Each year, after all the data and calculations have been checked, several lines are drawn across the final EMBA ranking table.

These subdivide the table and are meant to indicate that, despite adjacent position, the schools above and below are separated by a larger number of points than schools elsewhere in the ranking.

This year it was trickier to work out where the lines should go, because natural breaks in the scores were much less obvious. The range of points separating the top and bottom school is comparable to last year’s but schools seem to be more evenly spread across the range this year.

This applies particularly below the 20 mark, where almost all schools are separated from their immediate neighbour by at most 3 points, a percentage difference of only 1.4

This has some obvious consequences for the ranking; with comparatively small wins or losses, schools in this part of the table can move a rather long way up or down in the final classification.

Above the 20 mark, however, the table looks much as it did last year; 16 of this year’s programmes appeared in the top section of the 2006 table, three new programmes have come in to claim places and Iese Business School has moved up five places to 16th place.

A notable feature of this year’s top 20 is the proliferation of collaborative programmes. This year, seven of the 20 best EMBAs are joint initiatives, up from five last year and three two years ago. Some of these programmes are based in one centre only, such as the top-ranked Kellogg School of Business and Hong Kong University of Science and Technology tie-up in Hong Kong. Others such as the Trium Global Executive MBA, rotate participants between all the institutions involved: HEC School of Management in Paris, The London School of Economics and Political Science and New York University’s Stern School of Business.

The global network of top EMBA programmes, as ranked by the FT, expands every year and thanks to the growth of multi-school or multi-campus programmes (such as that offered by the University of Chicago) a top flight EMBA may be on offer near by, whether you live in Hungary, Spain or Singapore.

When EMBA graduates from 2004 were polled for this year’s ranking (the FT assesses graduates three years after their EMBA to obtain a more complete picture of how careers have progressed) about their reasons for doing an EMBA, they replied overwhelmingly that the most important reason was management development, followed by increased earnings. This follows the pattern of previous EMBA surveys.

If job position is taken as a proxy for successfully achieved management development, then many EMBA graduates must be happy customers. When asked about their job position, 59 per cent of respondents said they were working in more lowly “senior manager/executive” or “professional” level positions before they embarked on an EMBA. Only 14 per cent declared that they had already made it as partners or directors and 8 per cent had gained access to the swivel chairs and picture windows in the boardroom before starting their studies.

A number of the 2004 alumni report receiving an immediate career boost just after graduating: 20 per cent of them say they were partners or directors on graduation and 9 per cent made it on to the board.

Meanwhile three years on, 31 per cent are now partners or directors and an impressive 18 per cent report they are now workiat president, MD, CEO or “other board member” level.

The pattern is similar for salaries – the presence of an EMBA gives an immediate boost to earnings; for the graduates of 2004, average salary before their EMBA was $103,000. After two years of time-consuming and challenging part-time study they were earning $120,000 on average. Today they are around the $160,000 mark.

All in all, this year’s EMBA ranking presents quite a rosy picture for prospective students: average salaries are showing double-digit growth compared with last year and employers continue to be generous with their sponsorship. More than 70 per cent of respondents received partial or full funding of their fees.

And thanks to increasing global interest and recognition of this qualification, programmes and partnerships between leading business schools continue to pop up.

There are 11 new programmes in this year’s ranking – three of them joint initiatives. A further three are offered by US business schools, two run in Taiwan, one each in Australia and Canada, and Insead’s programme is split between France and Singapore.