The Absolute Worst MBA Rankings

Group of Business manThumbs Down To failing to work without a teamwork No understanding Cause job failure.show dislike or unlike

2) CEOWORLD Magazine

Like U.S. News, CEOWORLD loves rankings and does a lot of them. From ‘The World’s Wealthiest People” to ‘The World’s Most Influential CEOs.’ In other words, it has the clickbait game down well, fooling Google algorithms that can discern from what’s legit and what’s not. The latest business school ranking came out in January. To compile the list, CEOWORLD claims it surveyed 350,00 business executives, graduates, global business influencers, industry professionals, business school academics, employers, and recruiters in 156 countries and territories between Sept. 15, 2022, and Dec. 22, 2022.” But the publication never discloses the response rate for its survey nor the total number of people who actually completed the questionnaire. That is a huge red flag that may very well suggest a response rate so low it is embarrassing to the publication. “Ten percent of the interviews were conducted by telephone, 82% online, and 8% by post or face-to-face,” maintains CEOWORLD. “To establish our list, we collected information and statistics from publicly available sources, research, and survey. Participants were asked to rate institutions on a scale of 1 ‘marginal’ to 100 ‘outstanding’ or ‘don’t know.’”

Even if the magazine was able to get a level of response that would make the sample credible, the magazine makes no obvious attempt to weight more influential responders in its ranking. Amazon, for example, has been recruiting 1,000 MBA candidates annually so if the firm’s recruiters completed the CEOWORLD survey, the company’s opinions should be more heavily weighted than another company that may not recruit MBA students at all. Based on the limited description of its methodology, CEOWORLD also does not adjust for any bias from a respondent who is an alum of a business school and would therefore rank his alma mater more highly than its peers.

CEOWORLD claims its rankings are based on seven major metrics of “quality and reputation.” The overall Score (100%) is the sum of the following:

1) Academic reputation
2) Admission Eligibility
3) Job placement rate
4) Recruiter feedback
5) Specialization
6) Global reputation and influence
7) Annual tuition and fees

AS VAGUE A METHODOLOGY AS WE HAVE EVER SEEN

That is as vague a methodology as any we have seen. Is a school ranked higher if its tuition is lower? That’s not clear. Which job placement rates are used for the ranking? At graduation or three months later? No one knows based on this description of the rankings approach used by CEOWORLD. How and why would a school that offers specializations rank higher or lower? That remains unclear as well. And what is meant by admission eligibility? Does CEOWORLD measure this by the acceptance rate, the average standardized test score or the average undergraduate GPA of the latest cohort? It’s all a mystery. The description of the methodology is shorter than a recipe for a hamburger.

Just as bad, the reporting of the metrics used are also problematic. The score for each school is never given so a prospective applicant has no idea of the difference between #10 Yale SOM and #24 Georgetown McDonough because the underlying index scores are hidden from readers.

Then, there are the quirky results. fifth-placed Said Business School at Oxford University is ranked above Columbia Business School, Stanford Graduate School of Business, and INSEAD. The Judge Business School in Cambridge, ranked 11th, is above Kellogg, Booth, Dartmouth Tuck, and HEC Paris which somehow languishes in 21st place.

For all these reasons, this ranking is among the worst ever published.

The 2023 Top Ten According To CEOWORLD