Which MBA? - Economist Intelligence...

Which MBA?

The following is extracted from the 18th edition of Which MBA?. The full version includes details on different

delivery methods, such as part-time, distance-learning andexecutive MBAs. It also provides in-depth profiles of 120

major business schools, including a full breakdown ofschools' rankings.

The book is available from the Economist bookshop at:http://www.which-mba.com/

Making the right choice of executive education

George Bickerstaffe

Pearson Education LimitedEdinburgh Gate, Harlow, Essex CM20 2JE

Website: http://www.pearsoned.co.uk

The Economist Intelligence UnitThe Economist Intelligence Unit is a specialist publisher serving companies establishing and managingoperations across national borders. For over 50 years it has been a source of information on businessdevelopments, economic and political trends, government regulations and corporate practice worldwide.

The EIU delivers its information in four ways: through our digital portfolio, where our latest analysis is updateddaily; through printed subscription products ranging from newsletters to annual reference works; throughresearch reports; and by organising conferences and roundtables. The firm is a member of The Economist Group.

London New York Hong KongThe Economist Intelligence Unit The Economist Intelligence Unit The Economist Intelligence Unit26 Red Lion Square The Economist Building 60/F, Central PlazaLondon 111 West 57th Street 18 Harbour RoadSW1R 4HQ New York WanchaiUnited Kingdom NY 10019, US Hong Kong

Tel: (44.20) 7576 8000 Tel: (1.212) 554 0600 Tel: (852) 2585 3888Fax: (44.20) 7576 8476 Fax: (1.212) 586 1181/2 Fax: (852) 2802 7638E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected]

Website: http://www.eiu.com

Electronic deliveryThis publication can be viewed by subscribing online at http://store.eiu.com

Copyright© 2006 The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited. All rights reserved. Neither this publication nor any part of itmay be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic,mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the Economist IntelligenceUnit Limited.

ISBN-13: 978-0-273-7071-4ISBN-10: 0-273-71071-0

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data.A catalogue of this publication is available from the British Library.

The authors of EIU Research Reports are drawn from a wide range of professional and academic disciplines. All theinformation in the reports is verified to the best of the authors’ and the publisher’s ability, but neither can acceptresponsibility for loss arising from decisions based on these reports. Where opinion is expressed, it is that of theauthors, which does not necessarily coincide with the editorial views of the Economist Intelligence Unit Limitedor of The Economist Newspaper Limited.

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

09 08 07 06 05

Printed and bound in Great Britain by Ashford Colour Press Ltd., Gosport.

Have you got what it takes to be a world-class leader?

tel: +41 21 618 02 98 fax: +41 21 618 06 15e-mail: [email protected]

IMD – International Institute for Management DevelopmentChemin de Bellerive 23, PO Box 915, CH-1001 Lausanne, Switzerland

90 exceptional people experience the IMD MBA each year.Launch yourself into the challenge of this intensive, one-year leadership development program:

a life-changing experience.

Are you:• Bright, successful, on the fast track, wanting to make it to the top?• A young, experienced international manager with a global

mindset and a burning ambition to lead?• Ready to think outside the box and driven by the desire to make a difference?

If so, IMD is the place for you.Visit us at: www.imd.ch/mba

5402 IMD Which MBA ad.qxd 21.6.2006 11:08 Page 1

Which MBA? © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2006

Which skills will tomorrow’s leader need? 7

Full-time MBAs 19

Full-time MBA rankings 41

Open executive programmes 49

Custom executive programmes 57

Contents

7Which MBA? © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2006

Extracted from the 18th edition of Which MBA?

Which skills will tomorrow’s leader need?

Since any form of executive education is about improving your skill set to make you either

more attractive to recruiters or more likely to win promotion, it is first worth taking a look at

which skills recruiters say they are looking for.

Here we examine the results of a survey of a group of senior executives to find out what they

are looking for in tomorrow’s leaders. They were asked which skills they hoped to find in tal-

ented young managers and how these were likely to change over time; which skills were in

short supply; which methods of management education (for example, an MBA or short execu-

tive education courses) would most effectively meet those needs; which providers of man-

agement education were most important in developing managers; and many other questions.

By studying the results of the survey—and comparing them with similar surveys conducted in

2004 and 2005—you will get an idea of what companies, and therefore employers or

recruiters, are looking for in their managers and which providers of management education

can best supply this.

Although the survey reveals complex and sophisticated thinking about the use and value of

management education, one thing is clear: there is a greater determination among the exec-

utives surveyed to use it to train their best employees. Over the three years the survey has

been conducted, the percentage of executives saying they will rely on executive education

more over the next five years has risen from 35% to 58%. Those expecting no change in their

use of executive education have declined from 59% to 32% .

Over the next five years, do you expect your company will rely less, or more, on executive education(including MBAs) to train its best employees?(%)

2004 2005 2006

More 35 47 58

No change 59 41 32

Less 5 12 9

Only 8% of the executives surveyed believed that managers can develop all the skills they

need through experience, and that training has value only as an employee benefit. The num-

ber saying that management education is critical in building the knowledge and skills of

managers has remained fairly consistent at 31% (30% and 34% in 2005 and 2004 respective-

ly.) Overall, the executives generally believe—as they did in previous years—that experience

can provide some of the qualities they are seeking but that management education has a role

in topping these up. In other words, the consensus seems to be that an MBA does not make

the manager. Employers are looking primarily for someone with the right personal qualities

and see education as a way of bridging any skills gap.




What role does management education and training play in developing your company's best talent?(%)

2004 2005 2006

A manager can develop some of the skills he needs through experience, 27 29 31

and the rest can be developed through education and training

Management education and training is critical in 34 30 31

building the knowledge and skills of managers

A manager can develop most of the skills he needs through experience, 28 37 30

and the gaps can be plugged through education and training

A manager can develop all of the skills he needs through experience, 10 3 8

and management education and training is useful only because staff

perceive it as a benefit

As for who is responsible for equipping a manager with those skills, it is clear that most exec-

utives (68%) think that the firm and the individual share equal responsibility (though this is

a slightly lower percentage than in 2004 and 2005). Only 7% thought the company held the

primary responsibility and 25% said it was mainly something the manager himself or herself

had to take responsibility for.

Who is more responsible for equipping a manager with necessary skills?(%)

2004 2005 2006

Equal responsibility 71 73 68

The manager himself or herself 22 21 25

The company 7 6 7

So what are the skills these executives believe that young managers must have? Top of the

list, perhaps not surprisingly, is honesty and integrity, which is given a rating of 87%, largely

in line with the results of the previous two years.

Next come communication skills (84%) and people skills (82%), again showing little change

on 2004 and 2005. The corporate world seems to be delivering a consistent message: they

want their managers to excel in the soft skills, particularly leadership, rather than the hard-

er-edged technical and financial areas (perhaps because they assume managers will already

be skilled in these). A good understanding of technology and financial knowledge, for exam-

ple, is rated rather low at 64% and 57% respectively (virtually unchanged on previous years).

Furthermore, as in earlier surveys, previous managerial experience (54%) and management

education (51%) are not rated especially highly.




Which characteristics does your company currently look for in its most talented young managers?(importance rating, %)

2004 2005 2006

Honesty and integrity 86 82 87

Communication skills 80 81 84

Excellent people skills 81 80 82

Innovativeness/openness to new ideas 78 77 78

Strategic vision 75 70 73

International knowledge/the ability to manage across cultures 63 67 69

Deep knowledge of market needs and operations 71 66 68

A good understanding of technology 60 61 64

Dealmaking ability 63 60 57

Financial knowledge 58 58 57

Management experience 57 57 54

Management education 50 54 51

Functional knowledge of various parts of the business 59 60 50

In five years’ time, do you believe these characteristics will have gained or decreased in importance asthe qualities required of potential company leaders?

Increase/decrease in importance (–100 to +100)

Innovativeness/openness to new ideas +69

International knowledge/the ability to manage across cultures +60

Strategic vision +58

Communication skills +57

Excellent people skills +53

Deep knowledge of market needs and operations +51

A good understanding of technology +45

Honesty and integrity +35

Financial knowledge +26

Management education +25

Dealmaking ability +22

Management experience +22

Functional knowledge of various parts of the business +17

Furthermore, these soft skills are likely to remain high on the agenda of the executives sur-

veyed. Asked to assess those characteristics that will grow in importance over the next five

years, the majority opted for these rather than areas such as functional or financial knowl-

edge. Communications skills (57%) and people skills (53%) were both rated as likely to

increase in importance over this period. This is something that has not been lost on providers

of management education, particularly business schools. Leadership, communications and

ethics have become integral parts of the required curriculum of many MBA and executive edu-

cation programmes. However, the executives surveyed put an even greater emphasis on the

need for different kinds of “soft” skills, perhaps more closely connected to business issues.

For example, in an increasingly international and competitive business world, 69% say that

innovativeness and openness to new ideas will matter more in five years than they do now.




Coupled with this will be a need for strategic vision and, in particular, an ability to manage

effectively in the global marketplace. Of the executives surveyed, 60% thought that inter-

national knowledge and the ability to manage across cultures would grow in importance and

58% believe that strategic vision will become increasingly important (these figures have

remained broadly consistent over the three years the survey has been conducted).

Both trends reflect underlying realities. Globalisation, evident in such phenomena as

increased offshoring, shows no sign of slowing; indeed, it may well accelerate. Moreover,

rather than operating separate businesses in lots of countries, global firms are seeking to

integrate their many operations around the world seamlessly—hence the need for inter-

national knowledge and the ability to cross cultures.

The emphasis on strategic vision, though somewhat lower, is symptomatic of a move away from

concentration on core businesses which has defined many firms’ priorities in the past decade.

Knowing what skills are likely to be required in the future by potential employers is helpful in

deciding which management education options to choose. Even more helpful is to get an

insight into what skills employers believe are in short supply: those that are considered rare

are obviously worth acquiring.

When asked to identify the main skills shortages among their company’s up-and-coming tal-

ent, executives rated strategic vision (32%) and people skills (50%) as most rare. These are

qualities that can be hard to teach, of course, though the executives also threw in financial

knowledge (51%), market knowledge, innovativeness and management experience (all 53%)

for good measure.

Which of the following skills are most prevalent and which most lacking among your company's up-and-coming talent?(0 = extremely rare, 100 = extremely prevalent)

2004 2005 2006













When asked where the greatest talent shortfall will be, strategy is by far the biggest concern,

as it was in both 2004 and 2005. Strategy has long been one of the core subjects taught by

business schools, particularly on MBA programmes, and it is curious that the executives sur-

veyed expect a shortage of managers with strategic vision. On the face of it, sending up-and-

coming managers on an MBA or executive MBA programme might help address the shortfall.

However, the second-biggest concern—a lack of managers exhibiting innovativeness and

openness to new ideas (cited by 36% of executives)—seems more difficult to address.




In which areas do you see the greatest shortfalls in managerial talent over the next five years?(%)

2004 2005 2006













Which type of provider do you believe has the most important role to play in developing executives atyour company?(%)

2004 2005 2006

Business school 35 42 49

Independent provider/consultant 22 25 22

In-house trainer 29 19 17

Corporate university 14 15 12

Surprisingly perhaps, given that many executives criticise business schools for failing to teach

the business skills they require and for conducting research that they say lacks relevance to

“real” business, the survey shows that the executives who responded have considerable and

growing faith in business schools. In the 2006 survey 49% believe that they play the most

important role in developing their managerial talent, a rise from 35% in 2004 and 42% in

2005. This has been matched by a corresponding drop in the faith placed in in-house trainers,

traditionally the most common form of management education. The survey shows that faith

declining from 29% in 2004 to 19% in 2005 and 17% in 2006. Figures for independent

providers and corporate universities have remained largely consistent across the three surveys.

About the surveyIn May 2006 the Economist Intelligence Unit conducted an online survey of senior executives

asking them their views on what they thought the manager of the future would look like and the

role management education would play in equipping future managers with the skills they need.

Some 155 senior executives participated in the survey, including C-level executives (CEO, CFO,

etc), senior vice-presidents and directors in a variety of functional areas. There was a wide industry

spread, including manufacturing, professional services and healthcare. The annual revenue of the

companies involved ranged from under US$500,000 to more than US$10bn.




Which of the following courses does your company employ in developing managers?(%)

2006

In-house training 71

MBA 29

EMBA 25

Executive programmes (open) 27

Executive programmes (tailored) 27

Executive programmes (consortia) 7

The executives do not seem to putting their faith into practice, however. Only 29% of compa-

nies use MBAs to develop their managers. This may be because an MBA, as opposed to the

other types of programmes mentioned here, is usually paid for by the individual rather than

the company. A large number (71%) use in-house trainers as the predominant means of

developing their managers, even though only 17% think they play the most important role.

One reason could be that this is an efficient and cost-effective way of training large numbers

of people in a fairly short time.

In your experience, which of the following courses have delivered good value in developing talent at yourfirm?(0 = very little value, 100 = excellent value)

2004 2005 2006

In-house training 67 61 69

EMBA 52 61 68

MBA 59 62 66

Executive programmes (tailored) 59 64 63

Executive programmes (open) 50 53 55

Executive programmes (consortia) 44 47 47

Asked which types of management education have delivered good value for their firm in

developing talent, two of those provided by business schools—MBA and EMBA programmes

and tailored executive education—were rated at around the same level as in-house training.

Only open-enrolment and consortia executive education programmes scored relatively low

figures. This reflects a growing trend to rate various forms of executive education more or

less equally. In 2004, for example, executives said they regarded in-house training as much

better value than any business school offering, when it scored 67%, compared with 59% for

tailored courses and MBA programmes and 52% for executive MBAs.

It is difficult to determine exactly what this change reflects. It is true that business schools

have devoted considerable energy and resources to their executive education programmes in

the past few years (largely as a response to falling MBA applications). So there may be a per-

ception among company executives that these courses are better designed and organised,

more relevant to their needs and, simply, better value.



Full-time MBAs

Management education comes in lots of different packaging. In the MBA market alone there

are at least three distinct delivery methods: full-time, part-time and distance learning. On

top of that there are short, non-degree executive education courses, which in turn can be

broken down into open enrolment programmes or those tailored to a specific company. Here

we concentrate on full-time programmes.

Advantages and disadvantagesA full-time programme is what many prospective students regard as the “authentic” MBA

experience. It certainly offers advantages compared with other options. Studying an MBA

full-time gives you the opportunity to immerse yourself fully in the programme with few dis-

tractions from the learning process and in a stimulating atmosphere. Teaching faculty are

usually much more accessible than, say, on a part-time evening programme, where time for

out-of-class contact is limited. Moreover, the cliché that you will learn at least as much from

fellow students as from professors is largely true, and having easy and frequent opportun-

ities to meet, talk and work with classmates is a big advantage.

Full-time programmes form the basis of the Economist Intelligence Unit ranking and they are

the only type of programme that fully delivers all four elements in our ranking criteria: career

opportunities; increased salary; networking; and personal development/education experi-

ence. Part-time and executive MBA students are often sponsored so the career/salary issues

are less important, and distance-learning students, by definition, find networking difficult.

Indeed, networking is one of the key benefits students look for in an MBA programme (see

Table 2.1). This is much easier on a full-time programme. As one of our student diarists

points out (see Student perspective), full-time students, particularly at a campus-based

school, generally work and play together and often form life-long friendships.

Of course, networks exist on other types of programme. Part-time and EMBA students spend

large amounts of time together and establish friendships. But the experience is on a slightly

lesser scale: less intensive and perhaps not as long lasting.

Why did you decide to study for an MBA degree?Full-time students, (%)a

To open new career opportunities 37

Personal development 21

To increase salary 14

To further current career 13

Educational experience 9

Potential to network 6

Company advice or requirement 1a Importance accorded by students to each factor.

20 Which MBA? © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2006



Full-time MBAs

Full-time options (1-year, 2-year)A full-time programme can take anything from a mere ten months to two years to complete.

In the US most full-time programmes last two years, taught over four semesters (or some-

times eight mini-semesters) of about 13–14 weeks in the winter and spring of each year.

(This means they do not actually last two years in total teaching time, just two calendar years

overall.) A variation on the semester system is trimesters, or three periods in each of the two

years (these are also sometimes referred to as terms or, confusingly, quarters).

There is much greater variety outside the US. Some leading schools, such as London Business

School (LBS) and IESE in Barcelona, follow a two-year style programme, though with consider-

able flexibility. For example, the LBS MBA lasts between 15 and 21 months; IESE’s programme

is completed in 19 months. At two other prestigious European schools—INSEAD in France and

IMD in Switzerland—programmes last under a year. The full-time programme at Bocconi in

Milan lasts 14 months, at RSM Erasmus University in Rotterdam 15 months and at Imperial

(Tanaka) in London 12 months.

US schools have also tinkered with their programmes to reduce the time taken to gain an

MBA. Many now offer accelerated one-year tracks for students who have studied business or

related degrees at undergraduate level. Students take a short top-up course in business fun-

damentals during the summer and then go straight into the second year. However, there are

no signs yet that any of the top-ranked US schools, with the exception of Pittsburg (Katz),

are about to switch to one-year programmes. Indeed, Katz has introduced a much more tradi-

tional two-year programme alongside its long-running one-year European-style MBA.

In the past, some schools have attempted to shorten programmes by allowing students to

continue to study straight through the summer. However, this caused problems because of

the importance American employers place on the summer internship (company placement).

Many job offers following graduation come as a result of successful internships and most US

schools now accept that they are essential for career success.

The classic two-year programme

The first year of a two-year programme is generally devoted to “core” courses. These deal

with the fundamentals of business, typically including finance, financial and managerial

accounting, human resources management, information management, macroeconomics and

microeconomics, marketing, organisational behaviour, production and operations manage-

ment, and quantitative analysis. Increasingly, though, in response to student demand,

schools will offer one or two electives in the first year to allow earlier specialisation as stu-

dents are looking for a certain amount of specialised knowledge that they can take into their

summer internships.

The second year will sometimes begin with a compulsory integrative (or “capstone”) course,

frequently based on business strategy, designed to pull together the first year’s work. How-

ever, this practice is declining. This is an interesting development, given that our survey of

executives (see Chapter 1) shows that they generally regard strategic vision as an increasing-

ly valuable, but frequently missing, competence among employees.

Mainly, though, the beginning of the second year is a time for students to pursue their own

interests or career objectives by taking optional subjects, or electives. These, especially in

the US, can (or sometimes must) be grouped into specialisations, often known as concentra-

tions or majors, that reflect functional areas such as finance or marketing or even specific

How having that extra bite can make you the world’s no.1.

The University of Edinburgh Management School holdsboth EQUIS and Association of MBAs accreditation.

Steve Jobs, co-founder of Apple, is famous for his incisive and demanding

leadership style. It may not always make Jobs popular: but it works. As

everyone knows, Jobs is core to Apple’s success. The appreciation of different

leadership styles is just one of the things you’ll learn at the University of

Edinburgh Management School. The Edinburgh MBA is unique. It has developed

its very own career and personal development programme which allows you

to evaluate and truly develop your own management and leadership style, one

that really works for you. All in all, an Edinburgh MBA will help make you a

better manager, with just the right amount of bite. For more information visit

www.ems.ed.ac.uk or email [email protected]



Full-time MBAs

career goals. The longer the course, the more time students have to devote to these.

Such two-year programmes only occasionally include the project-based thesis that is a feature

of many one-year programmes, particularly in the UK. But most do include in-company project

work and softer elements such as leadership, interpersonal skills and general personal devel-

opment, either as courses in their own right or as parallel workshops and seminars. These

courses were introduced over a decade ago, largely in response to companies’ complaints that

although MBA graduates were very good at theory, many were not so talented in actually man-

aging people. They seem to have had mixed results, according to our survey of executives,

which rates communications skills and people skills as among the somewhat lacking.

The one-year-plus programme

Although so-called one-year programmes vary considerably in length, they are all extremely

intensive. Most of them follow the same core/elective framework as two-year programmes,

but because of time constraints the range of electives offered may be limited. In addition,

some schools, especially in the UK, include a lengthy in-company or research project that

also restricts the time allocated to teaching; in many, such as Oxford (Saïd) and Lancaster, at

least two months of the programme is taken up by off-campus research and thesis writing.

Proponents of one-year programmes argue that the time spent face-to-face with teaching

staff differs little from two-year programmes, but their opponents respond that one year is

not long enough for issues to be covered comprehensively or in depth. It is certainly true

that the intense pressure of a one-year course is a good preparation for business life—where

time management and prioritising are essential skills—but the first year of a two-year pro-

gramme can be just as gruelling and effective.



Full-time MBAs

What should be in an MBA programme?There are certain elements that by consensus are regarded as essential to an MBA. They include

initial functional or core courses (such as finance, marketing and economics) and specialist

analytical techniques (mainly statistics), followed by more advanced courses or electives in one or

more of the core areas. Soft skills may be part of the core courses or taught in supplementary

seminars and workshops. This is essentially an American model (dating from the 1950s and

earlier), aimed at enabling a general manager to understand the work of functional specialists and

how the various activities fit into the business as a whole (or, as most students now use the

degree, to allow a functional specialist to become a general manager). Elective courses can

produce specialists, but they will be specialists who can understand the other functions of

management.

There have been experiments with new approaches and variations on this theme, but the model

has proved remarkably robust. Below is a checklist of what an MBA programme should ideally

contain. Although developed by the Economist Intelligence Unit, this is not dissimilar from the

criteria used by the major international accreditation bodies (see page 26).

Checklist for an MBA programmeThe programme should ideally contain the following:

● Pre-programme courses (optional or required) on quantitative methods, computing and

mathematics for students not already skilled in these areas.

● An orientation programme before the start of the first term to meet other students and members

of the faculty, and for team-building exercises.

● Solid grounding in core courses for general management.

● Waivers for existing skills (these are opposed by some schools).

● A wide choice of electives that also allow in-depth specialisation. Some courses outside the

business school (for example, in other university departments) should be allowed and

encouraged.

● Good international content, for example: course material, the number of foreign students and

teachers, visits overseas, the opportunity for language tuition and exchanges with foreign

schools.

● Reasonable emphasis on soft skills.

● A good range of company projects.

The schools should also provide the following:

● Good teaching skills and research and library facilities.

● A satisfactory programme of senior executives as guest speakers, “executives in residence” and

others.

● Reasonable open-door policy for access to faculty.

● An administration willing to respond to student concerns.

● Formal help with finding accommodation.

● Excellent careers services, including training in interview skills.

● A good and active network of alumni.



Full-time MBAs

CostCounting the cost

No one can claim an MBA is cheap; studying it full time will cost you a great deal of money.

The full-time two-year MBA programme at Stanford in the US, for example, costs US$43,380

per nine-month academic year; the 10-month full-time programme at INSEAD outside Paris

costs €45,000 (US$56,250) for individuals or €60,000 (US$75,000) for sponsoring compa-

nies; and the 11-month programme at IMD in Switzerland costs Swfr55,000 (US$44,000).

Note that this is just what the schools charge for teaching you. You will also have to find the

cash for rent, books and food—all without the comfort of a regular salary cheque.

In the US, business schools that are part of state universities can be considerably cheaper

than private institutions, with little effect on quality. Canadian schools also generally have

tuition fees lower than the North American average and offer good value for money. Most

schools in Europe are cheaper than their North American counterparts, largely because they

have shorter programmes, though as the figures above show there is very little difference in

the cost per time figures. Even so, any good programme will be expensive and will represent

a significant investment in personal terms. At many schools charges vary according to the

origins of students. Foreign and (in North America) out-of-state students can expect to pay

more. In Europe, the differentiation is often between residents and non-residents of the EU.

Costs for full-time students break down into three areas: tuition, living expenses and forgone

earnings. Note that tuition may not always include other business school expenses such as

textbooks, fees for the use of a gym and even such essentials as printing out pages from a

school computer. Good schools will make clear the scale of these additional costs.

Tuition

As pointed out above, tuition costs vary greatly between schools. These are almost always

featured on a school’s website. For an easy school-by-school comparison, look at the Appen-

dix table on page 488. Fees usually go up each year and will be finalised quite late.

Living expenses

For full-time students, tuition costs are only the beginning. They also have to find accommo-

dation and fund their living expenses, and some may have their families with them. Accom-

modation costs vary according to location. For example, McGill in Montreal estimates a total

of C$14,500 (US$10,357) per year for books, rent, food and transport. In France, INSEAD

estimates total expenses excluding tuition at around €17,500 (US$21,875) for the pro-

gramme for a single individual.

Other expenses that need to be considered include health insurance, networking (going for

meals or drinks with other students or contacts), exchanges, which may include spending

time in expensive European cities or the US, and simple things such as photocopying, which

are often charged to students as additional costs.



Full-time MBAs

Accommodation costs around the world,a 2006

City 3-room furnished apartment 4-room furnished apartment

Europe

Amsterdam €1,225 (US$1,531) €1,650 (US$2,063)

Barcelona €855 (US$1,069) €960 (US$1,200)

Brussels €900 (US$1,125) €1350 (US$1,688)

Dublin €1000 (US$1,250) €1200 (US$1,500)

Geneva Swfr2,600 (US$2,080) Swfr3,500 (US$2,800)

Helsinki €645 (US$806) €850 (US$1,063)

London £1,520 (US$2,764) £3,000 (US$5,455)

Lyon €650 (US$813) €750 (US$938)

Madrid €855 (US$1,069) €1280 (US$1,600)

Manchester £575 (US$1,045) £795 (US$1,445)

Milan €1,100 (US$1,375) €1,300 (US$1,625)

Oslo Nkr8,000 (US$1,242) Nkr9,000 (US$1,398)

Paris €2,000 (US$2,500) €2,500 (US$3,125)

North America

Atlanta US$1,000 US$1,200

Boston US$2,500 US$2,800

Chicago US$1,700 US$2,400

Cleveland US$725 US$1,200

Detroit US$985 US$1,325

Houston US$2,000 US$2,500

Los Angeles US$1,600 US$2,500

Mexico Ps19,000 (US$1,743) Ps25,000 (US$2,294)

Minneapolis US$1,200 US$1,600

Montreal C$1,200 (US$857) C$1,600 (US$1,143)

New York US$5,500 US$5,500

Pittsburgh US$600 US$1,000

San Francisco US$2,500 US$3,500

Toronto C$1,500 (US$1,071) C$2,000 (US$1,429)

Vancouver C$1350 (US$964) C$2200 (US$1571)

Washington, DC US$1,450 US$2,300

Asia and Australasia

Hong Kong HK$38,000 (US$4,884) HK$50,000 (US$6,427)

Melbourne A$1,920 (US$1,466) A$2,725 (US$2,080)

Perth A$1,250 (US$954) A$1,150 (US$878)

Shanghai Rmb12,132 (US$1,481) Rmb20,220 (US$2,469)

Singapore S$2,580 (US$1,969) S$5,150 (US$3,931)

Sydney A$2,200 (US$1,679) A$3,420 (US$2,611)a Moderate cost accommodation taken from the Worldwide Cost of Living Survey, June 2006, The Economist Intelligence Unit.



Full-time MBAs

The financial rewards

Whatever the cost of their programme, MBA students are quite capable of working out that

an MBA is an investment and that the return, in terms of increased salary after graduation, is

good enough to justify the outlay.

For example, Table 2.3 shows the average starting salaries for MBA graduates reported by a

number of schools and the percentage increase this represents on their pre-MBA salary. (Fur-

ther details can be found in the comparative tables in the Appendix.)

Average starting salaries of recent graduates from selected schools

School Salary (US$) % change (2006/06)

Europe

Ashridge 238,181 98

Henley 140,909 34

IESE 131,250 163

Oxford (Saïd) 116,363 45

IMD 113,000 51

NIMBAS 108,750 85

Cranfield 107,940 76

London 106,857 82

ESCP–EAP 106,250 37

Strathclyde 105,454 100

North America

Stanford 104,197 42

Dartmouth (Tuck) 100,000 66

Pennsylvania (Wharton) 100,000 47

Harvard 99,848 85

MIT (Sloan) 99,589 41

Chicago 97,613 50

Northwestern (Kellogg) 96,690 39

Columbia 96,620 34

California at Berkeley (Haas) 95,519 53

Michigan (Ross) 91,835 64

Rest of the World

Macquarie 90,142 21

Cape Town 74,685 30

Melbourne 74,113 36

Curtin 68,351 17

International University of Japan 68,045 36

Hong Kong UST 63,724 n/a

Otago 63,519 43

Hong Kong SB 56,323 36

Singapore 47,891 77

Nanyang 41,437 69

Note: Local currencies converted using average exchange rates for 2006: US$1 = A$1.31, €0.80, HK$7.78, £0.55, NZ$1.42, R6.36, S$1.66, ¥110.22.



Full-time MBAs

Choosing a schoolHow and why do students choose a particular school and programme? According to the

Economist Intelligence Unit’s survey of students and graduates for Which MBA? 2006, the

most important factors are reputation, programme content, location, a school’s published

ranking position and the quality of the teaching faculty. There are many other criteria, of

course, and the importance of factors varies from student to student and region to region.

How did you choose the school where you are taking or took your MBA?(full-time students, %)a

World Europe North America Asia & Australasia

Reputation of school 34 33 35 34

Content of programme 16 17 16 15

Location 12 14 12 13

Published ranking position 11 12 11 8

Quality of teaching faculty 10 9 11 12

Tuition and living costs 5 5 5 7

Teaching methods 4 4 4 3

Friend's recommendation 3 3 3 2

Careers services record 2 1 3 3

Starting salary of graduates 2 1 2 2

Published guides 1 1 1 0a Importance accorded by students to each factor.

The results in Table 2.4 show the overwhelming importance of a school’s reputation. Careers

services and starting salaries, according to our survey, play a remarkably small part in

attracting students. Why this should be so is unclear, since MBA students complain vocifer-

ously if they feel that these areas are underperforming. It may reflect a growing acceptance

that even the best careers office cannot promise, let alone guarantee, a job.

We have selected a number of criteria that are frequently considered by students based on

our research (see below). Of course, some individuals might rate other factors not mentioned

as more significant.

Programme

What makes a good MBA programme, including such things as core and elective subjects and

projects, is discussed in the box on page 14. You can find this information on schools’ web-

sites and in their brochures. But you should look carefully at the details of any programme

you are interested in, particularly any changes that are being proposed—these can be more

frequent than you might think. Students’ views on their programmes, according to our sur-

vey, are set out in Table 2.5. The results are based on questions covering areas such as the

content and structure of the programme, the range of electives, the teaching quality and

practical relevance.



Full-time MBAs

Student and graduate ratings of programme content

School % School %

Chicago 96 Dartmouth (Tuck) 89

IE 93 Henley 89

MIT (Sloan) 93 Monash 89

Northwestern (Kellogg) 93 UCLA (Anderson) 89

Michigan (Ross) 92 HEC Paris 88

Virginia (Darden) 92 Duke (Fuqua) 88

Carnegie Mellon (Tepper) 91 London 88

Cornell (Johnson) 91 New York (Stern) 88

INSEAD 90 Stanford 88

York (Schulich) 90 Yale 88

Note. These figures are derived from our survey of students and alumni; caution should be used when interpreting them.

Faculty

A school’s faculty—academic teachers and research staff—is the foundation of its reputation.

Their abilities and qualifications are one of the best indicators of a school’s standing. Faculty

are also a key element in a school’s marketing mix and are crucial in attracting good students

and corporate support.

What students think of the faculty: student rating by region(full-time students, %)a


Teaching ability 85 82 86 80

Attitude and receptiveness/approachability 90 85 92 84

Leading-edge research/capability/knowledge 84 80 86 78a Importance accorded by students to each factor.

Top academic staff, who combine original and innovative thinking, a realistic grasp of corpo-

rate issues, and the skill to impart their knowledge and enthusiasm to students, are hard to

come by. A shortage of good young business faculty is causing problems for schools that are

eager to recruit them and is driving up academic salaries, especially in areas such as strategy,

accounting and finance (see box on page 20).

As well as their own faculty members, many schools play host to visiting academics from

other schools (sometimes as a prelude to poaching them), practising executives and others,

normally known as visiting or adjunct faculty, who bring fresh knowledge and perspectives

into the classroom.



Full-time MBAs

A matter of facultyThe scarcity of top-quality young faculty to teach students and carry out research in business

schools has long been a serious concern. For many, however, the issue has now reached crisis

point. A lack of faculty may already be widening the gap between the best business schools and

the rest. It certainly has the potential to change the make-up of every one of them.

AACSB International reported a 19% decline in the numbers of new US doctorates (PhDs) in

business studies between 1995 and 2001 and predicted that the problem will deteriorate further

over the next decade. Douglas A Shackelford, from at Kenan-Flagler Business School, University of

North Carolina, says: “I tell people that finding good people is now my primary job. Where do I find

them? Wherever I can.” Shackelford compares the situation to needing a repair to your roof and

putting it off from year to year. “I wouldn’t say we’re in a real crisis yet, but some time in the

future we may well be.”

Crisis or not, there are three main reasons for the current shortage. The first is simple

demographics. The “baby-boom” generation (born after the second world war), which has supplied

the bulk of business school faculty over the past 20 years, is now rapidly reaching retirement age

and is not being replaced. At the same time, the rise in the number of business schools in China,

India, and central and eastern Europe has dramatically increased the demand for qualified

faculty—often recruited from the US and western Europe. The problem is compounded by the fact

that the supply of new business studies PhDs is shrinking.

Big money transfers

While there is little that can be done to overcome the effects of demographic change, the growing

competition between schools is a real problem. Ken Green, from Manchester Business School (MBS)

in the UK, says the competition for top faculty is global and that individuals often move between

leading schools, rather like highly paid football stars. “At MBS, we have an aspiration to be among

the very best schools in the world by 2015,” he says. “That means being world-class in the quality of

our offering and in the quality of our faculty.” The problem, of course, is that so does everybody

else. The laws of supply and demand mean that faculty pay is rising well above the level of inflation.

However, the shortages are not affecting all schools equally. The biggest schools are likely to be

best placed to weather the crisis. Tuck’s senior associate dean, Robert G Hansen, agrees that there

could be a growing split in the US between the top and mid-tier schools, which are probably

hardest hit by the faculty crisis and are increasingly dependent on visiting and adjunct faculty to

meet their teaching obligations.

Mr Shackelford has his own ideas on why the number of faculty produced, especially in the US, is

falling. One is that business schools have become too focused on published rankings. “Before the

rankings, there were two ways of building your school’s reputation: the number and quality of your

PhD students; and what similar institutions thought of you. After the rankings appeared in the late

1980s, it was what magazines and newspapers said about you. I think a lot of schools looked at the

cost of producing PhDs and said that the money could be better spent on the full-time MBA

programme, which is usually what is ranked. You may have to take on three PhD students to

produce one good one. That’s expensive and the returns are long term.”

Faculty shortages have considerable implications for research. Although the top schools will

continue to attract leading researchers, it is now difficult to build a cohort of researchers in a

particular field because people are spread more thinly and the shift of resources towards the full-

time MBA means there is an increased emphasis on teaching. However, there is no reason why

teaching and research should be mutually exclusive. Schools have to undertake research because

in many ways it is their raison d’être (and it helps attract companies that are looking for the latest

ideas). But they also need people who can turn that research into useful teaching material. It is

this transfer of knowledge that is the real challenge facing business schools today.



Full-time MBAs

Student and graduate ratings of faculty

School % School %

IE 96 Dartmouth (Tuck) 92

Brandeis 94 Harvard 92

Carnegie Mellon (Tepper) 94 Stanford 92

Chicago 94 Duke (Fuqua) 91

Cornell (Johnson) 94 Hong Kong UST 91

Virginia (Darden) 94 Maryland (Smith) 91

Yale 94 North Carolina at Chapel Hill (Kenan-Flagler) 91

Indiana (Kelley) 93 Northwestern (Kellogg) 91

Michigan (Ross) 93 Rochester (Simon) 91

MIT (Sloan) 93 Washington in St Louis (Olin) 91


Culture

It is not just in terms of programmes that business schools can vary. Taking an MBA at, say,

the University of Hong Kong will be a different experience from studying one at Stanford, just

as Stanford will be different from Tanaka in London. This is much more than simple geogra-

phy; there are as many differences within countries as there are between them. These differ-

ences are an indication of the schools’ culture, that indefinable but all-pervading quality

that stems from a stated purpose, history, staff, students, business environment and so on. A

school’s prevailing culture is not easy to assess, but students consistently point out how

important it can be to the overall MBA experience. The editorial comments in the directory

indicate the more important cultural issues.

Of course, a vital ingredient of the culture is the students themselves. In our survey we asked

students to assess their own classmates. The highest scores are listed in Table 2.8, and a

breakdown by question and by region is given in Table 2.9.

Student and graduate ratings of quality of student body

School % School %

Stanford 97 Duke (Fuqua) 91

Dartmouth (Tuck) 96 Cornell (Johnson) 91

IMD 95 Emory (Goizueta) 91

Northwestern (Kellogg) 95 Harvard 91

Virginia (Darden) 95 UCLA (Anderson) 91

California at Berkeley (Haas) 94 UC Dublin (Smurfit) 91

Yale 94 New York (Stern) 90

Michigan (Ross) 93 Chicago 89

IESE 92 Cranfield 89

INSEAD 92 ESADE 89

MIT (Sloan) 92 Pennsylvania (Wharton) 89

Columbia 91 Southern California (Marshall) 89




Full-time MBAs

What students think of the quality of the student body(%)a


Esprit de corps 89 87 91 81

Quality of fellow students 84 81 86 79

Work experience 83 82 84 76a Importance accorded by students to each factor.

Size

Students can often overlook the size of a business school when they weigh up their choices.

But size can have a huge influence on the experience of taking an MBA. As with culture, the

size of business schools (not just the numbers of MBA students but also how many under-

graduates they have, whether or not they have large part-time and executive MBA intakes

and their involvement in executive education) varies enormously. Many schools deliberately

restrict the size of their full-time MBA intake, arguing that a smaller cohort improves the

quality of the teaching and learning experience. INSEAD, however, which hardly falls short

on either criterion, has one of the largest annual intakes at nearly 900.

The full-time average intake per year at North American schools in the directory this year is 217,

compared with 88 in Europe and 78 in Asia and Australasia. The directory entries show the num-

ber of students enrolled in the most recent incoming programme and the size of the faculty.

Smaller schools allow more involvement but may lack the resources to provide an extensive

choice of other elements, such as electives. Bigger schools running two-year courses can

have more than 1,000 students on campus. They may have the resources but they can also

sometimes be anonymous, offering minimal contact with the faculty.

Facilities

The physical facilities at most business schools are excellent. The directory entries give an

indication of what is available. Although the content matters more than the packaging, the

need to attract good students and staff and to introduce new technology, which is much

easier in a modern building, has stimulated a major and continuing business school building

boom. Chicago Graduate School of Business, for example, has spent US$125m on its new

facility. Emory’s Goizueta school has just spent US$33m on a new building to house its PhD

programme, research centres, executive MBA and executive programmes.

All this has been good for students. North American schools, with their large endowments

and ability to call on wealthy alumni, have created some superb facilities. Table 2.10 shows

the results produced when we surveyed students and recent graduates on schools’ facilities

and the back-up they received from schools’ administrations. This is a summation of ratings

for such things as the quality and accessibility of libraries, computers, databases and other

facilities and services; the range and suitability of teaching methods; the attitude and recep-

tiveness of faculty; the attitude of programme and school administrators; and the extent and

usefulness of the alumni network.



Full-time MBAs

Student and graduate ratings of back-up and facilities

School % School %

Dartmouth (Tuck) 95 Vanderbilt (Owen) 92

Emory (Goizueta) 95 Duke (Fuqua) 91

Cornell (Johnson) 94 Hong Kong UST 91

Harvard 94 Leeds 91

Virginia (Darden) 94 Bath 90

Cambridge (Judge) 93 Carnegie Mellon (Tepper) 90

Chicago 93 Hong Kong SB 90

HEC Montréal 93 Glasgow 90

Nanyang 93 IE 90

Cranfield 92 New York (Stern) 90

Indiana (Kelley) 92 Penn State (Smeal) 90

Monash 92 Washington in St Louis (Olin) 90


As a minimum there should be a good library of management and business books, preferably

reserved for MBA students, and access to national and international databases and commu-

nication systems, CD-ROM files and, especially, the Internet. Easy laptop access (preferably

wireless) to a school’s intranet is essential. Many schools require or advise students to have

their own laptop computer (where this is so it is indicated in the directory entry), although

computer centres with plenty of PCs remain important. More and more schools now provide

laptops or insist students buy those they recommend, often at a discount. This is mainly to

ensure compatibility but also because of fear of imported viruses. Sports and recreation facil-

ities are also highly desirable.

Careers services

However good a school’s programme, facilities, culture and so on may be, in the end you also

need it to help you find the job you want. Of course, no business school can hand you a job on

a plate, but it should have a careers service capable of introducing you to the types of firms

you want to work for and equipping you to perform as well as possible in the recruitment

process. How students view careers services and the salaries they achieve after graduation are

important elements in the ranking of schools by the Economist Intelligence Unit. In general,

North American schools devote more resources to these services, which are often better

organised and staffed than in Europe, where many university-based schools merely direct

their MBA graduates to the central careers office. This is a cause of many complaints.

Internationalism

There is probably not a business school in existence that does not claim to be international in

its outlook, student body, faculty and teaching material. Indeed, many are going out of their

way to prove it, often at considerable expense. INSEAD, for example, has two campuses, one

in France and one in Singapore. Chicago has outposts in London and Singapore. All schools

make a big issue in their publicity material of the numbers of foreign students and faculty

they admit and employ.

But even though internationalism may generally be seen as a good thing—indeed, it is a cri-

terion in our ranking—it does have its critics. Some schools are accused of neglecting their



Full-time MBAs

home market, for example. On some programmes native-born students point out that their

foreign classmates can limit a programme because they lack linguistic skills or have a cultural

aversion to participation.

Schools by percentage of foreign students

School % School %

Monaco 100 Macquarie 90

IMD 98 Monash 90

Hult 97 Birmingham 89

Newcastle 97 Cambridge (Judge) 89

RSM Erasmus 95 Hong Kong SB 89

Aston 94 EADA 87

Singapore 94 Edinburgh 87

Bradford 93 IE 87

London 92 INSEAD 87

Oxford (Saïd) 92 Nottingham 87

Glasgow 90 Nyenrode 87

Foreign students by region

Europe % North America % Asia & Australasia %

Monaco 100 Hult 97 Singapore 94

IMD 98 York (Schulich) 73 Macquarie 90

Newcastle 97 Brandeis 68 Monash 90

RSM Erasmus 95 British Columbia (Sauder) 64 Hong Kong SB 89

Aston 94 EGADE 63 Hong Kong UST 84

Bradford 93 North Carolina 56 International University of Japan 83

London 92 Rochester (Simon) 56 Nanyang 80

Oxford (Saïd) 92 Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 55 Chinese University of Hong Kong 77

Glasgow 90 HEC Montréal 54 Curtin 76

Birmingham 89 Iowa (Tippie) 54 Melbourne 70

Cambridge (Judge) 89 McGill 54



Full-time MBAs

Student and graduate ratings of internationalism

School % School %

Brandeis 94 Hong Kong SB 86

INSEAD 94 International University of Japan 86

Thunderbird (Garvin) 94 Melbourne 86

London 92 MIT (Sloan) 86

South Carolina (Moore) 90 Southern California (Marshall) 86

HEC Paris 89 York (Schulich) 86

Hong Kong UST 89 Cambridge (Judge) 85

IE 89 ESADE 85

IESE 89 Henley 85

Georgetown (McDonough) 88 Manchester 85

Helsinki 88 Michigan (Ross) 85

RSM Erasmus 87 Otago 85

EADA 86


It can also be argued that what matters more than numbers of foreign students or faculty is

the way teaching and casework are done. Unfortunately, this is hard for would-be students to

assess. In the end, the easiest and most common method of assessing internationalism is

simply to measure the percentage of non-national students and faculty studying and teach-

ing at schools. Tables 2.14 and 2.15, derived from our 2005 survey, provide these figures.

Schools by percentage of foreign faculty

School % School %

IMD 95 Ashridge 64

Monaco 93 Otago 64

Hong Kong UST 90 Hong Kong SB 62

Audencia (Nantes) 88 Cambridge (Judge) 56

INSEAD 87 Melbourne 55

NIMBAS 87 Durham 54

Chinese University of Hong Kong 83 RSM Erasmus 50

Helsinki 76 International University of Japan 48

China Europe Int Business School 71 Kingston 48

London 68 Monash 48

Imperial (Tanaka) 66 York (Schulich) 48

Nanyang 65



Full-time MBAs

Foreign faculty by region

Europe % North America % Asia & Australasia %

IMD 95 York (Schulich) 48 Hong Kong UST 90

Monaco 93 Calgary (Haskayne) 46 Chinese University of Hong Kong 83

Audencia (Nantes) 88 British Columbia (Sauder) 42 China Europe Int Business School 71

INSEAD 87 Carnegie Mellon (Tepper) 36 Nanyang 65

NIMBAS 87 Washington in St Louis (Olin) 36 Otago 64

Helsinki 76 HEC Montréal 35 Hong Kong SB 62

London 68 Duke (Fuqua) 34 Melbourne 55

Imperial (Tanaka) 66 McGill 32 International University of Japan 48

Ashridge 64 Michigan (Ross) 31 Monash 48

Cambridge (Judge) 56 Cornell (Johnson) 30 Singapore 43

However, internationalism also has a more practical side. It should mean some opportunity

to experience a foreign country as part of an MBA programme. This may involve a study trip,

an overseas project or a full-blown exchange, maybe spending a full term at a business

school in another country. Generally, there is no additional tuition cost for students involved

in these, although there may be extra expense. Schools simply balance the numbers leaving

them and the numbers they accept. Normally, exchanges are used to study elective courses,

which receive full credit from the home institution.

It also means language skills. English may be the international business language, and inter-

national courses are almost invariably taught in English, but the more internationally mind-

ed schools place a strong emphasis on linguistic ability. MBA programmes at IESE in

Barcelona and Bocconi in Milan are bilingual. INSEAD expects students to be fluent in French

and English when they arrive and to have picked up a third language by the time they leave,

and London Business School requires foreign-language skills for graduation.

Location

MBA students often choose where they would like to study for their MBA first and then look

round for a suitable school. This is not as whimsical as it might appear. In the US, for exam-

ple, an MBA programme can be a good way to find a job in a particular region. Schools in

favoured locations such as California or the south-eastern sun belt attract many out-of-state

students who settle in the area after graduation. In other parts of the world, students may be

attracted across national borders because they have an interest in working in a particular

country. Students often have existing links with, or an interest in, their chosen country of

study; they may already know the language and may plan to work there, at least for a time,

after graduation. Also their preferred career direction may dictate a location, such as New

York or London for finance or California for ICT. In any event, most students find that,

although it may add to the pressures, working for an MBA in a new location adds to the

development potential of any programme.

Accreditation

The three main accreditation bodies are the US-based Association to Advance Collegiate

Schools of Business (AACSB International); EQUIS, the accreditation arm of the European

Foundation for Management Development (EFMD) in Brussels; and the UK’s Association of

MBAs (AMBA). Most business schools listed in the directory are accredited by one or more of



Full-time MBAs

these bodies and some by all three. (A few non-accredited schools are included because they

are deemed to be of potential interest to some students.)

Although nominally geographically based, these three bodies are increasingly international

in scope, accrediting business schools outside their own regions. This is increasingly the

point about accreditation: business schools with global ambitions need accreditation sys-

tems that are attractive to international students. For example, many schools in Europe seek

AACSB International accreditation because it reassures students from North America.

Whether three competing international accrediting bodies can be sustained in the long run

or whether some form of mutual recognition or even merger will occur remains to be seen.

(Certainly there are signs of increasing, if perhaps cautious, co-operation between them.)

For the moment, however, discerning prospective students should ensure that the school of

their choice is accredited by at least one body.



Full-time MBAs

The student’s perspective: full-time MBAAnita Prabhu, MBA 2005, Manchester Business School, UK. Senior Consultant, Impact Plus, London, UK

After five years in the life and pensions industry, including a graduate management scheme and

roles ranging from a project manager to a senior supplier manager, I decided to undertake a full-

time MBA at Manchester Business School (MBS). The decision to go full-time rather than part-time

or via a distance-learning programme was relatively easy. I knew I wanted to immerse myself

without the distractions of a demanding job. I wanted to apply myself to some serious study that I

knew would stand me in good stead for the rest of my career. When you think of it like this, 18

months of study plus the fees and lost income are not as big a sacrifice as you might expect.

It’s just over a year since I finished my MBA and I can honestly say it was the most effective thing I

have ever done for myself both personally and career-wise. I very much doubt I would have got the

job I currently have had I not studied for an MBA. I’m not simply talking about the weight that an

MBA adds to your CV. I’m talking more about the way it improves your business skills and your

ability to communicate them to employers and clients.

If you want to get the most out of the MBA you need to throw yourself in to it. It has changed not

only the way I communicate with peers and clients but also the way I think about and approach

problems. I can’t deny it was hard work—really hard work—but when I think about how it has

changed my life, I already know that the time and money invested was absolutely 100% worth it.

The best thing about a full-time course is that you know that everyone else is going through the

same thing with you so you can’t help but support one another to do the best you can. An MBA is

different from an undergraduate degree in the UK in that you have invested a serious amount of

money in it and have usually had to take a career break, meaning that everyone there wants to

learn and do well. This is also part of the reason I chose MBS. The support and calibre of both staff

and students exceeded my expectations. It’s not unusual for people to go out of their way to

support you and there is a genuine community spirit in the school.

The most notable experience was undoubtedly the International Business Project, the culmination

of 18 months of study and practice. I am a management consultant now and know you simply don’t

get better preparation than from an MBA. You follow the whole process from bidding for the work

through to final deliverables. You manage your clients’ expectations and work with them to define

the scope and develop a plan for the work. This is real-life experience and while you work the

hardest you will ever work in your life, completing it and the satisfaction of delivering something

of real business value to the client is a fantastic feeling.

The MBA has been critical in getting me to where I am today in terms of developing the all-round

business skills that have given me the confidence to interact with people at all levels of an

organisation. If you are willing to work hard, it’s certainly worth the money.

As a student you should ensure that you chose a school with lecturers who maintain academic

intelligence combined with a good dose of practical and proven credibility in client work. MBS

lecturers have this and it shows in their lectures; it’s the stories and their experience that helps

you understand and learn.

The MBA has been one of the most rewarding experiences I’ve had and I know I will continue to

have a good and long-lasting relationship with my fellow students, faculty and staff at MBS.



Full-time rankingsExtracted from the 18th edition of Which MBA?

Full-time rankings

Why rank?The Which MBA? ranking of the world’s 100 best full-time MBA programmes is now in its fifth

year. Business schools traditionally dislike rankings (after all, no one likes to be graded by

outsiders) but most now generally accept them as inevitable and, indeed, useful for their

prospective students. The reality is that people pay attention to rankings because they are a

simple and effective tool for prospective students to compare schools. Using a number of sur-

veys together, students may gain a rounded picture. But no one pretends rankings are per-

fect. They need to be handled with care.

How is the Economist Intelligence Unit ranking different?The ethos behind the ranking is simple. For well over a decade the Economist Intelligence

Unit has regularly surveyed MBA students about why they take an MBA. Four factors consis-

tently emerge:

● to open new career opportunities and/or further current career;

● personal development and educational experience;

● to increase salary;

● the potential to network.

These factors are the basis of our ranking. The Economist Intelligence Unit ranks full-time

MBA programmes on their ability to deliver to students the things they themselves cite as

most important. It weights each element according to the average importance given to it by

students surveyed over the past five years. The criteria used to measure each of these four

factors are detailed in Table 9.8.

The ranking of full-time MBA programmes by the Economist Intelligence Unit sits alongside

those produced by Business Week and the Financial Times as one of the most important global

rankings. The Economist Intelligence Unit is among the best qualified to undertake a ranking

given its long experience in collecting survey data for the many reports it produces, includ-

ing 18 editions of Which MBA? (Business Week has published MBA rankings for 15 years and

the Financial Times for seven years).



Full-time rankings

Other rankingsBusiness Week’s ranking is probably the most influential, especially in North America. It surveys

MBA graduates and MBA recruiters on a wide range of issues. Perhaps mindful of the Financial

Times (see below), it has introduced a measure of “intellectual capital”, which it describes as “a

school’s influence and prominence in the realm of ideas”. Intellectual capital makes up 10% of the

overall rankings, with the remaining 90% split evenly between students and recruiters.

The Financial Times bases its ranking on three main criteria: the career progression obtained from

the MBA (particularly its purchasing power in the marketplace); diversity of experience; and the

school’s research qualities. The research rating is based on the number of publications in 35

international and professional journals. For each publication, points are awarded to the school

where the faculty member is currently employed.

All MBA programme rankings depend on surveys of interested parties: the business schools;

the students or graduates; and recruiters. The Economist Intelligence Unit ranking follows

this pattern but differs from the rest in several important areas.

● More student-centric (continuing Which MBA?’s tradition of appealing to a student audi-

ence). It measures the way schools meet the demands students have of an MBA pro-

gramme.

● All-embracing. It is based on detailed questionnaires completed by business schools and

around 20,000 current MBA students and graduates around the world. Key numerical data

(such as average GMAT scores) are combined with subjective views from students and

graduates (such as their assessment of a business school’s faculty).

● Global. It allows direct comparison of MBA programmes around the world.

● Regional. It compares MBA programmes in three regions: North America, Europe, and Asia

and Australasia.

● Flexible. Programmes may be ranked in many ways, producing, for example, tables of the

top ten US or Asian and Australasian schools by GMAT score or the top ten US and Euro-

pean schools by percentage of foreign students.

● Transparent. All the data used to rank schools are published as part of the school’s profile

in the directory section of this book.

Other rankings have some, but not all, of the above features.

How did we choose which schools to rank?The Economist Intelligence Unit ranking of full-time MBA programmes was based on an ini-

tial selection of 135 leading business schools around the world. All 135 schools were invited

to take part in our two-stage survey, which requires input from schools and the

students/alumni of each school. Of these, we were unable to rank 16 schools (see Table 8.1).

The global top 100 schools were gleaned from the remaining 119. Schools outside the top

100 were given a regional ranking only.



Full-time rankings

Why schools could not be rankedFailed to respond/unable or unwilling to take partAustralian Graduate School of Management

Babson College—Franklin W Olin Graduate School of Business

Concordia University—John Molson School of Business

University of Dublin—Trinity College School of Business Studies

ENPC School of International Management

Heriot Watt University—Edinburgh Business School

Maastricht School of Management

Queen's School of Business—Queen's University

Sheffield University Management School

University of Toronto—Joseph L Rotman School of Management

University of Queensland Business School

University of Western Ontario—Richard Ivey School of Business

Insufficient dataa

Royal Holloway School of Management—University of London

University of the Witwatersand—Wits Business School

No full-time programmeOpen University Business School

Note: Details of schools with insufficient data or no full-time programme appear in the directory section of this book.

a Minimum threshold not met for school data or number of student/alumni responses. See methodology (page 99) for details.

One of the world's most prestigious schools, Harvard, has made a decision not to co-operate

with rankings media. This means it now refuses to answer even simple questions such as the

make-up of its faculty or the performance of its careers office. Because we did not wish to

produce a ranking without one of the world's top schools, we have therefore gleaned data

from other published sources, including from the school itself. Where we were unable to

source data, we have produced estimates, based on a variety of sources, including past sur-

veys and our 2006 survey of Harvard students.

Given that 448 schools in the US have AACSB International accreditation and there are many

more that are not accredited, it could be argued that, with 57 North American schools, the

Economist Intelligence Unit ranking under-represents this important MBA market. However,

one of the main objectives of the survey is to provide global comparisons and it was limited

to leading schools throughout the world (so even schools at the bottom of our rankings are

among the world’s best). In common with all other rankings, there was an element of selec-

tivity before the ranking process began.

ResultsRankings are little more than an indication of the MBA market at a particular time. They

reflect the prevailing conditions such as salaries, jobs available and the situation at a school

at the time the survey was carried out. Results of rankings can be notoriously volatile, so they

should be treated with caution. However, the Economist Intelligence Unit survey looks at

data over a three-year period, which helps provide a more rounded picture. Table 9.2 is a list-

ing of schools in rank order.



Full-time rankings

Global ranking, 2006

Rank School Country(2005 position in brackets)

1 (1) IESE Business School—University of Navarra Spain

2 (3) Dartmouth College—Tuck School of Business US

3 (4) Stanford Graduate School of Business US

4 (6) University of Chicago—Graduate School of Business US

5 (5) IMD—International Institute for Management Development Switzerland

6 (2) Northwestern University—Kellogg School of Management US

7 (n/a) Harvard Business School US

8 (7) New York University—Leonard N Stern School of Business US

9 (8) University of Michigan—Stephen M Ross School of Business US

10 (10) University of California at Berkeley—Haas School of Business US

11 (20) University of Cambridge—Judge Business School UK

12 (9) Columbia Business School US

13 (14) University of Virginia—Darden Graduate School of Business Administration US

14 (21) Henley Management College UK

15 (15) UCLA—The Anderson School US

16 (16) IE—Instituto de Empresa Spain

17 (n/a) University of Pennsylvania—Wharton School US

18 (13) Massachusetts Institute of Technology—MIT Sloan School of Management US

19 (32) Cranfield School of Management UK

20 (23) London Business School UK

21 (39) Ashridge UK

22 (11) INSEAD France/Singapore

23 (17) Cornell University—Johnson Graduate School of Management US

24 (18) Yale School of Management US

25 (24) Emory University—Goizueta Business School US

26 (12) Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School Belgium

27 (n/a) University of Washington Business School US

28 (26) Carnegie Mellon University—Tepper School of Business US

29 (25) Duke University—Fuqua School of Business US

30 (27) York University—Schulich School of Business Canada

31 (28) Warwick Business School UK

32 (40) University of Notre Dame—Mendoza College of Business US

33 (22) Hult International Business School US

34 (29) Ohio State University—Fisher College of Business US

35 (34) ESADE Business School Spain

36 (31) University of Oxford—Saïd Business School UK

37 (82) Hong Kong University of Science and Technology— Hong Kong

School of Business and Management

38 (53) University College Dublin—Michael Smurfit Graduate School of Business Ireland

39 (45) University of Hong Kong—School of Business Hong Kong



Full-time rankings


40 (60) Leeds University Business School UK

41 (33) Washington University in St Louis—Olin School of Business US

42 (38) University of Bath School of Management UK

43 (41) City University—Cass Business School UK

44 (19) HEC School of Management, Paris France

45 (54) Lancaster University Management School UK

46 (55) Indiana University—Kelley School of Business US

47 (30) University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill—Kenan-Flagler Business School US

48 (48) Pennsylvania State University—Smeal College of Business US

49 (59) Monash University—Graduate School of Business Australia

50 (56) University of Minnesota—Carlson School of Management US

51 (52) Vanderbilt University—Owen Graduate School of Management US

52 (51) University of Maryland—Robert H Smith School of Business US

53 (49) Georgetown University—Robert Emmet McDonough School of Business US

54 (46) University of Southern California—Marshall School of Business US

55 (50) University of Texas at Austin—McCombs School of Business US

56 (36) Aston Business School UK

57 (62) University of Durham—Durham Business School UK

58 (35) The University of Edinburgh Management School UK

59 (63) Manchester Business School UK

60 (71) University of Wisconsin-Madison—Graduate School of Business US

61 (43) University of Birmingham—Birmingham Business School UK

62 (42) E.M. Lyon France

63 (57) NIMBAS Graduate School of Management Netherlands

64 (44) University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign—College of Business US

65 (47) University of Strathclyde Graduate School of Business UK

66 (58) University of Rochester—William E Simon Graduate School of Business US

67 (61) University of Glasgow Business School UK

68 (75) Nottingham University Business School UK

69 (81) Rice University—Jesse H Jones Graduate School of Management US

70 (64) Wake Forest University—Babcock Graduate School of Management US

71 (84) Bradford School of Management UK

72 (67) Purdue University—Krannert Graduate School of Management US

73 (73) University of Pittsburgh—Joseph M Katz Graduate School of Business US

74 (69) Southern Methodist University—Cox School of Business US

75 (93) International University of Monaco Monaco

76 (76) ESCP–EAP European School of Management France

77 (83) Nanyang Technological University—Nanyang Business School Singapore

78 (80) University of Florida—Warrington College of Business US

79 (37) University of Iowa—Henry B Tippie School of Management US

80 (65) University of California at Davis—Graduate School of Management US

81 (74) Macquarie Graduate School of Management Australia



Full-time rankings


82 (77) University of British Columbia—Sauder School of Business Canada

83 (89) RSM Erasmus University Netherlands

84 (99) University of Melbourne—Melbourne Business School Australia

85 (88) International University of Japan—Graduate School of International Management Japan

86 (n/a) Audencia School of Management Nantes France

87 (n/a) Brandeis International Business School US

88 (96) University of Georgia—Terry College of Business US

89 (95) Universiteit Nyenrode—The Netherlands Business School Netherlands

90 (66) Imperial College London—Tanaka Business School UK

91 (90) Curtin University Graduate School of Business Australia

92 (85) University of Newcastle upon Tyne Business School UK

93 (97) College of William & Mary—Mason School of Business US

94 (n/a) University of South Carolina—Moore School of Business US

95 (86) Bocconi University—SDA Bocconi School of Management Italy

96 (n/a) HEC Montréal Canada

97 (87) University of Otago—School of Business New Zealand

98 (68) Indian Institute of Management—Ahmedabad India

99 (n/a) National University of Singapore—The NUS Business School Singapore

100 (n/a) EADA—Escuela de Alta Dirección y Administración Spain

While the Economist Intelligence Unit’s ranking of full-time MBA programmes once again

underlines the dominance of US schools, a European school—Spain’s IESE—tops the list for

the second year. The school scores particularly highly in the “open new career opportunities”

and “increase salary” categories. However, eight of the top ten schools are in the US, with

Dartmouth (Tuck), Stanford and Chicago all featuring prominently.

The main things that set these schools apart are a robust programme and excellent faculty.

They often also inspire a strong sense of belonging, which makes students keen evangelists for

their schools. Although the number of questionnaires returned does not have a direct impact

on a school’s ranking (as long as a minimum threshold is reached), it often signifies that esprit

de corps has a big effect on the way its students and graduates respond to the questionnaire.

Many of the top ten schools were also high on the list of student and graduate responses.

The highest ranked school in Asia and Australasia (excluding INSEAD, which has campuses in

both France and Singapore) is Hong Kong University of Science and Technology’s School of

Business and Management in 37th place. This highlights a clear regional pecking order when

it comes to full-time MBA programmes: North America leads the way, followed by Europe, and

then Asia and Australasia, which still has a lot of ground to make up (see regional round-up).

US schools generally do particularly well in the “open new career opportunities” category.

This is partly because careers services in the US are often more lavishly funded, better organ-

ised and more professionally set up than in the rest of the world. At Chicago, for example,

96% of students find a job within three months of graduating and students rate the school’s

careers services at 4.7 out of 5, higher than any other school.



Full-time rankings

Top ten schools by category

Open new Personal Increase Potentialcareer development salary to networkopportunities and educational

experience

1 Indian Institute (Ahmedabad) Henley Ashridge E.M. Lyon

2 Chicago Hong Kong UST IESE Henley

3 IESE Monash Henley Notre Dame (Mendoza)

4 Stanford Hong Kong SB IMD Vlerick Leuven Gent

5 IE Stanford NIMBAS HEC Paris

6 Dartmouth (Tuck) INSEAD Strathclyde ESCP–EAP

7 New York (Stern) Dartmouth (Tuck) Hult Cambridge (Judge)

8 Virginia (Darden) Bath Oxford (Saïd) Thunderbird (Garvin)

9 Columbia Northwestern (Kellogg) London Southern Methodist

10 Northwestern (Kellogg) Michigan (Ross) Cranfield Cranfield

US schools have less of a monopoly in the personal development and educational experience

category. Although US institutions invest heavily in their faculty, worldwide competition

means that others are catching up. Still, it is not unusual to find that everyone teaching on a

top US programme has a PhD; this is the case at the University of California at Berkeley

(Haas) and MIT (Sloan), for example. They are also choosy about the students they admit.

Out of 12 schools with average GMAT scores over 700, only one, INSEAD, is outside the US.

However, one area in which European schools do well in this category is the average amount

of work experience of the class. At Henley, for example, this now stands at 13 years, nearly

three times higher than the average at, for example, MIT.

Partly because of this, another area in which European schools decidedly have the edge on

their US counterparts is the salaries of their graduates. At Ashridge in the UK, for example,

graduates can on average expect to earn well over US$200,000 per year; at Henley the aver-

age is US$142,000 and at IESE it is US$131,000. In total, 21 schools boast average graduate

salaries of over US$100,000 and only three are American: Stanford, Dartmouth (Tuck) and

Wharton. Apart from more work experience, European salaries are aided by the strength of

European currencies against the dollar. They also reflect the strong jobs market in the UK and

Spain, especially in the financial services sector.

European schools, which often have more international alumni, also do well in the network-

ing category.



Open executive programmes

As our survey of executives shows, tomorrow's business leaders will need a wide range of

skills. These will include, among others, market knowledge, strategic vision, knowledge of

market needs and operations, a good understanding of technology, management experience

and functional knowledge of various parts of the business. For those with gaps in their

knowledge, one of the traditional ways of plugging the holes is short executive education

courses run by business schools, consultants and other types of providers.

These programmes can be divided into two categories: open enrolment and customised.

Although the recent trend has been towards customised programmes, there is still an impor-

tant place for open-enrolment programmes. One of their principal advantages is the oppor-

tunity they offer for networking: not just meeting a senior manager from a competitor or

supplier in the coffee break, but learning about their experiences in the classroom. They also

offer diversity (managers from many different industries, functions and backgrounds), which

may not be possible on a customised course devised for a single company. Like all manage-

ment education these days, open courses rely heavily on bringing working experiences into

the business school.

What’s on offer?Most business schools provide a similar range of open courses, which can last from a day to a

month or even longer. Generally, there will be one or two top-level general management

courses aimed at senior executives just below board level. A good example is the Programme

for Executive Development (PED) at IMD, a school well known for its open executive courses.

At ten weeks the programme is relatively long, although it can be taken either as a single

block or in two five-week modules. The PED is based on five key themes: leadership, guiding

growth, driving innovation, managing complex organisations, leveraging globalisation and

inspiring effective change. Teaching methods include management simulations, case stud-

ies, negotiation, reflective exercises, outdoor exercises, role-playing, guest speakers and

site visits. IMD says the programme is aimed at individuals who already have significant man-

agement experience and responsibility but who want to broaden their knowledge across

functions and business challenges, gain leading-edge perspectives and tools, develop them-

selves as leaders and shape the organisations of the future.

Schools often offer similar courses aimed at mid-level managers, such as INSEAD’s Young Man-

agers Programme, designed to equip young executives with a general management perspec-

tive, increase their competence in key functional disciplines and expand their leadership skills.

At the next level are functional courses, such as the 2–4-day seminars in areas including

human resources, finance and marketing offered by the University of North Carolina’s Kenan-

Flagler Business School. Often these are similar to the core areas covered in an MBA.

Lastly, most schools offer a suite of “soft” courses focusing on areas such as communications,

people skills and, especially, leadership. Schools often have particular strengths in areas such

as marketing, finance or strategy, or even more esoteric areas such as hotel management,

tourism or even wine-making, so choose the one that is best in the area you are interested in.




As mentioned above, the benefits of open-enrolment courses come as much from your class-

mates as from the professors. Networking in coffee breaks and over dinner is one benefit, but

much more important is what you learn in the classroom from other people’s experiences.

Executive education programmes make much of using participants’ experience in course

work. Make sure that the calibre of your fellow participants is high (preferably a little higher

than your own).

It is also essential that the programme provider gives some feedback so you can justify the

expense and time required in terms of the likely return in increased performance. Many com-

panies are reluctant to allow managers to attend courses lasting more than a few days, and

the pressures of work mean that lengthy absences can be disruptive.

The search for a guaranteed return on investment—proof that a course actually does improve

a manager in the way it claims to do—is difficult, particularly in respect of open courses. Most

companies judge it on the reactions of the managers they send on a course. Some are so

committed to executive education that they do not need proof of “value for money”, but

companies that do not have a deep-seated trust in business schools or other providers are

likely to insist on hard evidence that their money is being well spent. This is even more the

case with custom programmes (see Chapter 7), where companies have clear aims and work

closely with management education providers to meet them.

What’s it like?An open executive programme, especially a longer residential course, can be a unique and

exhilarating experience. The work is challenging as are the faculty and your fellow students;

there is usually a reasonable amount of time for socialising and networking; generally the

facilities are excellent—and you don’t have to wear a business suit.

But you will certainly not be on vacation. On a typical course you might take as many as three

classes per day, spending as long as 6–8 hours in the classroom. On top of that, according to

one leading school, each class typically demands at least two hours’ preparation. You may

even have to spend your evenings in study groups or listening to a guest speaker after din-

ner. However, the effort is probably worth it. Many managers report an adrenaline rush of

well-being from such an out-of-office experience.

In many ways this is thanks to the teaching faculty as much as anything else. Business

schools earn a great deal of money from executive education and they often use their best

professors for such courses. This is not totally altruistic. If you gather a group of senior man-

agers or executives, each with 10–15 years of significant work experience, in a lecture room,

they are not going to sit quietly and absorb respectfully what they are told, particularly if it

happens to be about management or business. Teaching executive courses requires a lot

more skill and experience than lecturing MBA students.

However hard the work, you are likely to be pleasantly surprised by your surroundings, espe-

cially at the larger business schools and independent providers. They certainly know how to

pamper their customers and most executive education facilities would not disgrace five-star

hotels (indeed, some business schools make a virtue of this and build their own hotels as

training centres for undergraduate and graduate hotel management programmes). At the

very least you can expect a well-equipped single room with a large comfortable bed, a large

study area, TV and a broadband connection. (One top US school puts a PC in every room, but

you would be wise to take your own laptop.)




Food, generally, is superb. With breakfast, coffee and snacks between classes, lunch and din-

ner, you may be lucky to emerge weighing the same as when you went in. There seems no

particular reason why open executive programme providers are so obsessed with overfeeding

their participants, but across the world it is undoubtedly the case.

This, of course, allows you plenty of time for the all-important networking mentioned earlier.

The size of classes can be large depending on the subject area, perhaps as many as 40 in a

top general management programme. Participants will be at least as smart (preferably

smarter) than you are and many will be in better jobs. This is the one great benefit of open

courses and you should make the most of it.

Non-business school offeringsThe open executive course market is highly competitive and business schools are up against a

host of other suppliers. These independent providers can be broken down as follows:

● general providers of management development and training across a wide range of issues

and disciplines—this is by far the largest area and players range from very large to very

small;

● offshoots of global management consultancies;

● niche players concentrating on a narrow area such as leadership or change management

and increasingly offering technology-based solutions;

● large or small organisations offering specialised training and development based on “pro-

prietary” management philosophies or research.

Despite many executives’ criticism of business schools for failing to teach what they regard as

“relevant” business skills, the 2006 Economist Intelligence Unit survey shows that they have

considerable and growing faith in business schools as opposed to the other options listed

above. Of survey participants, 49% believe that business schools play the most important role

in developing managerial talent, compared with 42% in 2005 and 35% in 2004. By contrast,

the role of independent providers and consultants has remained steady over the same period

at around 25%, and that of the much-vaunted corporate universities is even lower, at 12% in

2006 compared with 15% in 2005 and 14% in 2004. At the same time there has been a reduc-

tion in their reliance on in-house trainers, traditionally the most common form of manage-

ment education, from 29% in 2004 to 19% in 2005 and 17% in 2006. This could suggest that

the type of skills executives are looking for—people skills, communications and cross-cultural

management (see Chapter 1 for details of the survey)—are much more diverse and diffuse

than the simple transfer of knowledge that non-business school providers are so good at.

CostThe cost of open programmes varies considerably depending on the business school, the

length of time involved, accommodation and the number of people taking part. For example,

the two-week Executive Development Program at Chicago costs US$14,950 (not including

accommodation) and the tuition fee for INSEAD’s two-week International Manufacturing Pro-

gramme is €10,500 (US$13,125). At Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School in Belgium the

six-day (two three-day modules) R&D Management Programme costs €3,000 (US$3,750)

(plus 21% VAT).




What’s important?An Economist Intelligence Unit survey of senior executives found that there were ten areas

that they felt were important to consider when choosing an open programme provider:

● content of the programme;

● internationalism of the programme;

● faculty quality;

● provider's amenities;

● quality of fellow participants;

● level of post-course support for participants;

● ability to demonstrate impact back in the workplace;

● maintaining an ongoing relationship;

● cost/value for money;

● wide range of courses.

Based on these criteria, we then asked participants on open programmes to rate the schools

they attended. We added to this some data provided by the schools—such as their level of

repeat business—to produce an overall school rating for open programmes. Eight schools

were awarded an overall rating of “excellent”, with a further four rated as “good”.

Schools rated excellent, open programmes

School Overall rating (out of 5)

Wisconsin-Madison 4.3

IESE 4.2

Washington St Louis (Olin) 4.2

York (Schulich) 4.2

IE 4.1

Northwestern (Kellogg) 4.1

Penn State (Smeal) 4.1

Rice (Jones) 4.1

Schools rated good, open programmes


Cape Town 4.0

Chicago 4.0

Indian Institute (Ahmedabad) 4.0

Thunderbird (Garvin) 4.0

For the full methodology of the executive education rankings, see page 102. The directory

entries show how the schools fared and their individual category ratings.



Custom executive programmes

The growth of customised courses, developed by business schools or other providers for spe-

cific companies at the expense of the open-enrolment courses described in Chapter 6, has

been a trend in the executive education world for some years. Open executive education pro-

grammes have traditionally been business schools’ bread and butter. Every year they could

offer more or less the same programmes and confidently expect their lecture rooms to be

filled with high-paying executives. Open programmes still have a lot going for them, but the

market has been hit by the growth in company-specific, or “customised”, programmes as

companies seek management development opportunities that can be linked directly to the

issues they face, such as strategic change, new market opportunities and globalisation.

What are they?Customised courses are concerned with the education of individuals in the context of their

organisation, and it is this involvement in the detail of corporate strategy and culture change

that sets them apart. After some initial reluctance, business schools have embraced them

enthusiastically. It was once felt that custom courses were closer to consulting than educa-

tion, and some of the leading schools, especially in the US, were opposed to offering them.

However, the acceptance of market realities and the realisation that they themselves had

much to learn in terms of in-depth research and faculty development have helped schools

change their minds.

From a company’s perspective, the increasing use of customised courses is understandable.

After all, if it is spending significant amounts of money on sending managers to business

school, it is only natural that a company would want to tailor courses as closely as possible to

its own particular needs. However, there are some concerns about the potential benefit for

individual managers. In particular, there is a worry that a single-company customised pro-

gramme will not expose them to the kind of diverse cultural experience that is gained when

sitting in a classroom with executives from different organisations. This is where business

schools’ expertise comes in. They have plenty of experience in dealing with companies and

executives from a wide range of industries, and they should ensure that faculty members are

in a position to give companies a diverse cultural input.

Most customised programmes begin with a diagnostic session, involving a business school

faculty team and senior managers, to discuss the company issues to be addressed and the

required outcome. On this basis the school will begin to put together a programme, listing

objectives, content and design. This is then likely to be further refined. As many schools point

out, a customised programme makes sense only if senior managers have established explicit,

precise goals, and the business school should be closely involved in this goal-setting phase.




What’s it like?Customised programmes are usually shorter and perhaps less exhilarating than the open pro-

grammes described in Chapter 6. They may also be more focused, in the sense that they are

concentrating on a particular issue the company is facing. This means they may be more con-

cerned with changing managers’ behaviour or perceptions rather than providing specific new

skills or knowledge; after all, the survey of company executives in Chapter 1 found that the

skills they thought most likely to be in short supply in the future were softer ones such as

strategic vision and people skills.

Another difference is that executives from the company involved are likely to be present for at

least some of the course and even to take part as presenters or on panels that judge present-

ations by participants. (See case study on page 63.) Custom courses can be held on campus or

off campus, depending on what the client wants.

Participants will, of course, all be from the same organisation. Although this may lessen the

impact of the diversity experienced on open courses, it is not necessarily a bad thing. The

other participants are unlikely to be the people you see every day in the office. They may

come from other parts of the company (geographical or functional) and can usefully expand

your work network.

You are unlikely to miss out on the social and culinary delights. Even if a custom course is not

held at a business school, the general belief that managers can concentrate only if they are reg-

ularly fed and watered pervades most providers of management education, whatever its form.

Some of these providers, particularly so-called “corporate universities”, are considered below.

Non-business school offeringsHow long the boom in customised programmes will continue is anyone’s guess. Publicly, at

least, many business schools believe that it will last indefinitely, but competition, particular-

ly in the form of “corporate universities”, has intensified in recent years. Estimates vary, but

there have been suggestions that there are already 4,000 such institutions in the US alone

and that more are being created every day. The Brussels-based European Foundation for

Management Development (EFMD), which set up a task-force to examine the issues raised by

corporate universities, describes them as “a real phenomenon of the contemporary manage-

ment development movement” and says that they challenge the domain of traditional busi-

ness schools.

One of the oldest corporate universities is Motorola University, which began in 1981 as the

Motorola Training and Education Center. During the 1980s, Motorola University’s charter was

to help the corporation build a quality culture. By the end of the decade, the university had

expanded its operations both in the US and around the world. It then started offering new

and more comprehensive services, particularly its own Six Sigma quality improvement

methodology, via both open and customised programmes.

Intel, a chip-maker, also has its own “university”, a worldwide internal training organisation

offering more than 7,000 courses. The company claims that, on average, an Intel employee

participates in six different courses each year. Hundreds of employees, including members of

the executive staff, serve as volunteer instructors on courses ranging from technical expert-

ise to employee development.




The EFMD, which already accredits business school through its EQUIS scheme, is also now

offering a similar service to corporate universities. Even if it is not exactly accreditation, it

goes some way to setting benchmarks for quality.

Other independent providers can be broken down into similar categories as those outlined in

Chapter 6.

CostCustomised courses vary according to circumstances and it is difficult to give indications of

costs, not least because business schools and companies are unwilling to disclose them.

However, because they involve considerable input from the company and the provider and

take time to develop and deliver, they are not cheap. For example, a high-level course aimed

at, say, members of the board and involving a lot of preliminary research may well run into

six or seven figures; lunch-time seminars on a relatively simple topic, such as globalisation,

will be considerably cheaper; and company-wide culture change programmes can be as

expensive as the board-level variety, although they cover many more employees.

Choosing a providerCustomised programmes are designed to tackle a particular problem within an organisation.

Before setting one up, make sure that you understand the issue or issues you want to address

and that the providers you approach will be able to come up with a viable programme. Identi-

fy at an early stage which of your own executives, usually senior, will be prepared to work

with the academics on identifying issues and proposing solutions, and make sure they are

committed and have the time to see the project through. Lastly, make sure that senior man-

agement is in favour of the idea and will give it emotional, managerial and financial support.

As with open programmes, the Economist Intelligence Unit asked senior executives what

they were looking for in a custom provider. There were nine major factors:

● ability to understand issues specific to your company;

● faculty quality;

● provider’s amenities;

● level of post-course support for participants;

● ability to demonstrate impact back in the workplace;

● maintaining an ongoing relationship;

● cost/value for money;

● flexibility/ability to customise the programme;

● wide range of expertise.

Ratings were given by the people within companies who were responsible for purchasing a

customised programme. Data provided by the schools were also used. Nine schools were

awarded an overall rating of “excellent” and three rated as “good”.




Schools rated excellent, custom programmes


Penn State (Smeal) 4.6

IESE 4.4

Ohio (Fisher) 4.4

Cape Town 4.3

Chicago 4.3

Georgetown (McDonough) 4.3

IE 4.3

University of Washington (Seattle) 4.3

York (Schulich) 4.3

Schools rated good, custom programmes


ESADE 4.2

Rice (Jones) 4.2

Washington (Olin) 4.2

For the full methodology of the executive education rankings, see page 102. The directory

entries show how the schools fared and their individual category ratings.




Custom programme case study: Total UK and Lancaster University Management SchoolTotal UK is the UK arm of Total, the world’s fourth largest and Europe’s leading refiner and

marketer of fuels, employing over 5,000 people. The company was looking for a way to shift the

attitudes of its senior managers and work towards achieving a clear change in management

behaviour, according to Aidan Dwan, director of human resources at Total UK. “Every single

manager within the business has the knowledge to be a successful manager and leader,” he says.

What Total UK needed was a custom-made development programme that would achieve this.

Working with Lancaster University Management School (LUMS; see page 301), the company

developed the Total Management Development Programme, designed to help its managers become

leaders who can achieve results, both individually and through others. Over 100 of Total’s senior

managers have now completed the programme.

Mr Dwan says the programme is not prescriptive but aims to encourage sustainable change

throughout the business. Rather than concentrating on teaching new skills and knowledge, it

focuses on the behavioural aspects of management, integrating personal growth, leadership

development and commercial awareness. “The programme tackles managers’ behaviours and seeks

to challenge their attitude to leadership,” says Sally Watson, director of the management

development division at LUMS. “It is very much about ‘getting the genie out of the bottle’ and

empowering managers to manage.”

Total UK’s board of directors has been the central element in the success of the programme. “They

have played a huge role in the design and delivery of the programme, through their support for the

managers and their contribution and backing of the Leadership Forum at the formal end of each

group’s programme,” says Dr Watson.

The programme is taken by cohorts of 20 managers who participate in three separate modules. The

one-day start-up session, introduced by a Total UK director, provides background information

about the course and allows participants to meet their personal coach, who remains pivotal to

them throughout the programme.

The next phase follows six weeks later, when delegates attend a five-day course at LUMS. During

this phase participants learn about different leadership styles and the various circumstances in

which they can be used. More importantly, they are taught how to apply them in order to get the

best from their teams.

Communication is an essential element throughout the programme and delegates are introduced

to the intentional and unintentional effects it can have. On a practical level, this teaches senior

managers to recognise and value diversity.

Participants are also required to take some “time out” to complete a course in self-analysis and

spend some time alone in the Lake District, a picturesque and isolated area of the UK, to reflect on

where they believe they are today and where they want to be in the immediate and more long-term

future.

The programme concludes with a Leadership Forum, which allows managers to demonstrate what

they have learned on the programme. Participants work in small teams of three or four and present

the results of a strategy project that will add value to the business to the rest of the group and to

directors.

“Total made a distinct link between the growth of its managers and the development of the

company. Many of the business projects that have been signed off by the board have cost savings

or performance-related savings attached to them,” says Dr Watson. “The Leadership Forums have

been a great success, often with projects being signed off there and then, or teams being asked to

provide further information to earn the board’s seal of approval,” adds Mr Dwan.

For more information on studying an MBA at Manchester Business School visit www.mbs.ac.ukcall +44 (0)161 306 1320or email [email protected]

On which MBA can you...listen to feedback on your latestbusiness solution and a few hourslater listen to the InternationalMarketing Director of Shell, discoverthat successful international alumniwant to know what you think andfind an audience for your CV in over130 countries?

The Manchester MBALearn from Experience

Which MBA? - Economist Intelligence...

Documents

Transcript of Which MBA? - Economist Intelligence...