No ranking for AIM in global survey
BusinessWorld | 11/10/2009 12:41 PM
Printer-friendly version | 
Send to friend | 
Share your views
MANILA - The MBA program of the country’s leading business school did not do well in a global survey by The Economist, ending up unranked, along with 9 others, in a list of 110 institutions.
In a report posted on its Web site, the London-based publication described the Asian Institute of Management’s (AIM) Master of Business Administration program as strong in finance, marketing and entrepreneurship, but wanting in theoretical instruction.
A school official said the result may have been due to fewer alumni responding to the poll, and stressed that the AIM was more of a "practitioners’ school rather than theoretical".
The Economist acknowledged that ranking MBA programs could be contentious, saying: "Business school rankings are not perfect. What makes a good MBA program will vary for each individual. Our ethos is to look at business schools from the students’ perspective."
Spain’s IESE Business School-University of Navarra replaced last year’s top-ranked International Institute for Management Development of Switzerland, which slid to second. US schools dominated the top ten, with six getting spots.
The study, the 8th of its kind, noted that 98% of IESE students found employment within three months of graduation, with an average basic salary of $125,000. It added that the graduates of other top-ranked schools were also attracting handsome compensation offers.
In the Asian and Australasian region, the Melbourne Business School was adjudged best, rising 9 spots in the world rankings to 17th place. Of the 13 schools in region included in the survey, only the AIM was unranked.
The Economist said the quality of MBA instruction in the region was improving due to heavy investments by schools. It noted, however, that the increasing interest in business education was a 2-edged sword as it could stretch thin the number of qualified educators.
School MBA programs were measured based on four main criteria: ability to open new career opportunities; increase salaries; personal development and educational experience; and the potential to network
Asked to comment, AIM MBA program director Ricardo A. Lim said: "We wish we were higher [in the list], but you have to look at these surveys with a grain of salt.
"I think we are good company [though]... We feel sad but at the same time happy ... I don’t think we were even included last year," he added.
Mr. Lim said the AIM’s inability to secure a ranking was due more on the lack of alumni who participated in the survey than on the quality of the MBA program itself.
"A lot of these surveys are dependent on alumni that give ratings. What happened is that not enough of our alumni responded," he said.
Mr. Lim agreed, though, that the institute was focused more on the actual than the theoretical.
"That’s always been AIM’s mission. We have always a practitioners’ school rather than theoretical. The emphasis is on real world best practices and experience, both good and bad...
"We will stay with this approach. We would try to build on fundamental theory ... however we will continue with [our] practitioner-[centered approach]."
As for the 4 categories measured, Mr. Lim said the AIM probably received high marks when it came to educational experience.
"I think we can offer the best [when it comes to] educational experience ... for example, people who participate in our exchange programs to schools in Europe find that our quality here is much, much higher," he said.
"[But] As far as job placement is concerned we have some catching up to do...," he said.
The Economist invited 135 schools to take part in a two-stage survey involving both the school and its students and alumni. Of these, 25 were not included for reasons such as the lack of data, failure to respond and the absence of a full program.
The poll involved 19,817 students and graduates and was done in the spring of 2009 using web-based questionnaires. -- D. G. K. Carreon, BusinessWorld
Comments