The top 10 MBA programs and their rank are somewhat different for US News & World Report than for LinkedIn.
At US News & World Report:
- Stanford Graduate School of Business and the Wharton School (University of Pennsylvania) are tied for number one
- Booth School of Business (University of Chicago) and Kellogg School of Business (Northwestern University) are tied for number three
- MIT Sloan
- Harvard Business School
- Tied for 7 are NYU Stern, Berkley Haas, and Yale.
- Tied for number 10 are Dartmouth Tuck and Virginia’s Darden School.
According to LinkedIn, the top ten are:
- Stanford Graduate School of Business
- INSEAD
- Harvard Business School
- The Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania
- MIT Sloan School of Management
- Indian School of Business
- Kellogg School of Business (Northwestern University)
- Tuck School of Business (Dartmouth)
- Columbia Business School (Columbia University)
- Booth School of Business (University of Chicago)
US News & World Report methodology includes factors like employment rate at graduation and 3 months after graduation, mean starting salary and bonus, peer and quality assessment scores, and various measures of student selectivity. The problem is that they get some of this data from the colleges. The colleges, in turn, get data like employment status and salary by surveying their students. And, of course, not all the students respond to the survey. When I graduated, I certainly didn’t.
In contrast, LinkedIn’s methodology ranking is built on LinkedIn data that leverages the network’s ability to gain insights on career outcomes of LinkedIn members. LinkedIn’s five key pillars were: job placement (hiring rate and labor market demand), career advancement, network growth and strength, leadership potential, and gender diversity.
In both methodologies, there were things used in the ratings that arguably should not be included. I am a bottom-line guy. Things like salary, career advancement, and job placement clearly matter. But in the case of US News, I don’t care about selectivity or peer quality assessment. At LinkedIn, I would argue network growth and strength, leadership potential, and gender diversity – while all wonderful things – should be sparingly used.
However, in my mind, the key factor in liking LinkedIn’s ranking better is that they just have better data. Further, LinkedIn ratings are global, not just focused on US schools.
