Survey Methodology Overview

How we arrived at the MBAUniverse.com B-school Rankings 2011-12

-- Under the guidance of our survey advisory body, MBAUniverse.com and research agency Facts & Data framed the survey methodology.

-- We additionally conducted MBA aspirants and MBA Recruiters survey, to provide inputs to arrive at our methodology. This gave us a multi-dimensional picture of the expectations from B-schools. MBA aspirants     favour B-schools that offer high placements, while recruiters favor B-schools that have high quality of input, and faculty strength.

-- For arriving at the rankings, we gathered hard data from 100+ B-schools through a 25-page questionnaire. All prominent B-schools participated in the survey. In some cases, MBAUniverse.com used the Right to      Information Act (RTI) to ensure that B-schools share required data.

-- MBAUniverse.com Rankings are based on latest student, faculty and placements data from B-schools. All questions were pertaining to current batch admitted in June/July 2011.

-- Overall Rankings (which indicate relative quality of B-schools) are calculated on basis of three broad parameters & their respective weightages:

    a) Input scores (30%); b) Process scores (39%); and c) Output scores (31%).

- NO PERCEPTION DATA IS USED FOR ARRIVING AT MBAUniverse.com RANKINGS.

Input Scores are based on following sub-parameters:
-- Number of applications per seat
-- Quality of student intake, as determined by the candidate’s academic history and entrance exam cut-off scores
-- Percentage of students admitted with professional degrees (like CA/Medicine/Engineering)
-- Work experience of students admitted

Process Scores are based on following sub-parameters:
-- Size & quality of full time faculty: Quality of faculty is judged on percentage of faculty with a PhD & their teaching experience
-- Size and quality of visiting faculty
-- Industry exposure: Based on quantity and quality of industry speakers visiting campus
-- Physical Infrastructure: Residential campus (that promotes holistic learning) is given higher weightage than non-residential.

Output Scores are based on following sub-parameters:
-- Placements performance: As measured by percentage of students placed and their Median salary.
-- Academic output: As determined by the number of Research Papers, Consultancy assignments, and MDP’s

Please refer our detailed Research Methodology note for specific weightages of each of the sub-parameters within Input, Process & Output parameters.

Compare B-schools on the basis of zones and cities

     Filter by Zone     North     East     West     South     All
      Filter by City     Delhi     Mumbai     Kolkata     Chennai     Pune
    Bangalore     Gurgaon     Noida     Ghaziabad    

Compare B-schools according to Ranking, Students, Faculty, Infrastructure and more

Overall Ranking:

Overall
Rank
Institute Name
Location
Final Score
(Max -1000)
1
Ahmedabad
950
2
Kolkata
935.12
3
Lucknow
864.95
4
Jamshedpur
853.39
5
Indore
839.78
6
Calicut / Kozhikode
830.69
7
Delhi
822.96
8
Gurgaon
815.36
9
Mumbai
802.14
10
Mumbai
756.09
11
Mumbai
726
12
Delhi
721.72
13
Mumbai
719.2
14
Ghaziabad
676.86
15
Delhi / NCR
657.54
16
Delhi
639.34
17
Bhubaneswar
632.47
18
Mumbai
623.06
19
Mumbai
621.5
20
Delhi / NCR
591.56
21
Delhi
568.43
22
Bengaluru / Bangalore
560.41
23
Mumbai
549.39
24
Pune
533.03
25
Pune
528.83
26
Ahmedabad
515.24
27
Hyderabad
506.15
28
Mumbai
501.26
29
Nagpur
496.77
30
Trichy
482.89
31
Bengaluru / Bangalore
464.61
32
Trichy
455.15
33
Pune
453.41
34
Coimbatore
451.14
35
Bhubaneswar
450.65
36
Bengaluru / Bangalore
448.18
37
Coimbatore
443.44
38
Pune
429.79
39
Assam - Other
422.15
40
Noida
415.71
41
Hyderabad / Secunderabad
399.55
42
Pune
387.63
43
Hyderabad / Secunderabad
386.94
44
Lucknow
376.72
45
Bengaluru / Bangalore
375.41
46
Delhi
374.95
47
Hyderabad
374.78
48
Delhi / NCR
374.53
49
Delhi
371.71
51
Delhi
367.96
52
Gurgaon
363.94
53
Noida
363.82
54
Noida
355.03
55
Warangal
349.61
56
Pune
347.64
57
Delhi
345.74
58
Delhi / NCR
337.97
59
Indore
335
60
Coimbatore
324.7
61
Kanpur
317.88
62
Gurgaon
317.82
63
Ghaziabad
312.46
64
Jaipur
312.2
65
Pune
307.48
66
Noida
306.51
67
Lucknow
301.64
68
Lucknow
301.59
69
Delhi
300.2
70
Jaipur
296.53
71
Delhi
293.9
72
Dehradun
291.17
73
Bengaluru / Bangalore
286.4
74
Pitampura, Delhi
276.08
75
Kolkata
255.14
 
Overall Input Ranking:
Overall
Rank
Institute Name
Location
Input Rank
Overall Input Score
(Max -300)
1
Ahmedabad
1
266.81
2
Kolkata
4
255.4
3
Lucknow
6
238.64
4
Jamshedpur
8
227.96
5
Indore
5
240.71
6
Calicut / Kozhikode
3
258.28
7
Delhi
7
230.13
8
Gurgaon
11
208.12
9
Mumbai
14
207.51
10
Mumbai
13
207.64
11
Mumbai
2
259.2
12
Delhi
9
224.38
13
Mumbai
10
212.82
14
Ghaziabad
17
199.45
15
Delhi / NCR
16
203.2
16
Delhi
12
208.02
17
Bhubaneswar
15
207.22
18
Mumbai
18
197.89
19
Mumbai
33
168.73
20
Delhi / NCR
27
174.31
21
Delhi
22
187.26
22
Bengaluru / Bangalore
19
197.56
23
Mumbai
24
185.39
24
Pune
23
186.21
25
Pune
40
161.64
26
Ahmedabad
26
181.49
27
Hyderabad
42
157.61
28
Mumbai
39
162.1
29
Nagpur
25
184.53
30
Trichy
21
190.15
31
Bengaluru / Bangalore
28
173.11
32
Trichy
20
193.15
33
Pune
45
156.09
34
Coimbatore
30
171.29
35
Bhubaneswar
31
170.47
36
Bengaluru / Bangalore
36
166.78
37
Coimbatore
43
157.57
38
Pune
31
170.4
39
Assam - Other
53
148.02
40
Noida
38
163.05
41
Hyderabad / Secunderabad
75
115.52
42
Pune
34
167.23
43
Hyderabad / Secunderabad
41
160.82
44
Lucknow
66
133.81
45
Bengaluru / Bangalore
51
149.4
46
Delhi
35
166.79
47
Hyderabad
48
151.23
48
Delhi / NCR
44
156.93
49
Delhi
37
164.64
51
Delhi
52
149.2
52
Gurgaon
67
132.67
53
Noida
71
129.97
54
Noida
49
150.73
55
Warangal
61
135.81
56
Pune
29
171.79
57
Delhi
63
135.2
58
Delhi / NCR
56
139.6
59
Indore
60
137.68
60
Coimbatore
70
130.68
61
Kanpur
69
131.55
62
Gurgaon
50
149.65
63
Ghaziabad
58
138.4
64
Jaipur
59
138.1
65
Pune
74
126.67
66
Noida
62
135.34
67
Lucknow
46
153.85
68
Lucknow
64
134.18
69
Delhi
57
139.19
70
Jaipur
55
140.27
71
Delhi
68
132.16
72
Dehradun
73
127.17
73
Bengaluru / Bangalore
47
152.95
74
Pitampura, Delhi
65
133.9
75
Kolkata
72
127.39
 
Overall Process Ranking:
Overall Rank
Institute Name
Location
Process Rank
Overall Process Score
(Max -390)
1
Ahmedabad
2
378.23
2
Kolkata
1
390
3
Lucknow
3
351.84
4
Jamshedpur
7
329.52
5
Indore
6
329.58
6
Calicut / Kozhikode
11
295.22
7
Delhi
16
282.82
8
Gurgaon
4
345.55
9
Mumbai
9
312.82
10
Mumbai
5
331.04
11
Mumbai
33
179.95
12
Delhi
10
302.08
13
Mumbai
12
295.01
14
Ghaziabad
8
316.37
15
Delhi / NCR
14
292.9
16
Delhi
36
169.63
17
Bhubaneswar
17
268.24
18
Mumbai
13
294.24
19
Mumbai
18
259.53
20
Delhi / NCR
15
287.81
21
Delhi
22
238.37
22
Bengaluru / Bangalore
26
216.9
23
Mumbai
21
240.19
24
Pune
20
241.14
25
Pune
23
236.35
26
Ahmedabad
28
202.1
27
Hyderabad
19
244.1
28
Mumbai
24
233.48
29
Nagpur
25
220.02
30
Trichy
37
161.89
31
Bengaluru / Bangalore
34
179.75
32
Trichy
49
141.22
33
Pune
35
177.19
34
Coimbatore
29
194.3
35
Bhubaneswar
32
185.56
36
Bengaluru / Bangalore
31
188.5
37
Coimbatore
30
193.27
38
Pune
38
158.74
39
Assam - Other
27
212.13
40
Noida
45
152.01
41
Hyderabad / Secunderabad
44
152.38
42
Pune
59
126.55
43
Hyderabad / Secunderabad
39
156.91
44
Lucknow
42
154.35
45
Bengaluru / Bangalore
41
155.56
46
Delhi
51
137.64
47
Hyderabad
47
146.17
48
Delhi / NCR
56
132.05
49
Delhi
53
135.42
51
Delhi
61
120.13
52
Gurgaon
40
155.79
53
Noida
43
154.23
54
Noida
55
132.84
55
Warangal
52
137.1
56
Pune
67
106.17
57
Delhi
50
138.07
58
Delhi / NCR
62
117.85
59
Indore
54
133.77
60
Coimbatore
46
146.46
61
Kanpur
66
111.21
62
Gurgaon
68
102.74
63
Ghaziabad
64
113.67
64
Jaipur
69
101.63
65
Pune
57
131.92
66
Noida
60
124.83
67
Lucknow
71
89.72
68
Lucknow
48
143.53
69
Delhi
73
80.48
70
Jaipur
65
113.19
71
Delhi
70
101.35
72
Dehradun
63
113.68
73
Bengaluru / Bangalore
74
62.99
74
Pitampura, Delhi
72
87.68
75
Kolkata
75
57.3
 
Overall Output Ranking:
Overall Rank
Institute Name
Location
Out put Rank
Overall Output Score
(Max - 310)
1
Ahmedabad
2
304.97
2
Kolkata
4
289.72
3
Lucknow
8
274.47
4
Jamshedpur
3
295.91
5
Indore
9
269.49
6
Calicut / Kozhikode
7
277.19
7
Delhi
1
310
8
Gurgaon
10
261.69
9
Mumbai
6
281.82
10
Mumbai
12
217.4
11
Mumbai
5
286.85
12
Delhi
14
195.26
13
Mumbai
13
211.36
14
Ghaziabad
17
161.04
15
Delhi / NCR
16
161.44
16
Delhi
11
261.69
17
Bhubaneswar
18
157.01
18
Mumbai
23
130.93
19
Mumbai
15
193.25
20
Delhi / NCR
26
129.44
21
Delhi
20
142.8
22
Bengaluru / Bangalore
19
145.94
23
Mumbai
27
123.8
24
Pune
31
105.68
25
Pune
24
130.84
26
Ahmedabad
21
131.65
27
Hyderabad
33
104.43
28
Mumbai
32
105.68
29
Nagpur
41
92.22
30
Trichy
25
130.84
31
Bengaluru / Bangalore
30
111.75
32
Trichy
28
120.78
33
Pune
29
120.13
34
Coimbatore
44
85.55
35
Bhubaneswar
37
94.61
36
Bengaluru / Bangalore
39
92.91
37
Coimbatore
40
92.6
38
Pune
34
100.65
39
Assam - Other
65
61.82
40
Noida
35
100.65
41
Hyderabad / Secunderabad
22
131.65
42
Pune
38
93.85
43
Hyderabad / Secunderabad
62
69.22
44
Lucknow
43
88.57
45
Bengaluru / Bangalore
58
70.45
46
Delhi
57
70.51
47
Hyderabad
49
77.38
48
Delhi / NCR
45
85.55
49
Delhi
55
71.66
51
Delhi
36
98.64
52
Gurgaon
51
75.49
53
Noida
48
79.62
54
Noida
56
71.46
55
Warangal
50
76.69
56
Pune
61
69.68
57
Delhi
53
72.47
58
Delhi / NCR
46
80.52
59
Indore
64
63.55
60
Coimbatore
72
47.55
61
Kanpur
52
75.12
62
Gurgaon
63
65.42
63
Ghaziabad
66
60.39
64
Jaipur
54
72.47
65
Pune
71
48.89
66
Noida
73
46.34
67
Lucknow
68
58.07
68
Lucknow
75
23.88
69
Delhi
47
80.52
70
Jaipur
74
43.07
71
Delhi
67
60.35
72
Dehradun
70
50.32
73
Bengaluru / Bangalore
59
70.45
74
Pitampura, Delhi
69
54.5
75
Kolkata
60
70.45
.
Advisory Body

Dr. Bakul Dholakia
Former Director, Indian Institute of Management - Ahmedabad and Padma Shri awardee

 

Dr. Bakul Dholakia is currently Advisor to Adani Group. Prior to joining Adani Group, he was Director of IIM Ahmedabad. He has 39 years of professional experience including 33 years at IIM Ahmedabad. In 2007, Dr. Dholakia was awarded Padma Shri by the Government of India in recognition of his distinguished services in the field of education.

 

Dr. Dholakia occupied the Reserve Bank of India Chair from 1992 to 1999, served as the Dean from 1998 to 2001 and as the Director of the Institute from 2002 to 2007. Dr. Dholakia has been a major motivator and a guiding force behind the numerous initiatives & expansion of activities at IIMA. His vision and strategic leadership have contributed to IIMA's enhanced International image and global recognition. He is widely recognized for his contribution to Management Education in India.


Ram Kumar
Executive Director on the Board of ICICI Bank

Mr. Ramkumar is the Executive Director on the Board of ICICI Bank, responsible for Customer Service and Human Resource functions at ICICI Bank. Mr. Ramkumar is recognized as one of India's foremost thought-leaders in the HR domain.


Prior to joining ICICI Bank in 2001 Mr. Ramkumar had over 16 years of experience. His work has mainly been in the areas of HR Management and Production Management. At ICICI Bank Mr. Ramkumar has been responsible for HR function, initially for the Bank and then for all the companies in the ICICI Group. He has worked extensively in the areas of recruitment, competency design, succession management, learning and development and Leadership Development. Under his guidance, ICICI Bank has implemented cutting edge practices and methodologies in the domain of leadership development, learning, creation and use of psychometric tools. At ICICI Bank, he has driven cost productivity across the organization through work methodization & norming, and process & structure optimization. He has joined the BOD with effect from February 1, 2009.


Dr. Rajesh Shukla
Director, NCAER Center for Macro Consumer Research

 

Dr. Shukla is one of India's leading authorities on Research for Public Policy and Consumer behaviour. He has authored seven books, more than 25 research reports, a number of research papers and popular articles. Some of his distinctive publications includes - First India Science Report (released by Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh), How India Earns, Spends and Saves (released by Sri Montek Singh Ahluwalia). He is a regular speaker at London School of Economics (LSE).


.
Survey Methodology Overview

MBAUniverse.com B-school Survey 2011-12

Research Methodology Note

December 6, 2011

Any research output is as credible as the methodology and data behind it. Understanding that a very large number of candidates will base their critical decision with respect to selection of B-school for taking admission on MBAUniverse.com B school rankings, we were very sensitive towards both the aspects: Methodology and Data.

We started the 2nd annual MBAUniverse.com B-school Survey 2011-12 by seeking guidance and inputs from our distinguished Advisory Body. Noted management academician Padma Shri Dr Bakul Dholakia, former Director, IIM Ahmedabad is the chairman of the Advisory Body. The other eminent members of the Advisory Body are Mr K. Ramkumar, Executive Director, ICICI Bank and Dr RK Shukla, former Director, NCAER-Centre for Macro Consumer Research. Together, our advisory body covered the critical domains of understanding the process of delivering management education, the corporate requirements, and how to conduct a rigorous research.

Our advisory body formulated the overall context & mission for the survey -- to create a highly credible B-school Ranking that helps the three key stakeholders: MBA Students (current and prospective), Recruiters and B-schools themselves.

While MBAUniverse.com, with guidance from the survey advisory body, created the overall framework for the survey, the actual task of Data gathering and analysis was given to a reputed research company - Facts & Data .

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:

Most critical aspect of any methodology is that it should be based on data and hard evidence and should be devoid of any kind of subjectivity whatsoever. As ranking B-schools involves quantifying a lot of qualitative information, it is very important to ensure that any subjectivity or bias is not allowed to creep in.

The stakeholders in this eco system are:

(a). Students

(b). MBA aspirants (or prospective students), as they take application decisions based on these surveys;

(c). Current students of various B-Schools – as their placements depend on our ranking;

(d). Past students of various B-Schools – as their career prospects depend on our survey.

(e). Recruiters (as they take recruitment decisions based on our survey), further split by:

(f). HR Heads and senior officials across leading organizations;

(g). Line managers across functional areas.

(h). B-Schools (as their ranking decide the fate of their current and prospective students, placements, ability to attract good quality faculty):

(I). Directors and leadership community a B-schools

(J). Professors or the teaching community.

Across all phases of the project, adequate precaution was taken to ensure that the ranks are based on data from all these stakeholders.

Step 1: Generation of parameters

The parameters that make a good B-School should be decided by all stakeholders of this eco-system, and can neither be left at the mercy of the intellect of the researcher OR on desk research. One of the common problems of research has been that those doing research believe that they “know” the parameters – which, data suggests is almost always incorrect. Keeping this in mind, Facts ‘N' Data , the research partner for this survey, conducted an extensive survey wherein, an exhaustive (laundry) list of all parameters that ‘ these stakeholders believe' make a good B-School was drawn. The next obvious challenge was to reduce this list to ensure that correlated parameters were taken care of. However, this by itself is a mathematically tedious process!

Step 2: Selecting the most important parameters

Having identified the attributes, while a much easy approach is to ‘logically' reduce this list, based on researcher's experience, common sense, industry knowledge (or whatever we prefer to call it), Facts ‘N' Data deliberately chose a much more robust, though difficult path to ensure that the rankings are the most credible ones. Based on hard data and ranks of previous surveys done by MBAUniverse.com , Principal Component Analysis was used to reduce this list to most important components that explain maximum variance. Thus, data not ‘ex perience' dictated the final list of parameters.

Step 3: Arriving at weights of parameters

Again, while it's very easy to allocate weights to various parameters that ‘make sense' or ‘appear logical' or ‘are obvious', Regression technique was used to arrive at weights of these parameters, based on last year's data. Since context is dynamic and things could have changed from last year, all the stakeholders were asked to state the weights to these parameters as well.

The weights arrived at, based on the regression of last year's data were further fine tuned based on the stated weights of all the three stakeholders, giving equal weight to all of them at every level. Not surprisingly, minor aberrations were found in the two and data suggests that these were because of dynamism of context (change in preference year over year).

As a result of this step, we were able to arrive at final weights of various parameters.

So, data suggested that final rank was a function of Input, Output and Process parameters. It may be noted that MBAUniverse.com was the first one to use this methodology, which is clear from the published material available in public domain for over one year now. Not surprisingly, in 2011 many others tried to copy this methodology.

The Mathematical Equation at macro level was found to be:

Final Score^ (F) = f [Input Score^ (I), Process Score^ (P), Output Score^ (O)] ,

Mathematical relation being found to be:

F = (0.30*I) + (0.39*P) + (0.31*O)

Where:

Input Score^ (I) = f [Number of applications per seat (n), Quality of intake as determined by the candidate's academic history and entrance exam cut-off scores (q), % of candidates with professional degrees (p), cumulative past work experience of last year's class (e)] 1

Mathematical relation being found to be:

Input Score^ (I) = (0.300*n) + (0.302*q) + (0.149*p1) + (0.249*e)

Process Score^ = f [Faculty (f) 2 , Infrastructure (i) 3 ]

Mathematical relation being found to be:

Process Score^ (P) = (0.847*f) + (0.153*i)

Output Score = f [Output of students as determined by their placement data (s) 4 , Academic Output as determined by the number of Research Papers, Consultancy assignments, and MDP's (a) 5 ]

Mathematical relation being found to be:

Output Score (P) = (0.721*s) + (0.279*a)

Explanatory Notes:

1. Gender diversity was NOT found to have an influence on the quality of B-Schools

2. Where, Faculty is the EFFECTIVE FACULTY PER STUDENT, ‘Effectiveness' being determined by sum of permanent faculty (not on leave or deputation etc) weighted by the type of Ph.D. (Central Universities IIT's, IIM's and Tier I universities commanding a weight of 1.47, Select Foreign Universities commanding a weight of 1.54, Other Universities at a weight of 1.24), further weighted by the teaching experience (ranging from 1.11 through 1.76), further weighted by corporate or industrial experience (ranging from 1.19 through 1.58), supplemented by availability of Visiting Faculty (defined as those who took at least one complete paper in a semester) with weights ranging from 0.65 through 0.71 depending on their quality as determined by the quality of University or institute that they belong to, their industrial and teaching experience. The total effective pool was calculated at per capita (or per student) basis.

3. Infrastructure score is a complex function of IT infrastructure and Physical infrastructure including on-campus and off campus hostel facilities, availability of play grounds (Criket/ Football/ Gymnasium/ Pool/ Amphitheatre, etc), Library, Books, and Research Journals.

4. Output of produce (or students) is a complex function of % of students getting placed out of those opting for placement, and the Median salary (not mean salary as the data suggested that mean was NOT a good indicator of central tendency being highly prone to extreme values - this was smoothened by the skewness and kurtosis statistics of the data) and Academic Output is determined by the number of Research Papers weighed by the Quality of Research papers (as determined by the quality index of publications), the volume and quality of consultancy assignments and quality of MDP's conducted.

^Since the institutes provided data in hard numbers the challenge was to convert this to ‘SCORES' that were comparable. This was done by arriving at indexed scores based on the ‘best in class' institute on that parameter. These indexed scores, being relational in nature, were thus comparable.

DATA COLLECTION AND VALIDATION:

This survey gathers inputs from 3 different surveys for generating a 360% perspective of quality and performance of B-Schools:

•  B-School Survey: This survey forms the backbone for the MBAUniverse.com B-school Survey 2011-12. An exhaustive questionnaire with 50 questions was sent to those B-Schools that offer a 2 year Full Time program that is accredited to be equivalent to a Full Time 2 Year MBA or equivalent and that are at least 5 years old. The questionnaire contained detailed definitions of all the data points sought and the schools were asked to provide documentary evidence (E.g., in case of visiting faculty, the name of the faculty, paper taught, and dates were all sought and validated by the student's survey). Only that data for which verifiable documentary evidence was available was used and the rest was not considered. For a majority of schools, MBAUniverse.com went back to seek clarifications and ask for more data and evidence. The faith of B-Schools was evident by virtue of the fact that we received many calls from those schools that were not initially invited with a request to send them an invite, many schools went to the extent of responding with a hard bound set of documents (running up to 400 to 780 pages), many schools requesting an extension of deadline, a large number of calls to confirm the receipt of responses, and calls/ mails to enquire the date of release of results within 2-3 days of closure of the survey!

To generate a more robust understanding of the needs and demands of two key stakeholders (MBA students & recruiters), we conducted Student's Survey & Recruiters Survey separately.

What is to be noted is that the data and learnings from these two surveys were NOT added or fused together with the B-school Survey, but was used to understand the stakeholders needs. Broader learnings from the MBA Aspirant's survey will be published on MBAUniverse.com at a later date.

•  Current & Prospective Student's Survey: This was conducted using an online tool with the aid of a structured questionnaire as the survey instrument. This included a long list of response-based customizable instrument that captured data for recall value, perceptions and for existing and past students, in terms of experience with named institute. As we were capturing the IP address as well, we realized that there were a large number of institutes whose data was getting skewed in their favor (such responses being identified by same IP address and machine's MAC address/ configuration used repeatedly within a short duration (ranging from number of responses within an hour to a day). So as to ensure that these respondents perceived us to be dumb enough and to discourage them from using alternative techniques to bypass our surveillance, we did not warn them, but all such responses were completely removed from the system.

  Recruiter's Survey: Trained, qualified and experienced researcher (with over 15 years of experience and over 782 assignments) interviewed a mix (47:53) of HR Heads/ Recruitment Heads and Line Managers of a cross section of organizations (across organization size, geography of Indian headquarters, and industry vertical) using a semi-structured questionnaire and probed them on various aspects including their expectations and experiences with fresh recruits from various (named) B-Schools and their ratings on the same.

The survey was conducted with strict adherence to the code of conduct of Market Research Society of India and the data was treated as most confidential, with no one, except one member each from Facts ‘N' Data , and MBAUniverse.com having access to it.

 


.
In depth Analysis of Top 20 B-schools

MBAUniverse.com is committed to help MBA aspirants take correct admission decisions by providing authentic information. To offer total transparency and better understanding of our Survey, we are sharing important data points used to analyse and rank top 20 B-schools. As you can see from the table below, a B-school may perform very well on a parameter (say number of faculty), but its overall ranking maybe lower, because it fails to perform as well on other parameters (CAT cut-off or Placements). It's high relative performance in all three parameters -- quality of Input (students), Process (faculty & academic infra) and Output (Placements) -- that make a holistic B-school.

 

Institute Name
Application Received
CAT - Cut off
(%)
Other Exam - cut off
Work Experience
(%)
Parmanent Faculty
Visiting Faculty
Total Seats
Median Salary
Rs
INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT - AHMEDABAD
205699

99.81

NA

74


88
NA

305
1515000
INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT - CALCUTTA
205699
99.81
NA
68

87

16

388
1439250
INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT - LUCKNOW
205699
90
NA
82
78
37
366
DND
XLRI JAMSHEDPUR
60316
NA
XAT - 98.3%
73
61
20
240
1470000
INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT - INDORE
168137
90
NA
60
50
30
240
1407000 (Mean)
INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT - KOZHIKODE
168137
75
NA
55
58
37
320
1377000
FMS, UNIVERSITY OF DELHI
57226
NA
FMS Exam - 99.6%
72
33
18
203
1540000
MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE - GURGAON
14954
98.51
NA
71
67
44
316
1300000
S.P. JAIN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT & RESEARCH - MUMBAI
14009
98.51
XAT - 92%
89
43
31
178
1400000
NMIMS SCHOOL OF BUSINESS MANAGEMENT - MUMBAI
41000
NMAT - 91%
70
73
68
289
1080000
JBIMS - UNIV. OF MUMBAI
90000
99.9
MCET - 99.9%
64
6
90
120
1554000 (Mean)
INDIAN INSTITUTE OF FOREIGN TRADE - DELHI
45000
NA
IIFT Exam - 97%
64
53
46
208
955000
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING - MUMBAI
11388
98.26
NA
91
50
13
201
1050000
INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY - GHAZIABAD
11388
96
NA
53
64
39
411
800000
INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE - DELHI
7523
92
NA
79
45
NA
116
802000
DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, IIT DELHI
2200
JMET - 98%
77
14
37
52
1300000
XAVIER INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT - BHUBANESWAR
11030
XAT - 93%
88
55
39
176
780000
K.J SOMAIYA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES & RESEARCH - MUMBAI
5389
90.29
74
67
23
120
650443
SYDENHAM INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT - Mumbai
DND
MCET - 99.5%
65
13
67
120
960000
BIRLA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY - GREATER NOIDA
4149
80
39
67
14
178
643000

 

 


.