Not understanding this basic point is like not understanding that prices are endogenous--> Stanford is *really* good at training quant marketers.
Inferring causality from correlation, are we?
Official Marketing JM 2020 Thread
-
Previous posters were asserting it was all a (causal) bias story from the correlation. An implausible story with a clear alternative (quality).
But has testable implications. Are the Stanford grads more likely to flame out than non-Stanford grads? Doubt it.
Not understanding this basic point is like not understanding that prices are endogenous--> Stanford is *really* good at training quant marketers.
Inferring causality from correlation, are we?
-
I AM a BU Questrom faculty member, and have been one for quite a while.
Frankly this thread is silly and deals with issues that do not matter. What matters is that everyday, we get up without a chip on our shoulders, and we roll up our sleeves and try to be better than the day before. Today, we have the best faculty group we have ever had, our students are better than ever, and our programs are innovative and highly sought after. We are collegial, we seek consensus and involve all in important decisions. We have managed to attract and retain extremely productive and talented scholars despite the many competing offers than come their way.
This is what matters.
-
I AM a BU Questrom faculty member, and have been one for quite a while.
Frankly this thread is silly and deals with issues that do not matter. What matters is that everyday, we get up without a chip on our shoulders, and we roll up our sleeves and try to be better than the day before. Today, we have the best faculty group we have ever had, our students are better than ever, and our programs are innovative and highly sought after. We are collegial, we seek consensus and involve all in important decisions. We have managed to attract and retain extremely productive and talented scholars despite the many competing offers than come their way.
This is what matters.Good post, Carey. You are a pretty awesome dude.
-
9FD8, show some respect to Pradeep, please. He is among the best in our field.
Stanford hasn't hired from Booth since 2012
Stanford also reciprocates and hires from Booth. This time as well, they may hire from Booth again
And Stanford has not hired since 2012 on quant side.
Unless you count that one strategy guy as quant, but even he is working with Pradeep C
-
"Based on UTD Search by Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Marketing, Journal of Marketing Research, Marketing Science from 2015-2018 for the North America rankings"
Do people take these UT Dallas rankings seriously? How do you evaluate marketing departments without econ, psych, OR, and stats journals? Or Management Science? -
"Based on UTD Search by Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Marketing, Journal of Marketing Research, Marketing Science from 2015-2018 for the North America rankings"
Do people take these UT Dallas rankings seriously? How do you evaluate marketing departments without econ, psych, OR, and stats journals? Or Management Science?Or QME, which has the highest floor.
Don't ask bean counters which beans should count. They don't know.
-
"Based on UTD Search by Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Marketing, Journal of Marketing Research, Marketing Science from 2015-2018 for the North America rankings"
Do people take these UT Dallas rankings seriously? How do you evaluate marketing departments without econ, psych, OR, and stats journals? Or Management Science?Yeah it's difficult. You can't just include Management Science because it's also an outlet for other fields and obviously we cannot simply count publications in stas/OR/psych journals for the same reason. I suspect that's why some department are weirdly low and some are weirdly high on this ranking.
-
"Based on UTD Search by Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Marketing, Journal of Marketing Research, Marketing Science from 2015-2018 for the North America rankings"
Do people take these UT Dallas rankings seriously? How do you evaluate marketing departments without econ, psych, OR, and stats journals? Or Management Science?Yeah it's difficult. You can't just include Management Science because it's also an outlet for other fields and obviously we cannot simply count publications in stas/OR/psych journals for the same reason. I suspect that's why some department are weirdly low and some are weirdly high on this ranking.
What do other fields have to do with this? MS has a dedicated Marketing Department, it publishes higher quality papers than all other marketing journals. Has a higher IF too
-
"Based on UTD Search by Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Marketing, Journal of Marketing Research, Marketing Science from 2015-2018 for the North America rankings"
Do people take these UT Dallas rankings seriously? How do you evaluate marketing departments without econ, psych, OR, and stats journals? Or Management Science?Yeah it's difficult. You can't just include Management Science because it's also an outlet for other fields and obviously we cannot simply count publications in stas/OR/psych journals for the same reason. I suspect that's why some department are weirdly low and some are weirdly high on this ranking.
What do other fields have to do with this? MS has a dedicated Marketing Department, it publishes higher quality papers than all other marketing journals. Has a higher IF too
Yes, the point is that UTD doesn't discriminate pubs by field within MS, so if you select this journal everything published there no matter the field is going to count