<p>Sakky, I disagree with both BW and USNWR some of the times. Both aim to sell magazines above all else, so they sometimes like to stir things up. I said it many times before, I will say it again, taken together and historically, you get a better, more reliable rating. BW that you seem tho say is inconsistant has, histocially speaking, ranked Kellogg and Wharton at #1, Harvard at #3, Chicago at #4, Michigan at #5, Stanford at #6, Columbia at #7, MIT at #8, Dartmouth at #9 and Duke at #10. USNWR has ranked Harvard and Stanford #1, MIT #3, Wharton #4, Kellogg #5, Columbia #6, Columbia #7, Dartmouth #8, Michigan #9 and Duke #10. Personally, I hardly see a difference. One cannot even make an arguement for how #1 is better than #10 and since both publications have the exact same top 10, I would say they are pretty even. I don’t know what’s wrong with having KEllogg and Wharton at #1 rather than Harvard and Stanford. </p>
<p>The reason I like BW better is because it really tells you what corporate America thinks. Much more so that the USNWR. Stanford has some talented students, as talented as Harvard, Wharton and Kellogg students. But its faculty is roughly 2-3 times smaller than the latter 3. With the exception of Technology, Stanford really isn’t amazing at any Business field. Kellogg rules in Marketing and General Management/Strategy. Wharton rules in Finance. Harvard rules in General Management. When you ask the top recruiters to name you their top hunting grounds, most of the time, you will here Harvard, Kellogg and Wharton.</p>