Selections Interview with Della Bradshaw, Editor of the Financial Times Business School Rankings

Page 1 | 2 | 3

Selections: Why did the Financial Times decide to begin ranking business schools?
Bradshaw: There were a number of reasons. One of them was actually pressure from business schools outside of the U.S. There was a lot of concern that all of the rankings were solely U.S. rankings. The second reason was we felt we could develop a methodology that would actually give a lot of insight into a lot of different business schools and programs. The third reason was we thought it was of value to readers to have an international ranking, which hadn’t existed before.

Selections: How did you develop the methodology—including the weighting system—for your survey?
Bradshaw: We started out by setting up an advisory group of people from different business schools. They advised us on what they felt should be in there. Research was one of the elements that they were very keen on, which is why we have that in there. At the end of the day, we asked MBA students why they were doing this, and the general response was that it was to change careers or get a better job or to move into a different sector. And that is what we are trying to measure. We are trying to measure the degree of career progression that an MBA gives you, which is why our methodology is based on interviewing alumni from three years ago. Because most of those alumni who respond have actually changed jobs since they graduated. After three years, most of them are in different jobs.

Selections: In your survey questions, do you ask alumni questions about the classes they took in business school or questions that would get at the quality of their MBA education?
Bradshaw: All the business schools we look at—and we look at more than 100—they are all quality programs. They are all very, very good programs. So if you ask those people about the quality of their education, I would expect them to be very, very positive. You would expect them to get a good education. But also, they have no experience with any other business school, so it would be difficult for them to make an assessment. That is, in fact, why we look at career progression, because that actually shows what employers are prepared to pay these people and what jobs employers are prepared to give these people.

Selections: How is the Financial Times survey different from the other surveys that are out there?
Bradshaw: With the exception of the Wall Street Journal, we are the only one that does an integrated ranking that is completely international. One of the concerns I have about comparing the different rankings is that when you see the rankings compared, the fact that we are international is not taken into account. The MBA Newsletter—which is an excellent publication—but when it compared the rankings, it didn’t take into account that you cannot directly compare the numbers in our rankings to those in U.S. News and Business Week—because they have only U.S. schools in their rankings. When I compare them, I take out from our rankings all of the U.S. schools and create a U.S.-only ranking and compare that to U.S. News and Business Week. I find it interesting that there is enormous similarity in the schools. If you compare those, the top 18 schools in the U.S. are the same schools in slightly different order. Business Week uses three elements: students, recruiters, and research. U.S. News and the FT also use three elements. Then you look at the Wall Street Journal and Forbes. They both used a single criterion, so theirs are quite different.

Next page -->

Page 1 | 2 | 3