Daniels School of Business Archives - Colorado-based Business and Economic Research

Businessweek Rankings – Top Areas of Study for CU Leeds School of Business Near Bottom of Rankings

July 10, 2013July 10, 2013 horvath

Colleges and universities are held accountable for efficiently providing educational services by state agencies and private companies, such as Businessweek and U.S. News and World Report. In late March, Bloomberg Businessweek produced their 2013 ratings for 124 undergraduate business programs (additional information can be found at www.businessweek.com). The table below shows the rankings by academic specialty for Notre Dame, the top ranked school, and the three Colorado undergraduate business programs that were rated.

The profile for each business school included its top study areas. These are listed below along with their ranking by specialty.

Notre Dame Mendoza

2 Accounting
NA Consulting
4 Finance
4 Management of Information Systems
65 Marketing

DU Daniels

22 Accounting
39 Finance
NA Hotel Administration
60 International Business
100 Marketing
NA Ethics, Social Responsibility, General Business

CU Leeds

NA Certificate programs (Real Estate, Entrepreneurship, and Sustainability)
119 Accounting
73 Finance
NA Human Resource Management
121 Marketing
114 Operations Management

CSU Business School

97 Accounting
84 Finance
113 Management of Information Systems
86 Marketing
42 Operations Management

As expected, Mendoza’s top areas of study were also highly ranked, signifying that it is an elite school. At the other end of the spectrum, the top areas of study for CU Leeds were ranked in the lower half of all schools, between 73rd and 121st. This is an indication that it is a third or fourth-tier school. DU Daniels and CSU fall somewhere in between.

These rankings show the depth and quality of the elite programs and point out deficiencies of the lower ranked schools. While these rankings point out strengths and weaknesses of American business schools, the ultimate measure is whether it meets the needs of the individual students.

DU is Top Business School, CSU is Best Buy, Leeds School Lags

June 28, 2013June 5, 2014 horvath

On March 20th, Bloomberg Businessweek published the 2013 rankings for 124 undergraduate business programs (www.businessweek.com). Much to the chagrin of alumni and staff at the Dyson, Olin, Wharton, and Carroll schools, the Mendoza School of Business topped the charts for the fourth consecutive year.

Once again the rankings for Colorado universities showed the DU Daniels School is the top ranked school, #68, followed by CSU, which moved up in the ranks to #89. Once again the University of Colorado Leeds School of Business brought up the rear. This past year CU Leeds dropped in the rankings from #92 to #101, out of 124 schools.

On the lighter side, the three Colorado business schools were ranked third (DU), fourth (CSU), and fifth (CU) as he best business schools for ski bunnies. The University of Utah and BYU claimed the top slots.

The table, below, compares a portion of the Businessweek ratings for the Daniels, Leeds, and CSU business schools. The data covers three basic areas: cost, diversity/SAT scores, and quality/rankings in key areas.

Cost – The cost to attend these schools for four years, assuming an annual increase of 5% each year, is:
• Notre Dame – Mendoza $241,000.
• University of Denver – Daniels $223,000
• CU – Leeds (out-of-state) – $209,000
• CU – Leeds (in-state) – $119,000
• CSU – (out of state) – $151,000
• CSU – (in state) – $83,000.
The cost for an out-of-state student to attend CU Leeds is slightly less than Mendoza or Daniels, yet the data suggests the quality of the degree is significantly less.

Diversity/SAT of Students – The Daniels School has a higher percentage of female and international students than its peers. It and Mendoza have a greater mix of minorities.

There is no difference between the CU Leeds and CSU average SAT scores and both are significantly lower than the Daniels and Mendoza schools. There are bright students at all schools, but the caliber of students at CU Leeds and CSU is lower.

Quality/Rankings in Key Areas – CU Leeds has positioned itself as an expensive program that focuses on serving a large number of students by having large class sizes, i.e. the primary goal is quantity. Of the 124 programs, CU Leeds is the 21st largest. Only 6 of the top 25 schools have more students than CU Leeds; these schools are ranked 9th, 13th, 20th, 21st, 22nd, and 25th, i.e. quantity is secondary to quality at the top schools. Revenue generation for the University of Colorado is a priority of the Leeds program.

Unfortunately, CU Leeds is ranked 107th in the student survey and 92nd in academic quality. It only received a grade of B in teaching quality. In 2007 a $38 million renovation of Koelbel Hall was completed and the staff was reorganized to better meet the needs of the students. These changes fell short, as yet CU Leeds was only rated B for facilities and services.

A final consideration is the average wages for graduating students. CU Leeds is slightly higher than its Colorado counterparts, but not enough to warrant the extra cost of tuition and the lower quality of education. Most likely the average wages for DU Daniels students is lower because of the number of students that study in hotel management, an industry with lower wages.

It is possible for students to obtain a quality business degree at any of Colorado’s colleges and universities. Rankings such as those produced by Businessweek are a valuable tool for identifying the strengths and weaknesses of various schools and determining which ones are the best match for each individual’s needs.

2012 Undergraduate Business School Rankings – DU is State’s Top Business School

May 16, 2012May 16, 2012 horvath

Higher education is big business. There are commercial training programs to help students navigate the K-12 system, pass the college entrance exams, and select the right college based on published rankings.

In late March, Bloomberg Businessweek produced the 2012 ratings for 124 undergraduate business programs (additional information can be found at www.businessweek.com). They use nine different measures of student satisfaction, post-graduation outcomes, and academic quality to determine the overall rankings.

The following rankings, from Bloomberg Businessweek, show scores for Notre Dame, the top ranked school, and the three largest Colorado undergraduate programs.The Daniels School is clearly the top ranked undergraduate business school in Colorado, yet it is rated near the bottom of the second quartile of schools. CU and CSU have similar ratings and are on the border of the fourth quartile.

The Leeds School is ranked in the bottom quartile in all of the core subject matters. (The state deserves better from its flagship institution).

CU and DU are in the top quartile for their sustainability and ethics classes respectively. If CU and DU are good enough to be top ranked in specialty programs, why aren’t their core classes stronger?

Of the three schools, CSU is clearly the best buy, in terms of cost and quality.

Over time there is usually minimal variance in the rankings, i.e. schools move up and down within a certain range. When looking at rankings over several years it is important to note that there has been a steady increase in the number of schools ranked.

In 2008 Notre Dame was ranked 3rd of 96 schools. It has obviously improved in the rankings, although it didn’t have far to move. It is now 1st of 124 colleges.

Of the Colorado schools, the Daniels School at the University of Denver has improved the most. It was ranked 67th of 96 (70%) in 2008 and is now 57th of 124 (46%) in 2012.

The business school at Colorado State University has stayed the same. It was ranked 73rd of 96 (76%) in 2008 and is now 94th of 124 (76%). It remains in the bottom quartile of schools for its overall ranking.

And the Leeds School has escaped the bottom quadrant (barely). In 2008 it was ranked 83rd of 96 (86%) and it is now 92nd of 124 (74%).

These rankings are much like the BCS rankings in football. They are meaningful to the schools in the upper echelon and provide prestige and bragging rights. As well, they help the schools attract quality students and donors to the program.

The schools below the elite level have deficiencies, based on the ranking criteria. Many college officials tend to respond by saying, “The rankings don’t really matter” or “They just don’t take into account the challenges we face.” or “The criteria don’t really capture what a great school we are.”

There are many variables for measuring the quality of a business education. Most importantly, students must find a program that meets their individual needs. Then they must demonstrate willingness and motivation to learn. When that happens the rankings are irrelevant.

Is Colorado Higher Education Effectively Delivering the Goods?

May 17, 2011May 31, 2014 horvath

Earlier this spring Dan Hawkins was replaced as CU football coach because his teams lost too many games and ticket sales began to wane. There was a perception that investments in the CU football program were not paying dividends. A change was made and public sentiment turned from outrage to support when CU leadership announced a replacement (Yes, athletics are an important part of higher education).

When are the masses that cried for the removal of Hawk going to show a similar sense of concern when investments in academic programs do not pay dividends? It only seems fair that college deans should endure the same scrutiny as Hawk when their faculty cannot conduct research or connect with content in the classroom. Shouldn’t deans be held responsible when they manage programs that are irrelevant or not cost effective?

Colorado has one of the most highly educated workforces in the country. An exceptional higher education system is essential if the state hopes to retain it.

Non-farm wage and salary data shows that there are about 66,000 employees at higher education institutions in metro and rural areas across the state (This number includes some student workers). More importantly, they are a source of training for the world’s current and future workforce. Higher education is an economic driver of the state for both reasons.

During the Lost Decade (2000 – 2010), the state’s higher education sector added 12,300 workers. Meanwhile, the private sector (non-farm wage and salary) declined by 50,100 workers.

In Boulder County, higher education employment increased by 2,700 workers. At the same time, private sector employment shed 10,600 workers.

Current wage data for the period 1999 to 2009 shows that average wages for higher education increased faster than the private sector. In 1999 average annual wages for higher education and the private sector were similar, $34,126 and $34,317 respectively. By 2009, there was a noticeable gap between the two groups, $49,610 for higher education and $46,855 for the private sector.

During this time, many businesses were forced to reduce their staffs, cut expenses, and creatively mange their businesses. In the process, the surviving companies became more efficient and productive. All the while, higher education lobbied hard for increased funding and tuition increases. As well, they embarked on the silent phase of a $1.5 billion fund raising campaign.

The question must be asked, “What dividends did Colorado receive from this increase in the number of higher education workers and their higher than average wage increases?”

Consider the value proposition of the Laboratory of Atmospheric and Space Physics (LASP) at CU-Boulder. LASP’s goal is to train the next generation of space scientists, engineers, and mission operators. LASP is the world’s only research institute to have sent instruments to all eight planets and Pluto.

Recently, they were awarded a $425 million grant to work on the MAVEN (The Mars Atmosphere and Volatile Evolution Mission). MAVEN will be launched in 2013 to learn more about the Mars climate and atmosphere. Both undergraduate and graduate students will be taught the basics in the classroom, integrated into all phases of MAVEN, and provided opportunities for on-the-job training that will be invaluable when they enter the job market.

Historically, LASP has had a strong value proposition for students, faculty, sponsors, and its private sector partners.

Also consider the value proposition of the Leeds School of Business at CU-Boulder.

About a year ago, the Denver Business Journal published the results of national rankings for 111 business schools. The DBJ listed rankings for CU, CSU, and DU.

The Leeds School can point with pride to their ranking in sustainability:
• Sustainability: CU/Leeds, 19th; CSU, 36th; DU/Daniels, 40th

The Leeds ranking in the core areas of a business education make Dan Hawkins look like an All-Star:
• Accounting: DU/Daniels, 27th; CSU, 74th; CU/Leeds, 78th.
• Ethics: DU/Daniels, 3rd; CSU, 85th; CU/Leeds, 91st.
• Financial management: DU/Daniels, 50th; CSU, 84th; CU/Leeds, 89th.
• Strategy: DU/Daniels, 55th; CSU, 82nd; CU/Leeds, 105th.
• Operations management: CSU, 45th; DU/Daniels, 57th; CU/Leeds, 109th.
• Marketing: DU/Daniels, 31st; CSU, 73rd; CU/Leeds, 111th.

If the perception exists that Leeds students are not taught the basics, does it really matter if CU/Leeds has a solid sustainability program?

A more recent ranking of MBA programs shows that Leeds provides a solid MBA experience. However, a look at the average GMAT scores suggests that a Leeds MBA falls in the third or fourth-tier.

Why haven’t previous deans and associate deans who oversaw the MBA program been held responsible for not seeking “flagship status” for a Leeds MBA.

Let’s look at the cost of producing these results for Leeds undergraduates and graduates. The faculty pecking order ranges from senior instructor to full professor (tenured), with annual salaries varying from $100,000ish to $300,000+. The directors of the various centers receive salaries in this same range. Many of the higher paid professors have minimal “real-world” experience and often teach fewer students than the lower paid instructors. The leader of the group is the dean, with at salary of $400,000+ per year.

LASP can send a satellite to Mars and incorporate students in the process and the Leeds School can claim that their marketing program is ranked 111th out of 111. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that there is a difference in programs and the accountability of their leaders.

Will the Leeds dean be held accountable for improving the performance of the business school in exchange for the $1+ million he will receive for his brief layover in Boulder? (The life expectancy of a Leeds dean is about 2.5 years). What steps is he going to take to ensure that a Leeds education includes a strong foundation in the basics (marketing, accounting, strategy, operations, and ethics). What is going to be done to make the Leeds School as meaningful and relevant as LASP?

While these two examples focus on CU-Boulder, this isn’t just about them. Every institution of higher education has a number of programs and value propositions. Some are like LASP, some are like Leeds, and others are in between.

Every dean and faculty member at these institutions must be held accountable for efficiently and effectively training our country’s current future workforce.

During the Lost Decade, higher education employment increased and workers received greater wage increases than the private sector. It is now up to higher education to demonstrate and justify the dividends that have been generated because of that investment. If that dividend cannot be confirmed, then higher education has an obligation to reduce employment, eliminate programs, and seek the efficiencies that were gained by the private sector in the last two recessions.

Just as Hawk was held accountable for his team’s performance, stakeholders (state policy makers, parents, business leaders, alumni, and students) must hold higher education leaders accountable for the performance of their system. Colorado deserves a higher education system that pays greater dividends.

Large advertisement at Denver International Airport for CSU’s business school.