Talk:Grenoble School of Management/Archives/2012

Ranking

Informations dealing with the Grenoble EM are biased. First the Financial Times ranking is highly controversial, being ranked in one category is worth than not being ranked at all in this category. Then an average rank shows that Grenoble EM was on average ranked 8th [1] in France not third ! Sudents coming from 'classe preparatoire' rank it 7th in 2005 [2]. By the way, there is no comparison between HEC, INSEAD and Grenoble EM ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.56.122.54 (talk • contribs) 17:46, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Ranking Response

The article is factually correct. The Financial Times ranked Grenoble-EM (GGSB) #15 in Europe. The FT rankings are generally very well respected in the UK and rest of Europe. It seems that Grenoble-EM has been making quite the name for itself in Europe over the last several years.

I think the statement "there is no comparison between HEC, INSEAD and Grenoble EM !" is biased itself since there is obviously a comparison and the FT has ranked Grenoble-EM after HEC and INSEAD and ahead of ESSEC, Audencia, ESCP-EAP, EM Lyon and EDHEC. So there is a methodology that they used.

The link you gave was a ranking from 2003, 2004 and 2005. It is now 2006 and things change. It is not uncommon for school to move 5 places from year to year. There was a time when Henley Management College outranked Grenoble-EM on every chart, but not so true anymore. It's what we call academic growth and evolution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.158.99.225 (talk • contribs) 16:58, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Ranking controversy

The incriminate FT ranking was released in 2005 and not in 2006. The same year, students, most French newspaper ranked Grenoble EM after HEC, ESSEC, ESCP-EAP, EM Lyon and Edhec. That is why you should not only write "in previous years rankings". For years on HEC, ESSEC, ESCP-EAP, EM Lyon, and EDHEC will probably remain more prestigious, more selective and as long as those business school will remain innovative, their alumni will be on average better paid. Grenoble EM is a young business school, therefore most French HR executives ignore or disconsider this school. That is why Le nouvel économiste ranked it 19th among 40 French business school in 2006. That is to say the "academic growth" is not so evident.

HEC, INSEAD or even ESSEC oustand Grenoble EM. You should compare those schools in term of alumni salary, budget, lecturers reputation, number of research parutions. I wonder how many alumni from Grenoble EM work at Mc Kinsey, the most selective company...compare with INSEAD, HEC and ESSEC. These are the real facts.

Concerning the FT European Master in Management ranking. The Grenoble EM selected programm for the ranking is the Master in International Business. This programm is not representative of all Grenoble EM student as long as only the best student of ESC Grenoble, foreign students and engineers that are to have a international career and therefore be better paid. The mainstream of the students attend the Master in Management, that is why Grenoble EM should have presented its Master in management as did every Business School, then their ranking would not be controversial but they probably would not rank 3d among French business school.

Concerning the Business School ranking, the FT aims to resume five different rankings. But being not ranked only once is better than to be ranked in all rankings. For example the ESCP-EAP Master in Management is ranked 2d whereas Grenoble EM with its (International) Master in Management is ranked 8. But Grenoble EM outranks eventually ESCP-EAP, because ESCP-EAP is ranked several times and Grenoble EM only once: that is quite controversial, isn't it?

I agree the FT is well respected, but this ranking is not reliable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.56.122.54 (talk • contribs) 17:26, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

These are the facts

Why must his article be disputed? There is nothing in it that is not factual. I challenge the "disputer" on the facts. Regardless of what your personal opinions are, the Financial Times is a well respected institution and they have indeed ranked GGSB #15 in Europe. Those are the facts. If you have other facts, you are free to edit this article, but let us not let personal feelings get in the way of facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.197.54.137 (talk • contribs) 12:51, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

The ranking controversy is a fact and does not belong to my personal feelings

This ranking was disputed by most French business school students (including Grenoble Ecole de Management students who acknoledge his lack of relevancy) [3], by the EM Lyon president Patrick Molle himself (cf Challenge 15 december issue) and the press (see Le Figaro "A phony ranking ?" [4] and L'expansion [5] - that are both well respected). Therefore I propose that we qualify the FT ranking as controversial and that we create an article entitled Business School Ranking controversies including other criticisms towards rankings (cf Harvard refusal to cooperate with the press for ranking purposes). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.56.122.54 (talk • contribs) 18:13, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was not moved. --BDD (talk) 19:28, 25 October 2012 (UTC) (non-admin closure)

Grenoble School of Management → Grenoble Ecole de Management – "Grenoble Ecole de Management" is the official proper noun of this French institution. It is against all rules, on Wikipedia and anywhere else to translate a French proper noun in English, be it of a person or of an institution. Euroflux (talk) 22:47, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

• Actually, you may want to check the WP rules on this, see WP:Naming conventions (use English). --Guillaume2303 (talk) 23:04, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Again you gave a link having nothing to do with the subject. You always give Wp:links, but you do not seem to read any of them ! I have read this link, but you didn't ! And anyway good common sense is above any wp:link you can give ! Euroflux (talk) 23:18, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

• As far as I can see, a link outlining policies on naming articles on subjects for which the primary name is non-English is exactly what you need to read. And as far as I know, translating proper nouns is done all over the world to and from any language. The French call "New Orleans" "Nouvelle Orléans", the DUtch WP article on Paris is called "Parijs", the Italian one "Parigi", and so on. BTW, in French you lave a space before an exclamation mark, but in English you don't (in fact, in both languages the use of an exclamation mark is rather rare). --Guillaume2303 (talk) 23:26, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose move per WP:EN. There is established usage of the English name in anglophone press. [6] --Bob247 (talk) 23:50, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.