I saw that there's a new Online MBA ranking out from Fortune. It ranks US based programs. Here are the top ones:
1. UNC Kenan-Flagler
2. IU - Kelley
3. Carnegie Mellon - Tepper
4. USC - Marshall
5. Florida - Hough
6. Maryland - Smith
7. Pittsburgh - Katz
8. Syracuse - Whitman
9. Massachusetts - Isenberg
10. Rice - Jones
11. Washington - Foster
12. West Texas A&M
13. Perpperdine
14. GWU
15. Santa Clara - Leavey
16. Arizona - Eller
17. Cincinnati - Lidner
18. Massachusetts - Lowell
19. AU - Kogod
20. Utah - Eccles
21. Babson - Olin
22. Southern Indiana
23. Kennesaw State - Coles
24. Delaware - Lerner
25. Hofstra - Zarb
You can find the list by searching. I'm not posting the link because the list is littered with 'sponsors' which I feel makes it misleading.
Overall, the methodology is not too inspiring. The majority of the rank is determined by a "Program Score" which comes from a questionnaire that the schools fill out. The answers are augmented by average GPA and GMAT scores of incoming students (although they don't specify if these averages are based on the current year or the aggregate.)
The rest of the ranking is determined by a couple of other factors. The first is the 'Fortune 1000' score - which is determined by the number of a school's MBA alumni that are c-suite level at Fortune 1000 companies. Mind you, this is "MBA" alumni and not "Online MBA" alumni. The point is to use this as a proxy for network reach. Why only c-suite? I don't understand why you wouldn't want a fuller view of the network.
Then, there's a "Brand Score" which surveyed hiring managers on how they feel about each school. They surveyed 2500 professionals, but they don't give any indication of what kinds of firms these professionals work in.
Finally, the "Prestige Score" folds info from other rankings into the calculation.
Overall, the fact that the majority of the ranking is primarily determined by a questionnaire given to schools, and the fact that there are no metrics looking at salary / career outcomes, this makes me a bit skeptical of this ranking.
1. UNC Kenan-Flagler
2. IU - Kelley
3. Carnegie Mellon - Tepper
4. USC - Marshall
5. Florida - Hough
6. Maryland - Smith
7. Pittsburgh - Katz
8. Syracuse - Whitman
9. Massachusetts - Isenberg
10. Rice - Jones
11. Washington - Foster
12. West Texas A&M
13. Perpperdine
14. GWU
15. Santa Clara - Leavey
16. Arizona - Eller
17. Cincinnati - Lidner
18. Massachusetts - Lowell
19. AU - Kogod
20. Utah - Eccles
21. Babson - Olin
22. Southern Indiana
23. Kennesaw State - Coles
24. Delaware - Lerner
25. Hofstra - Zarb
You can find the list by searching. I'm not posting the link because the list is littered with 'sponsors' which I feel makes it misleading.
Overall, the methodology is not too inspiring. The majority of the rank is determined by a "Program Score" which comes from a questionnaire that the schools fill out. The answers are augmented by average GPA and GMAT scores of incoming students (although they don't specify if these averages are based on the current year or the aggregate.)
The rest of the ranking is determined by a couple of other factors. The first is the 'Fortune 1000' score - which is determined by the number of a school's MBA alumni that are c-suite level at Fortune 1000 companies. Mind you, this is "MBA" alumni and not "Online MBA" alumni. The point is to use this as a proxy for network reach. Why only c-suite? I don't understand why you wouldn't want a fuller view of the network.
Then, there's a "Brand Score" which surveyed hiring managers on how they feel about each school. They surveyed 2500 professionals, but they don't give any indication of what kinds of firms these professionals work in.
Finally, the "Prestige Score" folds info from other rankings into the calculation.
Overall, the fact that the majority of the ranking is primarily determined by a questionnaire given to schools, and the fact that there are no metrics looking at salary / career outcomes, this makes me a bit skeptical of this ranking.
