|
ponggr (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
INSEAD and LBS networks are VERY international (not only people from France or England) whereas US Schools are mostly American people.
ponggr (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Correlation vs Causation error ;)
papan1990 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Its Hose....not Jose...
sweeeedishfish (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
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 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
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 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
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. |
