以下是引用ASUNG在2005-6-6 1:24:00的发言：
从商学院整体水平来说，一流的好学校又有多少明显的差别呢？
>> I am not so sure. I think there IS A DIFFERENCE. But I am not so sure how big the gap is.
<Windmolen> So, what is your point then, Asung? A difference, but not sure?
你说的INSEAD, LBS等等学校确实都是不错的。但是像Oxford, Cambridge这类的历史名校，我就觉得虽然学校名声在外，但是真正商学院的水平却不能称得上一流。
>> Yes, Osford and Cambridge MBA are 'not there yet'. I will only say they have 'good potential'.
<Windmolen>The potential students looking for a good MBA programme is not buying an internet stock with "good" potentials. We all know how that bubble turned out. For a MBA student, the no. 1 concern should be job opportunity after the study. Such a heavy investment should be met with good return. Should we go to a place that has "good potential" or go to somewhere that already has a good reputation and job prospect after graduation?
当然，对于排名这东西，仁者见仁，智者见智。只能作为参考
You are right, but in any case RSM is not top 3 in Europe.
<Windmolen>Well, according to Businees week they are. So, I really don't see your point!
The competition is not the same....ex. INSEAD GMAT 707 average. RSM you can get in with something like 620 with okay working experience. I have the impression that it's easy to get in (maybe I am wrong).
<Windmolen>You are most certainly wrong! Intelligence is not the only factor that count in success in business and life. A profile of a person consists more than the GMAT average alone. At least, I hope that is the case.
This year they admitted already 15 Taiwanese. Many people get in with GMAT score 580 to 650. Of course GMAT is not a 'good' indicator....but I believe people who get in INSEAD, LBS, IESE with over 700 GMAT will not have worse working experience than those admitted by RSM.
<Windmolen>Statistically, bachelors with no working experience have on average a higher GMAT score than a person with 3-4 years of working experience because the working guy has less time and patience to study. So, you assumption is wrong.
As for Oxford and Cambridge....as far as I know they are attracting more high quility students than before.
<Windmolen>0.1 is still better than 0, so what is your point?
Also there is one important factore-it seems to me that Oxbridge people are 'eager' to reach the top. Many of them believe they eventurally will be top 5 in Europe (Not sure if this will really happen) while I never heard of RSM people saying the same.
<Windmolen>Maybe you should talk to a RSM person before you utter this kind of ludicrous assertion. Marketing is everything to every business school!! How can you survive by not saying you are the best? Only point is, are you the best?
I saw people who recommend RSM as 'comparable to US top 30'/ 'Good choise if you can't go to USA'. Man... as a 'European top 3' you don't say you are 'comparable to US top 30'. You say you are head to head with US top 10 or M7 schools.
<Windmolen>This is like back in 2000. You should update you info source.
Rankings can change.
But the best b-school always contains the following elements (in my view):
Competative student body (Attract the best of the best applicants)
Ambitious, eager to be the best
The ability to help students gain mobility after graduation(expecially important for international students)
MBA is expensive. Besides 'good education'you also need good job oppotunity after graduation and smart/bright classmates.
My two cents. Don't get me wrong. RSM is still a good MBA. Top 10 in Europe, but not top 3.(somewhere between 4 to 10)
<Windmolen>Well, you just summarized the motto and guideliness of RSM. So, I suggest you to take a look at their new site
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2005-9-6 00:13:00
