QS Global MBA Rankings
Korea University Business School
Global MBA — Full-Time Programme
New entrant in 2027 · No. 1 in South Korea · No. 11 in Asia
5-Year Scenario Target Band
Scenario, not a guarantee — the path is set out below.
Current Diagnostic|QS 2027
| Lens | Weight | QS 2027 Score | Indicator Rank | Gap vs Top-50 Band | Diagnosis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Employability | 40% | 57.5 | #77 | −7.6vs band median 65.1 | Core battleground: employer reputation (35% of the total score) is under-evidenced, not under-performing. |
| Entrepreneurship & Alumni Outcomes | 15% | 46.5 | 181–190 | −16.8vs band median 63.3 | Structural: a small, young alumni base — about 44 graduates per cohort, average pre-MBA experience 3.6 years — caps visible CXO-level impact. |
| Return on Investment | 20% | 98.5 | #9 | Abovevs band median 86.0 | Global top 10. The proof the product itself works. |
| Thought Leadership | 15% | 63.4 | #76 | −1.7vs band median 65.1 | Nearly at band level. Academic reputation (10% of total) is the lever inside this lens. |
| Diversity | 10% | 29.4 | 301+ | −38.9vs band median 68.3 | One strong card of four: international students are 75% of the class, but QS also scores women-student, women-faculty and international-faculty ratios. |
Gap = KUBS score minus the median score of programmes ranked #46–#55 in QS Global MBA 2027.
Priority Actions
-
Build the QS survey contact lists NOW — the submission window is open.Window open · closes 15 Jan 2027
QS accepts employer and academic survey contacts from 15 Sep 2026 to 15 Jan 2027; the surveys run Feb–Mar 2027. Who is on those lists decides who gets asked. This is the single highest-leverage action of this cycle.
-
Run a structured employer engagement programme.
Regular, useful touchpoints with the employers who hire KUBS graduates — in Korea and globally — so that recognition in the employer survey reflects real hiring experience.
-
Activate the global academic network.
Partner schools, CEMS peers, co-authors and conference communities: make KUBS research and faculty visible to the academics who answer the QS academic survey.
-
Publish an employment report.
Placement rate, employers, salary and three-month outcomes, reported to MBA CSEA standards. Today the programme publishes a class profile only — peers such as SKK GSB publicly report a 92% three-month employment rate. Evidence the market can check is what moves employer perception.
-
Micro-fix 1
Alumni outcomes: track and surface alumni achievement.Complete alumni records for every cohort, capture promotions, founding stories and CXO appointments, and feed them into the QS data submission. Small cohorts make every visible alumnus count double.
-
Micro-fix 2
Diversity: audit the four ratios before the next submission.Verify how women-student, women-faculty and international-faculty ratios are defined and reported to QS, correct any reporting gaps, and address the real pipeline gaps behind them.
Key Takeaway
Primary focus: reputation strategy
#75 → #48–#55
45% of the QS Global MBA score is reputation — Employer Reputation 35% + Academic Reputation 10%. The annual view below sets out the score gains the strategy must deliver each year; the diagnostic actions in Section 3 are how they are earned.
Compliance note: This is legitimate visibility and relationship work. QS surveys measure genuine recognition; the programme's task is to ensure its real quality is experienced and remembered by the employers and academics who know it. No incentives are offered to respondents, and no votes are solicited.
Modelled Vote Base
KUBS's combined base still sits in the upper half of the #46–#75 segment, ahead of Yonsei (AR 91 · ER 38) — but its five-year survey window holds only the debut year's votes, while peers' windows are full, so the real gap is larger than the scores suggest. It is concentrated in the programme-native electorate: the part the school controls directly, and the part the open contact-list window (to 15 Jan 2027) exists to build.
Annual View — filling the five-year window
| 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 | 2027 · Debut | 2028 | 2029 | 2030 | 2031 | 2032 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Employer reputation | ||||||||||
| Annual votes | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 42 | 62 | 80 | 95 | 107 | 117 |
| New votes won | — | — | — | — | Debut | +20 | +18 | +15 | +12 | +10 |
| In the 5-year window | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 42 | 104 | 184 | 279 | 386 | 461 |
| Reputation score (modelled) | — | — | — | — | 57.5 | 60.5 | 63.3 | 65.5 | 67.1 | 68.3 |
| Academic reputation | ||||||||||
| Annual votes | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 135 | 165 | 190 | 210 | 225 |
| New votes won | — | — | — | — | Debut | +35 | +30 | +25 | +20 | +15 |
| In the 5-year window | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 235 | 400 | 590 | 800 | 925 |
| Reputation score (modelled) | — | — | — | — | 63.4 | 65.2 | 66.8 | 68.0 | 68.8 | 69.4 |
Editions 2023–2026: KUBS was not in the QS Global MBA survey pool — zero votes, no score. Scores from 2027 on are the modelled reputation sub-score path; QS does not publish MBA reputation sub-scores.
Five-year totals: employer reputation +10.8 pts (57.5 → 68.3) on ≈75 newly won votes, as annual employer votes climb 42 → 117; academic reputation +6.0 pts (63.4 → 69.4) on ≈125 newly won votes, as annual academic votes climb 100 → 225 — roughly 200 new votes to win in five years. Because the first four window years are empty, the effort is front-loaded: votes won earliest stay in the window longest. Every new vote is won inside the MBA system itself, so the programme-native electorate grows from ≈20 academic / ≈12 employer to ≈145 / ≈87, while the university halo is held flat. This is a multi-year electorate-building programme — it does not happen as a by-product of normal operations.
Reputation Vote Ladder — QS Global MBA 2027 (modelled)
Estimated annual-equivalent reputation votes for the segment KUBS must climb through (MBA ranks #41–#75), modelled by the same method for every school. KUBS is highlighted.
| MBA Rank | School | Est. AR votes / yr | Est. ER votes / yr |
|---|---|---|---|
| 41 | Singapore Management University | 35 | 25 |
| 42 | EMLyon Business School | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 43 | Boston (Questrom) | 53 | 26 |
| 44 | Alliance Manchester Business School | 113 | 43 |
| 45 | HKUST | 212 | 42 |
| 46 | The University of Hong Kong | 111 | 25 |
| 47 | University of Sydney Business School | 99 | 32 |
| =48 | Georgia Tech (Scheller) | 52 | 44 |
| =48 | Nanyang NTU Singapore | 121 | 39 |
| 50 | Johns Hopkins Carey Business School | 63 | 19 |
| 51 | Carnegie Mellon (Tepper) | 60 | 42 |
| 52 | Indiana (Kelley) | 21 | 7 |
| 53 | Frankfurt School of Finance & Management | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 54 | EGADE Business School | 82 | 54 |
| 55 | Dartmouth (Tuck) | 24 | 15 |
| 56 | Grenoble Ecole de Management | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 57 | CEIBS | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 58 | WHU (Otto Beisheim) | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 59 | POLIMI Graduate School of Management | 104 | 60 |
| 60 | Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam | 102 | 18 |
| 61 | Georgetown (McDonough) | 16 | 20 |
| 62 | Virginia (Darden) | 18 | 9 |
| 63 | University of Edinburgh Business School | 115 | 40 |
| =64 | College of Business and Economics, United Arab Emirates University | 23 | 13 |
| =64 | Indian Institute of Management Bangalore | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 66 | Western (Ivey) | 15 | 9 |
| 67 | McGill (Desautels) | 100 | 35 |
| 68 | Cranfield School of Management | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 69 | Leeds University Business School | 58 | 23 |
| =70 | Durham University Business School | 57 | 47 |
| =70 | Emory (Goizueta) | 15 | 6 |
| =70 | Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| =73 | CUHK Business School | 101 | 18 |
| =73 | Florida (Warrington) | 30 | 11 |
| 75 | Korea University Business School KUBS | 100 | 42 |
Asian peers outside this segment: NUS AR 133 · ER 46 (#23) · Tsinghua 124 · 45 (#29) · Peking University 117 · 43 (#80) · Shanghai Jiao Tong 112 · 44 (#83) · Yonsei 91 · 38 (#88) · Sungkyunkwan GSB 36 · 17 (#201–250).
Full modelled ladder — all schools ranked above KUBS, plus Korean peers
| MBA Rank | School | Est. AR votes / yr | Est. ER votes / yr |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MIT (Sloan) | 156 | 54 |
| 2 | Harvard Business School | 143 | 50 |
| 3 | Stanford Graduate School of Business | 141 | 49 |
| 4 | Penn (Wharton) | 153 | 48 |
| 5 | Cambridge (Judge) | 115 | 44 |
| 6 | HEC Paris | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 7 | Oxford (Said) | 96 | 36 |
| 8 | INSEAD | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 9 | London Business School | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 10 | Chicago (Booth) | 160 | 52 |
| 11 | IE Business School | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 12 | UC Berkeley (Haas) | 119 | 43 |
| 13 | Northwestern (Kellogg) | 133 | 41 |
| 14 | Columbia Business School | 126 | 44 |
| 15 | Yale School of Management | 128 | 47 |
| 16 | IESE Business School | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 17 | NYU (Stern) | 133 | 47 |
| 18 | UCLA (Anderson) | 120 | 46 |
| 19 | Imperial Business School | 182 | 74 |
| 20 | SDA Bocconi | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 21 | Esade Business School | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 22 | Michigan (Ross) | 86 | 30 |
| 23 | National University of Singapore (NUS) | 133 | 46 |
| 24 | ESCP Europe | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 25 | Duke (Fuqua) | 111 | 35 |
| 26 | ESSEC Business School | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 27 | IMD | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 28 | Copenhagen Business School | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 29 | Tsinghua University | 124 | 45 |
| 30 | Warwick Business School | 104 | 50 |
| 31 | Erasmus (RSM) | 50 | 31 |
| 32 | UNSW (AGSM) | 111 | 35 |
| 33 | Cornell (Johnson) | 92 | 34 |
| 34 | Melbourne Business School | 107 | 37 |
| 35 | USC (Marshall) | 27 | 15 |
| 36 | EDHEC Business School | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 37 | University of St.Gallen | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 38 | Mannheim Business School | 23 | 49 |
| 39 | Toronto (Rotman) | 109 | 39 |
| 40 | Texas (McCombs) | 86 | 34 |
| 41 | Singapore Management University | 35 | 25 |
| 42 | EMLyon Business School | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 43 | Boston (Questrom) | 53 | 26 |
| 44 | Alliance Manchester Business School | 113 | 43 |
| 45 | HKUST | 212 | 42 |
| 46 | The University of Hong Kong | 111 | 25 |
| 47 | University of Sydney Business School | 99 | 32 |
| =48 | Georgia Tech (Scheller) | 52 | 44 |
| =48 | Nanyang NTU Singapore | 121 | 39 |
| 50 | Johns Hopkins Carey Business School | 63 | 19 |
| 51 | Carnegie Mellon (Tepper) | 60 | 42 |
| 52 | Indiana (Kelley) | 21 | 7 |
| 53 | Frankfurt School of Finance & Management | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 54 | EGADE Business School | 82 | 54 |
| 55 | Dartmouth (Tuck) | 24 | 15 |
| 56 | Grenoble Ecole de Management | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 57 | CEIBS | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 58 | WHU (Otto Beisheim) | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 59 | POLIMI Graduate School of Management | 104 | 60 |
| 60 | Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam | 102 | 18 |
| 61 | Georgetown (McDonough) | 16 | 20 |
| 62 | Virginia (Darden) | 18 | 9 |
| 63 | University of Edinburgh Business School | 115 | 40 |
| =64 | College of Business and Economics, United Arab Emirates University | 23 | 13 |
| =64 | Indian Institute of Management Bangalore | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 66 | Western (Ivey) | 15 | 9 |
| 67 | McGill (Desautels) | 100 | 35 |
| 68 | Cranfield School of Management | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 69 | Leeds University Business School | 58 | 23 |
| =70 | Durham University Business School | 57 | 47 |
| =70 | Emory (Goizueta) | 15 | 6 |
| =70 | Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| =73 | CUHK Business School | 101 | 18 |
| =73 | Florida (Warrington) | 30 | 11 |
| 75 | Korea University Business School KUBS | 100 | 42 |
| 76 | Texas A&M (Mays) | 45 | 30 |
| 77 | Babson College (Olin) | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 78 | Audencia Business School | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 79 | Washington (Olin) | 22 | 4 |
| =80 | Peking University - Guanghua School of Management | 117 | 43 |
| =80 | Washington (Foster) | 63 | 17 |
| 82 | The Lisbon MBA Católica|Nova | n/a — standalone, no WUR base to calibrate from | |
| 83 | Shanghai Jiao Tong (Antai) | 112 | 44 |
| =84 | Minnesota (Carlson) | 34 | 5 |
| =84 | North Carolina (Kenan-Flagler) | 37 | 7 |
| 86 | City University of Hong Kong | 74 | 13 |
| 87 | Penn State Smeal College of Business | 65 | 24 |
| 88 | Yonsei School of Business | 91 | 38 |
| 201-250 | Sungkyunkwan university GSB | 36 | 17 |
How the vote estimates are built (model estimates — QS never publishes vote counts): (1) each university's QS World University Rankings reputation votes are estimated with the log-linear score–vote calibration used in mShare's reputation workspace (fitted on anchor schools; AR R² 0.95, ER R² 0.78); for KUBS this gives AR ≈ 944 and ER ≈ 420 annual-equivalent votes. (2) The university total is scaled by the business share of the university's QS subject-reputation profile, to approximate what a business-only survey pool produces — Business & Management, Accounting & Finance, Marketing, Economics & Econometrics (for KUBS ≈ 11% of academic, ≈ 10% of employer reputation; the range reflects core vs extended subject sets and linear vs squared weighting, and was cross-checked against research-output structure). The QS Global MBA academic and employer surveys are separate instruments from the WUR surveys, with their own institution-submitted contact lists; the WUR reputation footprint is used as the calibration yardstick for the size of each school's business-reputation base — MBA votes are not literally carved out of WUR votes. (3) Annual new-vote requirements are converted from the score pathway with the same calibration. Vote bases measure the reputation asset a school can draw on, not the MBA surveys' actual tallies, which are not published; standalone business schools with no QS WUR presence have no WUR base to calibrate from and are marked n/a. Decomposition: because the MBA surveys are separate, the calibrated total is split into a university-halo component (the WUR-derived slice, discounted for partial overlap between the two respondent pools) and a programme-native component (votes earned within the MBA system itself, estimated from the programme's own employer and academic footprint). The ladder shows combined calibrated totals for all schools; the decomposition is shown for KUBS only. Window assumption: QS aggregates reputation survey responses over a rolling five-year window. KUBS enters the MBA surveys in the 2027 cycle, so the four earlier window years are modelled as empty; annual new-vote targets are therefore front-loaded, and each year's window total is the sum of the annual votes inside the window (equal-weight simplification — QS's exact recency weights are not published).
5-Year Roadmap
| QS Metric | Weight | Current (QS 2027) | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Year 4 | Year 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Rank | 100% | #75 | #64–#67 | #58–#61 | #54–#57 | #51–#54 | #49–#53 |
| Overall Score | — | 63.1 | 64.6~65.4 | 66.4~67.2 | 67.9~68.7 | 69.0~69.8 | 69.9~70.7 |
| Employer Reputation (ER) | 35% | 57.5* | 60.5 | 63.3 | 65.5 | 67.1 | 68.3 |
| Academic Reputation (AR) | 10% | 63.4* | 65.2 | 66.8 | 68.0 | 68.8 | 69.4 |
| Employability (lens) | 40% | 57.5 | 59.8~60.6 | 62.3~63.1 | 64.3~65.1 | 65.7~66.5 | 66.8~67.6 |
| Thought Leadership (lens) | 15% | 63.4 | 64.3~65.1 | 65.5~66.3 | 66.4~67.2 | 67.0~67.8 | 67.5~68.3 |
| Entrepreneurship & Alumni Outcomes | 15% | 46.5 | 47.6~48.4 | 49.6~50.4 | 51.6~52.4 | 53.1~53.9 | 54.6~55.4 |
| Diversity | 10% | 29.4 | 33.0~33.8 | 36.0~36.8 | 38.5~39.3 | 40.5~41.3 | 42.0~42.8 |
| Return on Investment | 20% | 98.5 | 98.5 | 98.5 | 98.5 | 98.5 | 98.5 |
Year 1 = QS 2028 edition … Year 5 = QS 2032 edition.
* ER and AR sub-scores are not published separately by QS for this ranking; the scenario sets them at their parent lens level in 2027 (ER within Employability, AR within Thought Leadership) and models their growth explicitly. Overall score = the published 63.1 baseline plus the weighted lens gains; QS computes the official overall from underlying metrics. Rank ranges assume competing programmes also improve. All figures are planning scenarios, not guarantees.