You are here

Business Masters Content Methodology
Learn more about the methods used to compile the

QS World University Content: Business Masters Content 2018.

New for the 2018 cycle of QS rankings, the QS World University Content: Business Masters Content is the first ranking dedicated to business masters programs.

Comprised of the QS Masters in Finance Content 2018, the QS Masters in Management Content 2018 and the QS Masters in Business Analytics Content 2018, these rankings use data collected in the QS Global Employer Survey, the QS Global Academic Survey and a survey completed by the business schools themselves. For the purpose of these rankings QS did not ask schools to survey their alumni. Instead, schools provided career progression information on their alumni using standards.

In each of these three rankings, universities and schools were assessed by measuring five different metrics, with slight differences in weighting between each ranking. Those metrics are:

  1. Employability
  2. Alumni Outcomes
  3. Value for Money
  4. Thought Leadership
  5. Class & Faculty Diversity

More information on these metrics, and how the weightings differed between rankings can be found below.


Between 2012 – 2017, we gathered over 158,000 responses to our Global Employer Survey, regarding which schools were considered the best by employers. This large pool of information gained from companies across all sectors and industries has allowed us to put a significant weighting on employability in these rankings. Recent employers to take part in the survey include Bank of America, Uber, Facebook and Google. Based on MBACSEA standards this indicator includes a three-month, post-graduation employment rate weighting.
Weighting: 35% (Management), 30% (Finance, Business Analytics)

Alumni Outcomes

We looked at over 150 regional and global lists such as the FT Global 500, the Forbes 2000 etc., to form the basis of our Alumni Outcomes Index. This is used to track over 49,000 executives, board members and CEOs of the largest companies in the world[PC1] , and the business school programs with which they are associated.
Weighting: 20% (Finance, Business Analytics), 15% (Management)

Value for Money

We used a number of data points to determine return on investment, which it can often be one of the hardest metrics to accurately predict, with many permutations and possibilities. We looked at a 10-year return on investment, mapping average post-masters salaries against average regional salaries for non-masters graduates, taking into account forgone salary as well as tuition and cost of living (using Mercer statistics). Salary increases are factored into both non-masters and masters salary, with the latter increasing at a higher rate, as you would expect. We also take into account the percentage of graduates accepting  employment within three months of finishing their studies.

We feel 10 years gives a more representative and meaningful return on investment compared with some rankings that use a five-year approach. No loans or scholarships were included in this methodology. We recognize no ROI calculation is perfect but believe we have come up with the best approximate ROI calculation with the data available.
Weighting: 20%

Thought Leadership

We take a number of things into consideration when determining thought leadership. First, we look at 172,107 responses from academics from 60 countries across the globe. The percentage of faculty with a doctoral degree is also taken into account, as is research impact. As per the QS World University Content by Subject methodology we measure citations per paper, rather than citations per faculty member.
Weighting: 20%

Class & Faculty Diversity

To give a reflection of diversity within a program we look at a combination of both female students and faculty within a program (those with a 50% female ratio scoring highest). In addition we also take into account the percentage of international students on the program and international faculty at the business school as a whole.
Weighting: 10%

For more information on the methodology, .

QS Staff Writer's profile image
Written by QS Staff Writer

Related categories:

Want to leave a comment?

Please login or register to post
comment above our articles


This is not a great methodology. These metrics say almost nothing about the quality of business analytics programs.

1. Your academic and employer reputation survey responses are associated with the reputation of the University and not with the analytics program. You additionally chose to aggregate responses from the past 5 years. when most of these programs didn’t exist 5 years ago.

2. Your alumni outcomes are based on business school programs when not all of these Analytics programs are even associated with their institution’s business school.

3.Your “Value for Money” calculation uses a 10-year return on investment. As I already stated, the vast majority of these programs didn’t exist 10 years ago. For example your top program - MIT’s Masters in Business Analytics was founded in 2017.

How about rank for Master of Commerce Business Analityc UNSW?