warwick not even on the table - how can pete consider them ?http://rankings.ft.com/businessschoolrankings/masters-in-management

OMG, someone might actually make a decision for themselves, without relying on a league table!!!

lol - but seriously how will he be taken seriously with a non-league school - all in all a good school - and world renowned - but still not on the ft table!...

You muppet read the FT's accompanying methodology document. They only looks at general Masters for "non-relevant degree holders without work experience". Even then it only researches a limited range of courses (hoping to undertake a more comprehensive review in future years). Specialist Masters are not considered.IMHO the exercise was a waste of time since generalist, non-experience Masters in Management are the least attractive to employers, especially these days. The FT just rushed it out at the last minute to keep up with the other rankers.

I am doing an M.Sc. at one of the top three schools in that FT Ranking. Actually, the generalist position gives me the oppportunity to start my career in different industries. As far as I am concerned, after working at the top IB and a top tier PE, I can happily say that they did care about the ranking and even in bad times, I am still doing well in securing job offers.

yes, I can echo that. I am now employed at a top tier strategy consultancy, and having graduated from the top 3 in that ranking did help.