3) Last point... Your final comment was about how GMAT scores correlate with starting salaries. That's true when you look at averages. But to say that a person will get get $3000 more in starting salary for every 10 points higher he scores on his GMAT is absurd. If you get into Wharton with a 600 GMAT, are you saying the person should retake the test to get a higher GMAT and therefore a higher salary?
2. In the same way you say FT and Economist are biased toward European programs, you are very clearly biased toward American programs. You say building a network in the US is more valuable. But, if you're aim is to work in Europe or Asia, obviously building a network in those networks would be more valuable to you.
This video was somewhat helpful in providing information about the value of different rankings.
However there were a few things I disagree with:
1.) You say the Financial Times and Economist give too many points to European programs. But US News does not look at European schools at all. And BusinessWeek ranks Non-US schools seperately. So, I would argue that US News and Businessweek give *too little* weight to Non-US programs. At least FT and Economist attempt to compare all MBA programs.
INSEAD and LBS networks are VERY international (not only people from France or England) whereas US Schools are mostly American people.
ponggr 9 months ago
Correlation vs Causation error ;)
ponggr 9 months ago 3
Its Hose....not Jose...
papan1990 1 year ago
3) Last point... Your final comment was about how GMAT scores correlate with starting salaries. That's true when you look at averages. But to say that a person will get get $3000 more in starting salary for every 10 points higher he scores on his GMAT is absurd. If you get into Wharton with a 600 GMAT, are you saying the person should retake the test to get a higher GMAT and therefore a higher salary?
sweeeedishfish 2 years ago
2. In the same way you say FT and Economist are biased toward European programs, you are very clearly biased toward American programs. You say building a network in the US is more valuable. But, if you're aim is to work in Europe or Asia, obviously building a network in those networks would be more valuable to you.
sweeeedishfish 2 years ago
This video was somewhat helpful in providing information about the value of different rankings.
However there were a few things I disagree with:
1.) You say the Financial Times and Economist give too many points to European programs. But US News does not look at European schools at all. And BusinessWeek ranks Non-US schools seperately. So, I would argue that US News and Businessweek give *too little* weight to Non-US programs. At least FT and Economist attempt to compare all MBA programs.
sweeeedishfish 2 years ago