????2010年11月11日，南方衛(wèi)理公會(huì)大學(xué)(Southern Methodist University)考克斯商學(xué)院(Cox School of Business)的幾位院長(zhǎng)焦急不安地等待著,?！渡虡I(yè)周刊》(BusinessWeek)編輯正在網(wǎng)上發(fā)布兩年一度的最佳全日制MBA排行榜?，F(xiàn)場(chǎng)發(fā)布會(huì)采用由低到高的次序，從當(dāng)年排名最低的學(xué)校開始,，一直至排名最高的院校,。

????圍攏在電腦旁的管理層看到,，第18名（考克斯商學(xué)院2008年的排名）是紐約大學(xué)(New York University)斯特恩商學(xué)院(Stern School of Business)。接下來又有更多院校的排名被公布,，但仍然沒有考克斯商學(xué)院。達(dá)特茅斯塔克商學(xué)院(Tuck School of Business)位列第14名,，隨后是康奈爾大學(xué)(Cornell University)約翰遜學(xué)院(Johnson School)。

????考克斯商學(xué)院去哪兒了,？是不是沖進(jìn)前10強(qiáng)了,？最終,，這所學(xué)院的位次定格在了第12名，這是該校有史以來在《商業(yè)周刊》排行榜的最高排名,。實(shí)際上,，這也是該校在五大最具影響力商學(xué)院排行榜中獲得的最高名次。簡(jiǎn)短地慶賀了一番之后,，考克斯商學(xué)院的工作人員立即起草新聞稿,，迫不及待地向外界宣揚(yáng)該校排名驟升6位的壯舉,。

????然而，《商業(yè)周刊》對(duì)這份排行榜不太滿意,，甚至略顯尷尬,。“每個(gè)人都在說它沒有通過氣味測(cè)試,，”2011年接受社交網(wǎng)站Poets&Quants采訪時(shí),，《商業(yè)周刊》副主編婁?拉維爾這樣說道,。“我們分析了一下產(chǎn)生這種結(jié)果的原因,，結(jié)論是,，我們的榜單上有一些MBA雇主很少提到的學(xué)校，比如考克斯商學(xué)院,。盡管雇主基礎(chǔ)不夠雄厚,，但少數(shù)提到這所學(xué)校的雇主卻都對(duì)它贊不絕口,?！?/p>

????這份雜志隨后改變了排名方法，更加青睞那些擁有更大,、盡管有時(shí)不太熱情的雇主基礎(chǔ)的學(xué)校,。結(jié)果，考克斯商學(xué)院2012年的排名一下子驟降17位,，跌至第29名。但不管是就MBA項(xiàng)目,、教職員工,，還是就學(xué)生質(zhì)量而言，這所學(xué)校沒有發(fā)生任何變化,。事實(shí)上,，考克斯商學(xué)院變得更好了,，原因恰恰在于,，《商業(yè)周刊》兩年前授予的高排名為它帶來了更多申請(qǐng)人,。

????但現(xiàn)如今，它的MBA項(xiàng)目已經(jīng)暴跌至前所未有的名次：從2008年的第18名,，2010年的第12名,，跌至2012年的第29名。這個(gè)結(jié)果讓考克斯商學(xué)院的官員目瞪口呆,。“我們非常震驚,，因?yàn)橐磺泄ぷ鞫家呀?jīng)結(jié)束后改變了排名方法,，”考克斯商學(xué)院研究生項(xiàng)目副院長(zhǎng)馬爾西?阿姆斯特朗說?！半m然這肯定是合法的,，他們肯定有權(quán)這樣做,，但在我看來,，這樣做似乎非常不道德,。坦白講，讓我們震驚的并不是我們的排名暴跌,，而是他們對(duì)排名體系做出重大調(diào)整的原因——他們不喜歡我們的名次,?！?/p>

????不管喜不喜歡，考克斯商學(xué)院并不打算退出慘烈的排行榜爭(zhēng)奪戰(zhàn),?！叭绻?jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手都在參加這種老鼠賽,，你就不能不陪著玩，”阿姆斯特朗指出,?！叭思椅诸D(Wharton)或哈佛商學(xué)院(Harvard)可以決定不參加，但大多數(shù)商學(xué)院根本沒得選,?！?/p>

????無論愛也好，恨也罷,，商學(xué)院無力承受忽略排行榜的嚴(yán)重后果,。申請(qǐng)人、校友和雇主特別看重各大排行榜,。調(diào)查顯示,，排行榜是MBA申請(qǐng)人最經(jīng)常參考的信息源，它的影響力高于同事,、親朋好友、在校生,、校友或MBA招生顧問的意見,。

????On November 11, 2010, the deans at Southern Methodist University's Cox School of Business were on edge. BusinessWeek editors were online, releasing the magazine's biennial ranking of the best full-time MBA programs in a live countdown from the lowest-ranked school that year to the highest.

????As Cox administrators gathered around their computers, they watched No. 18 -- Cox's rank in 2008 -- go to New York University's Stern School of Business. A few more schools were announced, but still no SMU. Dartmouth's Tuck School of Business came in at No. 14, followed by Cornell University's Johnson School.

????Where was Cox? Had it cracked the top 10? Finally, the school popped up at No. 12, its highest rank ever in the BusinessWeek survey. Indeed, it was the highest rank ever achieved by the school in any of the top five most influential rankings of business schools. Cox's staff indulged in a brief celebration and drafted press releases trumpeting the school's six-point rise.

????BusinessWeek, however, was less satisfied with the results, even slightly embarrassed by them. "Everyone was saying it didn't pass the smell test," explained BusinessWeek associate editor Lou Lavelle in a 2011 interview with Poets&Quants. "We looked at why that was happening and the reason was we had some schools, like SMU, which had very few [MBA job] recruiter mentions -- not a really deep base of recruiters -- but that small base was wildly enthusiastic about the school."

????The magazine then changed its methodology to favor schools with larger, and sometimes less enthusiastic, recruiter bases. As a result, SMU's business school slid 17 spots to No. 29 in 2012. Nothing at the school had changed: not the MBA program, not the faculty who teach there, or the quality of students. If anything, the program had gotten better, thanks to the higher rank BusinessWeek assigned the school two years earlier, which brought the school more applicants.

????But now SMU's MBA program had plunged in an unprecedented way: from 18th in 2008 to 12th in 2010 to 29th in 2012. Cox officials were flabbergasted. "We were absolutely astonished because the methodology was changed after everything was complete," says Marci Armstrong, Cox's associate dean of graduate programs. "While that's certainly legal, and they certainly have the right to do it, to me it seemed incredibly unethical.... It was stunning to be really honest with you -- not that we would move in the ranking, but that they would make a substantial change in the rankings because they didn't like how we were ranked."

????Like it or not, Cox isn't about to withdraw from the rankings rat race. "You can't not play the game if your competitor schools are doing the same," Armstrong points out. "If you're a Wharton or Harvard, you can make a decision not to participate, but for the majority of schools, it's not a choice we can make."

????Hate them or love them, B-schools ignore rankings at their peril. Applicants, alumni, and employers obsess over them. And surveys have shown that rankings are the most regularly consulted source for MBA applicants -- more influential than work colleagues, family and friends, current students, alumni, faculty, or MBA admissions consultants.