Yale Falls To 13th In U.S. News’ Ranking

by John A. Byrne on

USNewsshotYale University’s School of Management fell behind NYU, Duke and the University of Virginia to land in 13th place in the new U.S. News & World Report MBA ranking published today (March 12th). Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management, meantime, moved out of last year’s tie with the University of Chicago’s Booth School which fell two places to sixth.

Those are just two of many changes in the new and always controversial U.S. News annual ranking of the best full-time MBA programs in the U.S. Harvard and Stanford maintained their grip of a first place tie, while Wharton held on to its third place ranking. MIT’s Sloan School and Kellogg remained in a fourth place tie.

The biggest gains among the top 25 schools were by the University of Washington’s Foster School and the University of Minnesota’s Carlson School. Foster jumped 12 places to rise to a 23rd place with Carlson. Foster was 35th last year. Carlson rose seven places from 30th last year.

YALE DROP IS A SIGNIFICANT SURPRISE BUT DUE TO IMPROVEMENTS AT OTHER SCHOOLS

Yale’s drop out of the top ten, reported last week by Poets&Quants when U.S. News released a sneak preview of its top ten schools in alphabetical order, is a big surprise. A new and experienced dean, Edward Snyder, who had held the deanships at both Darden and Booth, has been making significant changes at the school in the past two years. So many observers would have expected the U.S. News survey to show a more positive result. It’s important to note, however, that the underlying data behind a numerical ranking is often bunched together, making changes in ranks appear more significant than they really are.

Interestingly enough, the underlying data for Yale did not change and U.S. News awarded the exact same score–an index number of 84–that Yale received last year. What made the difference was the improvement in the scores for Stern, Fuqua and Darden. Each of those three schools improved its index scores by four points in the latest survey to 87 for Stern, 86 for Fuqua, and 85 for Darden.

Just how tightly clustered many schools are can be seen by the number of MBA programs that are tied with others for the same rank. In the Top 50, more than half of the full-time MBA programs have the exact same rank as at least one other school for their numerical rank on the U.S. News list. Only 23 of the top 50 occupy a rank alone.

In numerous cases, three schools are tied for a single rank, such as Georgia Tech, Ohio State and Notre Dame, which all placed 27th. In one instance, four schools have the same rank: Arizona State, Brigham Young, Rice and Vanderbilt are all tied for 30th. And then, at a rank of 79, there are actually five tied schools: State University of New York at Binghamton, Fordham University, Syracuse, Texas Christian, and the University of Colorado.

WILD SWINGS IN THE RANKINGS ARE COMMON BECAUSE THE UNDERLYING DATA IS SO TIGHTLY CLUSTERED

The result: Peculiar and unexplainable swings in rank often occur in a single year even though no major changes were made to a school’s MBA program that could impact its true standing. Some of the more wild swings in this year’s survey affected the University of Arizona’s Eller School, which rose 13 places to a rank of 44th from 57th in 2012. The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign dropped ten places to finish 47th from 37th a year earlier.

But there were even steeper tumbles and ascents. Rennselaer Polytechnic Institute’s Lally School in Troy, N.Y.  plummeted by 26 places to finish 96th from 70th a mere 12 months ago. The University of Utah’s Eccles School jumped 23 places to finish 61st, up from 84th a year earlier. (See Winners & Losers in U.S. News’ 2013 MBA Ranking)

Like all rankings of business schools, the U.S. News list often engenders much controversy and debate. But it is among the most influential and most followed of several prominent rankings. The magazine only ranks U.S.-based schools, unlike BusinessWeek, The Financial Times, or The Economist which publish global rankings, either combined or separate.  (One other note: As a marketing ploy, U.S. News claims this is a 2014 ranking to give it greater shelf life. It is based on 2012 data and released in 2013 which is why we label it a 2013 ranking.)

U.S. News’ methodology takes into account a wealth of proprietary and school-supplied data to crank out its annual ranking of the best business schools. The magazine does its own survey of B-school deans and MBA directors (25% of the score). This year, U.S. News said about 43% of those surveyed responded, but it did not reveal how many deans were actually surveyed or how many replied.  It also does its own survey of corporate recruiters (accounting for 15% of the overall ranking and for which 16% of those surveyed responded), starting salaries and bonuses (14%), employment rates at and three months after graduation (7% to 14%, respectively), student GMATs and GREs scores (about 16%), undergrad GPAs (about 8%), and the percentage of applicants who are accepted to a school (a little over 1%). This is the first year U.S. News included GRE scores in its ranking methodology.

TULANE’S FREEMAN SCHOOL TUMBLES 24 PLACES AFTER SCANDAL

Tulane University’s Freeman School, which admitted in January that it submitted inflated data to U.S. News for five consecutive years, tumbled 24 places this year to a rank of 67th based on the now accurate information it gave to U.S. News for the ranking. The school had said it inflated average GMAT scores by an average 35 points for five straight years from 2007 through 2011. Freeman also conceded that it had falsely increased the number of completed applications it received by an average of 116 applications over the same time period. U.S. News tossed Tulane out of its ranking as a result of the admission, but the school was back in this year.

This year, Tulane said the average GMAT score for its just enrolled class of full-time MBA students was 629–some 41 points below its reported number of 670 last year. The school’s acceptance rate ballooned to 82.9%, up from the reported 56.7% number last year. The average grade point average also showed a slight decline to 3.24, from 3.30 last year, and the percentage of graduates who had job offers by commencement plummeted to 54.9%, from a reported 78.8% a year earlier.

(See following page for U.S. News’ 2013 rankings and changes)

DON’T MISS: A TO Z LIST OF TOP BUSINESS SCHOOL PROFILES

1 2 3 Next
  • Yakov

    John,

    What are the legal tricks of the trade among B-School officials to juice up ranking and improve their spots? How can they play the game?

  • Canada

    Jon,

    Two things. 1) Do you think if Duke had a higher GMAT, say 715, it could move up a point on the index and therefore the ranking? The GMAT number is about 16% of the overall number. 2) Are you able to provide the raw numbers as you did for last years rankings? It looked really close last year between those three schools (Duke, Stern and SOM) outside of the GMAT score.

  • AIG_Quant

    Some schools accept anyone with a 700+ gmat as long as they have a checkbook. Not really a great idea though since the class won’t be well-rounded and student quality definitely falls hard. Some people equate student quality with a high Gmat, but that is definitely not a great indicator. Work experience definitely tops that by far.

  • AIG_Quant

    1) Michigan Ross is definitely in a decline. Doesn’t help that it’s a public school in a decaying state. I heard weird/crazy stories about their adcom from various applicants.

    2) Duke continues to outshine its “peer” schools and I will not be surprised to see it crack the top 10 next year. Doubt it will be at it’s historical peak of #6 on USN though.

    3) Cornell still not getting any love from US News. Perhaps it’s time to create a new logo and keep marketing it’s ivy league status like Yale successfully did.

    4) Yale needs to close down it’s B-school.

    5) Darden continues to be a solid program. There is a stark difference between the economies of Virginia and Michigan.

  • highwyre237

    The oddest thing about cornell is… On BusinessWeek, the peer ranking was #2 out of the field, on this ranking it scored a 4.1 out of 5… such mixed signals… So, what business week is telling us it, Students LOVE the Johnson experience, and recruiters are pretty happy with them (ranked 12th) but usnews tells us… Students feel alright about their school (4.1 out of 5) and recruiters aren’t that impressed (3.9 out of 5)… Bleh, rankings are annoying

  • http://www.mbaover30.com/ MBA Over 30

    I think Cornell got the shaft. IMO they deserve to be about where Tuck is, and Tuck deserves to be top 5/6

  • Guest2

    Could you elaborate on the Michigan Ross stories? I am in between Michigan, Duke, and another. I was impressed during my visits to Michigan with the people and the program, but would be interested in hearing what others are saying.

  • Raghu

    which are those schools? I am sure these schools are lower ranked schools(50+). Correct if I am wrong

  • Phoenix from the flame

    I’m sure Dean Snyder and co. at Yale are fastidiously trying to explain the factors behind the rise of Duke and Darden this year. Coming from Booth, he ostensibly knows how to play the game and will hopefully reverse yale’s fall in the next year’s ranking.

  • hbsfun

    Why is NYU ranked highly? (A) Because when you go to school on Washington Square Park it’s insanely easy to intern at a bank/PE shop, startup, etc., during the year or jump on the subway to meet face-to-face with someone. That makes it a lot easier to get good experience and get hired. (B) The finance department has some of the best professors on the planet. (C) If you want to work in media, luxury, retail, or any New York-based industry it doesn’t make sense to spend 2 year anywhere else. (D) People want to be in New York, which means many applicants, which means it’s hard to get into, which means higher “selectivity” score. FYI Columbia selectivity is 20.8% while Stern has 15.7%… There is a significant difference isn’t there? Plus in Finance Stern is higher ranked…

  • elvasco1

    Just a quick, minor thing- I think Kelley and Olin should be +1 not -1.

  • johnmetovski

    Very True, Stern is far more selective than Columbia and its finance program is clearly ranked higher as per latest US News rankings

  • Orange1

    The schools you mention (10-18 types) pretty much have the same academics, students, and companies recruiting. Very little difference in quality. NYU Stern, Duke, Darden? Could argue for any of them being #10. Let’s call the variation a photo finish. Ratings for each of them will wax and wane – one will be the hot school for a while (looks like Cornell’s turn) and starting salaries/other metrics will go up and down and supporters will cheer and say “it’s on the way up, gonna beat someone else out of the top 10″
    1) I don’t think Ross is definitely in a decline. But I am amazed at how high their acceptance rate is. The continued decay of Michigan doesn’t really make a difference because most of the students are not from there and have no intention of staying.
    2) Duke is a fine school, no question about that.
    3) US News is more metric driven than other rankings so not sure if Cornell isn’t getting any love or just slightly below others due to hard, cold facts.
    4) Yale closing? A bit extreme,
    5) Darden is another fine school, no argument here.
    6) NYU Stern overrated? I have been hearing that forever but is it the school’s fault that NYC attracts a lot of highly qualified students and professors? Would you like them to move the school to the middle of Arkansas? Some very high quaiity there.

  • gasjomack

    Stern is an amazing school I won’t be surprised to see it soon into the top 6-7, just like NYU’s Law School. It has amazing faculty and its selectivity rate places Stern among the 5 most selective business schools in the world.

  • Dreamer

    I don’t think that looking at the percentage tells you much without knowing the composition of the applicants. Berkeley has a lower % rate but i am confident is not harder to get in than Wharton, Chicago or MIT. It is probably a bit of self selection as the applicant pool is stronger at Columbia.

  • hbsfun

    First, the applicant pool is certainly not stronger at Columbia and second, a selectivity of 20.8% at Columbia compared to 15.7% at Stern is a significant margin to justify your conclusion.

  • Shaniqua James

    Very amusing.

  • P&Q Fan

    Top 6 or 7? Lol

  • Rosser

    I’m at Ross. It’s an incredible program. Every faculty is top-10 under US News. It’s amazing if you have any interest in venture capital Come to GBR!

  • Dreamer

    I disagree with you. Columbia has a stronger brand so it will attract better people than NYU so though the admit rate is higher at Columbia, selectivity is much higher at Columbia than NYU. I never met anyone who was accepted at NYU but rejected at Columbia. Columbia is harder to get in. If you go to GMAT club and see the profiles of people most have admit at NYU denied at Columbia.

  • http://www.mbaover30.com/ MBA Over 30

    Columbia’s selectivity does not suffer because of NYU. Columbia is competing against candidates who are also applying to H/S/W,M,B,K. It wins some of those and loses some of those. I doubt Columbia looses many admits to NYU; the other way around is more likely. Booth goes through the same thing. Their selectivity number is about 22-25% (where as USC is about 70%), but they are competing against H/S/W/M/K. There is nuance around selectivity numbers that the raw value does not explain.

  • RossIsDead

    Go with Duke. No question. It is a program on the rise.

  • Caltech

    Cornell is horrible. Trust me. They should close down the B-school.

  • MIT_Brass_Rat

    I feel like Duke will break into the M-7 over the next few years. It is just a fundamentally sound program. From what I hear, Duke has a great faculty, an extremely collaborative culture, and global aspirations. The students also seem to really cherish their B-school experience at Fuqua, and happy students equal happy alumni.
    Good signs indeed.

  • http://www.mbaover30.com/ MBA Over 30

    Based on what data?

  • Another Rosser

    Your advice is dubious given your user name. It is well known that Ross and Duke fight for cross admits, as they are very similar schools.

    I’ll state my bias right here and say that I am at Ross now, and agree with Rosser below. Guest2, you should go to both schools’ admitted students’ open houses (most definitely come to Michigan’s GBR), and make the decision for yourself as to where you would be the most content and get the most for yourself.

    As to my sell pitch for my school: Ross is an excellent top-tier MBA program. If you want IB, consulting, marketing/brand mgmt/CPG, entrepreneurship, etc. Ross can and will get you there. It also has amazing extracurriculars as part of an incredible community, and also has 3 major investment funds. It’s MBA program offerings, including MAP and the venture funds, are currently being mimicked and implemented across other top schools.

    My only, most objective advice: do your own due diligence and trust that over anonymous commentators here, or on any other pre-MBA website for that matter.

  • http://www.mbaover30.com/ MBA Over 30

    Also its a reflection of who you are competing against. Berkeley is in an interesting position where besides maybe Tuck, they really don’t have “peers”, per se. Pretty much everyone considering “above” them rankings wise will get picked over them for the vast majority of qualified applicants. Then on the other end of the spectrum (the much more crowded end), Haas is a clear and easy choice over just about any school considered “below” them rankings wise. I really don’t count Columbia because despite their US News ranking they compete a lot more with H/S/W/M/B/K due to their brand and legacy in finance. With all of this being considered, it makes sense why Berkeley would have a tighter selectivity metric than HBS. By no means does that implicate that most students would chose them over Harvard. I would love for some brilliant mathematician to come up with an algorithm that could account for the relative nature of school groupings in terms of determining the implications of yield stats.

  • Guest

    Excellent conclusion strongly supported by your provided data analysis. Well done!

  • guest

    wasn’t stern 11th in 2012? so the change should be +1?

  • James Correa

    I really like your thoughts on Berkeley above, and I kind of see it in the rankings as well. Even in the US News Index scores there seems to be a buffer between the schools above and below Haas. That being said, Berkeley is a very small program and one that has gone through pains to articulate a clear and powerful culture. On a personal level, when you combine those attributes with the fact they have a very strong program in my intended career field (clean energy), not to mention being based in California, I wouldn’t bat an eyelash at picking Berkeley over any school that wasn’t H/S or MIT — and even then, for my goals, I think Haas is playing on an even field.

  • Booth guy

    I believe Cornell is a casualty of the “numbers” game. Most people would admit that Cornell is a stronger overall program than Stern, but has a lower average GMAT which accounts for 16% of the ranking. Johnson admissions tries very hard to admit a diverse class and probably gives no added points for say a 740 vs a 680. Once you’re in the ballpark, they look at other intangibles.

  • Orange1

    Not so sure it is stronger overall. Different? Yes but two excellent programs.

  • mindbullet26

    Columbia has an early decision process that admits a higher percentage of its candidates, then admissions % drops significantly in round 3. When you aggregate everything, it ends up slightly higher, but my thought is that regular admissions rounds are quite competitive.

  • justastudent

    Kind of weird to see Booth decline when it’s currently in it’s “best” momentum phase. Thoughts?

  • kide83

    I also believe that Tuck has a better program than Haas or Columbia. I do not understand why is it ranked below those programs if it has better average salary and employment percentage, amongst other really important metrics.

  • AIG_Quant

    I agree. No reason for Duke not to be ranked up there along with Kellogg, Columbia, Berkeley or even Dartmouth. Faculty and recruiting is just as good but the culture and student experience seems to be top notch.

  • Yakov

    Wow, 40% selectivity at Ross. How can this happen. Only two years ago, it was 25% with rising application numbers and what has led to this significant changes? What is their yield? I just heard from internationals that the lack of ‘no-cosigner loan’ has hurt Ross and internationals avoid Ross.

  • 2cents

    I might be coming at this with a different perspective having just finished the application/interview process, but in my limited experience there definitely appeared to be a small but noticeable difference between each of these “tiers” of business school programs. Duke’s network, while strong, simply just felt more regional, a la Darden and SOM, than schools like Kellogg, Columbia, Berkeley or Dartmouth (I would throw MIT and Booth in there, I didn’t sense those schools had really separated themselves to the 1 and 1a tier like some seem to be implying). Further, Duke, Darden and SOM seemed to have a lot more crossover in current students (applicants who got into both and somewhat proportionally decided between the two) compared to crossover with that next tier. It felt like these schools still emphasized program specific strengths and not program wide strengths. With that said old money doesn’t necessarily mean new wealth will follow, and I’d expect to see those schools blossom in the coming years. For now though I’m sticking with the old money.

  • Orange1

    Everybody in 10-18 thinks their school should be ranked higher. Once and for all, it is a tier system vs. individual ranking numbers:
    Tier 1:
    Harvard Stanford
    Tier 1a:
    Wharton, Chicago and or Northwestern
    Tier 2:
    Chicago and or Northwestern, MIT, Haas, Columbia, Tuck
    Tier 3:
    Duke, Darden, NYU Stern, Cornell, Michigan, Yale, UCLA, Carnegie Mellon, Texas
    The good thing about US News rankings is that ties are allowed. But to move a school from Tier 2 to Tier 3? Unless the Tier 2 starts accepting a 600 average GMAT or starting salaries fall 20% or the faculty stops doing research, how is a Tier 3 going to move into that area? Who are they going to take out? Maybe we are at the point where the differences in student and faculty quality in at least Tier 2 and Tier 3 are negligible.

  • Guest

    I can mostly agree with this, other than arguing as to who does and doesn’t belong in tier2/tier3.

    In my opinion, drop Haas into tier 3, and drop CMU and Texas out of Tier 3, and you are almost good to go. Maybe put Columbia in at 2a (I personally think Col is lower than Chi, K, MIT, and Tuck)

  • castor

    I agree with hbsfun that 5.1% points in terms of selectivity is a very wide margin which far from justifies your conclusion. If you also take it from another angle, the selectivity % of Columbia deteriorated by 4.9 points (the third worse deterioration) versus that of NYU Stern at 2.1 points. Does’t this ring the bell? Columbia just caries the Ivy League Status. Also in Finance, Stern is constantly ranked higher than Columbia without any doubt.

  • germain

    This is much more accurate for TOP TIER BUSINESS SCHOOLS:

    Top 10 Business Schools:
    Top Tier 1:
    Harvard Stanford
    Top Tier 1b:
    Wharton, Chicago and or Northwestern
    Top Tier 2:
    Chicago and or Northwestern, MIT, Haas
    Top Tier 2c:
    Columbia, Tuck, NYU Stern

    Top 11+ to top 20 Business Schools:
    Top Tier 3:
    Duke, Darden, Michigan, Yale
    Top Tier 3b:
    UCLA, Cornell, Carnegie Mellon, Texas

  • ivanreognovs

    I totally agree with germain. Some corrections: Top tier 2 Chicago and Northwestern should be removed since they are included under Tier 1b and Columbia, Tuck and Stern should be under 2b (and not 2c as mistakenly placed)

  • MBARoadWarrior

    It seems like people are pretty stuck on “tiers”. I think you’ll find the same challenges in ranking your tiers as the companies that rank grad schools. 1st what are you using the rank the schools? Opinion? Brand Strength (and if so in what field, it matters)? Starting pay? What about endowment? 2nd At the end of the day going to any of the top 10 or so schools will get you in the door of many of the top companies. They all open doors. After that, the success you achieve is on you.

  • 2cents

    would agree with Orange1. Guest – prior to ’08 everything I read says that Columbia was teetering on the 1a level. Dropping a school two tiers due to a selectivity bubble burst associated with the financial crash seems somewhat reactionary if the degree was nearly that valuable doesn’t it? For example, I would probably pick Columbia over Haas due largely to the transferability of the degree in the international scene with the sense that the schools are on par. Regardless glad to see people are high on the IL schools.

  • Datamotherlover

    Take a look at their methodology — kinda obscure data sourcing. At the end of the day, US news is far from the authority in Bschool rankings.

  • Guest

    Emory is on the same level as UCLA, Carnegie Mellon, and Texas. Despite the rankings, Cornell is a better than those I just mentioned, and Duke/Darden/Michigan are better than Yale. I’d probably add a 3c group and have Duke/Michigan/Darden as tier 3, Cornell/Yale as tier 3b, and UCLA/Tepper/UT/Emory as tier 3c. Yale just isn’t the same as Duke/UM/Darden, and Emory is definitely in the same category as UT-Austin (and probably better if you’re looking for a more traditional path, like consulting).

  • Justin

    Also, as much weight as USN rankings carry, placing Tuck behind Booth, Kellogg, or Haas is completely laughable (and not at all what employers actually think…which should probably be the most important metric). In the eyes of employers, Tuck and Columbia both are very much ahead of Haas, and one could argue ahead of Booth and Kellogg as well. Ask employers, as admissions consultants, etc., and this is the tier grouping you’d get the majority of the time:

    Tier 1:
    Harvard/Stanford
    Tier 2:
    Wharton
    Tier 2b:
    Columbia/Tuck/Booth/Kellogg/Sloan
    Tier 3:
    Haas/Stern/Fuqua/Darden/Michigan
    Tier 3b:
    Cornell/Yale/UCLA/Tepper/McCombs/Goizueta

  • MBAdude

    I think your on to something. Look at how clustered the rankings became this year as compared to last.

    Rank 2013 School Name Change in Score Ranking 2013 Ranking 2012
    1 Harvard 0 100 100
    1 Stanford 0 100 100
    3 Wharton 3 99 96
    4 Sloan 4 97 93
    4 Kellogg 4 97 93
    6 Booth 3 96 93
    7 Haas 3 93 90
    8 Columbia 2 91 89
    9 Tuck 3 90 87
    10 Stern 4 87 83
    11 Fuqua 4 86 82
    12 Darden 4 85 81
    13 SOM 0 84 84
    14 Ross 1 82 81
    14 UCLA 3 82 79

  • mark

    loool Cornell better than Stern? Are you kidding? Did you see the insane difference in the ranks not only under US news but all over. Did you see the huge difference in selectivity, employment % and placements? This is so amusing…

  • Do_As_I_Say_Not_As_I_Do

    On what basis should Cornell be ranked higher?

  • MBA student

    Justin, I’d agree with you on this for the just about all of it, save for one thing. I would actually drop Tepper, UT-A, and Emory down a tier. I don’t think you can argue that these schools are equivalent, tier-wise, to Cornell, SOM, or UCLA. I would say they are the tier 4.

  • highwyre237

    These are my Tiers

    Tier 1: HBS, Stanford
    Tier 1a: Wharton
    Tier 2: Kellogg, Booth
    Tier 2a: Sloan, Tuck, CBS
    Tier 3: Hass, Stern, Fuqua, Darden
    Tier 3a: Ross, Johnson, Yale, Anderson
    Tier 4: CMU, UT, Emory, UNC

  • Justin

    Yes, that makes sense. After thinking more about it, I agree Cornell, Yale, and UCLA are a touch higher than McCombs/Goizueta. I’m not sure about Tepper. I know it’s sort of a niche program, but I just see it being in the same class as Cornell/Yale/UCLA. However, I’m well aware that we’re splitting hairs at this level.

  • Jcarringon

    My take on this:

    1) US news should go to a tier system of rankings.S

    2) Yale seems to have lost some ground but year-to-year rankings should be taken with a grain of salt. It’s still a big brand.

    3) Ross needs to be a bit worried. It used to be a top 10 school..it seems to be in decline.

    4) I’m genuinely surprised to see Stern in the top 10. Seems like Duke should be in the top 10.

    5) Cornell seems to get a lot of positive press from everyone, but seems unable to make that run towards the top 10.

    6) UCLA seems a bit overrated at 14. Carnegie Mellon is underrated at 19.

    7) Realistically, a good candidate should not pick a school below UNC. That’s the point at which an MBA starts to become a bigger gamble and the quality of the students also drops. Indiana Kelly at 22 might be the exception.

    8) Carson Minn got some good press from P&Q and the dean – Ms. Zaheer was profiled. But frankly, it’s quite lucky to be ahead of McDonough.

    9) USC has paid the price for stocking up its program with rich domestic kids and internationals who can pay $$$. The companies that recruit know this and now the grads are finding it extremely hard to get jobs. It’s a nightmare down in USC for MBA grads.

    10) Frankly, I don’t see any difference between schools in the top 5 or 6. I also don’t see much difference between the schools ranked 7 to 12. They will all provide excellent career opportunities. If you can get into a top 5 school – great. If not, a top 12 or 13 school will just as well get the job done for you. I don’t see MIT or Kellogg or Stern having a huge advantage over a Hass or Tuck or Fuqua. Of course, H/S/W might be another story.

    Predictions for 2013: Tuck beats Columbia. Duke and Darden will beat Stern. Cornell will improve 2 spots. Ross will be out of the top 15. UNC will be out of the top 20 and USC will be out of the top 30.

  • Guest

    Reading Comp fail. I never implied that it should be ranked higher, I just called out Caltech’s impeccable logic and conclusion.

    PS. I don’t go to Johnson

  • Patrick Ó’Raghaillaigh

    What a great moment for all of us Catholics. We have a new pope! God bless everyone. I’m a bit surprised to see My Irish are not in the top 15. Mendoza is quite underrated and deserves to be much higher ranked.

    Go Irish

  • http://www.mbaover30.com/ MBA Over 30

    Its just a different methodology. BW weighs surveys more heavily and US News weighs various data points such as avg GPA,GMAT,selectivity, yield, avg salary at grad, etc. They are both imperfect. US News is somewhat the standard across all fields of study. BW gets a good deal of clout within the business world. IMO, yield is the most telling factor; though, it should be adjusted based on which schools you compete with most. For instance, Booth’s 56% or so should be adjusted for the fact that they are most often competing with the schools that the most qualified applicants are generally gunning for. Ultimately, reputation matters most…and even that comes in many colors. If you change regions, industries, etc., even that becomes a game of musical chairs. In southern California, there is no job that an HBS grad can get that a USC grad cannot. Same with UWash in the Pacific NW or UT in the Southwest. An employer in DC may be more impressed by an Ivy than Stanford. It goes on and on in circles. Applicants should be aware of what weight their target school’s brand carries in the realms that they want to do business in.

  • http://www.mbaover30.com/ MBA Over 30

    Sounds like that loan deal delivered the blow, which makes sense. Ross seems more dependent than most on getting its high quality applicants from overseas. Domestic talent will largely lunge for top 10 and local talent will focus on Booth or Kellogg.

  • http://www.mbaover30.com/ MBA Over 30

    NYU’s location brings it a lot of high GMAT-scoring applicants from finance and consulting by GMAT.

  • http://www.mbaover30.com/ MBA Over 30

    I’d love to see metrics such as share of placement in Fortune 100 companies, % of class that are C-Level or company founders within 5 years, or % of startups over $1M in revenues in value within 3 years of graduation…more metrics based on RESULTS as opposed to the meer “potential” of incoming applicants with high GMATS (after spending thousands in tutoring to get the score) or comparative salary numbers without being adjusted by COL indexes to make those numbers more equitable for schools whose grads end up in places like Ohio, Atlanta or Houston.

  • Anon

    There are too few MBA graduates that are C-Level (at the F500) within 5 years of graduation regardless of company. For company founders, how do you measure that? Anyone can start a company. These variables, even if measurable, won’t tell you much about the strength of an MBA program in general. US News focuses on certain metrics that it feels describes the quality level of an incoming class. After that, there are other rankings (such as B&W) that provide a “satisfaction” index for students coming out.

  • anon

    regardless of *school

  • Columbia

    I would pick Duke. Better brand, better atmosphere (this is subjective) and a more collaborative culture.
    This is just anecdotal advice, I haven’t attended either school.

  • Ozzie

    Booth has been overrated for a while IMHO. I think that it should be ranked 8-10.

  • http://www.mbaover30.com/ MBA Over 30

    I wouldn’t expect anyone to be a C-Level exec at a F500 within 5 years. I’d also want to vet companies that people claimed to found for revenue and tax status in order to count. The data is available. It would be an arduous, dirty job to put together and execute the process of collecting it–and take a lot of buy in from schools, but it is not an impossible mission. Either there is a commitment to do this right or there is not. Other weaknesses, such as not adjusting starting salaries for COL index, wouldn’t be nearly as hard to cancel out. My problem with satisfaction indexes is that they are purely subjective. Satisfaction relative to what? Relative to the failed expectation that you might get a $15M exit by the time you graduated from Stanford or relative to the exceeded expectation that you weren’t sure you’d get a 100k coming out of Kelley and you did after all? I think US News has the right idea to focus on hard data…but it needs to be much more rigorous to really measure what it claims to measure. I’m not even sure that it measures “quality” of an incoming class when you consider how much “assistance” many admits at top 10 or so schools get along the way. I don’t think there is ever a better measuring stick for anything than results.

  • raity

    Stern is a good school. unfortunately it’s just a NYU school.. NYU just doesn’t have the brand power or prestige compared to schools like Cornell. Also, Cornell trumps Stern in BW and Forbes ranking.

  • lora

    Tier 1: HBS, Stanford
    Tier 1a: Wharton
    Tier 2: Kellogg, Booth
    Tier 2a: Sloan, Tuck, CBS
    Tier 3: Hass, Stern, Fuqua, Darden
    Tier 3a: Ross, Johnson, Yale, Anderson
    Tier 4: CMU, UT, Emory, UNC

    Stern is way better than Cornell. You may argue about Cornell vs Ross or Anderson but its a huge margin below Stern. Stern is a brand on its own similar to the brand of NYU Law School. If you wish we may discuss about Stern vs CBS.

  • rafael

    NYU Has always been a top 10 school. Its location and great finance faculty, placements, etc attract very high caliber candidates, makes it the 5th most selective school in the world and therefore it undoubtedly remains (emphasis) a solid top 10 business school

  • rafael

    Stern is a way better school than Cornell. I would never discuss Cornell vs Stern but I would discuss Stern vs Columbia (Stern is even far more elective). Always, always rely on the US news rankings- highly prestigious firms rely on US news only

  • Tomh

    I feel sorry for stern student’s inferiority complex.. Entire universe knows people that get rejected from cbs goes to stern. It has been and always be a cbs backup school. Once Cornell opens it’s mba program in nyc, stern will really get squeezed between two ivy league schools. Enjoy your location advantage while it lasts.

  • Yakov

    I heard that Johnson, Duke and Ross tend to do a more holistic admission and look beyond GMAT at career arc, diversity and personal development. The opposite would be more GMAT centered BSchools such as Yale.

  • avivalasvegas

    What are you smokin’? If I give you my P.O.Box, will you mail me some of that? I need to lose my grip on reality once in a while. When you come back to it, you’ll realize that Columbia is on a rankings freefall for a reason and that Tuck , while a good program, cannot compete with schools like Kellogg and Booth. It is widely considered the bottom rung of the top 10, while still commanding the respect of a top 10. Kellogg, Booth compete for Top 5 consistently.

  • 2cents

    I mentioned this before – not sure I’d say Columbia is in a ranking free fall, they stayed in the same spot and their scores went up, seems like they’ve actually bottomed. I don’t know enough about Tuck to make an educated statement about them. hopefully to add credibility, I’m choosing between the Chicago schools, thanks for the love.

  • b-school guy

    Take a look at yield – people who get accepted and choose to go – a good test of what applicants think (ranked by yield based on latest US News data) – interesting that Duke ranks closely to its peer schools

    School
    Admitted
    Enrolled
    Yield

    Harvard
    1029
    919
    89.3%

    Stanford
    474
    398
    84.0%

    Columbia
    1126
    741
    65.8%

    Wharton
    1283
    837
    65.2%

    MIT
    645
    413
    64.0%

    Booth
    929
    575
    61.9%

    Kellogg
    1127
    625
    55.5%

    Tuck
    510
    282
    55.3%

    NYU
    615
    322
    52.4%

    Haas
    461
    240
    52.1%

    Duke
    868
    432
    49.8%

    Darden
    657
    320
    48.7%

    Yale
    545
    249
    45.7%

  • b-school guy

    School
    Admitted
    Enrolled
    Yield

    Harvard
    1029
    919
    89.3%

    Stanford
    474
    398
    84.0%

    Columbia
    1126
    741
    65.8%

    Wharton
    1283
    837
    65.2%

    MIT
    645
    413
    64.0%

    Booth
    929
    575
    61.9%

    Kellogg
    1127
    625
    55.5%

    Tuck
    510
    282
    55.3%

    NYU
    615
    322
    52.4%

    Haas
    461
    240
    52.1%

    Duke
    868
    432
    49.8%

    Darden
    657
    320
    48.7%

    Yale
    545
    249
    45.7%

  • b-school

    take a look at yield people -a true test of what applicants think:

    School
    Admitted
    Enrolled
    Yield

    Harvard
    1029
    919
    89.3%

    Stanford
    474
    398
    84.0%

    Columbia
    1126
    741
    65.8%

    Wharton
    1283
    837
    65.2%

    MIT
    645
    413
    64.0%

    Booth
    929
    575
    61.9%

    Kellogg
    1127
    625
    55.5%

    Tuck
    510
    282
    55.3%

    NYU
    615
    322
    52.4%

    Haas
    461
    240
    52.1%

    Duke
    868
    432
    49.8%

    Darden
    657
    320
    48.7%

    Yale
    545
    249
    45.7%

  • Yakov

    There is an old NYC joke among B-Schools applicants.
    Q: What have Columbia and NYU students in common?
    Q: Both got accepted at NYU.

  • H

    I’d say that the notion of most students choosing cbs over stern is still mostly true, but it’s becoming less so. The gap has definitely narrowed. And it’s interesting…I feel like the only people who think that stern students have an inferiority complex are the ones who don’t actually go there, and just assume that their students must have an inferiority complex because Columbia is so close by. Maybe Stern is often a backup for cbs, but cbs is just as much a backup for Wharton, and often even Booth. And I’d say the gap between columbia and wharton is much bigger than the gap between stern and columbia. I also hate how finance-centric these comparisons seem to be (partially guilty). If i were going into marketing, for example, and had a choice between nyu and cbs, I know where I’d rather spend two years. I’m sure the students love it, but everything at CBS just feels so disconnected from itself, if that makes any sense.

  • Justin

    Well, if I based my above post solely on the rankings, then I can see your argument. But, the the people I’ve spoken with (a couple of admissions consultants and a friend at McK) all have said Tuck is viewed as a top 5/6 program, regardless of the rankings. Tuck isn’t for everyone, due to a number of factors, but it is indeed in the same realm as Booth and Kellogg.

  • avivalasvegas

    In the minds of recruiters, industrialists, CEO’s and their conglomerates and in the pages of history, it’s always been:

    1) Harvard

    2) Stanford

    3) Wharton

    4) Kellogg

    5) Booth

    6) MIT

    7) Columbia

    Everybody else comes after. Positions 5-7 have swapped with each other over time but if you don’t go to one of these schools, you’re not considered to be on the same level. Sucks (esp with a place like Harvard being on top) but that is a time tested reality.

  • ProspectiveStudent

    On what basis should it not be ranked higher. As a prospective student, my preference is Cornell over NYU Stern – and this is not unique in discussions with other peer prospects that Im speaking with. If the metric you are using is simply average GMAT scores, than so be it NYU would rank higher. Hopefully however, you are looking beyond some GMAT points and GPA points?? I mean NYU is naturally advantaged (for the time being only I might add) since it is in NYC and thus attracts a far greater number of applicants than Cornell traditionally has – thus they can push acceptance rates slightly lower and GMATs up a bit. This is why USN ranks NYU higher and that is fine – NYU is an outstanding school that I would be thrilled to attend! However, the many other rankings have concluded that Cornell should be ranked higher and have made this effective in their rankings (BW = Cornell # 7 and NYU # 16, Forbes has Cornell at # 8 and NYU at #18, and P&Q Composite ranking has Cornell at # 11 and NYU at # 14). Cornell’s applications are surging – one of the few. The past is great, but Johnson from my visit had an energy that I did not feel at many other schools, NYU included. I felt a similar buzz at Duke as at Cornell.
    Also, the NYC Campus that Cornell beat out Stanford to develop in NYC will be a long-term game changer IMO – but not overnight. A second Ivy League business school in the business capital of the World. Cornell will make a strong challenge for #2 in NYC after Columbia – and NYC will be all the better to have 3 incredible business schools within its boundaries. To be fair these are two peer schools who will inspire each other to be even better. Just my thoughts. Thx

  • rick

    The gap between Stern and CBS is so minimal I would say that there isn’t any difference at all. Stern is definitely harder to get into and its finance department is undoubtedly ranked higher than CBS. However, CBS has the “Ivy League” status which “saves” it from further decline…

  • rick

    Cornell will never ever outrank Stern.

  • rick

    to add:

    Q: And what is their difference?

    A: Columbia people got full scholarship

  • makmie

    It appears that NYU Stern is doing very well given so much attention and discussion around the school (envy?). This is a real indicator from rival schools’ students/Stern rejects/Competing schools (such as CBS which, as rightly mentioned earlier, is in a ranking free fall…) that they clearly see Stern on the rise…

  • Dreamer

    No because that doe snot take into account self-selection. Wharton prob competes for students with H/S while Columbia competes with NYU/Tuck etc.

  • Dreamer

    The results is a good point but you might be attributing too much to the degree and not the person. I don’t think you become successful because you went to H/S/W but rather you were successful so you went to H/S/W and the school might actually not matter much. Results I think might tell you how good the school is because it attracts the most successful people.

  • Dreamer

    You speak the truth MBAover30

  • ProspectiveStudent

    Cornell already does out rank Stern???? Sure USN has NYU ahead but BW = Cornell # 7 and NYU # 16, Forbes has Cornell at # 8 and NYU at #18, and P&Q’s Composite ranking (which measures all the major rankings) has Cornell at # 11 and NYU at # 14. IF USN is your only yardstick then we agree. Otherwise we do not agree on this one – but respect the opinion. I would be very happy to attend both schools! However, I favor Cornell if given the choice – just my opinion.
    However, I think we can see that this is not a clear case and truthfully and fairly – they are peer schools…
    Again – only my thoughts and I appreciate the discussion and differences of opinion. Thx!

  • ThisIsFunny

    I take it you went to Stern, want to go to Stern, or are going to Stern – and in any case/event – congrats because Stern is a fantastc school. However, I have to laugh at how outrageous your USN rankings bias is – clearly you favor Stern, and you should becuase it is a top school. But it is funny, becuase when I speak with my Cornell friends, it just must be a coincidence that they tell me that BW, P&Q, and Forbes are the best rankings and that most “highly prestigious firms” only rely on those three rankings…
    Both schools are excellent – I find it hilarious to say that one is WAY better. Kinda silly – no?
    Cheers!

  • Patrick

    According the latest Business Week ranking, Tuck ranks 11th for employer satisfaction, while Booth and Kellogg rank 1st and 4th respectively.

  • Justin

    Does the number of respondents impact that metric? Listen, you guys (and gals if applicable) can continue to beat down my door on this. I’m cool with that…I’m tough. I’m not saying my word is the end-all-be-all. I’m simply saying that the few people I’ve spoken with (again, a couple of admissions consultants and a good friend at McK) said they view Tuck in that 5/6 range. They didn’t just say “they” felt that way, but that many of their peers felt that way. I realize them speaking for their peers is nothing more than second hand information, so I’m taking them at their word. I also don’t claim to be a b-school czar. Hell, I’m relatively new to the game (i.e. I haven’t even applied yet). Tuck is currently on my [semi] short list…I’m not sure they’ll stay there simply because I’m not sure I want to be in Hanover for 2 years (although I do jive well with the “outdoorsy” [too tired to come up with a better description] group). I’m just throwing in my opinion, which I wholly admit is based on perusing this site and discussing the topic with the few people I know who know more than I in this regard. Bottom line: I’m not Tuck’s drummer boy, and I don’t really care if others on this site (or anywhere else for that matter) view Tuck below Kellogg, or Booth below Sloan, or UVA below Michigan, etc. The only thing I strongly disagreed with was having Haas as a “tier” above Tuck, which I just don’t think is the case (Haas is a great program btw, and if I was interested in being on the west coast, it would be near the top of my list). Definitely enjoyed the dialogue ladies and gents…Ciao.

  • Orange1

    @Prospective, I know you like Conrell and that is fine. But you are also not looking at the FT and Economist. Personally, I look at USN/BW/FT and the others are discounted. Forbes measures only ONE thing,
    My problem with BW is that there are such big fluctuations. How can an institution change so quickly? And I also thought that the Cornell MBA in NYC is not going to be the full program?
    Personally, I think they are both of the same caliber and are going to get someone into the same companies – maybe one year one will have a higher GMAT, maybe another year the other will have slightly better placement. I would have no problem at either one of them.

  • ProspectiveStudentj

    @Orange1

    Fair enough points – respect the thoughts. A couple of things though; what Forbes measures is perhaps the most important – no? Return on Investment after 5 years is what Forbes I all about – while I agree it should not be your only measure – I would say it bears strong consideration. FT and Economist are great global measures but many criticize their methodologies. In any event both schools in question measure pretty close to one another. Again, I think P&Q as a composite ranking is great because it aggregates and reduces biases – and the result – as I think we are both saying is that these two schools are peers and terrific schools. Cornell has a slight edge in the rankings at the moment (2 spots or so in P&Q’s Composite) but next year that could just easily bounce the other way. Two great programs and I hope I am lucky enough to attend either.

    BTW and to your other question, When I visited Cornell, the new Dean indicated that the plans for the NYC Campus included 1 yr accelerated MBAs, full time MBAs, and exec MBAs, but the timing is still being debated for these offerings….exciting for the long term.
    Thx again

  • http://twitter.com/chilledfire cmoney

    You’d have to believe that Duke would go up at least a couple spots. Just a guess but it seems that Duke is using the GMAT as more of a measure a certain threshold competency. Further, I dont know if I agree with the US New’s philosophy: greater gmat = greater quality of students = greater prestige of a MBA program. What is the ranking actually trying to measure? The ability of incoming students? Well that is great – Picture Harvard’s MBA program as a 2 year vacation to Fiji. I am sure it would be a good time but it wouldnt really have the “impact” everyone is looking for.

    Wouldn’t it be more useful to measure the net impact the program has on a student. If we are to believe the all mumbo jumbo that top MBA marketing materials reference:”impact”, “transformative”, blah blah whatever – wouldnt it be interesting to know information such as the 5 year job satisfaction rate, level of happiness, or some type of measure of ambition. I know this all soft stuff that is hard to quantify but shouldn’t we be more interested in the outputs rather than the inputs?

    To sum up this mini-rant: The gmat is a useful measure of a students ability handle the MBA course load, but not such a useful measure in judging the quality of an MBA program.

  • orangecowboyhat

    You should probably learn how to use “it’s” and “its” properly before you start giving universities long-term planning advice. Yale will be ahead of NYU, Darden, and Fuqua again next year, and probably ahead of Tuck within the next 2-3 years.

  • Andrew

    Well said bro! top post.

  • Orange1

    MBA Over 30 does make some good points. Statistics can say whatever you want them to say. If someone goes to UWash and takes advantage of every possible opportunity at that school and lands at a Pac NW job and loves it and is well thought of, does it make a difference that he didn’t get that same job coming out of UCLA or Michigan or Cal Berkley? Business school is all about the individual. If a company is recruiting in NYC and seeing a pool of Wharton, NYU Stern., Columbia, and Cornell MBAs, does anyone really think that they are going to not pick a great person from the lower ranked school just because of where they went?

  • sevestus

    Hahahaha that’s a real joke! Ahead of Stern…never again. Stern is just an amazing school far better than Yale. Also, Darden and Fuqua are easily better than Yale. That was the end of Yale I am afraid…it’s just a good school nothing more.

  • sevestus

    Prospective, honestly Stern is a far better school. Cornell is great but Stern is far better by all means and angles. Placements are far better, US news rankings are consistently better and admissions are insanely much more rigorous to get into Stern vs Cornell. This comparison between those 2 schools should never even be on the “table”.

  • ProspectiveStudent

    Respect the opinion completely but FULLY disagree – respectfully of course. We agree tat they are both fantastic schools but they are comparable on balance in terms of quality – on that we disagree and so be it!
    Cheers!

  • AIG_Quant

    That is what makes Fuqua great. They look well beyond the GMAT and more into EQ – Emotional Intelligence and other aspects of an application. Would you rather have a classmate who has a 760 and is as exciting to talk to as a box of rocks, or would you rather have the charismatic 670 guy who has great leadership potential?

  • jmainel

    CBS>=Stern>Yale>Cornel. I am a CBS grad and I am very concerned of the fact that Stern is getting so close to CBS.

  • avivalasvegas

    I don’t believe its in the same realm at Booth and Kellogg. Not far but more along the lines of Columbia rival. There are just too many distinguishing factors working against Tuck for it to be a top 5 program.

  • agree

    completely agree with avivaLV. Tuck is a great school but definitely not in the same tier with Kellogg,Booth,Mit..

    H->S->W->K/B->Mit->Col->Haas/Tuck->NYU

  • Guest

    test

  • mbasshole

    Agree with the above – Anecdotally, I go to HWS, and if not here, I would have gone to Tuck. I also know a lot of people here that would have gone to Tuck, but did not even consider MIT/Booth.

  • Socrates

    Having just gone through applications and school visits I have to agree. I visited Duke 3 times and the interaction I had with the student body was noticeably lack-luster compared to the 7 other schools I visited. For example, nobody responded to my emails to coffee chat. When I met students on campus they did not carry themselves as well as other school’s students. And what shocked me at Duke is how many students went into “coasting” mode simply because they had fulfilled their credit requirements. One week prior at Penn the students were working their asses off, but at Duke they were golfing 4 hours a day and telling me how much “fun” they have. It felt like they were slacking off. I thought, is this school or is this high school? The truth is I was far more impressed with the prospective students than I was with the current students. I would have gone to Duke but it was clearly not my top choice. I know there are solid people at that program, but I felt the weight of the mediocre pulling a little too hard.

  • Ian

    You just convinced me to apply to Duke this year.

  • Ian

    Columbia isn’t really competing with Stern.

    Columbia competes with the rest of the M7. Stern competes with the entirety of the Top 15.

  • Ian

    (To be fair, Duke does not draw from the same set of highly qualified applicants as the top schools do.)

  • Ian

    Smaller schools can typically get away with this (YSOM comes to mind).

  • Fortherecord

    This is insane. If anything, Ross is less likely to get talent from overseas since neither Ross nor Michigan have much brand equity overseas compared to Ivys and other well known brands (UCLA, Stanford, etc.)

  • Canada

    Not sure what you mean here. UCLA has a mean GMAT of 704 almost 15 points higher than Duke. I doubt that UCLA draws from a different set of highly qualified applicants as compared to Duke.

  • avivalasvegas

    We have the same rivalry in Chicago albeit at the higher end of the ranking spectrum. Columbia’s position has fallen and Stern is pushing hard, so naturally the rivalry gets more intense. Take comfort in knowing that both are great schools and Columbia, atleast for now, remains M7.

  • TheGrandWizard

    Ross is the KKK of Business Schools

  • newguy1

    Hi,
    I recently got admitted to the full time MBA program at Yale SOM and Duke Fuqua. I am an international candidate and want to break into investment banking post my MBA. which school would you suggest?
    Thanks

  • Tyl

    Ya, it’s so hard to really compare schools. First, to the public, so much gets skewed, and it’s really hard to tell what is valuable information and what isn’t.

    Second, like you said James, is that it greatly depends on what you want to do. I’m going to apply to a handful of top 10 school, and like you said, I may end up picking Haas over almost anyone outside of the schools you mentioned.

    But that means nothing for someone interested in finance, and that is what makes it particularly difficult to come up with any hard and fast rules.

  • avivalasvegas

    Gotta love the Duka fanboys! Duke has never been a top 10 school. To compare it to schools like Kellogg and Columbia is just silly. Getting all Duke admits and alums to post on here won’t change that reality

  • Anna

    There is not a Wharton student who wouldn’t have taken Harvard if they had gotten in. Incredible inferiority complex. Stanford doesn’t enter into equation unless you want to work on the west coast.

  • rubicx

    It’s still Yale. Long-term reputations are much more important than year-to-year rankings.

  • rubicx

    I think you just demonstrated the subjective absurdity of tiering.

  • rubicx

    That would depend on the field. Columbia is by far much higher than Kellogg, MIT and Tuck in the field of Finance. 40% of MBA jobs are Finance jobs, most Finance jobs are in NYC and most of those finance employers rely on schools like Columbia, Wharton and Harvard over the other schools that you mentioned.

  • rubicx

    Really? What employers are you talking about? McKinsey only has open interviews at five schools, and Tuck is not one of them. If you don’t know what an open interview is it means the employer will meet with any student who wants to meet with them. Goldman Sachs doesn’t even visit Tuck or Haas. The laugh’s on you.

  • rubicx

    That may be the most revealing metric of all – yield. Tuck is a good second choice school, but most of the students go there because they didn’t get into Harvard, Stanford, Columbia, Wharton.

  • rubicx

    HWS?

  • Tony

    Yale will always be an Ivy League School. My friends in other countries will always think Kellog is a cereal manufacturer and never even heard of Univ of Chicago

  • Tony

    agreed

Partner Sites: C-Change Media | Poets & Quants for Execs | Tipping the Scales | Poets & Quants for Undergrads