Executive summary. Master’s programmes have become central to business school competitiveness as bachelor’s and MBA markets tighten. Drawing on interviews with 43 academic leaders across ten countries, our article identifies seven interconnected success factors shaping high-performing portfolios: enrolment and financial viability, student quality, curriculum design, student experience, employability outcomes, alumni engagement, and external recognition. We argue that schools must balance internal metrics with more agile external insight to understand programme health. A systematic, evidence-based assessment enables institutions to anticipate change, strengthen portfolio coherence, and ensure long-term relevance in an increasingly volatile environment.

Key takeaways

• Master’s programmes now anchor business school competitiveness, compensating for volatility in bachelor and MBA markets and becoming essential to enrolment and financial resilience.
• Seven interconnected success factors, from student quality and curriculum design to employability and alumni engagement, shape sustainable programme performance.
• Internal metrics alone are insufficient. Schools must integrate regular external insights to strengthen coherence between programmes and maintain competitiveness in a rapidly changing environment.

---

The full-time MBA has traditionally been the flagship of the business school. That position is now shifting, with masters increasingly taking the lead.

(Interviewee 5, cited in Thomas, Howells & Hardcastle, 2025)

The EFMD Master Programmes Conference, in December 2025, hosted by Bologna Business School, offered a strategic forum to examine the evolving role of master’s programmes. As pressures increase on student numbers in bachelor and MBA programmes, business schools are increasingly looking to master’s degrees to ensure robust enrolment and financial viability.

Given the growing importance of the master’s portfolio, understanding the key success factors has become ever more critical. To this end, in association with Graduate Business Curriculum Roundtable, my colleagues, Sarah Hardcastle and Gareth Howells, and I recently interviewed 43 Associate Deans, Portfolio Directors, and Programme Directors from leading business schools in ten countries. Through our in-depth, semi-structured interviews, seven key success factors emerged. These are shown in Figure 1 (below).

Figure 1

Unsurprisingly, success in master’s programmes is often judged by enrolment numbers. Many leaders see this as an immediate indicator of market fit. As one interviewee noted, “Programmes […] tend to bring in more students, if they’re positioned in a place where the market is interested and they’re doing a good job.” Strong student interest provides a valuable early signal. Yet numbers alone are not sufficient. Financial viability is a constant pressure. As one programme leader stated with great honesty, “I’d be lying if financial stability wasn’t part of the measurement.”  Given the variety of scholarships and financing methods that exist today, enrolment numbers and profitability of programmes do not always perfectly align. Tensions may also occur between the need for a high level of service and programme sustainability.

Beyond these questions, the calibre of students appears to matter greatly to schools. One interviewee suggested that success involves measuring “how many applications per seat we’re attracting, the quality of the student we’re bringing in.” Quality also appears to be understood in broad terms by the business schools we interviewed. Work experience, communication ability, and alignment with institutional ethos are seen as important. “We look for students who are smart, work hard, and get things done and who play well in the sandbox,” explained one leader. Diversity is seen as integral to the learning environment, while academic standards remain non-negotiable. Some schools are “raising the bar for thesis work, especially with the rise of AI tools,” signalling a commitment to rigour in an evolving educational landscape.

Curriculum quality and learning outcomes form another cornerstone of programme success. One interviewee observed, “Meeting all the learning objectives clearly, that’s formal success.” Effective programmes balance theory with practical skills, encouraging students to think critically and move beyond textbook solutions. Many institutions integrate personal development into their curriculum, embedding reflection alongside technical learning. One educator described this approach simply: “We help students learn about themselves,” highlighting a leadership course designed to foster introspection. Career coaching and experiential elements equip students for the uncertainties of the workplace, while teamwork, collaboration, and values-based education help shape a shared ethos. As one academic leader put it:

“We embed our strategic learning outcomes throughout, so students are aligned with our mission.”

Student satisfaction, transformation, and a sense of belonging appear to provide further insights into programme effectiveness. Leaders track sentiment through surveys, Net Promoter Scores, and exit interviews. One explained, “We track satisfaction. How likely are our students to recommend it to others?” Satisfaction is closely tied to preparation for the workplace. “We strive to make students ‘day one ready’ for their jobs,” said one participant. Others emphasised the profound personal growth that students often report. “We hear that students feel transformed, not just in skills, but in habits of mind and heart.”

Employment outcomes are a defining measure. One director noted proudly, “We measure success by our evaluations and the placement of our students. 98% find a job.” Long-term progress, salary development, and personal goals further enrich this picture. Alumni progress also plays an essential role. Strong alumni communities support recruitment, mentoring, and a sense of continuity. “We have an extremely strong and loyal network. They’re champions for our programmes,” commented one educator. At the heart of this lies a broader aspiration: “We want alumni who are so impactful they change the world in a positive way.”

Finally, external recognition continues to wield considerable influence over both prospective students and employers. Accreditation remains a significant part of the value proposition. One programme leader told us that “Accreditation acts as a signal of quality to external stakeholders, including employers and students.” Rankings such as the Financial Times or QS, also contribute to this reputation.

Balancing External & Internal Assessments of Programmes

Building on the key success factors identified, business schools must then assess the relative strength of each factor across their programmes. Too often, schools have perhaps relied on enrolment numbers and financial performance only. While these indicators provide a snapshot of current viability, they do not sufficiently highlight the underlying causes of why a programme thrives or fails. If schools truly wish to understand which programmes are likely to succeed in the future, they must also consider the other factors identified by our interviewees.

In undertaking this assessment, schools should ensure they balance internal and external perspectives to achieve a genuine 360° view of performance. Most institutions acknowledge that they are relatively strong in internal assessment, which typically includes student evaluations, graduate surveys, and feedback from faculty and programme management. These mechanisms are embedded within the system, readily accessible, and frequently referenced. Yet this only provides part of the picture.

Most schools we interviewed readily admitted being less effective in conducting external assessments. Accreditation bodies such as EFMD (EQUIS, EFMD Programme Accreditation, BSIS, etc.) provide detailed evaluations of institutions or specific programmes. However, these reviews occur only every few years. In today’s volatile geopolitical climate and rapidly shifting market conditions, schools must be far more agile in their approach. Regular external input is essential. Advisory boards, close collaboration with key employers and alumni, and the support of consultancy firms can provide deeper, more frequent insights into the health and relevance of master’s portfolios. This combination of external and internal perspectives enables schools not only to monitor current success but also to anticipate future challenges and opportunities. Figure 2 offers a diagrammatic representation of how this might be achieved.

Figure 2: Assessing the relative impact of Key Success Factors for Master Programmes

Conclusion

In the highly competitive environment in which business schools now evolve, the management of a master’s portfolio thus requires a more systematic approach than has perhaps been undertaken in the past. The success of each master’s programme should not be attributed to a single dimension. Rather, it is the result of an interplay of multiple factors. By engaging in rigorous analysis, schools can allow strengths to be consolidated and weaknesses to be addressed. This ensures that decisions are evidence-based and aligned with the expectations of students, employers, and accreditation bodies. By examining the full range of factors, business schools can anticipate challenges and adapt their programmes to remain competitive. This approach will be even more successful when external as well as internal assessments are studied and compared. Such a diversity of viewpoints will enrich the strategic dialogue, helping schools to anticipate change and to adapt its master’s portfolio for future success.

---

References

Thomas, M., Howells, G. and Hardcastle, S. (2025). The Master’s Portfolio, Building and Managing a Competitive Degree Portfolio, Hardcastle & Associates, retrieved from: https://www.hardcastleassociates.com/reports