hngu178

I do not doubt it, for sure. Many persons who have strong research experience will make decision by specific advisors not by school reputation

100% agree, very good reasoning. Very few stellar persons can get have choices between Harvard, MIT, Berkerley vs USC, UCLA, UWSL. In theory, they can. But in practice, the probability of getting admission for both schools is extremely small or nearly zero. One applicant can has admission from MIT, but still can easy be rejected by lower rank school. The application and admission process is not as straight forward as ranking. The number of applicants per year increases exponentially, the schools do not need to chase to some students, there are more than stellar applicants than the number of slots they can admit per year. This fact is true for this year, even for A- and B group. Do not count on absolute ranking to apply, spreading application to B group or even C group can increase the chance of admission.

Not crazy since many people still love its reputation 100% agree, depends on track Modeling or Strategy or CB and advisor. Many people apply to MKT for school reputation only, they do not completely how important faculty profile research is! 100% agree. The schools has produced many influential scholars and foundation fathers for MKT field, I can call the names of these persons for sure!

duplicate

For PhD or MBA? For PhD: yours looks nearly the same mine, not significantly different, excerpt for Georgia, Kentucky, and Cincinnati. Georgetown University (The McDonough School of Business) Boston College (Carroll School of Management) do not have PhD Marketing

Never. A lot of private info

Try to do thing yourself, you will know how to do. I did not just look at Chief, these are just examples . I have data from schools, I even know salary of all Prof in publics schools and many private schools.You will see that salary to professors closely corresponds to productivity not by placement or Name of school. I keep track data every year. You say cannot measure rigor but I did. Not difficult for statistician although not perfect. I am here, tried to help people in the forum that I benefit from 7 years. People are free to use my ranking, and adjust based their own criteria. You don’t like my ranking, this is not my business to explain and argue with you!

I remember nearly all broad name of members of top 4 journal and where they had PhD. Data I collect from websites and admission Committees. Ranking does not matter that much, your right: School Name cannot help people entirely their life, then personal ability is the most important factor. 60 percent cannot be Outliers in AMA ranking. You may not be updated with AMA. I attended AMA in New Orleans this Feb, met people and Chief there. The trend of city Business school in Big cities going up is here. Discussed with Profs. You are trying to refute the statistical evidence by your own perception. I know Rochester , 6 young Prof very few pubs, so fewer advantages for student to come there than USC in LA. More opportunities more competitive obviously fact . Rigor of curriculum is only 30%. Then It Counts little . Measurement Is simple if PhD Courses in hard sciences: categorical variables Low Medium High. It is not perfect but ok for me.

duplicate

@whatever123 very fun to know, but words of mouth are hard to confirm, maybe exaggerated

Look here please : PhD in Marketing | Georgia Tech https://www.ama.org/academics/Documents/2017-Who-Went-Where.pdf You may not understand my points because you look at placement for Strategy( Strategic Management not MTK Strategy) According to AMA, Marketing is an integrated and broad field that includes: 1)Quantitative modeling: Analytical(Statistical Modeling from real world data to make inference) and Empirical(Mathematics and Econometrics Modeling) 20% 2)Marketing strategy: focus on the application of marketing theories and its effect on firms and consumers. 30% 3) Consumer Behavior: Pyschology and Sociology, neuroscience, behavioral science 45% 4) Other tracks: Logistics, advertising, ethics, innovation, sales, sales management, and marketing & entrepreneurship 5% What you try to explain is just 20% of the persons in Marketing which follow Microeconomics and Econometric Modeling. Fun fact: My wife is Economist (BA, and PhD), I am also PhD student in Economics. A half of my friends is Economists. We agree that although Microeconomics training is good for PhD in Marketing, but not sufficient or totally required in all tracks. We need more than Economics to be productive researcher. Many Economists do not know or do not care about Marketing sub-fields such as CB, sales, innovation. Therefore, I do not want to include ECON ranking to the my ranking, it will add more bias. For us, top 30 microeconomics and econometric courseworks are good enough for Marketing because they are nearly the same format and content. The important thing is how well students perform in the class and how well they use the knowledge for their research. I know many people who have GPA 4.0 in ECON but still get stuck on research. My professors now nearly did not have ECON training, but he is now one of top 10 quantitative researchers in MKT in term of productivity and contribution to the field ( Ranked by AMA) and editor also. More importantly, the placement for PhD program you see is just initial placement, not tenure placement. The ranking for MKT placement is already on urch, I do not repeat the same thing. 4 year ago, I did the same things you did, looking for the initial placement posted by all top 100 in MKT. Later, I see that this way may not work well. Initial placement is good, but many people are unable to hold their position or promote to tenure-track or Associate Prof, and have to go to lower rank schools because they do not have good pubs on Top A journal. Some professors, I sent you a link are just some examples for many of persons who work hard, have creative mind in research, so they can hold tenure- position, the best reward. Chief Editor is the more than the best In MKT, we should know the persons following: Chief editor Journal of Marketing Research: PhD from Cincinnati, initial placement Washsington State, later Pen State, now at North Carolina. Chief editor Journal of Marketing: PhD Texas Austin, next person will be Duke female Prof. 4 years ago is the prof from Emory who has PhD from Pittsburgh Chief editor of Marketing Science: Yale prof, but PhD from Cornell Chief editor of Consumer Research: PhD Texas Austin. If you look at the ranking of AMA: researcher by productivity. Nearly 60% comes from lower rank A, A-, or B+ school. Looking at school ranking without thoroughly studying the faculty research profile is useless work. I appreciate young assistant prof by initial placement, but I much more appreciate and respect the persons who contribute very much on MKT field. They are not outliers, they are hard working and have creative mind. Many people used term "Outlier" to describe The trend that they cannot explain why. In statistics, if too many Outliers exist, we need to reconsider our assumption, conceptual framework and model. The Outliers can be very influential points for a hidden trend that you have not figured out at first!!! Initial Placement may last for a few years, but the Top A publications and tenure professors will last forever!

thank you for understanding my ideas. Merrit based hiring system still works here to improve productivity. But we accept that Biased process exists!

Remove

I agree with you

Your statement could be true for Quant, but not true for CB. Columbia has professors from Baruch and UCLA: Keith Todd Wilcox | Columbia Business School Directory My ranking is for 3 tracks not only for Quant. USC has placement at MIT, Chicago, Michigan even in finance, more heavily quantitative:PhD Program | USC Marshall even for Quant Marketing, Harvard has Prof from Pittsburgh Rohit Deshpande - Faculty & Research - Harvard Business School. Stanford has 2 Prof from Duke, 2 from Ohio state in CB track. Ranking in Economics does not matter that much in Business School.

[TABLE=width: 500] [TR] [TD]A+[/TD] [TD]A[/TD] [TD]A-[/TD] [TD]B+[/TD] [TD]B[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD][TABLE=width: 285] [TR] [TD]Columbia University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] Cornell University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] Duke University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of California at Berkeley[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Chicago[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Pennsylvania[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Carnegie Mellon University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Harvard University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Massachusetts Institute of Technology[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]New York University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Yale University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Stanford University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]University of California at Los Angeles[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]University of Southern California[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Washington University at St. Louis[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [TABLE=width: 342] [TR] [TD][/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [TD][TABLE=width: 342] [TR] [TD]Ohio State University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] Pennsylvania State University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Pittsburgh[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Texas at Austin[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Emory University (Quant only)[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Indiana University at Bloomington[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Texas A&M University at College Station[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]University of British Columbia[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]University of Colorado at Boulder[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]University of Florida[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]University of Rochester (Quant only)[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]University of Maryland at College Park[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]University of Michigan at Ann Arbor[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]University of Minnesota at Twin Cities[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]University of Toronto[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]University of Wisconsin at Madison University of Washington[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [TD][TABLE=width: 324] [TR] [TD]Boston College[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Baruch College[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] Florida State University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] Michigan State University(Quant only)[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] Purdue University(Quant only)[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Alberta[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Arizona[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Connecticut[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Iowa[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Miami[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Arizona State University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Missouri at Columbia[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Oregon[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of South Carolina at Columbia[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] Virginia Tech[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Georgia Institute of Technology[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Georgia State University(Quant only)[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]University of California at Irvine[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]University of California at San Diego[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]University of Houston[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]University of Texas at Dallas(Quant only)[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Western Ontario University[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [TD][TABLE=width: 306] [TR] [TD] McGill University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] Temple University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Arkansas[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Calgary[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of California at Riverside[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Central Florida[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Cincinnati[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Georgia[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Kentucky[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]University of Kansas[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Nebraska at Lincoln[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Utah[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Rutgers University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Syracuse University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]University of Texas at San Antonio[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] York University SUNY at Buffalo University of Tennnesse[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [TD][TABLE=width: 326] [TR] [TD] Colorado State University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] Drexel University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] Florida International University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] Iowa State University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] Oklahoma State University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] Simon Fraser University[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Alabama at Tuscaloosa[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Illinois at Chicago[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Louisville[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Mississippi[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Oklahoma[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of South Florida[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Texas at Arlington[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Louisiana State University[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] PhD in Marketing | Georgia Tech Source: Georgia Tech University- Marketing Department My purpose of ranking is not to compare which one is better than others. The ranking is good for later applicants who want to increase the chance of admission by sending applications from group A to B. The competitiveness is equally measured by GMAT, GPA, undergrad university. 70% The rigor of curriculum is measured by level of Quantitative(Econ, Math) and Psychology, Sociology. 30% I tried to take into account the strength of 3 track in Marketing: Strategy, Modelling, and Consumer Behavior which varies by schools. Therefore, Between the neighbor group like A+, A or A- etc, there are overlapping elements like Toronto may be in A+ for Quant and Strategy, but can be A for consumer. The same for Duke, CMU, Michigan... Some programs are very picky and admit only one student per year. Grouping is not 100% correctly, some overlapping schools between groups exists. My Ranking criteria are based on the difficulty on admission ( competitiveness) and the rigor of curriculum. Quant only is the program that does not have Consumer Behavior track. If the schools are in the same group, they are nearly equal in term of reputation, admission rate, rigor of curriculum, and placement. The schools in the A+ group are more likely to hire the students from other schools within group, sometimes hire from group A, hardly or never from group A- or B and so on. Group A hires from A+, within A, sometime A- , hardly B+( depend on student ability and advisor reputation) If the programs are within the same group, it very hard to say which one is better than other. The choices of school within group are often based on research interest, adviser reputation. Thus, the variance within group is small, but variance between groups is higher. In group A+ and A: Degree Requirement for Quant-Track: Series of graduate Micreconomics and Econometrics in ECON dept, Marketing Seminars, 3-6 courses in Statistics Dept. Therefore, the schools tend to admit the students who have strong quantitative background similar to students in ECON Dept in the same school. The qualifying exam is very rigorous. Degree Requirement for CB-Track: Series of Psychology courses or Sociology, Marketing Seminars, 3-6 courses in Statistics Dept. In group A- and below: Degree Requirement is less rigorous: Marketing seminars, ECON and Statistics are elective. Some exceptional programs such as Houston, Texas Dallas, Georgia State, Temple, South Carolina are on the up trend of research activities, they have many influential professors in Marketing field. Therefore, some years, we can see the placement on A school, but again it depends much on student performance in the program and adviser reputation. If you have many offers, you can use following criteria to make a wise decision: 1.Look at the curriculum of each program. 2.Know the content of course work, and who will teach the class. 3.Who will be the mentor for your research, the most important thing. 4. Know the research activity of professors in the program. 5. Location 6. Stipend 7. Marketing research Center and research facillity 8. Opinion from current students. 9. Placement records 10. Your plan after graduation: teaching or research schools, or balanced ones 11. Assistantship duties: too many teaching duties may affect academic performance Please feel free to remind me programs that are not in the ranking, so that I can add up, OR you can consider the universities in the list Phd Programs in Marketing To be continued...

I think you already have enough information to decide yourself. You know your strength ,weakness and your willingness to learn more. Good of fit with prof interest is only initial feeling, you may not know until you actually work with them. In my opinion, if University A, B, C are equal for you, I just encourage you to go with the most productive professors on Top A journal, who have diverse background research. You will learn a lot of thing from them and your graduation will become smooth. "Staying away from prof that have few good pubs, less research experience, and do not assume you can do research yourself without a good advisor." my prof recommended. This way can reduce the risk of getting into the wrong place. I guess Uni C is Utah!

That is true, combing stat and opinion from the current PhD students in the dept is better way. Considering the teaching duties on assistantship also. If the requirement is too heavy, it may affect the academic performance during the program.

You have good point here: if you use UTD by 4 journal, and sort by 2007-2018, all of these are Premier Jounal in Marketing (According to AMA) Journal of Marketing Journal of Marketing Research Journal of Consumer Research Marketing Science Iowa has :17 pubs, score factor: 6.41 Baruch: 27 pubs, score factor: 13.28 (Statistically different) However, Try to be fair, CB track usually have pub on Journal of Consumer Research, and journal of consumer psychology. But even I did so, Baruch is still better than Iowa when controlling for the number of faculty: Iowa 19, Baruch around 20 not much different. You can track the placement of schools by Who When Where. Some people say it is biased, but I think it quite accurate when using Marketing PhD jobs.org at the same time

Yes, I agree with you. I did so!

Yes, I strongly agree with you here: You may want to tell people if they need the name of the profs. I know you have a lot of information, I am just curious how you know that

Yes, I strongly agree with you here: You may want to tell people if they needed the name of the profs. I know you have a lot of information, I am just curious how you know that

I guess pqhai already felt in love in Texas A&M. You just have asked people's opinion to confirm your choice. But remember when a school want to have you in, it will give you future benefit that you will not know for sure. Especially, if they bring an assistant professor in, there is little advantage, but if this is a senior associate or full professor, this will be big plus.

Thanks XanthusARES, but how do you know that profs from Columbia and NYU will not help? I see at least 5 students have co-chair from big brand name, and then go to higher ranked school. This year, for example, one from National School Singapore, have co-chair from Dr. Rajdeep Grewal, Editor of Maketing Research, North Carolina Chapel Hill, have placement on Tilburg, Netherland (top 20 in the world in term of reasearch productivity). I agree that there is no guarantee here for mentor, but there is guarantee for taking the courses work at the different universities in the same city.

Hi Puffy, I hope You have not made decision yet . Iam statistician, so I want to make the decision based on data and probability. I appreciate the opinion from three persons above. However, how do you know Iowa is the better program than Baruch. What is the metric here to compare, or just the brand name Iowa is more famous than Baruch? It is very risky to advice someone to choose a program by hearing from student X, Y, Z, words of mouth is hard to be valid and confirmed. In order to evaluate a program, you need to : 1.Look at the curriculum of each program. 2.Know the content of course work, and who will teach the class. 3.Who will be the mentor for your research, the most important thing. 4. Know the research activity of professors in the program Because I also applied to Iowa and intended to apply to Baruch, I invested a lot of time doing the things above. I can say in the past ten years, the research activities in Iowa was much lower than Baruch in term of productivity and quality. You can see the trend if you look at the faculty CV and use UTD ranking over different periods. Baruch now is very strong. For Curriculum, Iowa did not post on its website, Baruch does. I see that the Baruch's one is standard for top 50: Marketing seminars and supporting fields including electives on Psychology, statistics, Economics. But I think Iowa's will be the same format. The person who will teach coursework are usually assistant and young associate profs. If taught by strong research experienced ones, it would be a big plus. For mentor, I can tell you some prominent persons in Baruch that you want to seek for: I copied and pasted from website, I am assuming you are in CB track: Dr. Block is a current Associate Editor for the Journal of Consumer Research and the Journal of Public Policy & Marketing. Nermin Eyuboglu, one of her articles was nominated for the prestigious Harold H. Maynard Award for Significant Contribution to Marketing Theory and Thought in 2007 In the worst case, If you dont want to work with the prof, I see many other ones graduated from Newyork U and Columbia. Then they will have strong connection to the Schools, it is not hard for you to find a co-chair adviser there.But, I don't see any advantages from Iowa. The professors from others schools are willing to help, if you take their courses, make them impressed, and if you are the potential person for them to invest their time and effort in. This factor depends on you. Combining all factors above, I see that Baruch is much safer choice. Iowa research activities is on down trend because of lacking faculty. You can see that trend now: The small local schools such as Houston, Baruch, Temple, Georgia State U, Miami , Texas Dallas, Texas San Antonio, Cincinnati are investing strongly on Business School And they compete with big brand, and flag ship state University now. The placements from the small local school are as good as Flagship if the persons are qualified. Again, the placement is much dependent on student qualification and the mentors excerpt for top 20 like Harvard, Chicago, Stanford. But In my opinion, the placement of the Luxury Brand Name Universities is strong because of selection bias at the entry: The school can select excellent students at the beginning and then better placement latter. I still see many students from top 20 went for teaching schools if they have no publication or good dissertation and Iowa, too Location is also important, since many research papers in business came from the industrial problems and funded by firms. Newyork is ideal place for Marketing research. Finally, in my opinion, Baruch is the safer and better choice, Iowa is a backup and risky one because Iowa is the flagship that did well on 20 or 30 year ago not recently. the world is changing.