Comments (68)

Mar 15, 2016

Crazy stuff. Stern #20, one spot ahead of Olin.

Mar 16, 2016

"During the statistical data collection process for the newly released 2017 edition of Best Business Schools, New York University's Stern School of Business did not submit its data for the number of new entrants to both its full-time and part-time MBA programs who provided GMAT scores... The Stern School of Business' position in both the full-time and part-time MBA rankings for the 2017 edition were negatively affected as a result of the data omission."

http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/college-rank...
full ranking

http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/...

Mar 20, 2016

I was just at Stern last year and did a tour for the MBA program it seems great very pristine but number 20, that is new to me.

Sep 27, 2016

Thats Crazy why should Booth even be in the top 3? With more than 4 MBA programs almost everyone in Chicago has an MBA from that school. Stanford actually has standards when it comes to admission, not a million programs like Booth and Kellogg have. All with the same degree at the end.

    • 1
Sep 27, 2016
Nico-Skeba:

Thats Crazy why should Booth even be in the top 3? With more than 4 MBA programs almost everyone in Chicago has an MBA from that school. Stanford actually has standards when it comes to admission, not a million programs like Booth and Kellogg have. All with the same degree at the end.

this is the dumbest thing I have heard. there are more respects paid to M7 & top 10 programs than you belittled. Now it seems like you went to HBS, GSB or Wharton to make such a stupid comment, but I assume you did not, because a HSW MBA wouldn't say something as dumb as you did.

Jul 3, 2018

@Nico-Skeba, what are you even talking about? You went to Western Michigan University, run a digital marketing company with no employees, and don't have an MBA. Stop being a poser...

Mar 16, 2016

Yale, Tuck and Berkeley do make a convincing case for turning the "M7" into a "top-10" in the near future.

I disagree with some parts of the US News methodology though, the employment rates for the top programs are not representative of their quality (due to people pursuing harder-to-get jobs) and the starting salary favors the finance-heavy schools, otherwise Stanford would run away with it compared to Booth/Wharton, which would be equal.

Mar 16, 2016

Snyder sure knows how to game the USNews ranking.

The tiered ranking system still is most accurate:
Cluster 1: HBS, Stanford

Cluster 1a: Wharton, Booth

Cluster 2: Sloan, Columbia, Kellogg (M7)

Cluster 3: Haas, Tuck

Cluster 4: Ross, Darden, Johnson, Fuqua, Yale, Stern, Anderson (All peers with lots of cross admits choosing based on personal preference)

    • 9
    • 1
Oct 2, 2016
MBAGrad10:

Snyder sure knows how to game the USNews ranking.

The tiered ranking system still is most accurate:Cluster 1: HBS, Stanford

Cluster 1a: Wharton, Booth

Cluster 2: Sloan, Columbia, Kellogg (M7)

Cluster 3: Haas, Tuck

Cluster 4: Ross, Darden, Johnson, Fuqua, Yale, Stern, Anderson (All peers with lots of cross admits choosing based on personal preference)

Kellogg beat Booth in cross-offers last year...It also has (very slightly) better stats of accepted students, and lower acceptance rate. Booth was artificially inflated because of using generous financial aid to win cross offers. Kellogg now offers equitable financial aid, and more students are choosing Kellogg.

Completely ludicrous to put Booth above Kellogg, Booth was beat on almost every stat last year.

There's a nice comparison between Kellogg and Booth class of 2018 here:
http://poetsandquants.com/2016/09/21/meet-northwes...

    • 1
    • 2
Mar 16, 2016

I guess Stern fucked up, but I can't imagine it really matters. Most people applying to MBA will know Stern's prestige, and with the ranking going back to it's normal ranking next year, I can't imagine this effecting much. Stern UG still remains more prestigious than MBA anyway, as far as I know.

Mar 16, 2016
fraoz02:

I guess Stern fucked up, but I can't imagine it really matters. Most people applying to MBA will know Stern's prestige, and with the ranking going back to it's normal ranking next year, I can't imagine this effecting much. Stern UG still remains more prestigious than MBA anyway, as far as I know.

Looks like an egregious error from US News, really. No one is saying Stern should be part of the M7 - but there's probably reasonable consensus that it's somewhere between 9-16. Not only does it expose how shitty and volatile their algorithm is, it shows a lack of attention to detail at best (from their ends) and malice at worst.

Good thing is no one really gives a shit about their rankings and it hopefully won't affect anyone matriculating in the next year.

Mar 16, 2016

The only one making an egregious error is you. If you read the article instead of going off about the results you'd know that they were down due to a late data submission on NYU's part. If NYU submits all their data on time next year you'll see them back at their normal position

Mar 16, 2016

I'm not a big fan of stern but even I think it's complete bullshit for Us News to fuck them over for an honest mistake like submitting one unimportant data point late.

They are obviously a top tier program on par with Yale/Fuqua/darden/Ross. Next year when stern rises 10 spots they are just going to look rediculous.

    • 1
Mar 16, 2016

I've long said that the M7 is silly since Tuck and Haas are clearly peers with (if not outright better than, as US News is now saying) the school that invented the moniker (CBS is still part of the distinct, fixed top 9).

There is no Top 10. There is only a Top 9. 9 schools that are consistently ranked there; the 10th spot is a Hot Seat shared by almost a handful of other schools and it's a red herring (we just like the number 10).

Stern's drop is an anomaly, and a distraction, that will be corrected next year as it returns to a spot between 10 and 13 (it's one of those in the hot seat). Also a clever marketing ploy by USN as it's free publicity.

Yale's rise is the Dean Snyder effect but it'll be hitting its glass ceiling soon; it's a hot seat player. Still, impressive.

The perception of H and S at the top will be hard to change no matter what any one ranking says, but those folks who started saying, 5 or 6 years ago, that HSW could become HSWB are starting to look vindicated as Booth persistently hangs in that crowd (especially Wharton's space). Think of it this way: if anyone talks about HSW expanding into a Top 4, it's pretty common knowledge who the new addition's going to be.

However, don't discard MIT Sloan, which is quietly doing plenty of things right.

The tl;dr version:
- M7 dead
- Top 10 doesn't exist, only Top 9 (10th = hot seat)
- Stern's drop will be corrected next year
- Yale = Snyder effect, watch glass ceiling
- Now a Top 4 effect (H/S still in the lead, B solidifying as a peer)

    • 5
Mar 16, 2016

It has always been always M7 + Tuck and Haas* Tuck and Haas sit just outside of it because, respectively, they each do one particular thing extremely well (Consulting, Tech) but lag behind the powerhouse programs in terms of other opportunities on a relative basis. You could easily get Marketing or Finance from Tuck, of course, but it's just not known for it as a specialty, if that makes sense.

As for Yale, the school's only weakness was salary-and Snyder has simply turned it into a more conventional MBA program. He pays lip service to the public mission but the recruiting ties it's building now are with top-tier Fin/Tech/Consulting and it's been choosing fewer "quirky" candidates for MBA robots. That and the overall brand cement it as top 10 and I won't be surprised if they eventually grab Columbia's seat

Booth will continue to muscle its way into HSWB, and at the very least commands the #4 spot. It's historically been a top 5 school, but that endowment has changed the landscape and has enabled them to shower money on students they would have lost a decade ago. I know plenty (more than a handful) of students who had it as their 2nd or 3rd choice but matriculated because they were handed a stack of cash or were aggressively recruited (phone calls from alumni who are industry leaders in their field are not unusual).

Solid ranking overall that reflects the new reality-less NYU's SNAFU

Mar 16, 2016

Stern shouldn't be 20. It is a peer of the top 15 group (Darden, Ross, Johnson, Fuqua, Yale, and Anderson).

Mar 16, 2016

http://poetsandquants.com/2016/03/15/big-changes-u...
According to the metrics, Wharton is significantly ahead of Booth in a number of measures including acceptance rate, pay, GMAT, etc. and is tied in recruiter and peer surveys. Booth simply came out ahead on having a higher employment rate at graduation. Honestly, I think this is a rather dubious statistic. MBA grads from elite should have no difficulty finding traditional employment. It simply reflects the fact that they are aware that they have bargaining power and so are still searching for the "perfect" opportunity.

Mar 16, 2016

The Yale thing is interesting because it's still significantly easier to get into then the M7s + Tuck (maybe Haas, but I'm not a fan). They give large scholarships to people with no scholarship from places like CBS/Sloan/Kellogg/etc. They also recruit significantly worse than those schools at the top jobs. I guess Snyder just really has the game down pat.

Also, as someone who chose not to attend Booth, I honestly don't think it's as good as Wharton which I believe is a step down from H/S. When I was going through the process of both applying and then choosing between several M7 schools I did A LOT of research. And it was pretty clear to me that as far as distinguishable differences it's this:

Tier 1: H/S
Tier 2: W
Tier 3: B/K/C/S
Tier 4: T/H
Tier 5: D/S/Y/F
Tier 6: R/J/A

    • 2
    • 1
Mar 16, 2016

It is laughable to put CBS in the same tier as Booth. Even Sloan is making its moves above CBS while CBS is in decline.

    • 1
    • 8
Mar 16, 2016
MBAGrad10:

It is laughable to put CBS in the same tier as Booth. Even Sloan is making its moves above CBS while CBS is in decline.

Not if you look at the recruiting (which is why I picked CBS over Sloan and Booth). And I would have gone to Wharton over all three if I had gotten in.

    • 1
  • Anonymous Monkey
  •  Jun 2, 2016

If there is a reason I wouldn't take some of the WSO stuff too seriously, it's this. A 3rd year Corp Fin Analyst who introduces 6 tiers within what the rest of the world see as the top-20 (Tier-1) schools. Even a layman could probably tell that Harvard > Ross, but hey, that's pretty much the normal person's inclination for such fine classification. This is simply put, lethargy - to be so focused on creating classification, to seek a brand and distinguish further within tiers, network with other people who hold that brand, promote the brand all over the internet, and pretend to yourself that the brand will save you when push comes to shove because you have already pretended to yourself that the only important and relevant people in your life are those that come with the brand.

A bit insular, don't you think?

    • 1
    • 2
Best Response
Mar 16, 2016

these contests and shouting matches over the difference between being 4th and 7th on some ranking is so juvenile. Successful people are going to be successful. My boss got his MBA from Michigan State, is a multimillionaire, and hasn't seen a day of the "high finance" jobs these boards covet (started as RE broker, runs his own RE investments, runs a franchise of a brokerage currently). That's not to say fk Harvard and go to M-State, it is to say discussions about rankings like these are pointless. If anyone thinks the current difference between Columbia and Booth is enough to make or break a career, they're doing life wrong.

    • 12
Mar 16, 2016

Stern flubbed it, USNews was inflexible, they both got free publicity, they'll kiss and make up, and next year, Stern will be back somewhere between 10 and 13, as usual.

School prestige is a VERY viscous space, and takes a long time for things to change. It takes 5 years to start to notice something, 10 years for it to be a thing, and more like 20+ for it to really be ingrained.

  • Fact: for the past dozen years, the Top 9 have been the same 9 schools. Not a single exception. This is the most significant number; there is no M7, there is no Top 10. One's a misnomer that stuck, the other's a nice number. But baseless in the world of full time MBAs.
  • Broadly, in the past decade, there have been 3ish (3.5) tiers within the Top 9.
    • HBS and Stanford consistently trade the top 2 spots. THE top tier.
    • Wharton is tier 1.5. Usually 3rd, sometimes trades with the half tier above, or the half tier below.
    • the data suggested MIT was close to joining tier 1.5. The talk and data the last 5 years is that Booth now is.
    • Booth, MIT and Kellogg are the next tier. They consistently trade spots 4, 5 and 6.
    • The last tier in the top 9. Haas is pretty much ALWAYS 7th.
    • Columbia and Tuck generally trade 8th and 9th. Tuck sometimes ties with Haas for 7th.
  • In the hot seat for 10th, Stern wins most often, but it's Darden, Ross, Fuqua, etc who are there. Yale's surge is actually a steady march into said hot seat arena.
  • You'll commonly see people justifying their personal preferences with their favorite data point (admissions %, yield, cross admits, GMATs, salaries, job %, etc).
  • None of that here. Not a single comment on a school's quality, culture, students, etc. Simply looking at the tiers you see forming in the most slow-moving, conservative and consensus-leaning ranking over the past decade or so.
Mar 16, 2016

Do you think if HBS did not produce this data point they would have dropped them to outside the top-10? I doubt it there would be too much of an uproar and the network too powerful to piss off.

Mar 16, 2016

Wow this is really huge news

This just in, US News releases a ranking that's slightly different than the previous one, with some schools shuffled around

Stop the presses folks

    • 2
    • 2
Mar 16, 2016
Going Concern:

Wow this is really huge news

This just in, US News releases a ranking that's slightly different than the previous one, with some schools shuffled around

Stop the presses folks

Silver Banana for you sir!
I was just gonna write the same thing more or less.

Stuff is the same as usual, as always, with a few things shuffled around to justify the yearly ranking. Only real (minor) change I've noticed over the last few years, is that Yale does seem to be building itself more and more of a name. (well Yale always had the name... but the B-school of course..)

Mar 16, 2016

Who gives a shit... Oh wait, there ARE people who support Trump.

    • 1
    • 3
Mar 16, 2016

Vanderbilt went from rank 27 to rank 22. Very good news to hear right before I attend the MSF program. The situation regarding Stern is ridiculous. I honestly think it could hurt the school as many looking at the ranking won't know any better.

Mar 16, 2016

I've always found people who graduated from CBS & Stern to be pricks. Good riddance - no one in their right minds would attend these 2 schools if you got into their peer schools.

    • 1
    • 2
Mar 16, 2016
snakeoil:

I've always found people who graduated from CBS & Stern to be pricks. Good riddance - no one in their right minds would attend these 2 schools if you got into their peer schools.

Yeah, such intelligent and thoughtful analysis here. You're not generalizing AT ALL, right?

Mar 16, 2016
snakeoil:

I've always found people who graduated from CBS & Stern to be pricks. Good riddance - no one in their right minds would attend these 2 schools if you got into their peer schools.

'Raises Hand'
...
"Right mind"
...
O... OK. Never mind.

Mar 16, 2016
AllDay_028:

snakeoil:I've always found people who graduated from CBS & Stern to be pricks. Good riddance - no one in their right minds would attend these 2 schools if you got into their peer schools.

'Raises Hand'..."Right mind"...O... OK. Never mind.

Let me explain what I mean, to give you an example:

Me to Stern or CBS grad (sample size = 2 each): Hey XX, can I talk about your experience at CBS/Stern and about my path to B School. Them - are you sure you want to apply? Your GPA/School/WE doesn't seem to be good enough for CBS! I have never met a CBS grad who wanted to enthusiastically talk to me about their experience and never met anyone who didn't put me down because of where I went for undergrad/my GPA.

Me to Booth grads (sample size = 3: Hey Boothie, can I talk to you about your Booth experience?

Them - Sure, why don't we find time to grab drinks/coffee after work. They happily talk about their experiences and tell me what I need to do from now to get it without mentioning how pathetic my undergrad record was. Most times, they paid as well. ( I will bet I will never meet a CBS grad who will pay!). You listen to a Booth grad talk about their school and you want to go there.

    • 1
    • 5
Mar 16, 2016

MBA rankings in general are dumb. Neither I nor my classmates and colleagues pay attention to it.

Ultimately, the only thing that really matters is whether you can get the job you want coming out, at the right compensation range. Everything else, including facilities, faculty, etc., are low on the list.

There is a hierarchy, of course. But beyond say HBS/Stanford and maybe Wharton, there's a group of schools that are clustered relatively close together. People choose say Columbia over Booth, Kellogg over MIT, Tuck over Haas, and vice versa, all the time. To look at 1 or 2 years of rankings and arrive at a definitive conclusion about a school's rise or decline is pretty short-sighted. Quite frankly, I think arguing over MBA rankings is pretty asinine.

    • 1
Mar 16, 2016
MBAGrad2015:

MBA rankings in general are dumb. Neither I nor my classmates and colleagues pay attention to it.

Ultimately, the only thing that really matters is whether you can get the job you want coming out, at the right compensation range. Everything else, including facilities, faculty, etc., are low on the list.

There is a hierarchy, of course. But beyond say HBS/Stanford and maybe Wharton, there's a group of schools that are clustered relatively close together. People choose say Columbia over Booth, Kellogg over MIT, Tuck over Haas, and vice versa, all the time. To look at 1 or 2 years of rankings and arrive at a definitive conclusion about a school's rise or decline is pretty short-sighted. Quite frankly, I think arguing over MBA rankings is pretty asinine.

Come on Brady. This whole trend on WSO was basically ignited by you.

    • 2
Mar 16, 2016

Put this comment thread on the front page next to the latest "30 under 30" list and a target vs non-target discussion, and you could call it The Axis of Butthurt.

Mar 17, 2016

Holy shit. Tons of insecurity with some people in this thread as usual. Everyone needs to get over rankings. If you go to a school only because it has a higher general ranking with several flawed / illogical factors or weightings then you are a fucking idiot. Even if the methodology was perfect, everyone has their own preferences and needs that will sway the argument in favor of one school over another.

To the idiot blindly playing up Booth over and over - I have actually lost respect for the school and it's student body based on your idiotic comments. Well done.

    • 1
    • 1
Mar 17, 2016

Yeah, this is the first time I've read these MBA posts as I'm just about to graduate undergrad, and the Booth pushers seem really needy for validation.

Mar 17, 2016

And by idiot, I mean you MBAGrad10 / MBAGrad2015 / Brady.

    • 2
Mar 17, 2016

Best comment in the thread. SB'd

Mar 17, 2016

I think having a clear post-MBA goal matters a lot to your choice of school. For example, I will pick Columbia over HBS any day for investing and will pick Johnson / Stern over Tuck for finance.

I think ranking does matter if you are gunning for a company that cares about prestige. Firms like Blackstone, Goldman, and McKinsey immediately come to my mind when it comes to recruiting a pool of homogeneous people from Harvard, Stanford, or Wharton, the "top business schools" in the nation. So again, my point ties to knowing your goal.

I could use everyone's opinion on each school's competitive advantage though.

    • 1
Mar 17, 2016
vanillathunder:

I think having a clear post-MBA goal matters a lot to your choice of school. For example, I will pick Columbia over HBS any day for investing and will pick Johnson / Stern over Tuck for finance.

That's really dumb.

    • 1
    • 3
Mar 17, 2016

Its funny.... They kind of deserved their drop. This is an elite school for MBAs, a place where they stress accuracy and complete information.... but they couldn't even submit the proper data on time. Is that really a place you want to be associated with ? ( sarcasm... I would be very happy going to NYU MBA one day)

Mar 17, 2016

keep measuring your dick sizes year by year by what school you went to because, surprise bitches, after your first OCR job it all comes down to what you fucking know and who you can connect with.

if all you can connect with is other people through your school network then you better work on your social skills.

    • 1
Mar 20, 2016

Unfortunately, for many PE/HF jobs headhunters will look for people from certain schools if they're trying to conveniently winnow down the field even further. A guy I knew in PE said his firm told the headhunter responsible for running their candidate selection process to only consider Harvard or Wharton graduates from GS TMT / GS FIG / or MS M&A. He knows there's probably a kid at Lazard who graduated from Indiana who can do just as well if not better, but it's not a fair world. School-based discrimination is huge in high finance (particularly in certain parts of it), but you're right in that it definitely has less of an effect after work experience accumulates.

Mar 17, 2016

i have a state school degree and get interviewed by firms full of stanford MBAs

zero fucks given. see above.

    • 1
Mar 17, 2016

The best way to think about these rankings is to look at historical averages. See below a link to an analysis of USN historical rankings I am citing. Basically, when you look at the average of historical rankings, they confirm the tiers that seem to be popular convention. Also, I like this view because the longer the school has been ranked higher the more likely the alumni base is stronger i.e. MBB partnerships are dominated by HBS, Insead, Wharton, Kellogg, and Stanford.

Booth has had strong rise in rankings over the last 15 years from being a 6-9 school in the late 90's/early 2000's to a 2-6 school in the last 10 years. Presumably this is tied to the huge donation they received. The interesting question is whether or not schools like Sloan/Kellogg/Columbia/Wharton - feeling the pressure from Booth - will raise a huge donation that levels them with Booth or even pushes Booth back to its historical 6 spot.

Here are the groupings of schools based on the average of USN rankings over last 15 years:

  • Tier 1: HBS/Stanford (approx. average ranking=1.1/1.2)
  • Tier 2: Wharton (2.9)
  • Tier 3: Sloan/Kellogg (4.1/4.2)
  • Tier 4: Booth (5.9)
  • Tier 5: Haas/Tuck/Columbia (7.1/7.8/8.2)
  • Tier 6: Fuqua/Stern/Ross/Darden/Yale/UCLA (approx. average rankings between 11-13.5)

What's clear is that there is a huge separation between Haas/Tuck/Columbia and the Fuqua-UCLA group, signaling those 3 are the last stop for an elite MBA.

Source: Poets and Quants "Business School Rankings Amazingly Stagnant at the Top

    • 4
    • 7
Mar 19, 2016

More important to talk about BB IB rankings. Here you are folks:

1a) GS, MS
1b) JPM
2a) CS, Citi, Barclays
2b) BAML, UBS, DB

    • 2
Mar 19, 2016

^ Lol @ the MS. People are so predictable.

    • 1
    • 2
Mar 19, 2016

What are everyone's thoughts on Columbia? Why does is it worst than Booth ?

Mar 20, 2016
KimchiNoodleSoup:

What are everyone's thoughts on Columbia? Why does is it worst than Booth ?

Columbia is a great school, but there's several things that are really hurting the school.

  1. Glenn Hubbard has been a terrible dean. In my opinion, he's the worst dean of any top MBA program. Hubbard has done very little to improve CBS; rather, he is using the job as a placeholder before a Republican wins the White House. This is pretty well known on the Columbia campus.
  2. CBS is going through an identity crisis. With the secular decline of finance, the school is trying to re-invent itself as the Stanford of the East Coast, going full throttle on tech and startups. Thus far, it has been a debacle. Startups are nothing more than the latest MBA fueled bubble, and CBS does not have enough of a competitive advantage to make a real mark in this space.
  3. CBS career service is atrocious. While at other top programs, they at least try to help out students and alumni, CBS doesn't even put in an effort. Rather than guiding them to alumni who can be of help and setting things up, they just tell you to look up alumni on linkedin who work at companies you're interested in and reach out to them. A lot of CBSers find this deeply insulting, lamenting how worthless career service is.
  4. CBS is not as nearly as generous as Booth with scholarships. This could change with the recent big donation from Henry Kravis.
  5. CBS' Uris Hall is an utter disgrace; the facilities are worse than a lot of public high schools. The new campus looks great though, but I think this has obviously hurt the school with prospective students.
    • 5
    • 2
Mar 22, 2016

Columbia is a great school, but I agree with your points.

  1. Hubbard pretty much tarnished his own reputation when he snapped during the documentary with his "you have three minutes" speech.
  2. CBS likes people who have very specific career goals (even though lots of people do not pursue what they say during the interview). During an info session, I asked about working in managerial finance at a Fortune 500 company and wanting to take advantage of CBS to learn about different industries, the adcom gave me a stink eye and said "you need to figure out which industry before coming in". I said the same thing in all other apps and other schools were fine with exploring industries as long as you know the function of interest.
  3. CBS attracts impressive students, but I felt people just reach for the stars on their own, which defeats the purpose of going to bschool in the first place. Tons of type-A banker / PE guys (not a lot of girls) during info sessions. Alumni are not that responsive in my opinion: big class -> they get tons of emails -> hard to differentiate.
  4. Facility is old. Thanks to raider Ron Perelman, they will get a new campus in 2022 I think? Henry Kravis is donating too.
Mar 28, 2016

This ranking is a joke. Everyone from top business schools knows that low percentage of graduates with a job after graduation has nothing to do with real job placement, but just a function of how selective the students are. If you sort that column from high to low, you will see a lot of lower ranked schools on the top.

From my personal experience, no school except H/S (arguably W) can beat CBS from a pure job-seeking perspective. The traditional 3-tiers M7 ranking still holds true. Haas and Tuck have their niche but can't compete with M7 broadly. Yale SOM is catching up but not anywhere near M7.

    • 1
    • 2
Mar 29, 2016

Brady and Vanillathunder make some excellent points about CBS.

    • 1
Jan 18, 2017
Comment
    • 1
    • 2