返回列表 发新帖
查看: 45753|回复: 219

[排名] 2019金融时报全球MBA排名 (Financial Times Global MBA Ranking 2019)

[精华]   [复制链接]
发表于 2019-1-28 06:55:17 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式

2019 年 1 月 28 日,英国《金融时报》(Financial Times,以下简称“FT”)发布了 2019 年全球 MBA 百强排行榜。

斯坦福大学商学院(Stanford Graduate School of Business)、哈佛商学院(Harvard Business School)、欧洲工商管理学院(Insead)、宾夕法尼亚大学沃顿商学院(University of Pennsylvania: Wharton)和中欧国际工商学院(Ceibs)位列前五,其中,中欧国际工商学院首次跻身全球前五。

此次排名,中国共有 6 所商学院入选百强排行榜,分别是第 5 名中欧国际工商学院(Ceibs)、第 18 名香港科技大学工商管理学院(HKUST Business School)、第 34 名复旦大学管理学院(Fudan University School of Management)、第 41 名香港大学(University of Hong Kong)、第 51 名上海交通大学安泰经济与管理学院(Shanghai Jiao Tong University: Antai)和第 57 名香港中文大学商学院(CUHK Business School)。

在 FT 全球 MBA 排名标准的众多权重中,占比最大的两个权重分别是:毕业生三年后的平均薪资(占比 20%)和攻读 MBA 前后的薪资涨幅(占比 20%)。由此可见,FT 排名对 MBA 毕业后的薪资情况还是比较看重的。

与往年不同的是,今年 FT 增加了一项新的排名标准——企业社会责任排名(Corporate Social Responsibility Rank,简称 “CSR Rank”),即商学院传授企业社会责任、伦理道德、社会和环境问题等在其核心课程教学中所占的课时比例。此项标准系首次采纳使用,权重占到整个排名的 3%。

2019 年度 FT 全球 MBA 百强排行榜单,即刻为大家揭晓排名结果。附件中的 PDF 包含了排名各项指标的得分。



3 Yr
School Name Country
1 1 1 Stanford Graduate School of Business US
2 5 4 Harvard Business School US
3 2 2 Insead FR / SG
4 3 3 University of Pennsylvania: Wharton US
5 8 8 Ceibs China
6 4 5 London Business School UK
7 6 7 University of Chicago: Booth US
8 9 10 MIT: Sloan US
9 7 8 Columbia Business School US
10 10 11 University of California at Berkeley: Haas US
11 15 14 Yale School of Management US
12 11 11 Iese Business School Spain
13 27 24 University of Oxford: Saïd UK
14 12 13 Northwestern University: Kellogg US
15 16 16 Dartmouth College: Tuck US
16 13 11 University of Cambridge: Judge UK
17 18 20 National University of Singapore Business School Singapore
18 14 16 HKUST Business School China
19 21 20 HEC Paris France
19 19 21 Duke University: Fuqua US
21 20 19 Esade Business School Spain
22 24 22 IMD Business School Switzerland
23 32 30 University of Virginia: Darden US
24 28 26 Indian School of Business India
25 23 22 New York University: Stern US
26 25 28 UCLA: Anderson US
27 17 24 Cornell University: Johnson US
28 26 26 University of Michigan: Ross US
29 30 33 Georgetown University: McDonough US
30 22 25 Nanyang Business School, NTU Singapore Singapore
31 - - IE Business School Spain
31 29 27 SDA Bocconi Italy
33 35 39 Indian Institute of Management Bangalore India
34 42 - Fudan University School of Management China
35 40 38 Carnegie Mellon: Tepper US
36 41 40 Warwick Business School UK
37 44 42 University of Texas at Austin: McCombs US
38 47 45 Emory University: Goizueta US
39 58 - University of Florida: Warrington US
39 51 45 Imperial College Business School UK
41 33 38 University of Hong Kong China
42 51 49 Sungkyunkwan University GSB South Korea
43 49 - Singapore Management University: Lee Kong Chian Singapore
43 57 49 Indiana University: Kelley US
43 64 61 Durham University Business School UK
46 59 51 University of Southern California: Marshall US
47 31 36 Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad India
48 64 58 University of California at Irvine: Merage US
49 48 46 University of Washington: Foster US
49 78 74 Indian Institute of Management Calcutta India
51 34 40 Shanghai Jiao Tong University: Antai China
52 37 44 University of North Carolina: Kenan-Flagler US
52 73 68 Vanderbilt University: Owen US
54 50 57 Washington University: Olin US
55 37 41 Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University Netherlands
56 45 55 Rice University: Jones US
57 43 45 CUHK Business School China
58 77 65 University of Notre Dame: Mendoza US
59 36 42 Alliance Manchester Business School UK
60 54 58 Georgia Institute of Technology: Scheller US
61 66 68 Melbourne Business School Australia
62 51 57 Arizona State University: Carey US
63 75 76 Pennsylvania State University: Smeal US
64 46 49 City, University of London: Cass UK
65 72 65 Michigan State University: Broad US
66 81 78 Babson College: Olin US
67 67 71 Boston College: Carroll US
68 86 79 Boston University: Questrom US
69 60 63 University of St Gallen Switzerland
70 63 62 AGSM at UNSW Business School Australia
71 94 - WHU – Otto Beisheim School of Management Germany
72 55 60 University of Maryland: Smith US
73 82 80 University of Pittsburgh: Katz US
74 - - Macquarie Graduate School of Management Australia
75 55 66 Purdue University: Krannert US
76 61 63 Cranfield School of Management UK
77 61 64 Mannheim Business School Germany
78 68 70 Brigham Young University: Marriott US
79 88 79 ESMT Berlin Germany
80 99 - EMLyon Business School France
81 71 72 Wisconsin School of Business US
81 85 85 University of Minnesota: Carlson US
83 83 81 University of Rochester: Simon US
84 68 72 Ohio State University: Fisher US
85 86 79 University of Toronto: Rotman Canada
86 80 79 The Lisbon MBA Portugal
87 78 - McGill University: Desautels Canada
87 73 84 University of Edinburgh Business School UK
89 94 84 University College Dublin: Smurfit Ireland
90 - - George Washington University US
91 70 68 Lancaster University Management School UK
92 91 - SMU: Cox US
93 96 - Essec Business School France
94 90 93 Western University: Ivey Canada
95 - - Fordham University: Gabelli US
96 - - Incae Business School Costa Rica / Nicaragua
96 93 94 University of Texas at Dallas: Jindal US
98 - - Grenoble Ecole de Management France
99 - - Texas A & M University: Mays US
100 - - William & Mary: Mason US

Table Note

Footnotes: * KPMG reported on the results of obtaining evidence and applying specified audit procedures relating to selected survey data provided for the Financial Times 2019 MBA ranking for selected business schools. Enquiries about the assurance process can be made by contacting Lori Huber of KPMG at The specified audit procedures were carried out between November and December 2018. The audit date published denotes the survey for which the specified audit precedures were conducted.

**These schools run additional courses for MBA students for which additional language skills are required. Although the headline ranking figures show changes in the data year to year, the pattern of clustering among the schools is equally significant. Some 200 points separate the top programme, Stanford, from the school ranked number 100. The top 14 participants, down to Northwestern University: Kellogg, form the top group of MBA providers. The second group, headed by Dartmouth College: Tuck, spans schools ranked 15 to 38. Differences between schools are relatively small within this group. The 51 schools within the third group headed by Imperial College Business School, rank joint 39th, are similarly close together. The remaining 11 schools headed by George Washington University make up the fourth group.


您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看,没有帐号?立即注册

 楼主| 发表于 2019-1-28 06:56:08 | 显示全部楼层


This ranking features the world’s best 100 full-time MBA programmes. A total of 150 schools took part in the 2019 edition. All participating schools meet the FT’s entry criteria, including being accredited by Equis or the AACSB.

The FT surveys alumni three years after completing their MBA. For schools to enter the ranking calculations, the FT requires that a minimum of 20 per cent of alumni reply to the survey, with at least 20 fully completed responses. About 8,000 from the class of 2015 completed our survey — a response rate of 38 per cent.

The ranking has 20 different criteria. Alumni responses inform eight criteria that together contribute 61 per cent of its weight. Eleven criteria are calculated from school data, accounting for 29 per cent of the ranking. KPMG audits a number of schools every year. The remaining criterion, the research rank, counts for 10 per cent.

Alumni-informed criteria are based on data collected over three years. Responses from the 2018 survey carry 50 per cent of total weight and those from 2018 and 2017, 25 per cent each. If only two years of data are available, the weighting is split 60:40 if data are from 2019 and 2018, or 70:30 if they are from 2019 and 2017. For salary figures, the weighting is 50:50 for two years’ data.

The first two alumni criteria are average income three years after graduation and salary increase compared with pre-MBA salary, both weighted at 20 per cent. For the latter, half of the weight applies to the absolute increase and half to the percentage rise (published). Current salaries are converted to US dollars using October 2018 International Monetary Fund purchasing power parity rates.

The salaries of non-profit and public sector workers and full-time students are removed, as are the highest and lowest salaries from each school, to calculate a normalised average. Finally, salaries are weighted to reflect differences between different sectors.

“Value for money” for each MBA is calculated by dividing its average alumni salary three years after graduation by the total cost, including tuition, lost salary, opportunity cost and other expenses. Any financial help given to alumni is subtracted from the total.

The FT also collects information from schools on their current faculty, newly enrolled students and the latest graduating class. School criteria include the diversity of staff, board members and students by gender, nationality and the MBA’s international reach. For gender criteria, schools with a 50:50 composition score highest.

The research rank is based on the number of articles by full-time faculty in 50 internationally recognised academic and practitioner journals. The rank combines the number of publications from January 2016 to October 2018, with the number weighted relative to faculty size.

The FT has removed the PhD graduates category from the criteria and replaced it with a new criterion: Corporate Social Responsibility. It is based on the proportion of teaching hours from core courses dedicated to CSR, ethics, social and environmental issues. It carries a weight of three per cent and additional weightings have been placed elsewhere.

The FT Global MBA ranking is a relative listing. Schools are ranked against each other by calculating a Z-score for each criterion. The Z-score is a statistic that shows where a score lies in relation to the mean. These scores are then weighted as outlined in the ranking key and added together for a final score.

After removing schools that did not meet the response rate threshold from the alumni survey, a first version is calculated using all remaining schools. The school at the bottom is removed and a second version is calculated and so on until we reach the top 100. The top 100 schools are ranked accordingly to produce the 2019 list

Judith Pizer of Jeff Head Associates acted as the FT’s database consultant. The FT research rank was calculated using Clarivate Analytics data from the Web of Science, an abstract and citation database of research literature.


Salary today: average alumnus salary three years after graduation, US$ PPP equivalent (see methodology). This figure is not used in the ranking.†

Weighted salary (20): average alumnus salary three years after graduation, US$ PPP equivalent (see methodology), adjusted for variations between sectors.†

Salary increase (20): average difference in alumni salary from before the MBA to now. Half of this figure is calculated according to the absolute salary increase and half according to the percentage increase relative to pre-MBA salary.

Value for money (3): calculated using salary today, course length, tuition and other costs, including lost income during the MBA.†

Career progress (3): calculated according to changes in the level of seniority and the size of company alumni work in now, compared with before their MBA.†

Aims achieved (3): the extent to which alumni fulfilled their stated goals or reasons for doing an MBA.†

Careers service (3): effectiveness of the school careers service in terms of career counselling, personal development, networking events, internship search and recruitment, as rated by their alumni.†

Employed at three months (2): percentage of the most recent graduating class who had found employment or accepted a job offer within three months of completing their studies. The figure in brackets is the percentage of the class for which the school was able to provide employment data and is used to calculate the school’s final score in this category.*

Alumni recommend (3): calculated according to selection by alumni of three schools from which they would recruit MBA graduates.†

Female faculty (2): percentage of female faculty.

Female students (2): percentage of female students on the full-time MBA.

Women on board (1): percentage of female members on the school’s advisory board.

International faculty (4): calculated according to the diversity of faculty by citizenship and the percentage whose nationality differs from their country of employment — the figure published in the table. ‡

International students (4): calculated according to the diversity of current MBA students by citizenship and the percentage whose nationality differs from the country in which they study — the figure in the table. ‡

International board (2): percentage of the board whose citizenship differs from the country in which the school is based.

International mobility (6): based on alumni citizenship and the countries where they worked before their MBA, on graduation and three years after.

International course experience (3): calculated on whether the most recent graduating class completed exchanges, research projects, study tours and company internships in countries other than where the school is based.*

Languages (1): number of extra languages required on graduation.*

Faculty with doctorates (5): percentage of full-time faculty with a doctoral degree.

FT research rank (10): calculated according to the number of articles published by current full-time faculty members in 50 selected academic and practitioner journals between January 2016 and October 2018. The FT50 rank combines the absolute number of publications with the number weighted relative to the faculty’s size.

Corporate social responsibility rank (3): proportion of teaching hours from core courses dedicated to CSR, ethics, social and environmental issues.

Schools with a 50:50 (male/female) composition receive the highest possible score in the three gender-related criteria.

† Includes data for the class of 2015 and one or two preceding classes where available.

* Graduated between July 2017 and June 2018.

‡ While we recognise the distinction between Chinese and Taiwanese scholars and students, within China no such distinction may have been observed when recording diversity.

发表于 2019-1-28 09:15:39 | 显示全部楼层
发表于 2019-1-28 16:46:31 来自手机 | 显示全部楼层
发表于 2019-01-28 06:55:17

发表于 2019-1-28 20:52:43 | 显示全部楼层
发表于 2019-1-29 12:56:32 | 显示全部楼层
发表于 2019-1-29 13:03:18 | 显示全部楼层
发表于 2019-1-29 13:52:54 | 显示全部楼层
发表于 2019-1-29 15:33:06 | 显示全部楼层
发表于 2019-1-29 16:55:16 | 显示全部楼层
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

ntu Advertisement

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2023-6-5 19:06
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 All Rights Reserved.