<p>Interesting and gratifying to note that in the "Ivy Crazed" world our kids live in, this survey shows that you still don't have to have an Ivy pedigree or have paid the big bucks to attract national recognition or be highly attractive to top recruiters.</p>
<p>Here's the complete list:</p>
<p>It may be worth noting that this article is about graduate business programs (MBAs), not undergraduate business programs.</p>
<p>Go Blue!</p>
<p>(Proud University of Michigan MBA grad...lol!)</p>
<p>It is also worth noting that the methodology of the "study" was based soley on recruiter opinions:
[quote]
the ratings of all 85 schools across the three rankings are based on how recruiters evaluated them on the same 21 attributes, as well as the recruiter's intention to return and hire a school's graduates over the next two years. In addition, the rankings include a "mass appeal" factor, which is the number of recruiters that the National and Regional schools attract.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>If one read the whole section, it is pretty clear that recruiters liked the humility (as in "gee, you wanna talk to me?!") at some of the lesser schools.</p>
<p>The hiring managers, the ones who set the salaries and such, obviously think a bit differently. After all, some of these WSJ top schools don't exactly turn heads with the salary levels their grads get.</p>
<p>Newmassdad is exactly correct. One reason Harvard ranks as low as it does is that its grads are not "hireable" for many of the postions offered by many recruiters. They won't accept the salary level, job content, or location of certain jobs.</p>
<p>Take these surveys as a single datapoint.</p>
<p>I have read that recruiters do not like to go to Cornell due to its location in Ithaca, NY. That is, they will have to spend an entire day dedicated to just Cornell since getting to and from their is an issue.</p>
<p>Most recruiting visits take a more than a full day, since you have to be there the night before in order to do an interviewing schedule that usually begins early and runs all day. A lot of firms also hold receptions the night before their schedules, depending on their hiring needs. </p>
<p>Having said that, visiting Ithaca or Hanover in January is not quite the same as gong to Palo Alto.</p>
<h2>Oh please. The sour grapes....</h2>
<h2>"The rankings aren't necessarily a reflection of the schools with the most celebrated academic reputations. Although the 21 attributes include the curriculum and faculty, academic quality isn't the primary concern of most survey respondents. Instead, they care most about the M.B.A. students' interpersonal and communication skills, teamwork orientation, personal ethics and integrity, analytical and problem-solving abilities, and work ethic."</h2>
<p>This is probably the most meaningful ranking I've seen to date. In-house recruiters value candidates who make them look good....that is, those candidates who succeed in their placement. And in the case of headhunters, this success directly affects their ability to gain and retain corporate clients. </p>
<p>Ivy is not the only path to success ...and it is a lesson that needs to be driven home to our kids.</p>
<p>ldmom06</p>
<p>Oh please. :)</p>
<p>If it makes you happy to know where the recruiters are happy, then yes, pay attention to these rankings. </p>
<p>But, if you want to know what HIRING MANAGERS think of various schools, (yes, those "sour grapes" types that actually give out the jobs!) then you'd better look at other resources. </p>
<p>BTW, Headhunters have nothing do do with the WSJ survey, and nothing to do with hiring new MBA grads. Am I missing a bigger point you're trying to make?</p>
<p>Finally, sour grapes? My alma mater did pretty well in the survey. That does not mean the survey is worth anything IMHO.</p>
<p>"If one read the whole section, it is pretty clear that recruiters liked the humility (as in "gee, you wanna talk to me?!") at some of the lesser schools.</p>
<h2>The hiring managers, the ones who set the salaries and such, obviously think a bit differently. After all, some of these WSJ top schools don't exactly turn heads with the salary levels their grads get."</h2>
<p>Newmassdad - Your first statement is a bit of a stretch if you ask me. What I took from the article was NOT that recruiters are motivated by flattery by humble, yet inferior, candidates, as you suggest. The article states recruiters appreciate candidates who are "collegial" and possess the attributes such as "strong interpersonal and communication skills, teamwork orientation, personal ethics and integrity, analytical and problem-solving abilities, and work ethic". The article also states recruiters prefer candidates who have strong workforce experience prior to entering an MBA program. You seem to suggest that these are all minor attributes compared to the 'gee, golly, whiz' attribute. I highly doubt that. :-)</p>
<p>And given that all 19 schools on the national list are kicka$$ business schools, I'd like some substantiation on your statement that "some of these schools don't exactly turn heads...."</p>
<p>I think it is a fair assumption that a recruiter who wants to be successful in HIS career is not going to present his company's 'HIRING MANAGER' with a bunch of lame choices. And for those hired through headhunters, and mind you many MBAs are hired in this fashion, the same is true. Both are motivated to present the best possible candidate to the hiring company. </p>
<p>And sour grapes is to those who actually think the 'weather' or the 'location' is why their school ranked below other schools. That's laughable.</p>
<p>Go Tarheels!</p>
<p>eadad: Thanks for posting that link!<br>
I got a big kick out of reading the responses here. Very funny--and utterly predictable.</p>
<p>ldmom: I'm in complete agreement with you.^</p>
<p>newmassdad: Sour grapes really isn't a very flattering look. And your alma mater (whatever it is) may have done "pretty well in the survey," but UChicago ranking lower that UNC-CH and some other schools here is, I suspect, what's really eating at you and the real source of your sour grapes. Relax, newmassdad. As you say, it's just a survey. </p>
<p>Go Tarheels! Oops.. did I say that already? ;)</p>
<p>Well, they could take twelve monkeys, arm them with darts, and end up with a more reasonable ranking. Wait, that is probably what they did to end ranking Fort Worth's TCU above the University of Texas at Austin ... for the past two years. For the record, UT has been the top school for accounting in undergraduate, masters, and PhD, and for years. And, since accounting is only a part of a business school, let's compare the McCombs School of Business's reputation and fame with TCU's ... [fill the blank] </p>
<p>Yes, be honest in your response ... did you know the name of the school before reading the list?</p>
<p>"For the record, UT has been the top school for accounting in undergraduate, masters, and PhD, and for years."</p>
<p>Funny, I always thought that was UIUC.</p>
<p>Mini, that depends where you look. :)</p>
<p>Accounting</p>
<h1>1 Graduate Program, Public Accounting Report (11/05)</h1>
<h1>1 Undergraduate Program, Public Accounting Report (11/05)</h1>
<h1>2 PhD Program, Public Accounting Report (11/05)</h1>
<h1>1 Accounting (Undergraduate), U.S. News (8/06)</h1>
<h1>2 Accounting (Graduate), U.S. News (4/06)</h1>
<h1>3 Accounting (MBA), Wall Street Journal (9/05)</h1>
<p>Departments, Programs, & Specializations: Graduate</p>
<h1>2 Accounting, U.S. News (4/06)</h1>
<h1>3 Accounting (MBA), Wall Street Journal (9/05)</h1>
<h1>3 Management Information Systems, U.S. News (4/06)</h1>
<h1>4 MBA Program for Hispanics, Hispanic Business (8/06)</h1>
<h1>6 Information Technology, Wall Street Journal (9/05)</h1>
<h1>8 Entrepreneurship, U.S. News (4/06)</h1>
<h1>9 Marketing, U.S. News (4/06)</h1>
<h1>11 MBA Program for Indians, IndUS Business Journal (9/04)</h1>
<h1>15 International Business, U.S. News (4/06)</h1>
<h1>16 Top MBA Programs for Latin Americans-Global, America Economia (08/06)</h1>
<h1>17 Productions/Operations Management, U.S. News (4/06)</h1>
<h1>18 Finance, U.S. News (4/06)</h1>
<h1>20 Best Global MBAs for Mexicans, Expansion (9/06)</h1>
<h1>21 General Management, U.S. News (4/06)</h1>
<p>Departments, Programs, & Specializations: Undergraduate</p>
<h1>1 Accounting, U.S. News (8/06)</h1>
<h1>3 Management Information Systems, U.S. News (8/06)</h1>
<h1>3 Marketing, U.S. News (8/06)</h1>
<h1>5 Management, U.S. News (8/06)</h1>
<h1>6 Finance, U.S. News (8/06)</h1>
<h1>6 International Business, U.S. News (8/05)</h1>
<h1>7 Insurance/Risk Management, U.S. News(8/06)</h1>
<h1>10 Entrepreneurship, U.S. News (8/06)</h1>
<h1>11 Production/Ops Management, U.S. News (8/06)</h1>
<h1>13 Quantitative Analysis/Methods, U.S. News (8/06)</h1>
<h1>16 Supply Chain Management/Logistics, U.S. News (8/06)</h1>
<h1>18 For Minorities, Diverse Issues in Higher Education (6/06)</h1>
<p>CPA Personnel Report's 23rd Annual Professor's Survey-2004</p>
<p>Top Undergraduate Programs
School 2004 2003 2002
The University of Texas at Austin 1 1 1
University of Illinois 2 2 2
Brigham Young University 3 3 3
University of So. California 4 4 5
University of Notre Dame 5 5 4</p>
<p>Top Graduate Programs
School 2004 2003 2002
The University of Texas at Austin 1 1 1
University of Illinois 2 2 2
Brigham Young University 3 3 3
University of So. California 4 4 4
University of Notre Dame 5 6 5 </p>
<p>Top Five Doctoral Programs
School 2004 2003<br>
The University of Texas at Austin 1 1<br>
University of Chicago 2 4<br>
Stanford University 3 3<br>
University of Michigan 4 2<br>
University of Illinois 5 5</p>
<p>Aw heck Xiggi, what do those ole accountants know? Let's rely on the recruiters and the schmooz factor anyday.</p>
<p>There go the sour grapes again ("schmooz factor")...lol! Hmmm....is that a scientific parameter I wonder? </p>
<p>I wonder if any of you with issues with the WSJ rankings would like to explain which schools you feel are undeserving of the recognition?</p>
<p>xiggi -</p>
<p>I've searched and can't find the actual criteria used in the professor's survey. In fact, since CCH took over the CPA Personnel Report, there isn't much about the biweekly publication at all. You're the great internet sleuth; maybe you can reveal exactly what was considered by all those professors in determining the accounting program rankings for the PR/PAR.</p>
<p>ldmom,</p>
<p>Let's just agree that I find recruiter opinions to be of weak importance, and you find them to be of great importance.</p>
<p>So, you can rely on those rankings if you want, and I can ignore them if I want.</p>
<p>I see no great need to pursuade you to my position. It is just not that important. They are just rankings.</p>
<p>newmassdad - I know why I think the WSJ rankings provide useful information; but I don't know why you think they are to be dismissed. I'm trying to understand why you think the recruiter's opinions are not valuable, and which school's ranking you find objectionable....but I'm okay with agreeing to disagree.</p>