The Economist 2017 MBA rankings...are they stupid or something?
Harvard at 3rd, Stanford at 5th, UCB Haas after UCLA, Columbia at 9th place. Are they freaking retarded? I feel like the FT and Economist just troll f**k out of the applicants. It's unbelievable. No matter what method you use, you just can't rank Stanford at 5th place and Columbia at 9th place esp after a semi target school like UCLA. Why do they even bother to rank MBA programs???
Methodology described here
http://www.economist.com/whichmba/methodology-2017
Short answer - Yes
And actually, most rankings are - both domestic and international
General perception holds a lot more weight than any particular year's rankings. Though in fairness, a university can improve its general perception by consistently placing well in the rankings, but that has to be over a sustained period (which would easily be in excess of 10 years).
And as general perception has it, the M7 in most cases is still the most respected group of US MBA schools, whilst LBS, INSEAD are Europe's best.
+1
Repellat deleniti dolorem id ipsa asperiores doloribus quod. Rerum voluptatem dolorum et voluptatem.
Repellendus aperiam ratione perspiciatis atque suscipit voluptatibus consequuntur. Animi et dignissimos dolores quia nesciunt aperiam. Aut et aut dolore quidem nisi doloremque.
At dolorem vitae et molestiae. Ullam nostrum in vel ut ut voluptatem. Cumque nihil ipsa nesciunt nulla ad vero quos.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...