The BusinessWeek MBA rankings came out last week to the usual hubbub about what they mean, how accurate they are and what their limitations may be. This year commentators were talking about how BusinessWeek had changed their methodology – and how this had led to some surprising results. Chief amongst these being Harvard’s relegation from second place two years ago to eighth this – the first time the venerable Cambridge institution had dropped out of the top five.
It’s undoubtedly true that you have to take any biz-ed ranking with a pinch of salt – and also look at the results in the context of each ranking’s criteria and methodology. But what’s also indisputable is the exposure these lists give to the world’s business schools. Despite everything, the world’s top business schools strive to do well whether they believe in the methods or not. A good ranking in a respected list such as BusinessWeek (the originators of regular business school rankings in the late 80’s) is clearly a sign that you’re doing things right.
This year’s list included a pleasant surprise for BlueSky and one of our long-term clients, ESMT business school in Berlin – who, only 12 years after setting up, came third in the international ranking for schools outside the US. This comes hot on the heels of strong showings in The Economist and Financial Times rankings in recent years. The ranking also featured several other BlueSky clients listed as among the top MBA programmes in the world.
So, regardless of which ranking you look at or how you perceive individual results, this year’s BusinessWeek ranking was good for BlueSky, good for a number of our clients, not so good for Harvard. Never mind chaps, you can’t win ‘em all!!