Rankings: Key

Key: customised programmes

The first 10 criteria are informed by companies that commissioned executive courses; the next five from each business school. These criteria are presented in rank form, with the leading school in each column ranked number one. The final two criteria are for information only and do not inform the ranking. Figures in brackets show the percentage each criterion contributes to the overall ranking weight. The weighting accorded to the first nine criteria is determined by the level of importance that clients attach to each.

Preparation (8.3) The level of interaction between client and school, the extent to which clients’ ideas were integrated into the programme, and the effectiveness of the school in integrating its latest research.

Programme design (8.4) The flexibility of the course and the willingness of schools to complement their faculty with specialists and practitioners.

Teaching methods and materials (8.0) The extent to which teaching methods and materials were contemporary and appropriate, and included a suitable mix of academic rigour and practical relevance.

Faculty (8.5) The quality of teaching and the extent to which teaching staff worked together to present a coherent programme.

New skills and learning (8.4) The relevance of skills gained to the workplace, the ease with which they were implemented, and the extent to which the course encouraged new ways of thinking.

Follow-up (6.8) The extent and effectiveness of follow-up offered after the course participants returned to their workplaces.

Aims achieved (8.6) The extent to which academic and business expectations were met, and the quality of feedback from individual participants to course commissioners.

Facilities (7.0) The rating of the learning environment’s quality and convenience, and of supporting resources and facilities.

Value for money (8.0) Clients’ rating of the programme’s design, teaching and materials in terms of value for money.

Future use (8.0) The likelihood clients would use the same for future customised programmes, and whether they would use the school for the same programme.

International clients (5.0) The percentage of clients with headquarters outside the business school’s base country and region.

International participants (3.0) The extent to which customised programmes have participants from more than one country.

Overseas programmes (4.0) The international reach of the school’s customised programme teaching.

Partner schools (3.0) The quantity and quality of programmes developed or taught in conjunction with other business schools.

Faculty diversity (5.0) The diversity of school faculty according to nationality and gender.

Total responses The number of individual surveys completed by the school’s clients. Figures in brackets indicate the number of years of survey data counted towards the ranking.

Custom revenues Income from customised programmes in 2012 in $m, provided optionally by schools. Figures are based on average dollar currency exchange rates for 2012.

——————————————-

The top 70 open enrolment programme providers

Key: open enrolment programmes

The first 10 criteria are informed by programme participants; the next six from each business school. These criteria are presented in rank form, apart from women participants (a percentage), with the leading school in each column ranked number one. Revenue data are provided for information only and are not part of the ranking. Figures in brackets show the percentage each criterion contributes to the overall ranking weight. The weighting accorded to the first 10 criteria is determined by the level of importance participants attach to each.

Preparation (7.7) The provision of advanced information on content, and the participant selection process.

Course design (8.6) The flexibility of the course and appropriateness of class size, structure and design.

Teaching methods and materials (8.3) The extent to which teaching methods and materials were contemporary and appropriate, and included a suitable mix of academic rigour and practical relevance.

Faculty (8.7) The quality of the teaching and the extent to which teaching staff worked together to present a coherent programme.

Quality of participants (8.0) The extent to which other participants were of the appropriate managerial and academic standard, the international diversity of participants, and the quality of interaction among peers.

New skills and learning (8.7) The relevance of skills gained to the workplace, the ease with which they were implemented and the extent to which the course encouraged new ways of thinking.

Follow-up (7.3) The level of follow-up offered after participants returned to their workplaces, and networking opportunities with fellow participants.

Aims achieved (8.6) The extent to which personal and professional expectations were met, and the likelihood that participants would recommend the programme.

Food and accommodation (6.6) Rating of the quality of food and accommodation.

Facilities (7.5) Rating of the learning environment’s quality and convenience, and of supporting resources and facilities.

Women participants (2.0) The percentage of female course participants.

International participants (3.0) Amalgamation of the percentage of participants from outside the business school’s base country and region.

Repeat business and growth (5.0) The amalgamation of growth in revenues and percentage of repeat business.

International location (3.0) The extent to which programmes are run outside the school’s base country and region.

Partner schools (3.0) The quantity and quality of programmes taught in conjunction with other business schools.

Faculty diversity (4.0) The diversity of school faculty according to nationality and gender.

Open-enrolment revenues The income from open programmes in 2012 in $m, provided optionally by schools. Figures are based on average dollar currency exchange rates for 2012.