How to Use the MBA Rankings Admissions Chat with Dean Paul Danos

Please feel free to let us know if you would like to be informed of future chats by sending e-mail to chat@accepted.com. We would also be interested in knowing if you would prefer a different format or different topics.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 8:52:00 AM)
Dean Paul Danos, Dean of the Tuck School of Business.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 8:52:05 AM)
Paul Danos is the ninth Dean of the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth College and the Laurence F. Whittemore Professor of Business Administration. He was appointed Dean of Tuck on July 1, 1995. Before joining Tuck, he was Senior Associate Dean and chaired professor of accounting at the University of Michigan. Dean Danos has led major curricular innovations at both Tuck and the University of Michigan. He is very active in reviewing and counseling business schools for accreditation in North America and Europe.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 8:52:20 AM)
Della Bradshaw, Editor of the Business School Rankings, Financial Times.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 8:52:27 AM)
Della Bradshaw has been the business education editor at the Financial Times for the past 11 years. Previous to that she was a technology writer for both the Financial Times and for trade journals. Between 1975 and 1981, Della worked as an English teacher and teacher trainer in Sicily, Turkey and Japan.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 8:52:32 AM)
Kim Keating, Director of Public Relations at Tuck and an expert on the different rankings.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 8:52:42 AM)
Kim has been with Tuck since 1999 when she was hired to develop the Public Relations Department. In her position as Director of Public Relations, Kim is responsible for developing and implementing the School's media strategy. She designs media relation projects to increase brand awareness and enhance the reputation of the Tuck School around the world.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 8:52:54 AM)
Welcome and thank you for taking the time to come today.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 8:53:01 AM)
First a little bit on procedure. We will begin with a short panel discussion and then a moderated question-and-answer session.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 8:53:49 AM)
Kim, can you give us a quick overview of the background of the major b-school rankings (Businessweek, US News, WSJ, Forbes, Financial Times, and the Economist) and what they measure?

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 8:53:58 AM)
I'll give a quick overview of each of the 6 major rankings with some time in between each one so that you have time to read them.

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 8:54:18 AM)
Business Week was the first publication to do a ranking. They issued their first in 1986 and focused on MBA students and corporate recruiters. 45% of the ranking is based on graduating students' survey responses. The recruiter poll accounts for 45% of the ranking and, since 2002, the remaining 10% is based on an intellectual capital rating from tallying journal articles and books published by faculty.

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 8:54:40 AM)
US News started in 1987 and ranks all MBA programs accredited by the AACSB. Rankings are based on 4 measurements: The deans and directors ratings account for 25%; the ratings from the recruiter survey account for another 15%. Placement success accounts for 35% and student selectivity accounts for the remaining 25%.

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 8:54:54 AM)
Forbes began publishing a ranking of MBA programs in 2000 based on return on investment. They determine ROI by looking at compensation five years after graduation minus tuition and the forgone salary during school. They survey graduates five years after graduation.

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 8:55:09 AM)
The Financial Times has surveyed graduates three years after graduation and gathered data directly from the schools since 2000. The FT ranks schools based on three factors; performance of the MBA program accounts for 55%. Diversity accounts for 25%. The research rating accounts for 20%.

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 8:55:24 AM)
The Wall Street Journal ranking, first published in 2001, is based on surveys of corporate recruiters. The ranking components for all schools measured include three equally weighted elements: perception of the school and its students (20 attributes), intended future supportive behavior toward that school, and a measure of mass appeal based on how many indicated that they recruit at the school.

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 8:55:39 AM)
Economist Intelligence Unit branch of the Economist organization has published a book on business schools, "Which MBA?" since 1988. Their online ranking began in 2002. They collect data from the schools, current students and recent graduates. The ranking measures career opportunities for graduates (35%), the quality of the educational experience (35%), increases in salary pre and post MBA (20%), and the potential value of the alumni network (10%).

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 8:56:07 AM)
Della, why did Financial Times decide to publish a ranking? Why did you choose the criteria you chose?

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 8:56:56 AM)
The Financial Times decided to publish rankings in the late1990s because there was no global ranking of business schools. As top corporations became more international we felt we needed to look at which schools were producing the top global managers. Also, there was a real ground swell of European schools which felt the US-only rankings were no longer enough. As Kiki said, we talked to business schools, corporations and students before we began and chose three planks to our rankings. The first was the career progress of alumni; the second the research agenda at the school – which schools are producing the big new ideas – and the international experience.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 8:57:50 AM)
Paul, how do you feel rankings have helped or hurt MBA education?

PaulDanosTUCK (May 4, 2006 8:58:50 AM)
I'm a big believer in giving prospective students as much information as possible from as many perspectives as possible. I'm very positive on rankings but I also like to be involved with the publishers in terms of perfecting their ranking methodologies. I think that the rankings overall have prompted improvements in MBA programs. There's also a downside; it's costly to respond to all of the inquiries that we get. One has to balance the cost and the benefits of the prospective students.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 9:00:39 AM)
Della, what do you think about Dean Danos' response?

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:02:32 AM)
I agree with him that the more information there is out there, the better. In the US, there are now six major rankings as Kiki points out and that must be really time-consuming for schools. I think that is why there are so many moves now - which I applaud - to move towards standardized, audited data.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 9:03:23 AM)
Della, wouldn't that put the individual rankings out of business or would you just all pull from the same data and slice it differently?

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:05:37 AM)
We all have questions which are unique to our rankings - for example the FT does its own research analysis. But a lot of the data is the same - percentage of international students, job placement and so on. I can see no problem in us all using the same questions for this type of question.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 9:05:41 AM)
For all of you, how would you like applicants to use rankings?

PaulDanosTUCK (May 4, 2006 9:06:46 AM)
As a follow-up to a previous question, we do appreciate publishers who ask for our input and who allow us to have some effect on the methodology.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 9:06:59 AM)
Thanks for the clarification Paul.

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:07:19 AM)
I think there is a lot more to a ranking than the headline ranking figure. We publish more than 20 pieces of data for each school as well as ranks for previous years, and school groupings. In addition I think the proliferation of rankings has resulted in two types of rankings emerging - those that rank according to how much participants appreciated the course, and those that look at long-term career progress. The FT and Forbes fall into the second category - Tuck does very well in both the FT and Forbes rankings.

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 9:07:45 AM)
I hope that students will use the rankings to gain a broad range of information. If they look at what each methodology ranks and compare some of the rankings they will be able to see a wide range of opinions about each school. As Della points out, each one of the rankings covers many pieces of data and getting the big picture by really looking at what each one measures can really help a prospective student to figure out which school is best for him or her.

PaulDanosTUCK (May 4, 2006 9:09:19 AM)
We certainly hope that the rankings articles prompt further investigation and now with the internet it's so easy to probe more deeply and get more information. The rankings are a starting point, but shouldn't be used as the final method for matching a person's interest in schools.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 9:10:09 AM)
Thank you all. Personally, I think understanding the criteria and the different data measured are key to constructive use of the rankings. They are a place to begin one's research, not end it.

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:10:31 AM)
Hear, hear.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 9:10:32 AM)
We are going to take question from the "floor" now.

Bill Miller (May 4, 2006 9:10:58 AM)
Linda - I have a follow-up question for Dean Danos and Kim. To what extent can business schools and their PR departments have an influence on rankings?

mba8 (May 4, 2006 9:11:37 AM)
Della, is it worth waiting one year and reapply to a school ranked 15 or should I start my MBA with the university that is ranked 30?

PaulDanosTUCK (May 4, 2006 9:12:40 AM)
Bill, we've found that over the years that when we make points about specific errors in logic or where criteria are not properly defined that in general there is a responsiveness to correct that if possible. Generally we're satisfied with our ability to make the rankings more meaningful for prospective students.

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:12:51 AM)
mba8, you should go to the school which you feel will give you the education and the career you want.

Guest (May 4, 2006 9:13:23 AM)
Dean Danos, what are the most important parts of a ranking methodology for you?

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 9:13:58 AM)
Bill, the rankings editors all seem to want to be able to measure programs so that we, as institutions, can improve in areas that may be highlighted in the rankings. I have seen many responses from schools to the rankings and also have taken the opportunity to point out to editors areas that they may not have thought about measuring.

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:15:11 AM)
I think the most important part of any ranking methodology is that it is transparent, that the criteria are clear.

PaulDanosTUCK (May 4, 2006 9:16:23 AM)
For me, the most important thing about criteria is that the definitions used reflect the actual reality that's trying to be portrayed. Occasionally criteria are used that are only indirectly related to the quality of an MBA education. Also, criteria are sometimes not properly defined so there can be various interpretations and therefore the comparisons across schools are not valid.

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 9:16:25 AM)
It's always hard to effectively measure a variety of different programs. I always look to see that a methodology is effectively measuring the areas that it seeks to measure in a way that is fair across the board to all of the B-schools being measured.

ejaan (May 4, 2006 9:16:39 AM)
Dean Danos, I would like to know how the rest of the top 10 schools feel with regards to the Harvard/Stanford/Wharton mould which has somehow seemed to establish itself on most rankings. I fail to understand what is so 'obvious' in the superiority of such programs over great programs such as yours. Don't you feel such stereotyping misguides prospective students (during early research days). Can this myth be broken?

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 9:17:47 AM)
Actually, H/S/W are pretty consistently 1,2,3 in US News, but not so in others. Della, what are the top 3?

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 9:18:17 AM)
BW is different as is the WSJ.

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:19:08 AM)
Our top three are Wharton, Harvard, Stanford, as you say, but this is certainly not true in the Economist, WSJ or BusinessWeek - Kellogg tends to do pretty well there.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 9:19:16 AM)
In the WSJ it's Dartmouth, Michigan, Tepper. In BW's 2004 rankings it was Kellogg, Chicago and Wharton.

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 9:20:01 AM)
Harvard ranges from 1 to 14 in the 6 rankings, Wharton ranges from 1 to 6, Stanford ranges from 2 to 15. Tuck ranges from 1 to 10 - this is what I mean by seriously looking at the 6 rankings to see where each school comes out in the various things being measured.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 9:20:03 AM)
So it's not so universal, except in forums.

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:20:13 AM)
In WSJ Europe its IMD, Esade, and Carnegie Mellon.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 9:20:26 AM)
Point well taken Kiki.

Trevor Ugolyn (May 4, 2006 9:20:37 AM)
Dean Danos, you commented on how you are involved with the publishers in terms of perfecting their ranking methodologies. Which methodology do you believe is the most applicable to perspective students and what aspect/aspects in the rankings would you like to see the heaviest weighting given to?

PaulDanosTUCK (May 4, 2006 9:20:40 AM)
Ejaan, I think to some extent you're confusing brand recognition with the actual places in the rankings. If you look at the rankings of these six publications, it doesn't always come out the way you say. But, there's no doubt that for many people there are certain schools are synonymous with top quality business education. There are thousands of business schools and certainly the schools that you normally see in the top 10 or top 20 are all excellent schools, but it is true that the recognition by people who have not done deep research into business schools typically go to just a handful of schools that come to mind.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 9:21:32 AM)
I think the responses again point to the necessity for applicants to look at different rankings and understand what they measure.

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 9:22:05 AM)
Absolutely. All of the methodologies are available online and we have a section on the Tuck website which gives an overview and links. Look at http://www.tuck.dartmouth.edu/news/rankings.html.

PaulDanosTUCK (May 4, 2006 9:22:25 AM)
Trevor, Tuck does well across the board and we do particularly well in the categories of student satisfaction and return on investment. When the criteria go to things that are related to volume, Tuck because of it's personal scale, will not do as well. We like the criteria that deal with individual experience and individual career success.

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:22:46 AM)
Just to point out as well, in a ranking like the FT which is a global ranking, US schools will come lower than they would in a US-only ranking.

Liz (May 4, 2006 9:22:55 AM)
To all: Do the Business School rankings play a role in a company's decision to recruit graduates from an MBA School?

PaulDanosTUCK (May 4, 2006 9:25:07 AM)
I think, Liz, that certainly it can have an affect. I know that for some companies, there's an imperative to be very efficient in their recruiting and therefore they limit their recruiting to some top ranking schools, so it can have an effect if you're say, below the top 20 schools. So I think that companies in their cost consciousness will make those types of limitations sometimes.

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:25:10 AM)
I think corporations study rankings in the same way as students do. But at the end of the day a great student will do well wherever they study, I think.

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 9:25:35 AM)
I think the entire business world tunes in to look at ranking results. It can't help but have an influence on what companies and other audiences think about a school's reputation.

Jlevi (May 4, 2006 9:25:47 AM)
To add to Bill's question - to what extent can business school students skew rankings through the surveys that rankings like BW offer?

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:25:59 AM)
I wonder, as well, if the size of the school is a strong factor - the bigger the better.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 9:26:27 AM)
Kim and Paul, what do you have to say to Della's last comment?

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:27:16 AM)
What has always pleasantly surprised me with the alumni questionnaires we send out, is clearly how honest respondents are.

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 9:28:11 AM)
Della, I think it depends on the ranking and the school. A focused, small program that graduates excellent students can do well in the rankings. Tuck is in the top 10 of all six rankings although we are smaller than most programs in the top 20.

PaulDanosTUCK (May 4, 2006 9:28:57 AM)
Jlevi, one of the beauties of having six rankings that use different criteria is that the manipulation by some people becomes less important. Last year we were ranked number 1 overall, if you averaged the rankings, at least according to the FT and we track all six rankings and I think that although you may not be happy with one particular ranking and you may suspect some manipulation in some cases, overall I think if you look at all the rankings and take an overview, you get a pretty good picture of relative quality at the schools. And Della, to your point, Tuck is one of the smaller of the top schools and last year our placement as the world's highest quality businesses was at the very top.

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:29:10 AM)
Yes, indeed, you do very well in our rankings, but I wondered if recruiters prefer to recruit at larger schools.

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 9:29:36 AM)
To Della's earlier question...Our size is one of the things that fosters the incredibly strong alumni network we have, which in turn helps students to get great jobs and stay connected over the years.

tim (May 4, 2006 9:29:44 AM)
For all of you: One of the problems I have with the rankings is that the focus emphasized by schools and the media and is on the overall ranking placement, which should mean little to the student who is focused on one or two particular areas or specialties. It seems people gravitate toward rankings because they are the only prominent quantitative comparisons out there. What do you think can or should be done to get the focus in the right place?

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 9:31:13 AM)
Tim, take a look at the methodology of each ranking. For example, if you really want to know about return on your investment, that is exactly (and only) what Forbes ranks. If you want to know about salary three years later, you can look at the FT or US News, etc.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 9:31:45 AM)
Also, some of the rankings do provide sub-rankings within different specialties and functions.

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:31:50 AM)
Tim, I think you're right - the aim should be to get as much information as possible out there.

mbalars25 (May 4, 2006 9:32:24 AM)
Della, is the emphasis for MBAs to have a “global perspective” impacting the rankings methodology? If so, how?

Deepak (May 4, 2006 9:32:36 AM)
Tim, I believe BW ranks schools by specialties also.

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 9:34:47 AM)
There are so many ways to get information on B-schools these days...guide books, websites of the school, information sessions in each city and MBA tours. The rankings should be one tool in the kit that a student uses to determine what is best school for them.

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:35:44 AM)
The criteria we use for our rankings includes the percentage of international students and faculty, the international mobility of students (where they work before and after the MBA) and the actual course components (exchanges, etc.). So it is critical to our rankings (and the Economist). Not so for US-based rankings. Figures from GMAC show that fewer than 2 percent of US students apply to schools outside the US, so I guess these criteria are not important to US rankings.

Liz (May 4, 2006 9:35:46 AM)
To all: Thank you for your answer to my previous question. It would appear that there is room for a small number of schools to rise significantly in the rankings over the previous year. HEC and the Schulich School are two that come to mind in the FT 2006 ranking. Are there dramatic differences in the data provided or is the data reflecting changes in the school's strategic directions and overall program performance? How seriously do you take such leaps in ranking profiles?

sn8kebite (May 4, 2006 9:37:07 AM)
A related question to Liz's: How hard and how long can it take a school to improve their rankings. For example, USC who has fallen from 18 to 29 in the US News Rankings.

PaulDanosTUCK (May 4, 2006 9:38:09 AM)
Liz, it is true that one should be suspicious of big fluctuations in rankings. If the methodology is sound you wouldn't expect to get huge changes from year to year. Over time, a school can change its strategy and certain aspects of its experience that you would hope to create a different level of quality, but it's unlikely that it should be huge changes in short periods of time.

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 9:38:24 AM)
s8kebite, every once in awhile one factor may have influenced a school's score. I have seen changes quickly when a school has immediately addressed a specific concern.

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:38:49 AM)
Yes, we saw several rises in the FT rankings this year - Manchester was another, which had merged with other university department in Manchester, so we were effectively ranking a different school. I think for schools like Schulich and HEC, they are new on the international stage and have made changes to their programs and have a growing global prescence, which counts in the FT rankings.

ejaan (May 4, 2006 9:39:00 AM)
Della: Thanks you for all your insights! Does any ranking factor in the success or rather return on investment for internationals as one of the criteria? There are all kinds of stories doing the rounds (forums again) about how some schools are more savvy to the careers for internationals than the others. Would such a ranking even be considered since rankings I am sure play a bigger part for internationals applicants who just cannot afford to visit each school?

EuroMBA (May 4, 2006 9:39:11 AM)
All: Similar question to mbalars25 - perhaps worthwhile discussing together. Why do rankings, the FT's excepted, fail to compare European-Asian and US schools head-to-head?

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 9:40:09 AM)
ejaan: By "international" do you mean non-US?

PaulDanosTUCK (May 4, 2006 9:42:03 AM)
ejaan: For the top schools in the world the employers are really looking for global managers and there's a convergence of markets for the top business leaders. I think in the future that the distinctions will become less and less meaningful. I know at Tuck our international students do as well in placement as our US students and all of our students or most of our students work for companies that would be considered as global companies. I think this is going to be more and more the case.

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:42:23 AM)
The issue for us is that some schools have 100 percent international students - IMD in Switzerland for example. But I guess your question is, if you are from outside the US and go to business school in the the US, which school would get you a better job. Do you mean in the US or elsewhere?

tim (May 4, 2006 9:42:43 AM)
To Dean Danos: What are some examples of the negative effects of the rankings emphasis - not necessarily at Tuck or any named competitor, but anywhere in the industry, where you see administrators choosing actions inspired by rankings that might not be in the best long term interests of education?

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:42:54 AM)
But the short answer is that I know of no ranking that factors that in - but it would make a great editorial article.

ejaan (May 4, 2006 9:42:54 AM)
Yes, non-US...and for US rankings alone!

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 9:43:17 AM)
EuroMBA, it's hard to compare things like salaries when the currencies are so different. There are also other factors that are hard to compare and might make a head to head ranking intrinsically unfair. Also, the publishers probably publish for the readers and where the bulk of their readership is coming from.

PaulDanosTUCK (May 4, 2006 9:45:05 AM)
tim: I suspect that the vast majorities of schools are trying to do what's best for their students irrespective of any direct effect on rankings. As I said before, now that there are so many credible rankings, a school can point to the areas in which they are particularly strong. It is unfortunate, however, that with thousands of schools in the world, that really only at most 50 schools are focused upon in the rankings.

Deepak (May 4, 2006 9:45:40 AM)
Paul - Kim, a number of times students are not exactly sure about options/choices available after B-school and hence might want to look at overall rankings. Do students stick to majors/career options they mention in essays or do they also explore other opportunities available?

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:45:52 AM)
Yes, I heard a great suggestion from an Italian at a conference recently - that salaries should be weighted for the number of days worked in that country per year.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 9:46:05 AM)
:-)

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 9:46:51 AM)
Della, that alone makes a career in Europe look inviting!

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:47:42 AM)
Unfortunately, only some parts of Europe....

PaulDanosTUCK (May 4, 2006 9:48:13 AM)
Deepak, I think that the vast majority of people come into an MBA program with a very general notion of overall business leadership. And most top schools will allow a student to sample broadly the various fields and courses. It has been our experience that students don't really have to concentrate deeply in one area to get the very best jobs, even jobs in very specific fields like finance. At Tuck a person in their second year can concentrate and go as deeply as they'd like, but I don't think it has that much of an effect on the quality and quantity of job offers they get.

Liz (May 4, 2006 9:48:27 AM)
Dean Danos: You mentioned earlier in the chat that rankings can be one useful tool in researching B-Schools. However, some of your colleague deans are very critical of ranking methodologies and it seems more critical when schools slip in the rankings. How does a B-School brand itself as a deliver of a top MBA in light of the possible fluctuations in rankings?

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 9:48:57 AM)
Deepak, we do see students coming in to Tuck who completely change their careers. Even coming in and thinking that they want to pursue a certain career, they have an opportunity to check out that career in their summer internship. Some change their minds after that summer experience and focus in another direction. That's the beauty of the two year full time experience.

Deepak (May 4, 2006 9:50:23 AM)
Paul - Kim, Thanks. :)

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:50:33 AM)
Liz, I would just like to make one comment. I recently looked at the websites of the top 100 schools in the Financial Times MBA rankings. Of the 100, 96 cited their position in rankings on their websites. Most of these top schools use ranking information in their marketing, however critical they are.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 9:50:53 AM)
Valuable point.

ejaan (May 4, 2006 9:51:01 AM)
Would it ever be possible to have one global 'universal' ranking publicly accepted by most top schools that factor in weightings to the different factors accepted by them all? Or would this be asking for too much Della? It's like this vicious cycle. The rankings influence the number of applications to a school, which then boosts their acceptance rates for example which further boost their ranking the next time. I hope your getting the drift!

KimKeatingTuck (May 4, 2006 9:51:37 AM)
Della, that is amazing! What an excellent marketing tool for these schools when you consider that there are thousands of programs out there.

PaulDanosTUCK (May 4, 2006 9:52:00 AM)
Liz, I think that every school has to reflect on its strategy and its strengths and get a very clear understanding of what its prospective students and what the nature of their education is going to be. If a school is clear and then relentlessly pursues quality along with the characteristics they choose, I think that with or without high rankings they can have very satisfied graduates. Then perhaps they will have to do some extraordinary communications and have very clear and crisp communications with their constituents to make sure that people understand the nature of their program. The rankings are a shortcut to this to some extent, but not everybody can be ranked highly when you consider the number of schools in the world.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 9:52:27 AM)
Thanks again to Paul, Della, and Kiki for sharing their insights and insider knowledge today and to all guests for joining.

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:52:27 AM)
Will there ever be a ranking everyone likes? - No.

Liz (May 4, 2006 9:53:14 AM)
Thanks Dean Danos. That is very interesting perspective and one well taken.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 9:53:18 AM)
For further insights on the MBA scene, please visit these blogs: Accepted Admissions Almanac and BizDeansTalk.

PaulDanosTUCK (May 4, 2006 9:53:19 AM)
Thanks. This has been an interesting hour.

DellaBradshawFinancialTimes (May 4, 2006 9:53:24 AM)
This has been great. Thank you so much.

Linda Abraham (May 4, 2006 9:53:41 AM)
Good luck with your applications! Information about Accepted.com's consulting and Editing Services

MBA Chat Transcript Index || Chat Room