There are a few global rankings for B-schools. ISB has participated in the FT ranking. IIMs have participated in the Economist rankings. Is this article saying that FT ranking methodology is not accurate? Or that ISB ranking is biased? If not - what's the whole point of this article. 1. ISB has partnerships with Kellogg, Wharton and LBS. A Student benefits by learning from the best faculty – does residency status matter. Anyway, ISB has good number of resident faculty now. 2. I found IIM-A in the 2007 Economist rankings (EIU). It's ranked 92. Salary increase and feedback from alumni are included in this ranking as well. http://mba.eiu.com/index.asp?layout=2007rankings http://mba.eiu.com/index.asp?layout=school_snapshot&university_id=900471490&mba_program_id=910471491&university_name=Indian+Institute+of+Management+%2D+Ahmedabad http://mba.eiu.com/site_info.asp?info_name=wmba_rank_method 3. I doubt if anyone measures only the fixed component of salary. Any comments on this from other readers? 4. Of course the methodology of rankings should be evaluated - But isn't this true for any Award, Ranking or Recognition. The fact that a reputed third party conducts the raking is important. I think the focus should be more on - how more business schools from India can be in the top 20 global rankings. Let's stop getting so worked up, and instead be inspired that one b-school has made it there.