Univ of Texas, Dallas B-School ranking by Reasearch Publications
This is a pretty good source to use for applicants because it shows how much attention the Profs put on staying at the edge of learning themselves. In reviewing a school, I would use this ranking to see if the school is continuing their research trend. It would probably be more telling to see back to back years of continued growth or sustained research priorities.
The information in the database is used to provide the "Top 100 rankings of business schools for the period 2001-2005" based on:
Total contributions of their faculty. Additionally one can also search the database by:
1) Any journal or combination of journals between the time period 1990 to date to get a ranking of schools. 2) School name to see a list of publications by a school for any combination of journals and time period between 1990 to date. 3) Author name to see a list of publications by an author for any combination of journals and time period between 1990 to date 4) Key phrase in article name to see a list of publications containing that phrase for any combination of journals and time period between 1990 to date
The biggest problem with this ranking is that it measures numbers of research publications and not numbers of research publications per Staff/Prof at each school. How can you compare Wharton's huge Prof staff edge to pump out huge numbers of papers compared to the much smaller staff that Darden, Stanford, Tuck or Stanford have? You simply can't. I would raise my eyebrow if they did. That would be amazing to see Wharton trumped by Stanford. I doubt this would ever happen anyway. Having said that, this ranking is not fair to the smaller schools. Heck.. this ranking is for the Academic world anyway.... not the us. Sort of an insiders trophy thing. Take it with a grain of salt.
Despite the drastically different numbers of Prof's at a large school like Wharton compared to Darden or an Oxford, we should still see the likes of Darden to have pretty good publication numbers. The fact that it didn't blew me away.
In fact, the big surprises for me were Darden, Oxford, Vanderbilt, and Tuck. Darden went from 71 to 79, Oxford was 98 in this ranking and the last one (There were only 100 schools on the rank), Vanderbilt stayed consistant at 76, and Tuck stayed consistant at 42. With Darden's massive leadership change these last few years, I can see why the numbers would drop. Since Tuck is doing so well in overall rankings, as far as I'm concerned, whatever their doing seems fine to me.
I say this because a school that forces their Profs to pump out more papers means that those Profs spend less time with students. Seriously though... there is no excusing Darden and Oxford. What the heck! Darden doesn't even produce 1/2 the research that Tuck does. That's strange. Yet... Darden is ranked so high.