<p>Methodology: Between May 18 and June 7 of 2012, more than 2,500 recruiters and 2,200 international chief executives and business managers were asked to select their top universities. The countries represented were Australia, Brazil, Britain, China, Germany, France, Italy, India, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, the Netherlands, Russia, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United States.</p>
<p>Ranking of all U.S. Universities</p>
<ol>
<li>Harvard</li>
<li>Yale</li>
<li>Stanford</li>
<li>MIT</li>
<li>Columbia</li>
<li>Princeton</li>
<li>Boston University </li>
<li>CalTech</li>
<li>UChicago</li>
<li>Brown</li>
<li>Berkeley</li>
<li>Duke</li>
<li>NYU</li>
<li>UPenn</li>
<li>Dartmouth</li>
<li>UCLA</li>
<li>Johns Hopkins</li>
<li>Northwestern</li>
<li>Georgetown</li>
<li>University of Southern California</li>
<li>Carnegie Mellon</li>
<li>Boston College</li>
<li>Cornell</li>
<li>UNC Chapel Hill</li>
<li>University of Virginia</li>
<li>Michigan State</li>
<li>Arizona State</li>
<li>University of Michigan-Ann Arbor</li>
<li>Purdue</li>
<li>Washington University in St. Louis</li>
<li>Texas A&M</li>
<li>BYU</li>
<li>Univ. of Washington</li>
<li>Brandeis</li>
<li>Case Western</li>
<li>Ohio State</li>
<li>UCSF</li>
<li>UT Austin</li>
<li>Arizona</li>
<li>Wisconsin</li>
<li>Emory</li>
<li>Rice</li>
<li>Univ. of South Carolina</li>
<li>Vanderbilt</li>
<li>Univ. of Florida</li>
<li>Rutgers</li>
<li>Univ. of Illinois</li>
<li>Univ. of Maryland</li>
<li>Univ. of Notre Dame</li>
<li>Univ. of Minnesota</li>
<li>Univ. of Pittsburgh</li>
</ol>
<p>For all you public school lovers, you will be overjoyed with this ranking. It shows that beyond the top 15 or so private schools, your local state flagship may be viewed just as highly if not more highly than the next tier of private schools like Emory, Rice, Notre Dame, Vanderbilt, etc.</p>
<p>I suspect this ranking for the most part simply telegraphs the USNWR rankings, with a little added bias for big public universities that are convenient stops on the college recruiting circuit. Why would Boston University be as high as it is? Is it doing something extra for student hiring that, say, GW or Northeastern are not? Or, did a cluster of BU boosters somehow get into the survey data?</p>
<p>Notice that last years survey was done with business leaders (CEOs, chairmen, etc.) while this year was done with recruiters. In the 2011 ranking, Boston University ranked 51. This might imply that while Boston University might be more heavily recruited overall, schools like UCLA and Duke have people in higher positions (e.g. executives) which is why they were rated higher by business leaders; although it might also imply (and probably does imply) that business leaders are out of touch with the universities that their companies recruit from.</p>
<p>I agree with tk21769. American universities like Boston University, NYU, and Boston College benefit because of their association with prominent American cities (included in their names) which makes them more prestigious internationally. Basically the rest of this ranking mirrors USNWR except that public schools fare better here compared to non-super elite private schools due to greater exposure and visibility (a larger alumni base).</p>
<p>
Beyphy, the reason Asian schools fare a lot better here is because Asian recruiters from South Korea, India, China, Japan, Malaysia, etc. were part of the respondents here. This is a much more global employability ranking in scope than the previous one which only polled executives in Europe and North America. That’s part of the reason why Berkeley does so well-its incredible reputation in Asian countries.</p>
<p>
I wouldn’t nitpick so much over minor shifts (up or down) in the rankings. Both our alma maters, UCLA and Duke, do very well in both rankings and both our schools are ranked higher than Penn both times which is extremely impressive given how well represented UPenn grads are in the business world.</p>
<p>
That’s 2 years in a row! More telling perhaps is that both Michigan flagship schools perform better than Notre Dame, Rice, Emory, and Vanderbilt.</p>
<p>Ah, i missed that. While it potentially explains a lot, inconsistencies still remain. </p>
<p>For example, although Duke’s US rank only fell from 9 to 12, its ranking in relation to world universities fell from 13 to 26. UCLA sees a sharper drop, as it falls from from 11 to 45. However, this drop isn’t as bad as Northwestern’s. It falls from 6 to 67</p>
<p>The jump in ranks, especially for schools like Northwestern and UCLA are difficult to explain. It indeterminate whether their changes in rank are the result of an influx in the countries that are polled, a change in the people that are polled, or both. </p>
<p>Ultimately, though, i’m not sure how Peking University and Goethe University achieve near opposite placements within the rankings (both jump +100 spots.) I could guess as to how this happened, but it would merely be conjecture. I do think such odd placements do give us reason to suspect the integrity of the ranking however. The inconsistency is too large, and, as of yet, unexplained.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, UCLA ranks slightly below Penn at 16 and 14, respectively, in relation to US universities.</p>
<p>Agree that the results of this survey look odd and not just due to poor BU perhaps being confused with H or MIT. The question appears to be “what universities produce the ideal young graduates”, lol (in terms of breadth and vacuity). Also, what are they actually hiring for – CS, MBA, law, eng’g, mgmt, math/science etc. Without knowing this, the survey becomes pretty meaningless. Same if the survey purports to measure hiring across all disciplines since no one candidate is looking for a job across all disciplines. The one message of some interest seems to be it is better, in general, for world employment to attend a school in a large city where multinationals are located.</p>
<p>I thought about that too stellergolf11, although UPenn does pretty well anyway at #14. I’m surprised CalTech is so high-anyone met a CalTech alum in the business world?</p>
<p>I’d bet that Penn was confused by many repondents with Penn State–note that Penn State doesn’t appear anywhere on the entire list of 150 schools. And I agree that many probably didn’t associate Wharton with Penn (although Penn’s College of Arts and Sciences and School of Engineering and Applied Science also do quite well in corporate placement).</p>
<p>“I’d bet that Penn was confused by many repondents with Penn State.”</p>
<p>That was mentioned last year on a thread about the same ranking. I am sure if California State University at Los Angeles were mentioned in the survey, many respondents would have confused it with The University of California at Los Angeles.</p>