# **II. Previous Research**

The background literature on the quality of MBA training has taken two forms. First, there are numerous sources that have rated MBA programs over the past two decades. Second, there are a few analyses and surveys that have examined the quality of MBA graduates in terms of particular skills.

_BusinessWeek_ was the first source to publish a periodic ranking of MBA programs in 1988, to be soon followed by _U.S. News and World Report_ , as well as the _Financial Times, Forbes, The Economist, The Wall Street Journal,_ and _America Economia._ The initial rankings focused exclusively on U.S. business schools, but in the last decade international schools have also been included in some rankings. While _BusinessWeek_ still focuses most of its attention on schools in North America, Canada and Latin America, the _Financial Times_ and the _Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU)_ now have lists of the top 100 international MBAs, which include universities from North America, Latin America, Europe, and Asia. At the regional level, Asian business schools are ranked yearly by _AsiaWeek_ . At the national level, publications like the _Financial Mail_ of South Africa and _Business Today_ of India rank national business schools, though these rankings only exist for a limited number of countries.

Despite the fact that the MBA rankings now look across the world and are divided into different business fields (with separate rankings for areas such as finance or marketing), the information they provide is comparative across programs and does not reveal firms’ views on the quality of MBA graduate training in general. Though it can be argued that the market must value the services of MBAs because firms continue to hire increasing numbers of these graduates at substantial costs, the present rankings system reveals little about the overall quality of MBA training.

The set of material that looks specifically at the quality of MBA graduates’ training is far more limited. An interesting article by Pfeffer and Fong (2002), “finds that business schools are not very effective: Neither possessing an MBA degree nor grades earned in courses correlate with career success, results that question the effectiveness of schools in preparing their students”.<sup>1</sup> First, the authors cite studies in which firms found that nonMBAs performed as well as, or better than, their business school counterparts.<sup>2</sup> The authors also present evidence that the curriculum taught in business schools has a relatively small relationship to what is important for succeeding in business, though it should be noted that the evidence used may be dated.<sup>3</sup> Similar ideas have been echoed in other recent papers, such as that of Mintzberg and Gosling (2002).<sup>4</sup> Analysis of information about MBA graduates from outside the U.S. is scarce. Included in this

> 1Pfeffer, J.  and Fong, C., “The End of Business Schools?  Less Success Than Meets the Eye,” _Journal of Management Learning and Education_ , 2002,Vol. 1, No. 1, 78-95.  See page 78.

> 2Leonhardt, D., “A Matter of Degree?  Not for Consultants,” _New York Times_ , October 1, 2000, Section 31:1-18. Lieber, R.,  “Learning and Change:  Roger Martin,” _Fast Company_ , December 1999, 30:262. 3Porter, L. and McKibbin, L., “Management Education and Development: Drift or Thrust into the 21st Century,” 1988, New York:  McGraw-Hill.

> 4Mintzberg, H. and Gosling, J., “Reality Programming for MBAs,” _Strategy and Business_ , 2002, 26 (1): 2831.

4