Rankings & Accreditation Consulting
Strategic consulting for universities pursuing standing in QS, THE and ARWU, and accreditation from AACSB, EQUIS, ABET and FIBAA.
What we do
Rankings and accreditation ask different questions of the same institution. The data, governance and evidence that satisfy one usually strengthen the other — provided they are built deliberately rather than assembled twice.
Position is decided by a small number of weighted indicators, most of which depend on data you already hold but may not report well.
Accreditation rewards evidence, not intention. We build the systems that produce that evidence continuously, not in the year before a review.
Framework decoder
Three systems, three definitions of a good university. Institutions lose years optimising against the one that rewards them least. The weightings are public — reading them correctly is where strategy starts.
Times Higher Education weights research quality and teaching almost equally, with research environment close behind. International outlook and industry income carry comparatively little.
Quacquarelli Symonds leans heavily on reputation surveys. Academic and employer reputation together carry 45% of the score, so nearly half of a QS position reflects how an institution is perceived rather than what it produces.
The Academic Ranking of World Universities uses no surveys at all. Awards, highly cited researchers and top-tier publications decide position, which makes it the hardest to influence quickly.
Who we help
Presidents, provosts and vice-chancellors setting institutional direction and answerable for position.
Academic leaders preparing programme accreditation or lifting subject-level standing.
QA teams running accreditation cycles and institutional effectiveness.
Staff responsible for submissions, data collection and year-on-year tracking.
IR professionals owning data governance, reporting and the evidence base.
Cross-functional teams turning institutional ambition into measurable plans.
How we work
Establish where you actually stand: current performance, data quality, and position against the peers you are measured beside.
Identify what is holding position back, separating what can move this cycle from what is structural.
A sequenced plan with owners, milestones and the resourcing each step needs. Realistic about timelines.
Advisory support through implementation: troubleshooting, training and adjusting as conditions change.
Track against the indicators that matter and adapt as methodologies shift.
What changes
Not a promised position — no consultant controls that. These are the things that reliably improve when the underlying work is done properly.
Institutional data that is accurate, complete and reportable without a scramble each cycle.
Better standing in the global, regional and subject tables that actually reward your strengths.
Submissions that succeed, and systems that keep succeeding at renewal.
A repository that answers an assessor rather than being assembled for one.
Collection, validation and reporting that stop consuming the same effort twice.
A shared, accurate understanding of position across governance and leadership.
How we work in practice
Composite examples drawn from situations institutions commonly face.
Five years in the same QS band while research funding rose steadily. Leadership could not explain the gap between investment and position.
A private business school in EuropeAn initial review that did not succeed, citing unstructured Assurance of Learning and insufficient academically qualified faculty.
An emerging technical institute in AsiaNo international recognition and an ambition to attract overseas STEM students within three years.
University Health Check
A structured self-assessment across the indicators that decide ranking position and the systems accreditors expect to find. You get a readiness level and a clear view of the gaps. About five minutes, completely confidential.
Common questions
No, and anyone who does is misleading you. Ranking organisations make ranking decisions and accreditors make accreditation decisions. What we can do is make sure your performance is accurately recorded, correctly attributed and properly reported — which is where most institutions lose position they have already earned.
Ranking positions move over cycles, not months, and accreditation is typically a multi-year process. A data and attribution audit can show results within one submission cycle. Anything structural takes longer, and we will say so before you commit.
They are illustrative composites based on situations institutions commonly face. They are not specific clients, and we say so on the page. We hold client relationships in confidence.
No. We are an independent consultancy with no relationship to any ranking organisation or accreditation body, which means nothing we recommend is shaped by one.
That is usually the best time. Most of the expensive mistakes we see come from institutions targeting an outcome before the underlying data and evidence can support it.
Engagements are scoped and quoted individually, because the starting point varies enormously. There is no charge for a discovery call or a Health Check.
UniRanking is an independent consulting firm. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or officially connected to any ranking organisation or accreditation body. All ranking decisions are made by ranking organisations, and all accreditation decisions are made by accrediting bodies. We help institutions prepare — we do not influence outcomes.
A discovery call is a straightforward conversation about your position, your targets and whether we are the right people to help.