FT Executive Education Rankings 2020: methodology and key
This is the twenty second version of the Financial Situations rankings of the world’s foremost providers of customised and open up-enrolment executive education and learning programmes.
The customised rating capabilities the major 85 small business educational institutions — these are programs customized to the teaching needs of the organisations that commission them. The second rating includes the major 75 educational institutions for open up-enrolment programmes — programs on specific subjects, these as leadership, that are directed in the direction of specialists regardless of their employer. A third, merged rating lists the major fifty educational institutions for executive education and learning, calculated from the customised and open up tables.
Schools taking section need to be internationally accredited by possibly Equis or AACSB and have gained revenues of at the very least $2m in 2019 from possibly their customised or open up-enrolment non-degree programmes. This year, a total of 107 educational institutions took section in possibly or both equally rankings.
The rating of customised program providers is compiled working with details from the small business educational institutions and their corporate purchasers in 2019. Each individual college need to nominate a minimum amount of 20 purchasers. At the very least five of them need to comprehensive the FT study for a college to be qualified for the last rating.
The FT study was concluded by 1,a hundred thirty five small business college purchasers this 12 months — a response price of fifty six per cent. Each individual rated their programme on a ten-position scale in accordance to a assortment of indicators. Their solutions instantly notify the initial ten of the ranking’s standards, from program design to observe-up and long term use, which account for a merged 80 per cent of the ranking’s body weight.
Client responses are weighted in accordance to programme form. Consumers pick out a person of 3 selections to categorise their programme: strategic (shipped to major administration and intended to affect a company’s direction) standard (shipped to administration on operational facets of a firm) or practical (relevant to a specific operate, these as internet marketing). Strategic programmes have the premier weighting and as a result the best impression on the rating.
Responses are also weighted in accordance to the seniority of the unique dependable for specifying the program, the size of the client organisation and the range of educational institutions with which that client has commissioned customised programs in the earlier 3 several years.
The last five standards are calculated from information and facts provided by educational institutions on worldwide purchasers, abroad programmes, development, husband or wife educational institutions and school diversity.
The open up-enrolment rating is compiled working with details from program providers and individuals who concluded their nominated administration programmes in 2019. Schools submit one or two standard programs of at the very least 3 days in length and a person or two state-of-the-art programs of at the very least five days. At least 20 per cent of these programmes’ members need to comprehensive the FT study, with a minimum amount of 20 concluded surveys, for a college to be regarded as in the last rating.
A total of 5,480 members answered this year’s open up programme study — a response price of 37 per cent — rating factors of their program on a ten-position scale. Responses by state-of-the-art and standard-level members are merged to compute the initial ten rating standards.
These standards, which involve the quality of the members, of the training and the relevance of the capabilities they acquired, notify 80 per cent of the rating. College details are used to compute the remaining standards on feminine and worldwide members, development, worldwide site and husband or wife educational institutions.
For both equally rankings, information and facts collected in the previous two several years is used, the place available, to compute standards educated by client and participant responses. If a college has participated for the earlier 3 several years, the weighting is forty:33:27, with 2020 details counting for forty per cent. If two several years of information and facts is available, the weighting is fifty five:45, with 2020 details accounting for fifty five per cent.
The weightings accorded to the initial nine and ten standards in the customised and open up rankings, respectively, are established by the level of great importance purchasers and members connect to just about every in their surveys for the 2020 rating. Weightings for these standards as a result vary slightly from 12 months to 12 months.
Schools that feature in both equally rankings are qualified for the merged total rating. The major fifty educational institutions are calculated in accordance to an equal weighting of the total scores obtained in both equally rankings, instead than an ordinary of rating positions.
Judith Pizer of Pizer-MacMillan acted as the FT’s databases guide
Essential: Customised-enrolment programme
(weights for rating standards are demonstrated in brackets as a percentage of the total rating)
The initial ten standards, up to and including “Future use”, are centered on details from the corporations that commissioned executive programs.
The future five are centered on details described by small business educational institutions. Schools are rated for just about every of these standards. The last classification, “Total responses‡”, is for information and facts only and does not notify the rating.
Figures in brackets display the body weight just about every criterion contributes to the total rating. The weighting accorded to the initial nine standards, from preparation to worth for funds, accounts for 80 per cent of the total ranking’s body weight. It is established by the level of great importance that purchasers connect to just about every.
Planning (8.3): level of interaction between client and college, the extent to which clients’ ideas were being integrated into the programme, and the effectiveness of the college in integrating its hottest investigation.
Programme design (8.4): flexibility of the program and the willingness of educational institutions to complement their school with exterior experts.
Instructing solutions and materials (7.nine): extent to which training solutions and materials were being modern day and appropriate, and involved a suited blend of tutorial rigour and functional relevance.
Faculty (8.4): high quality of training and the extent to which training team labored collectively to current a coherent programme.
New capabilities and understanding (8.3): relevance of capabilities acquired to the office, the relieve with which they were being applied, and the extent to which the course encouraged new approaches of imagining.
Comply with-up (7.3): extent and effectiveness of observe-up made available immediately after the program members returned to their workplaces.
Aims obtained (8.4): extent to which tutorial and small business expectations were being achieved, and the high quality of opinions from unique members to program commissioners.
Services (7.4): rating of the understanding environment’s high quality and convenience, and of supporting sources and facilities.
Worth for funds (7.7): clients’ rating of the programme’s design, training and materials in conditions of worth for funds.
Upcoming use (8.): probability that purchasers would reuse the same college for other customised programmes in the long term, and whether they would recommission the same programme.
Internation
al purchasers (5.): centered on the percentage of purchasers with headquarters outside the house the small business school’s base country and region.
Overseas programmes (two.): worldwide get to of the school’s customised programme training.
Growth (5.): centered on the total development in revenues from customised programmes as very well as the development in revenues from repeat small business.
Husband or wife educational institutions (3.): quantity and high quality of programmes created or taught in conjunction with other Equis or Association to Progress Collegiate Schools of Organization (AACSB) accredited small business educational institutions.
Faculty diversity (5.): diversity of college school in accordance to citizenship and gender.
Whole responses: range of unique surveys concluded by the school’s purchasers. Figures in brackets point out the range of several years of study details counted in the direction of the rating.
Essential: Open up-enrolment programme
(weights for rating standards are demonstrated in brackets as a percentage of the total rating)
The initial ten standards are centered on details from programme members the future six are centered on details submitted by the small business educational institutions. Ranks are demonstrated for just about every of these standards, apart from “Female participants”, which displays the percentage. Figures in brackets display the body weight just about every criterion contributes to the total rating. The weighting accorded to the initial ten standards, from preparation to facilities, accounts for 80 per cent of the total ranking’s body weight. It is established by the level of great importance that members attach to just about every.
Planning (7.7): provision of state-of-the-art information and facts on programme articles, and the participant choice process.
Course design (8.6): flexibility of the program and appropriateness of course size, construction and design.
Instructing solutions and materials (8.3): extent to which training solutions and materials were being modern day and appropriate, and involved a suited blend of tutorial rigour and functional relevance.
Faculty (8.7): high quality of the training and the extent to which training team labored collectively to current a coherent programme.
Quality of members (7.nine): extent to which other members were being of the appropriate managerial and tutorial standard, the worldwide diversity of members and the high quality of interaction among peers.
New capabilities and understanding (8.7): relevance of capabilities acquired to the office, the relieve with which they were being applied, and the extent to which the program encouraged new approaches of imagining.
Comply with-up (7.3): level of observe-up made available immediately after members returned to their workplaces, and networking prospects with fellow members.
Aims obtained (8.4): extent to which personal and expert expectations were being achieved, and the probability that members would propose the programme.
Food stuff and accommodation (6.8): rating of the high quality of food items and accommodation.
Services (7.6): rating of the understanding environment’s high quality and convenience, and of supporting sources and facilities.
Feminine members (two.): percentage of feminine program members.
International members (3.): centered on the percentage of members from outside the house the small business school’s base country and region.
International site (two.): extent to which programmes are operate outside the house the school’s base country and region.
Growth (5.): centered on the total development in revenues from open up programmes as very well as the development in revenues from repeat small business.
Husband or wife educational institutions (3.): quantity and high quality of programmes taught in conjunction with other Equis or AACSB accredited small business educational institutions.
Faculty diversity (5.): diversity of college school in accordance to citizenship and gender.
