MBA News » Article

Melbourne Business School: The Economist’s Ranking got it all wrong

The latest MBA ranking from the Intelligence Unit of the British magazine “Economist” contains a serious error, which has resulted in an incorrect ranking for Melbourne Business School. According to the “Economist”, MBS sits at number 46 internationally. It should be positioned considerably higher, finds the school itself. MBS had a rank of 26 in 2008 and 17 in 2009 in the Economist’s list.

The error is the result of the Economist incorrectly recording the MBS student exiting salaries. The average salary of MBS students used by the Economist in its calculations was 71,200 dollar, which is 22 per cent lower than the true figure of 91,772 dollar.

MBS Dean, Professor Jennifer George says: "There were no substantial shifts in the data reported by the School this year. While exiting salaries were slightly affected by the financial climate, our career placement results were comparable to or better than most other business schools around the world, therefore we expected a similar ranking to last year." She added: "It is gutting to realise that an error like this can seriously affect our reputation through absolutely no fault of our own."

Last year MBS was ranked by the Economist as the number one full-time MBA program in Asia Pacific. This year, even with the error MBS is still number one.

kosh / 08-14-2011 / 10:39h

The dispute is over exchange rate interpretations.

Which locally means jack s***.

henry / 10-05-2010 / 20:27h

I totally agree. What´s even more interesting is that Barabra Bierach lives in Sydney. Perhaps Melbourne Business School has given her some extra money to publish their press release.

Peter Hirne / 10-05-2010 / 17:50h

it´s really a shame that the author just copy the press release from Melbourne Business School. This is no serious journalism anymore. You can find the correction here:
http://www.economist.com/whichmba/Melbourne-Business-School-correction.
So now Melbourne is on place 44 instead of 46!

Tell us what you think



Spam protection

back

Share this Print Page