The FT rankings have a certain weightage for business research (& IIRC, the Businessweek and U.S. News rankings do not).
Professors in management degree programs are supposed to *teach*. The quality of teaching is hard to measure, and so the lack of emphasis of practice-oriented research in the FT rankings is not a big deal. I do not know if there is any particular weightage for practice-oriented research specifically, but the point of using business research in the rankings is to indirectly measure the quality of faculty in any particular faculty. For non-Harappan-Americans : academic journals in business are hardly ever read by practicing managers. The journals that practicing mangers read include the Harvard Business Review and the Sloan Management Review, but these are not considered academic business research journals per se. Hence the question of practice-oriented research publications is a reasonable one. Anand :+: Linkback : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/indo-euro-americo-asian_list/message/517 ________________________________ From: Aditya Kapil <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 8:40 AM Subject: Re: [silk] Yay, we are number 11 Does the FT rating method take into account research published in high impact, peer-reviewed journals? Adit. On 7/21/11, Sidin Vadukut <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 21 Jul 2011, at 16:08, Anand Manikutty wrote: > >> Thanks to IIMA's PGPX #11 ranking in the FT Global MBA rankings >> (http://rankings.ft.com/businessschoolrankings/global-mba-rankings-2011), >> demand has risen for the program, I understand, and so the batch size has >> been increased. I wonder what is going on at ISB. >> >> Anand >> > > Woo hoo. -- Sent from my mobile device
