Poets and Quants

2011 Economist Ranking of the Best B-Schools

by John A. Byrne

The Economist 2011 Ranking of Full-Time MBA Programs

2011 Economist Rank 2010 Rank Year-Over-Year Change
51. Ohio State (Fisher) NR +50*
52. University of Maryland (Smith) NR +49*
53. Rice University (Jones) 41 -12
54. EDHEC Business School 49 -5
55. Warwick Business School 34 -21
56. Washington University (Olin) 45 -11
57. Henley Business School 17 -40
58. Curtin Graduate School 76 +18
59. University of Iowa (Tippie) 66 +7
60. University of Oxford (Said) 71 +11
61. UC-Davis 60 -1
62. Hong Kong Univ. of Science 52 -10
63. Grenoble 62 -1
64. McGill (Desautels) NR +37*
65. Minnesota (Carlson) 63 -2
66. SDA Bocconi 65 -1
67. Rotterdam (Erasmus) 57 -10
68. George Washington Univ. 73 +5
69. Nanyang Business School 69 –
70. University of Birmingham 68 -2
71. University of Strathclyde 77 +6
72. Ashridge 67 -5
73. Macquarie 64 -9
74. Audencia Nantes 72 -2
75. Durham Business School 55 -20
76. Yonsei University NR +25*
77. Aston Business School 74 -3
78. IIT-Ahmedabad 85 +6
79. Southern Methodist (Cox) 78 -1
80. Concordia (John Molson) 96 +16
81. Univ. of Calgary (Haskayne) 82 +1
82. British Columbia (Sauder) 79 -3
83. Copenhagen Business 98 +15
84. University of Edinburgh 75 -9
85. Purdue (Krannert) 90 +5
86. National Univ. of Singapore 84 -2
87. Thunderbird 80 -7
88. Chinese Univ. of Hong Kong 70 -18
89. Temple University (Fox) NR +12*
90. University of Georgia (Terry) 87 -3
91. CEIBS 100 +9
92. Brandeis 91 -1
93. Tilburg University (TiasNimbas) 86 -7
94. Notthingham University NR +7*
95. EADA 95 –
96. HEC Montreal NR +5*
97. University of Florida (Hough) 99 +2
98, University of Pittsburgh (Katz) 94 -4
99. South Carolina (Moore) 92 -7
100. Lancaster University 89 -11

Source: The Economist

 

Related Reading:

 

 

Pages: 1 2 3

  • http://Twoissueshere Cookie

    well, one has to say how funny these results look.
    - Haas ahead of Wharton?
    - HEC ahead of Insead?
    - bath and cranfield around 20th?
    - University of HK ahead of HKUST?

    Everyone knows this can’t be right…

  • gnut sucram

    Well, I think most rankings’ results (except U.S. News & Forbes) look funny.

    FT ranks HKUST, ISB, Indian Institute of Mgt. higher than Kellogg/Tuck/Fuqua/Stern

    BW ranked SMU higher than Tuck/Stern, Haas higher than MIT

  • Concerned

    I’m concerned about Ross…not only the drop in rank, but the employment stats were rather depressing.

  • Jay

    UVA over HBS, Wharton, Stanford, Columbia, MIT, and Northwestern?

    They must know something the rest of us don’t……

  • Todd

    Rankings are stupid in general, but I feel like this hurts my chances at Tuck:(

  • Spearhead

    Why did The Economist use 2010 data for its 2011 ranking? Most schools have already released their new data. A year can make a big difference, i.e. Ross salary placement last year was $98K avg Salary / 78% placement, vs this year $107K avg salary / 86% placement.

    I am currently a b-school student at Ross, this ranking uses metrics that NOBODY at school cares about (diversity score, #of languages,etc). At the end of the day the only thing that matters in choosing a school are
    1. Fit
    2. Reputation (This includes network)
    3. Companies/Industries that recruit on campus, including placement stats, salaries, etc…

    The Economist can rank all they want. The reality is that nobody is going to pick Darden over Wharton, or Carnegie Mellon over Ross…

  • Concerned

    Great point Spearhead. I hadn’t bothered digging into the numbers, but I knew something was off.

  • Spearhead

    Excerpt: “In 2010 the average tuition fee charged by American institutions ranked within our top 100, but outside of the top 15, was $81,911 for the full two years”

    This is absolutely ridiculous, The Economist is now throwing iconic programs like Kellogg, Duke, Michigan and INSEAD in the same bucket as unheard of MBA programs like Pittsburg, Florida and South Carolina…

    I’m a subscriber to The Economist and I love their journalism, but why are they being completely irrational and out of touch when it comes to this ranking?

    For all of you who are wondering what the legitimate “Top” programs are out there let me give you that list and save you the time of trying to interpret all these ridiculous rankings (I wish someone would have shared this with me when I started applying last year, I would have saved many hours of wasted times on the rankings) Here they are in no particular order:

    Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, Kellogg, Chicago, MIT, Columbia, Tuck, Haas, Ross, Duke, NYU, Darden, Yale, Cornell, UCLA

    + the international schools: INSEAD, London Business School

    Thats it, if you are like the 80% of MBA applicants who want to go into Consulting, Investment Banking, or Management, those are your target schools. Obviously some of these programs are better than others, but with a little talent, work ethic, and networking you can get into 95% of all the top firms from these schools..The same CANNOT be said of other programs out there, no matter how high they are ranked by the Economist…

  • plantmaths

    I read the full article and I have to agree with part of the info and analisis the Economist did.
    can’t deny the quality and skills of my Tuck and Darden collegues

  • b-school guy

    John,

    When do the new P&Q rankings come out???

  • http://poetsandquants.com/members/jbyrne/ John A. Byrne

    b-school guy,

    We’re aiming for early November–first week.

    Best,
    John

  • Kachi

    This result is ridiculos…

  • Simon Chu

    Thx a lot John, I’ve been reading all your blogs here, really intelligent writings. Tuck is one of my dream schools too, Just a quick assessment for me would be great

    Mr Greenpeacer

    750 GMAT
    3.2 Under 3.6 Graduate
    Earned an engineering degree at top university in China, a master in environmental in a top Canadian University
    28 years old, Canadian Citizen
    Worked in a boutique consulting firm for a year. Has been working for Greenpeace Canada for 3 years ever since, active project organizer, lots of leadership stories, steady progress, decent extracurriculars
    Career goal: Environmental NGO in China
    Concern: Greenpeace’s evil and aggressive impression

    Target schools:

    Yale
    Tuck
    Cornell
    Duke
    Darden
    INSEAD
    Oxford

    Thanks very much!

  • CBoston

    Honestly, these ratings are bunk.

    I would love to see any of the following:

    (1) A recruiter who would blindly accept a Darden MBA over a Harvard MBA
    (2) A student who would turn down Harvard for Darden
    (3) An academic who would prefer to be part of Darden over HBS
    (4) A parent who would prefer their child go to Darden over HBS

    Harvard, Stanford, and Wharton only ever lose cross-offers to each other.
    The world votes with applications and yield – and that’s all that matters – not with these obtuse metrics.

  • gnut.sucram

    Hi John,

    When do the new P&Q rankings come out???

  • Skeptical this time

    CBoston, HSW do lose admitted applicants to Booth and INSEAD. They probably win aggregate, but I’ve seen it happen enough times.

  • HBSguest

    @Skeptical this time: Yes, HSW do lose admits to schools like Darden, Booth and INSEAD, but usually there is 1) a very compelling personal reason to choose that location (e.g. a brother that lives in Chicago is suddenly diagnosed with a major illness; a candidate decides they want to live in Virginia for the rest of their lives and rightfully figure that Darden has the best geographic location for their long-term goals), or, more commonly, there is a huge scholarship component involved. I went to HBS and was also accepted and offered a significant scholarship at a slightly lower-tier (but still top 10) school — not a full ride, but large enough to make me do a double-take. My decision to turn down the scholarship and choose HBS is due to the fact that I honestly believed then (and continue to believe today) that the case method is the absolute best learning format for me. (I know that sounds like b.s., but some of us out there genuinely believe this and choose HBS over S/W for that reason!)(it ain’t just b.s. for the essays)….But these examples of HSW getting turned down are few and far between.

    The scholarship component only solidifies CBoston’s point: even the *schools themselves* realize that certain candidates are probably going to get into a HSW and so they roll out a proverbial red carpet to have a fighting chance to try to win those people over.

    All else being equal though (geographic neutrality, equal financial aid, no strong family/personal/professional “tie” to a school), I have to agree with CBoston that few people admitted to HSW would choose another school (if they really love Tuck so much, then why did they even bother applying to HSW in the first place?), and I feel that the Economist is doing what all of these publications do: create “controversy” to get traffic and attention.

Partner Sites: C-Change Media | Poets & Quants