The Economist 2012 Rankings

BTbanker:

UVA #2? Barf.

We need Brady to talk some sense into these clowns.

He's here - switched his name to TheLastCall

Jamie Templeton:

This ranking system gets more and more laughable as the years go by. The system unfairly rewards a system just because it is attracting less "elite" students with much lower pre-MBA salaries. So a Harvard might bring a jump from a 7 to a 9.5 in terms of salary since most HBS accepts have pretty great pre-MBA salaries to start with and they are probably looking at the quality of work rather than just a pure increase in salary while picking their post-MBA job. A Darden on the other hand might have a 4 to 7.5 jump for its grads and the system rewards that more. That is fair enough to judge the bang for the buck but IMO should be weighted appropriately and not become along with student given ratings, the primary source of ranking. The proof is in the pudding - do a quick survey on people who would leave a Tuck for an INSEAD, or a Darden for Stanford, etc. I'm sure it would be close to a 100% rate. HBS/Stanford are still unquestionably the top 2 overall, INSEAD/Kellogg tops for Consulting, Wharton/LBS/Chicago for Finance. Dont fall for the rankings rollercoaster...pick a college with a brand and legacy that will last you a lifetime.

I agree with your general thesis, and i hate to be nitpicky here, but i don't think INSEAD and LBS belong in the same category as kellogg/booth/columbia/wharton. First, INSEAD is a one-year program; thus, most of its students are being sponsored by their employers. It places well in the european offices of major consulting firms and some PE, but given that it's a one-year program, it's not at all clear what proportion of its students are simply returning to their previous firms as opposed to getting those jobs through recruiting. Second, LBS is very overrated, sort of the "Stern of London." Its primary selling point is its location, strength in london finance recruiting, and an international student body. However, even for london jobs, LBS pales in comparison to wharton/booth/columbia. Almost any major bank or hedge fund in europe will have more M7 grads in their ranks than LBS. Finally, the caliber of the student body at LBS is quite unimpressive, both academically and in terms of pre-mba experience.

Jamie Templeton:

This ranking system gets more and more laughable as the years go by. The system unfairly rewards a system just because it is attracting less "elite" students with much lower pre-MBA salaries. So a Harvard might bring a jump from a 7 to a 9.5 in terms of salary since most HBS accepts have pretty great pre-MBA salaries to start with and they are probably looking at the quality of work rather than just a pure increase in salary while picking their post-MBA job. A Darden on the other hand might have a 4 to 7.5 jump for its grads and the system rewards that more. That is fair enough to judge the bang for the buck but IMO should be weighted appropriately and not become along with student given ratings, the primary source of ranking. The proof is in the pudding - do a quick survey on people who would leave a Tuck for an INSEAD, or a Darden for Stanford, etc. I'm sure it would be close to a 100% rate. HBS/Stanford are still unquestionably the top 2 overall, INSEAD/Kellogg tops for Consulting, Wharton/LBS/Chicago for Finance. Dont fall for the rankings rollercoaster...pick a college with a brand and legacy that will last you a lifetime.

Way to sneak in there, INSEAD guy.

Comparing INSEAD to Stanford is completely ridiculous. Also, few would leave a school like Tuck (or even Top 15 Darden) for a waste-of-time European MBA.

Boothorbust:

It's based on "student satisfaction" - whatever that means. I could believe a story you told me that students at Darden enjoy their experience more than students at Columbia. That doesn't it mean its better. Like anything else, you have to look at the methodology. This list isn't any more "right" than any other - they just measure different things. If you are interested in other criteria, you should look to other lists.

^^Spot on.

Regards

holla_back:

Since we're on the topic of Darden, does anyone here have any anecdotal evidence to share about the actual schoolwork that they do there? What's the workload like? I always hear about how academically challenging it is when compared to the other Top 15 schools, but it's really difficult to tell how much of it is actually true and how much is just bombast.

I have a friend there now who confirms it's pretty taxing. It's a new case every class, and you are in case groups for each class that meet daily for several hours at a time outside of class. Plus all the reading and any individual work. She's enjoying it though. I get the sense that it's not the difficulty, but the amount of work.

Also consider that Darden attracts less former finance people than Booth, Columbia, etc - so you don't have people used to working 90 hour weeks.

sweetlily:

The Darden workload is huge. I'm a current student so take it from me. There is too much work. The volumes and not the difficulty makes the difference. Try understanding 3 20 page cases each day and reading tons of chapters in a textbook, technical notes, individual quizzes and assignments, and building all sorts of models between 1:30pm and 7:00pm each day before your learning team. Try going through that material in 2 hours with a learning team of different people from different backgrounds with different views. Oh and toss in club activities and recuriting in the mix on a daily basis. And be prepared to make your class contribution, jostling to be heard in a class of 65 for your class participation grade. There are investment bankers who break under the load. Try getting hung up on a minor detail with 2 ego centric classmates who think they are smarter than everyone and waste the class time arguing over their point. Try watching the professor stand back and watch, claiming that this is the case method and they are only a facilitator and don't need to teach. At Darden, you teach yourself, or get someone else who has had a job in whatever field to teach you. I wonder why we have professors anyway. Such a waste of money. I am only here to get a diploma that says MBA. That's what your money get's you at Darden. And a tip for international students, people here are generally xenophobic, if you want a truly international experience, Darden is not the place for you. If people would tell the truth, student satisfaction is not so high. Make sure you visit the campus and watch everything carefully, reading between the lines before you make your decision. Ask lot's of questions on how the collaborative nature of the program fits with the need to gain class participation points by air hogging. Ask questions on how much preparation students spend on cases. Ask questions on how the faculty assign their class participation points exactly (20%-50% or your grades will depend on this) and what informs their decision. Is there quality control on how professors measure participation? Should all courses be taught using the case method? There are so many questions to ask to make sure that this school is a fit for you before taking a step. You want to get into a school, but make sure that it is the right school.

I'm very surprised that you are not enjoying your darden experience. My friends there do complain about the insane amount of work and are not too happy about the case method, but they seem to enjoy the experience overall. I also think an exclusively case oriented approach to an MBA education is deeply flawed.

Aside from the classes, what are your impressions of darden overall? Is recruiting strong there this year? Also, what makes you say that it's "xenophobic?" I know it's mostly a southern white school, but it's not like darden is filled with racist rednecks.