Selections Interview with with Parminder Bahra, Senior Adviser on Education Projects, Financial Times

Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

<-- Previous page | Next page -->

Selections: There’s no denying that the business school rankings have had an impact on management education. How do you see the Financial Times rankings affecting business schools and management education?
Bahra: That’s a tricky one. But I think it’s probably from the international perspective. The fact that INSEAD and the London Business School are talked about in the same breath as the top American schools. The point of running an international survey is to understand the marketplace from an international perspective, and I think that now American employers and American business schools are more aware of what is going on in Europe and vice versa. In that respect, I think that is what we have added to the community.

Selections: As I’m sure you know, there has been some criticism of the rankings throughout academia. Some argue that the rankings have actually changed the nature of management education by placing a greater emphasis on school image and reputation rather than on true school quality. Do you feel this is true, and do you feel the Financial Times has contributed to this?
Bahra: I think it has always been there. We’re not necessarily adding or taking away anything. I think there has always been that need or that desire to form some sort of ranking. And I think it has always been there in one shape or form. And there is a lot of criticism of ranking tables, but I remember that 15 years ago in the U.K., there was one criterion that people looked at when they wanted to look at the performance of a university, and that was the number of students to the number of staff. Now I happen to think that 15 years ago, that single criterion was probably more misinforming than our 20 criteria today. And if anything, it is much better to have 20 criteria today and be able to make your own judgment and assessment than having just a single criterion. As to whether people are taking the rankings more seriously or less seriously or whether the rankings are changing the focus of the business schools, I think that is possible. But I think there are many other factors that will change a business school. I don’t think rankings are the only thing changing the focus of the business schools or their directions. Ultimately, the rankings should be there. The rankings can only collect information on what is asked. If a series of questions that you are interested in are not asked, then that table is probably not as relevant to you as the next table. I think people need to recognize that. I don’t think there are any right or wrong tables or that anyone’s tables are any better or more correct than others. It’s up to the individuals reading the tables to look at the criteria being offered. They should be making decisions on that basis. I’m fairly confident that a dean won’t change the direction or his or her vision for the business school on the basis of one set of bad rankings.

Selections: What is the purpose of—or the need for—publishing ranking numbers at all? Why say this school is number 1 and this school is number 2 and so on? And, really, how much difference is there between schools that are just a few ranking numbers away from each other?
Bahra: I think that is a valid point. If you look at the distribution of points throughout the table, you’re right. Outside of the top 10, a small number of points will move a school many places in the ranking. In a way, I think people like to have a ranking of one to 100. If I were speaking as a true statistician or a true researcher, I would say that given the margins for error within the calculation of figures, then we could probably have a system where we just tier schools: first tier, second tier, third tier. But I think the ranking provides a degree of interest to the readers because there is this difference. From my perspective, I don’t think there would be a huge difference in using tiers. But I think the current system provides for a more interesting read because you have that kind of level of granularity. It also provides a degree of comparison for the schools. If you just had tiering, then if you were comparing one school in one tier to a school in another tier, it may not be quantitatively as obvious.

<-- Previous page | Next page -->

Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5