Durham or Manchesr for International business?!

To me and this is just my view, I would be very scared of a university that ranks so low domestically and especially viz course satisfactions, I'd be loathed to pay such expensive fees for bad teaching.

But hey that's just me.

I would change to MSc in HR and go DBS or drop them both and go to a better place.

I would also look at Biz School specific rankings an not THES overall ranks.

I have offers from all of the 9 except Warwick, Nottingham and Bristol but I also didn't apply to them. I really just want to go to the best business school with an international reputation because I might decide to go outside the UK for employment. That is really all I care about. A nice city with a decent standard of living is just a plus...

I am really confused between Manchester and Durham. I have completely ruled the rest out because I thought their business schools weren't up to par. Edinburgh was just too expensive.

I always looked at the business school specific ranking because that's what matters most to me. I'm not really into HR, so that's not an option. The quality of education does matter though, which is why the rankings psyched me out a bit. I would choose Manchester without a doubt if it weren't so low in the rankings.

I also have offers from Lancaster, Bath, Edinburgh, Glasgow, St. Andrews, all consistently doing well in the rankings. Now I'm more confused...

I admit that I applied for MBS and had an offer from MBS cuz I think it is good. But I decided to go to another school after doing research about both unis giving me offers. That's the reason why I can tell u so much about UoM and MBS.

1. Golden Triangle includes KCL instead of LBS. And it's not just about geography, it's also about their research powers. U can goog it.And I didn't mean Manc was part of Golden Triangle.

2.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/8635891/Top-students-concentrated-in-just-12-elite-universities.html


The first link can tell you that which unis have the largest numbers of good students. For the second chart, u need to know that Manc enrolled around 6000 students and KCL enrolled 2000 students. But they have near the same percentages. These students graduate recently.

So in the UK, Durham and Manc are both OK. But outside UK and for Biz school, MBS will be better.

I have to say durham really lacks the intl rep. First, it is a new russel group member so it lacks a very good research power( it lacks some nobel prizes or good research results to make it famous). Second, not being top in the intl rank. Many people regard it as a very good british uni instead of world famous.
If just considering the b school, look at MBS's and DBS's exchange partners, u will know the difference.

Are you being serious? Just look at the post below you; he understands. You must be British or going to Durham. Durham is not a famous name across the globe. It stays within the UK and that's really it. Among employers in the UK, Durham is very good. Durham doesn't put as much emphasis on internationalism as other big universities in the UK which is why it's not as known around the globe as, for example, LSE, Manchester and probably Nottingham, which I would put in the same bracket. Also, Durham's research aspect is poorer, so how would employers believe that Durham graduates are more adjusted to current work than the other universities? Outside the UK, if a Manchester graduate and Durham graduate were to apply for the same job with similar statistics, the Manchester graduate would get the job because Manchester puts significantly more emphasis on what employers want rather than what a textbook wants you to know.

I've attended an International school for basically my entire life around the globe. Sure my friends have never heard of Durham, you're correct on that one, but neither have the employers I've worked for.

Dear God you're referring to an article about a research study from four years ago. If you had kept up to date, as is a trend in modern society, you'd be using QS, who, btw, base their rankings on research quality, employment statistics etc. so it's very relevant. Manchester is clearly up high, so yes, we'll agree on that. You'll also find that Nottingham (74) is placed higher than Durham (95). Also note that the research at Nottingham is labeled as "VH", meaning very high as opposed to Durham's "high". RAE is outdated by now.

The QS rankings also order the universities according to "best universities as voted by EMPLOYERS". That's right, EMPLOYERS. I feel like I had to say it twice in all capitals for you to get it considering it didn't sit in your mind in the first post I sent. Sure Durham is known outside of Britain, but it goes to show that it's not that internationally known and probably respected as many other British universities, meaning that Durham is really just a university for the England employers.

To find a job in UK, forget the ranking of unis. 13 unis are good: golden triangle(6 unis) , edinburgh, manc, bristol,( they are famous unis in and outside the UK), st.andrew durham( maybe famous in liberal art and good undergrads) , warwick and bath ( good b schools and good undergrads). U can also ad york and nott maybe.

These unis have the highest proportion or largest number of good students with good A Levels. If you apply for jobs in uk, ucas point or its equivalence is required. So employers are more likely to target these unis for lower recruitment cost.
Wolrd famous unis are the 9 unis mentioned above, for their stable good ranking in all international rankings ;they also have some world leading strengths in some fields eg. KCL-law Manc-physics and biochem, and they have some world famous alumnus or previous staffs. I think world famous unis will seldom be unis famous in liberal art for barriers of languages. eg, u can not say a uni good at American Studies is better than a uni good at German Studies, because u cannot compare them in fact.
I think the only two outputs of unis are people and research results. So that's why Manc is more famous than Durham internatinally . But Durham is like Wellesley College in US.

As the last post was a bit long and, as a result of tiredness, perhaps long-winded let me just summarise.

Durham is a multi-faculty university. As with any multi-faculty university it has strengths and weaknesses across its faculties. It is not particularly well known for "liberal arts" and some of is strongest, most internationally known departments, are in the sciences.

You are both arguining about research, one using the latest RAE and the other the QS rankings. It is true that the RAE is based on research conducted prior to 2008 and, as a result, is out of date (with some academics and research staff having transferred since then). But this isn't to say that the criteria used by the QS rankings is necessarily objective or an accurate reflection of what can be described as "research quality".

Durham is a city one tenth the size of Manchester. Its research income, off the top of my head, is anything from a third to a fifth of Manchester's (maybe less). However, Durham does not produce poor research, even relative to other Russell Group members. Due to its size, and that it lacks things like a large medical school, it does lack the same reseach power as Manchester across the disciplines (but does compete with Manchester in some). But power and quality are two different things.

Becuase of their different sizes, the two do have contrasting international recognition among the public abroad. Durham is seeking to address this and over the last few years has focused on "internationalisation" (when there should be greater priorities but there we go....)

I fail to see any link between employer perception or how graduates are able to cope in employment and research power. Besides, Durham doesn't just "teach what the textbooks say". It has an effective careers service, is targeted by major employers, and runs highly effective and successful employability schemes.

Durham business school is one of the oldest in the UK and has triple accredation. It is one of the strongest in the UK, and its graduates do end up worlwide and not just in the UK. To suggest that any business school which has people from 100 different countries studying at it, and whose graduates then work in organisations (including major multi-nationals) worldwide, some back int their native country and some not, as "only for England employers (sic) is misleading and absurd.

This is not me making a case for Durham. I am not an expert on the OP's field but, from what I know, both Durham and Manchester are strong business schools (Durham perhaps less so at undergrad level, which is unusual for Durham, but we are talking postgrad here, of course). Manchester arguably has the slight edge and, for this reason, as well as the larger city environment, I'd probably chose Manchester myself.

I'm just making the point that I do feel people overstate the importance of university reputation and certainly overstate how unknown Durham is. Like MAnbchester it has produced successful CEOs and MDs of major international companies and will continues to do so. In fact, Durham actually performs as well, if not stronger, than larger universities in this respect (e.g. University of London).

Oh, and that list of 9/13 universities is curious to say the least.

You sound like an oxymoron, that or English isn't your first language because you are full of contradictions.

If you rejected MBS, then why do you care who goes there or why do you pop up in every UoM thread.

"Golden Triangle includes KCL instead of LBS. And it's not just about geography"


Now I know you're blagging - Do you realise what you just said ?

You have dismissed the world's number 1 Business school and yes A triangle IS a geometric shape.

What part of that is unclear ?

And yes, you did attempt to include UoM as part of the GT though it is nowhere near the South East.

" To find a job in UK, forget the ranking of unis. 13 unis are good: golden triangle(6 unis) , edinburgh, manc, bristol,( they are famous unis in and outside the UK), st.andrew durham( maybe famous in liberal art and good undergrads) , warwick and bath ( good b schools and good undergrads). "


I suppose a ghost wrote that ?

That's not true. What exactly do you mean by "good reserach results". Like any university of its size and quality it produces a decent amount of research that is recognised worldwide, across disciplines. You'll find it ranks very highly indeed, among the top in the world, in certain fields.

If you are simply referring to Nobel Prizes or Field Medals then, no, it doesn't have any (again, largely due to its relatively small size). Liverpool has two Nobel laureates to its name (I think). Aberdeen has....three I think. Are they more "famous" than Durham or Warwick? This alone doesn't account for a university's fame and has no bearing on employer perception.

That it is a new Russell Group member (having opted out of being a member when the Group was originally created in the 1990s and then being a founding member of the 1994 Group instead) does not explain why it doesn't have the same research power as Manchester. By that I mean that its research power won't necessarily grow in future years by future of being in the RG (which is what you seem to suggest).



What on earth makes you think that? Do you have any experience of Durham that allows you to make this conclusion? Is this just based on its research performance? How on earth does the research that academics perform have any bearing on the employability of students and graduates? That's absurd.

Again, Durham is at a disadvantage in global rankings as it is significantly smaller than Manchester with a smaller research income, but is still a leading research intensive university and certainly not an institution that produces "poor" research. The global rankings do not look at the quality of research (as you seem to believe) but more research power (ie. quanitity - number of citations).

As for the point about internationalism, when the current Vice Chancellor took his post a few months ago he made it known that Durham will focus on internationalsim as, due to the small size of both the university and city, its international reputation is lacking compared to its domestic one (his famous quote was to make Durham "the Princeton of Europe"). During this time it has made a number of steps toward what I think you will call internationalism including appointing a Dean for Internationalisation.

It's worth noting that Durham does rank well in international employer reviews. It features Presidents, CEOs and MDs of major multi-national companies, including a former President and COO of Ford (though I think he attended Durham as an undergrad, I think) and an MD of Goldman Sachs. Whilst its alumni list is no more impressive than Manchester's, people do overstate how "unknown" Durham is, or the effect that this has on

Utimately Durham is one of the strongest universities in the country. Its courses are, by and large, of a high quality. Its business school, one of the oldest in the UK, is one of the few to have triple accreditation. It is well targeted by national and international firms. It attracts some of the strongest students who, as one would expect, are typically very successful post-graduation. For it is an individual's own qualities and experience that utlimately gets them the job and not the university name - even internationally.



See above (and check your grammar). You are suggesting that Durham graduates are destined only for work in the UK. This is absurd. As well as the well known cases I have described above I personally know of several grads, some British and some international (usually American or Eastern European) who work for NATO, the UN, a commercial law firm in Sydney, and various global finance firms.

If you're going to use the tables to try and determine international rep and employers perception it might be worthwhile checking the employers review (which you allude to). Last time I checked Durham was top 20 in the world in the employer review (despite being around 100th in the general table). I can't remember if this was the THES or QS. I don't care quite frankly.



It's a myth that Durham is best for "liberal arts". It doesn't even offer many. Some of its strongest departments, in terms of research, are the sciences (particularly astrophysics where it really is known worldwide).

The list of "good" universities you have provided is not exhaustive and fails to include the rest of the Russell Group (and others) and it seems you've just pulled it out of your behind, quite frankly. The majority, if not all, of the Russell Group have a broadly comparable intake though some of the largest are disadvantaged (in terms of their UCAS tarriff) by offering a larger number of subjects, some not as popular.

How targeted a university is is determined by a number of factors including the size of university, the faculities it has, and the city as much as its student intake. I fail to see how those 13 universities are more "respected", or advantagous, than any other Russell Group university (Newcastle, Glasgow, Leeds, Sheffield...)

I have explained it once, and I don't need to do it again to convince u.
I said: golden triangle(6 unis), tell me how I did attempt to include manc?
again, lbs is not included in GT. And u can goog what GT really includes.

U can have ur opinions and disagree on what I said, but u don't need to " attack" me.

You can have any opinion you like, as can I, but you can't embellish facts and then turn around and cry " attack ", when you are rightly corrected.

Like I say perhaps English is not your 1st language but you will still be subject to correction if you are wrong.

The same applies if I was to attempt to write in Hindi.


" tell me how I did attempt to include manc "


Yes you did. Please see post #44.

Frankly a bloody superb post. Durham is a truly fantastic institution, both domestically and internationally. Frankly, many of the posts in this thread have been based entirely upon false assumption and conjecture.

I would say there is little evidence for Durham having a low international presence. Its research quality is consistently rated as 'world class'. Hell their IR department is/was funded by Sultan bin Mohammed al Qasimi; I'm not quite sure how much more international you would want.

The other thing you may want to consider (not sure if it has already been mentioned) is that you won't be based at the main campus. Medics, psychologists, business students as well as a few other subjects are based at Queen's Campus in Stockton, which is around 40 mins away. There is a free bus between the 2 campuses but very few people can be bothered to go to Durham regularly unless they play a sport not offered at QC.

Queen's campus offers more of a college life then a University life. There are only around 1000 students there and though you can get to know everyone and have an excellent time, the rush of a busy university/city is unheard-of. Everything moves pretty slow at QC. I guess you could argue you have more time to focus on your studies. Also, it's cheaper. But if it were me in your shoes I'd probably go to Manchester.

n.b. Ive studied at QC but I haven't studied Business so can't comment on the course.

The other thing you may want to consider (not sure if it has already been mentioned) is that you won't be based at the main campus. Medics, psychologists, business students as well as a few other subjects are based at Queen's Campus in Stockton, which is around 40 mins away. There is a free bus between the 2 campuses but very few people can be bothered to go to Durham regularly unless they play a sport not offered at QC.

Queen's campus offers more of a college life then a University life. There are only around 1000 students there and though you can get to know everyone and have an excellent time, the rush of a busy university/city is unheard-of. Everything moves pretty slow at QC. I guess you could argue you have more time to focus on your studies. Also, it's cheaper. But if it were me in your shoes I'd probably go to Manchester.

n.b. Ive studied at QC but I haven't studied Business so can't comment on the course.

The other thing you may want to consider (not sure if it has already been mentioned) is that you won't be based at the main campus. Medics, psychologists, business students as well as a few other subjects are based at Queen's Campus in Stockton, which is around 40 mins away. There is a free bus between the 2 campuses but very few people can be bothered to go to Durham regularly unless they play a sport not offered at QC.

Queen's campus offers more of a college life then a University life. There are only around 1000 students there and though you can get to know everyone and have an excellent time, the rush of a busy university/city is unheard-of. Everything moves pretty slow at QC. I guess you could argue you have more time to focus on your studies. Also, it's cheaper. But if it were me in your shoes I'd probably go to Manchester.

n.b. Ive studied at QC but I haven't studied Business so can't comment on the course.