MSc in Management - Bath vs Warwick

All the league tables I've seen (Times, Guardian, Independent, FT) rank Bath slightly higher for Business Studies but not as a university overall.

As a prospective postgrad you really shouldn't be looking at newspaper league tables that are useless to sixth formers, let alone postgrads. A quick look at the methodology used to compile such tables will make you think twice before quoting these rankings. Those same tables ranked Warwick top in the UK a couple of years ago. For every table you mention, I can cite you another saying exactly the opposite.

Certainly marketing has a strong influence on one's perception of a university and the strenght of its name on a CV, and this is especially true of business schools. But "brand name" is everything when it comes down to applying for jobs in the City (consulting, investment banking...) and I assume you'll be looking at applying for those jobs given that you are ready to pay quite a lot for the course in either case.

All I can say is that Business/Management is one of Warwick's strongest assets, and is one of the subjects that made the university what it is today. It has a much stronger presence than Bath within the financial/consulting sector and is refered to as a "target university" by employers in that sector.

If you are in fact not at all interested in working in consulting/finance, then my advice doesn't apply and you should pick your course based on your interests.

Hey guys,

I'm currently trying to decide whether to go for Bath or Warwick for an MSc in Management, having previously studied Modern Languages. I've received offers from both places and understand that they are really good unis. According to the Times University guide, Bath is slightly better for business but Warwick is a better uni overall. Then again, these guides aren't necessarily based on postgrad study. Apart from that, Bath's Management tuition fees for the coming academic year will be around £8,600 whereas Warwick charge a horrendous £13,000. I've not had time to visit either place so far, but from what I've heard, Bath is much a nicer city while Warwick has a bigger uni with more international students and possibly lower living costs (correct me if I'm wrong). I'm not really bothered about nightlife or cost of a pint...

At the moment I'm tending towards Bath, mainly because of tuition fees, location and reputation for course, but I'd be grateful if anyone here happens to be actually studying for the MSc in Management at either Warwick or Bath and could give me some more details, e.g. what do you think of the course, is it good value for money, what are the staff like, what are living costs like, did you get a room on campus? Any other notable information such as general advantages/ disadvantages of the unis would be very welcome. I'm just trying to justify my decision either way I suppose...

Thanks!!!

Cat

Which league tables have you been consulting? Although they do not matter, but even in them (and in real as well) Warwick is miles ahead of bath in business and related subjects.

Thanks Yoyo, unfortunately I'm studying way up North and won't have time to visit either uni before the offer-reply deadlines have passed... I've heard Bath uni is situated in a much nicer area and Warwick is a bit dull and grey but has a great campus life. Have you been to either?

I think league tables do offer a guideline to start off with and shouldn't be completely ignored. Many people who criticise them are actually at top-ranked universities themselves and defending their prestige and reputation, which was often based on the league table results in the first place. I'd be interested to see some alternative examples that show Warwick as ahead of Bath for business.

FT, for example, don't even mention Warwick in the Master in Management ranking, however Bath comes 34th or something
http://rankings.ft.com/businessschoolrankings/masters-in-management

The Times ranking shows Warwick as 6th in the country overall and Bath as 13th, so based on that I would not say that Bath is "miles" behind by any means, especially if we take into account the fact that Bath does not market itself as much as Warwick and is a relatively new university.
http://extras.timesonline.co.uk/tol_gug/gooduniversityguide.php

If you search for business specifically, Bath comes 4th and Warwick comes 8th
http://extras.timesonline.co.uk/tol_gug/gooduniversityguide.php?AC_sub=Business+Studies&sub=11&x=32&y=6


For these reasons I find it difficult to see how Warwick is so far ahead of Bath. Then again, these league tables are often skewed and made for top bankers and I think the course content is more important than the reputation, since it seems to vary so much.

Anyway, my main objective in this post was not to discuss the credibility of certain rankings but to hear some opinions of people who are actually doing the MSc at Bath or Warwick, although other useful comments are welcome of course

Hey Krush even if you have a masters you apply to the normal grad schemes right?

Although the rankings do not matter, but just as alternative the Guardian rankings have been placing Warwick in the top 3 consistently with the exception of the latest ranking (which surprsingly places LSE at 11!!).

My sugestion was based on the job prospects - in that respect Warwick is indeed miles ahead of Bath, from my experience atleast. I am sure a significant majority of relevant posters will agree with me. There are certain sectors e.g banking for which the Warwick name will help you a lot in getting interviews, where as this is not the case with Bath. I just used Banking as an example, but this applies to other sectors as well. Do not worry too much course content, it does not vary that much. Morover Warwick has a large business faculty so you will have a lot of choice in terms of courses.


The Warwick programme - to my knowledge - is relatively new and that might be the reason for its omission from the rankings. For example the LBS MSc is also missing from the MSc rankings, but without doubt LBS business education is arguably better than Harvard/Chicago and on par with Wharton. (WBS has an exchange programme with Wharton, I think this inidcates the high quality of WBS)

I wold also advise you to use the governement rankings or assesment exercises - more specifically the RAE - I think it is a good parameter to quantify the quality of education which ofcourse depends on the quality of the educators . Although I do not know the results of the latest RAE, but in the seond last one WBS scored very well. In my opinion, you should look at the global business school rankings rather than MSc specific as they are more widely used as an evlauation criteria, reason being that many top b-schools do not offer an MSc in Managment.

Although I am at the Judge Business School (Cambridge) and doing a different programme (Finance) but I would adise you to seriously consider Warwick, becuase we can't deny that career aims are an important factor while choosing the university, and this is even more true for business education. In that respect Warwick is tier 1 (with Oxbridge, LSE, Imperial and UCL ) and bath is Tier 2.

Warwick Business School is much better , check the MBA rankings, the masters is taught by the same members of staff that teach the MBA so should be just as good. It's also important to remember that Business schools are separate institutions from their universities. For example, Aston Business School is well regarded. The Master is certainly an investment , I personally think 13k is fine. Maybe defer the programme and work for a year to raise the funds for the course?

Most employers just look at what University you come from not the course itself, have you thought about doing something less expensive?

However, if you want to go by league tables pick the Sunday Times, the Guardian one is a joke.

I am thinking of applying to the same course next year, I wondered if you could PM me what your conditional offer is, and what you think made your application stand out e.g. grades, work experience etc...?

Why do people say the masters is an investment? Masters student also apply to the same graduate programmes as undergraduate students do right? As employers don't require industry specific knowledge but just look at your core competencies, why bother doing a masters in finance/management as long as you have a decent undergraduate? A bit confused sorry.

It's a converstion masters we're talking about here; it gives you a qualification on top of your undergrad degree, the latter not usually being related to business at all. This means you can apply to a whole range of business jobs rather than just jobs that would match your first degree.

Ah right, but would that apply to a person who has studied BSc economics because I can apply for all the jobs as it is?

Hi
Just to let you know, my brother did his phd at bath and loved it. Ive been to the city and really loved it too. If you want a cool tourist city, with culture, then I would go Bath! Ive been to Warwick to visit, as ive applied there this year, there are cool cities close by, but you will end up paying a lot in transport. Everything you need is at Warwick uni tho.