization ranks Trium at all. Meantime, Duke’s EMBA program gets a ranking of nine by the Financial Times, 10th by BusinessWeek, and fourth by U.S. News & World Report. Based on “brand value” and “rankings,” Duke clearly has the edge. I would ask to speak with two or three current students of each program, listen carefully to what they say and don’t say about each program’s strengths and weaknesses, and them made the decision. There are other factors, of course, that I can’t help with because I don’t know what you want to do with the degree. If you want a more international focus, perhaps the Trium program would be better–London, New York, and Paris–is a fascinating mix. Good luck with your decision.

  • SJ


    The rankings, mthodology can be quite confusing. In short which one would you suggest

    EMBA – TRIUM or Fuqua?

    Thanks SJ

  • Rahul

    Hello John:
    Nice review and agree with your insights..One question –
    I am interested in the EMBA Program offered by Wharton, NYU, Columbia and MIT (second year).
    I have read your current article and also the ‘Winners & Losers in the FT’s New EMBA Ranking’. I understand that WSJ ranked the schools on three components including surveys of graduates, which might have excluded MIT’s new Program.
    I looked at all your posts in Rankings and considering the limited credible information available especially regarding the EMBAs how would you rank MIT’s new EMBA Program? (and especially against the Wharton, NYU or Columbia from the East coast).
    Any insights would be highly appreciated.
    Thank you

  • Jane

    This ranking is useless for anybody looking for an EMBA program outside the United States. Where are HEC, London Business School, IMD, INSEAD, IESE, ESSEC, Mannheim, Cass, NUS or CEIBS???

  • Lance Miller

    So Olin and Thunderbird are in the top 5 but Duke and Emory fall off the list?

    WSJ went from being semi-worthless to a complete joke. Half of the schools in the top 25 are not given the time of day by elite employers.

    Curious to see P&Q EMBA rankings, hopefully not as busted as wsj.

  • By the way, thanks much for raising this point. A key part of what I’m trying to do is to put a lot of context and perspective around these various rankings so that users can make their own decisions based on the strengths and flaws of each system. You pointed out a very important flaw.

  • Marc T


    Thanks a lot. I would have to say that despite inherent faults in any kind of methodology i would have more of a tendency to discard the Economist or the WSJ rankings on that basis.
    As such I believe the WSJ’s rankings or any ranking too centred on a given territory is not doing students any favours at all as it fails to convey the key message that education is now global.
    Methodology is everything for prospective students to get a fisrt glimpse of where to potentially go. Self promotion seems to transpire in a lot of rankings. I believe they all ought to give precise details of the methodology used. If they believe this will bore prospective readers then they should not publish rankings in the first place. The targeted audience of such rankings is actually quite keen to get as much of an understanding as possible as to what goes into such apparently objective criteria.



  • Marc,
    Right you are. The FT’s methodology–which is based more heavily on school data–also allows the list to be cover a larger number of schools around the world. Of course, this is all a matter of how you approach such a survey. In some cases, a publication will use a survey of corporate executives, MBA recruiters, B-school deans or MBA directors, to set the field and then survey from there. In that case, if you survey largely U.S. execs, recruiters and deans, you’re going to get a more U.S.-centric pool to fish in. Because the follow-up surveys would then only go to the schools that are high enough on the first survey. The WSJ’s explanation of its methodology doesn’t really tell us in that kind of detail who the surveys went to but you can pretty much assume it was not a very international poll.

  • Marc T

    Dear John,

    Whilst you list some of the key methodological differences between the BW and WSJ rankings I cannot help but be surprised by the sheer lack of European schools being represented. For example the FT EMBA ranking does also have IE around 7th place yet, programs like London Business School’s EMBA, the Trium EMBA, INSEAD’s GMBA all ahead of IE are not represented. The Journal’s survey of corporate Execs has clear limitations – Are corporate execs interviewed throughout the world or are only US based corporate execs being interviewed? If that is the case then it would probably influence materially the rankings as one could easily imagine many US based execs to have obtained their degree from US institutions therefore limiting their ability to judge objectively other institutions outside of their backyard.Also whilst teaching quality, career services, curriculum and other aspects are undoubtedly important, ultimately one will evaluate the quality of their program based on their achievements in terms of career progress, salary increases and opportunities through alumnis.

    Could you believe the above to have played a part in the WSJ rankings?



  • Eric,

    Certainly didn’t mean to say that it came in number one because of the cost. It is the most expensive MBA program in the world and it just happened to come out number one in the Journal’s ranking of Executive MBA programs. No weighting is given to cost by the Journal.


  • eric_S

    Your lead into the story “The world’s most expensive MBA program wins Wharton top honors” suggest that the Wharton program won top honors because it is the most expensive. Is that the case? I mean, is the weighting such that the cost of the program helps you get a better ranking.

    Thanks for the write up though.