640...Dissappointed, but will move on...

I know you are pretty good at quant(from your posts I could make it out).

If you have time to take a shot at it, I would suggest you for it.

You can score more than 46Q.

Anyways 640 isnt bad too !!!

Congrats !!

Congratulations!

It's not bad score at all. I was following you posts & I'm also surprised a bit on your score but never mind. If you have written it once, I sincerely suggest you to consider retaking after some introspection.

Cheers...

Thanks Jainan, AK, Trivikram and Vivek for your very encouraging words!
You'll are very kind.
They make me feel much better than what I felt after the score appeared on the screen!

It is not a bad score.
and a Q of 46 is not bad either.

once u firmly decided not to spend the $250 again, it is time for the next step. Imagine once u get into your B-school, everyone is at the same starting line again, even if dudes beside you may even have a score of 790.

Tennis, I prefer to disagree with u. GMAT score will be valid for 5 years even after MBA. If ur planning to get into strategy consulting, GMAT score is a very important thing to take care of.

sorry, i don't get what you mean. Why do you say the score is useful to the strategy consulting? GMAC clearly states that the score cannot be used for any other purpose such as those career related.

Got a very good friend who works as an associate for Morgan Stanley. He said he was point blank asked his GMAT score at his first interview.

What is the purpose of this question? Do the companies want to hear that the interviewee got a 760+ or do they just want to make sure that the interviewee didn't get below a 640?

Will they say, candidate A got a 780, but B only got a 720, so we should consider A more favorably. Or do they say, 780 is a better score, but 780 720 is a wash. At least it's not a 600!

I'm finding more and more reasons (albeit not for business school applications) to sit for test again.

This is interesting!...I am not so keen on strategy consulting, but are they other jobs out there where a gmat score might count?...
Looks like its not yet time to get rid of OG! And I thought I was done with the gmat once I get into an mba program.

Tennis, sorry for not being clear. Matt, thanks for clarifying that.

I was trying to be a little funny and ended up being vague. What I was trying to say is, even after we complete our MBA, recruiting firms, particularly consulting firms, keep asking what our GMAT score is. I guess..even Investment banking firms do so.

Pelihu is the right person to comment on this. I read an excellent post of his on this topic. Hope he sees this post.

640 = 80%

That is good!

(The difference between a 720 and a 780 is only 3%! So, I doubt anyone really cares, but you never know.)

It is absolutely true that all of the top Investment Banks and Consulting Firms look at the GMAT (and other test scores). In fact, most require that you include these scores as part of your application.

Generally speaking, recruiters in other fields do not ask for GMAT scores. I spoke with a friend that recently graduated from Ross. He now works in marketing for a major products company and he told me that he was certain his offer was based entirely upon his interview (and the fact that he was attending Ross of course). He was sure that MBA GPA, uGPA and GMAT were not considered at all - and he even doubted if prior work experience was a factor.

For the most part, jobs in IB and MC are the most competitive and pay the best (not including the handful of PE, VC and other specialized jobs that limited folks at HSW compete for). Employment statistics from most of the top schools show that 2/3 or more of their graduates go into these fields. The 2005-2006 report from Chicago shows that 58.8% went into finance, and 22.1% went into consulting, for a combined 79.9%.

So, those not considering jobs in these fields can probably be less concerned with the GMAT once they are admitted (and offered financial aid & scholarships, which are affected by the GMAT as well). Those that are or might be interested in these fields (or the large paychecks that many seem unable to resist) will need to consider how their GMAT score will affect future prospects. There are rumors that, at some banks and MC firms, a 750+ will guarantee you an interview; and corresponding rumors that scores below a certain number will result in an automatic rejection. Banks and MC firms require these scores because they are extremely important in the hiring process.

Even for those that are not interested in MC and IB, consider that it is now common practice for MBA students to include their GMAT scores on their resumes. I read the following anecdote, written by a student currently at a top 10 school, recently: Those that score 740+ are happy with this trend. Those that score 700-730 include their scores reluctantly. They are aware that scores in this range do not distinguish them from the competition, but they must include it because recruiters will otherwise assume they scored below 700. So while other recruiters may not ask for your GMAT score, they will no doubt be aware of your score range - unless you are a high scorer that just refuses to adhere to this convention (not smart).

Finally, there's a story from the official Chicago GSB message board (from last year if I recall). A candidate with exceptional qualifications, background and grades got a 660 on the GMAT and asked if he should consider retaking the exam. An Adcom member (not some random person) responded saying that given this person's qualifications, he had a good chance of being admitted, but even so, he should consider retaking the GMAT; to paraphrase "your GMAT score will haunt you throughout your job search".

After writing the prior post I went out run and feed my dogs and I thought of a few more things.

A high GMAT is not the only path into IB and MC. Those that have relevant prior experience can probably overcome a moderate GMAT score. For example, is someone worked as an analyst for 2-3 years and then went off to a top school to get an MBA, they are probably prime candidates for associate level jobs (both IB and MC), as long as their GMAT isn't too low.

Another possibility is a quality blue-chip employment background. Work experience at a blue-chip company in a position of responsibility could be a great stepping stone to a move into MC; of course this is the same type of thing that can help get you into a top MBA program.

But for career changers that do not have exceptional (as compared to other candidates from top MBA schools) experience, the GMAT will be a pivotal factor when competing for highly sought after jobs.

It all depends on the point of getting an MBA. Pelihu, it almost sounds like someone doesn't need an MBA if their GMAT is high enough. However, I have hired hundreds of people (granted NOT MBA positions--entry level management) and I really could care less about test scores. I am not Boston Consulting or IBM, or even in the same universe, but hiring is hiring and it is more imortant that you find someone that makes sense for the business than someone with a high IQ. If all these jobs want is some generic demonostration of the knowldege of obscure quantitative and verbal rules, then they are not for me! Also, there are so many factors beyond intelligence that will determine job success and job satisfaction that standardized tests cannot ever quanitify. For example, many people here study for 1 month, and get 90%+ scores. Others (me included) have studied for months and might break 90% on a good day. What i have demonstrated in many ways is more valuable--work ethic, dedication, strong desire to succeed, etc. This, because it DIDNT come easy and because I had to work really, really hard. I would take that over someone who is naturally good at taking tests. Since when does a job consist of determining whether x is positive or negative? Further, many jobs require people skills--communicating, speaking, writing--which does not come through the GMAT. How can you tell if someone speaks well from the GMAT, or they have great charisma, or ability to influence others or demonstrate leadership et cetare.

Well, that is my point of view. But I am looking for work in academia and GMAT is a key part, but so are many other things. As with MBA programs, it is often who you know. That is the same as finding a great job. It is who you know and how hard you try. There are probably many people that work in 'blue-chip' companies that never took the GMAT nor have an advanced degree, but arrived where they are from simple dilligence and hard work. An MBA is not a magic pill that instantly whisks one to the job of ones dreams.

Unfortunately, much of what Pelihu says is probably correct. GMAT is too important. That is the game. Do what I did, go to a large university where GMAT is not a big deal, get an education just as good as most, and spend less on tuition!

(By the way, this obsession with 700 drives me crazy! 690 is 91% 700 is 92% for that matter, 680 is 89%! What gives? Does this bother anyone else? It is a spread of a few percentage points over 680-710, a grand total of....... 6 whole percent!! Yet, a spread of 30 points. Doesn't it seem that the scoring method needs revising to more accurately reflect the %? I know that the % changes, while the score stays constant over time, but isn't there a better way? Make freaking 600-700 the scale! Then NOONE will get over a 700!---Ok, rant over)

Well, you don't have to be unhappy about it. It is daily business in that industry probably. But who said you really wanna work in that industry?
You probably work in Walmart to sort through apples or Exxon to examine oil rig technologies one day and earn more than those consultants who work 25/8.

People have gone out of IB/MC to do something else, while some other get in to fill the roles. It is not as if there were no other world for MBA graduates if u don't get into IB/MC.

I agree that for many many jobs, hiring the hardest working most dedicated person is more important than hiring the brightest, most intelligent person. On the other hand, the most competitive jobs (MC and IB) require that candidates have it all.

I've spent substantial time working across from IB folks, and I can say for certain that it's not possible to succeed by working harder. These people work 80, 90, 100 hours a week regularly. To get to this point, they were already the brightest and most efficient.

Remember, we're really just talking about maybe 6-8 management consulting firms and maybe a dozen investment banks. This is just my opinion, but I believe that these firms believe that high GMAT scores will come pretty easily for those that are qualified to work for them. Firms don't care about what someone learns when the study for the GMAT; to them the GMAT is a known quantity that candidates can prepare for.

All MBA candidates are faced with the same problem known as the GMAT. People that are able to quickly adapt and learn the skills necessary to ace the GMAT also be the people that are able to think quickly and adapt to challenging situations on the job. I think you are missing the point if you believe that firms look at the GMAT because they are interested in how good you are at DS or RC or whatever. They want to know that when faced with a challenge, you can rise to the top of the heap.

Regarding whether an MBA is necessary, most of the top firms do recruit a lot of people with advanced degrees other than MBAs. When I worked in NY I knew many lawyers that moved over to become investment bankers. McKinsey and company is known to recruit actively at top law schools, PhD programs and even medical schools. Of course, regardless of the school they are recruiting at, they will want to look at your test scores (I know this to be 100% true for the LSAT).

For someone not looking at MC or IB, then the GMAT is much less important. As mentioned above, recruiters will assume that you scored below 700 if you don't include it on your resume (during MBA recruiting of course). Now, this may not matter at many companies - I gave the example of my friend where he was sure his scores didn't matter. But there are other competitive industries where GMAT might still factor in.

Whether a high GMAT is a good indicator of success is another question altogether, but firms are reasonable entities when it comes to hiring. They wouldn't rely on data unless they believed it correlated with successful hiring. They don't ask you to indicate your shoe size or hair style in their application, but MC and IB firms do require that you indicate your GMAT. You can draw your own inferences.

Thanks Pelihu, for droping in.

I completely agree...Hard work, attitude, communication skills are important in any profession. But they may be relatively less important compared to aptitude in some types of jobs.

I belive what GMAT tests is aptitude. In my opinion aptitude is a natural talent. Talent in solving a problem in a given unit of time. All said and done, some of us are born with better aptitude or talent.

Some exams like GMAT, IIT JEE (in India) test that aptitude. Some professions like consulting, research need that. Hard work is of course necessary. Also essential is, that natural skill to get inside the issue and come out with an acceptable solution.

No one has ever accomplished great heights in any profession without hard work. But in some professions natural talent or aptitude makes the climb much easier.

Federer, Agassi, Woods, Buffet are there where they are not only because of their hard work and attitude, but because of their natural talent. A top consultant needs similar talent. In an ideal scenario even a CEO or any other top manager needs similar talent. GMAT tests that. And is quite successful in measuring that.

I agree..there are many managers who reached top positions without great talent/aptitude or GMAT scores. But reaching those positions would have been suprisingly easier if they had high aptitude.