Fortune Ranking Methodology of Online Doctor of Education in Organizational Leadership (Ed.D.) Programs

Whether it’s a business, university, non-profit organization or government, effective and ethical leadership makes the difference between success and failure. Today’s leaders face new challenges, which means they must develop new solutions. The ongoing ramifications of the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change, political and social issues, and fluctuations in the economy are all factors people and institutions need to navigate. Therefore, strong, forward-thinking and dynamic leadership is essential.

A Doctor of Education (Ed.D.) in Organizational Leadership is a degree program for those looking to enhance their leadership skills and develop new solutions for their team, organization, and industry. Professionals come to these programs from all types of professions to research how to improve their organizations and prepare their teams for the obstacles ahead.

The focus of these programs may include maximizing the benefits of modern technology through technical training in data analysis tools, as well as learning leadership strategies and tips through courses and collaboration with peers. In an online Ed.D. In the Organizational Leadership program, leaders often apply what they learn in real time, as they can attend classes and work on their dissertations, while continuing to work. That is why Fortune ranks the online Doctor of Education (Ed.D) in Organizational Leadership Programs. In total, we have classified eight Ed.D. in organizational leadership programs.

Our final ranking is made up of three elements: selectivity score, success score, and demand score.

The best Ed.D. programs have a top-notch curriculum taught by world-class faculty. That’s not all: they should also attract some of the brightest students. The post-graduation success (or lack thereof) of these alumni helps shape how the outside world will perceive this program. This is also why Fortune put so much weight on the strength of a school’s incoming class.

To calculate the selectivity score, we first looked at the average undergraduate GPA of incoming students and then weighted the program’s acceptance rate. Simply put: hard-to-accept programs attracted a larger cohort of students.

To hold the programs accountable for their success, we measured one-year retention rates.

If the programs are not successful, they will not be able to continue to attract and graduate the best students year after year. Moreover, a larger number of students also means a larger alumni network. That’s why we measured the total size of a program’s most recent promotion.

Aubrey L. Morgan