I honestly think that there are just too many unknown variables to be able to speculate about our chances. I have heard that about 60% of people interviewed are admitted but I even have to question that figure this year given that they had a different proportion of applicants in each round this year. What we do know is that Sloan typically admits half of the class in the first round. But we also know that they had far fewer R1 applicants this year because of the earlier deadline. Does anyone know if they still filled half of their class? Was their first AdMIT weekend as large as it typically is?
Also, my guess is that the yield is higher in R1 than it is in R2 given that people applying in R1 generally apply to all of their first choices in R1. (Not to mention that the adcoms have more money to give out in R1 than they do in R2). So does that mean they let in more of the people they interviewed in R2 to finish filling the class? Or do they admit less but pull from the waitlist more?
I really enjoyed speaking with my interviewer and he was incredibly complimentary throughout the interview. But I had only 1 behavioral question/provide a story scenario (with a follow-up) where as other people at the lunch reported being hit with them one after the other from the get go and until the very end.
grasshawper wrote:
Like many who frequent this board, I have a lot of time on my hands and not much else I can think about these days. So here's a mental exercise I did last night, am curious what the other lurkers on here think and whether it puts your mind at ease at all:
1st, consider if 3 people interviewed, one will definitely have performed well, one will have performed well or average, and there will likely be a clear distinction with the third person having performed the worst of the 3. Keep this thought in mind as I go through this exercise, but know that there will be 8 total categories:
If they interview 800 people, we can categorize them like this, in my opinion:
Rank #1: ivy league/great school, high gpa, solid gmat, all-around good career with good recs, interview well, shoo-in
Rank #2: almost everything #1 has but a significant Achilles (lesser ranked school, no quant background, slightly lower gpa, low verbal pulling down gmat, not much experience, etc), interview well, shoo-in
Rank #3: demographics that help round-out the class, ie highly qualified minorities, females, poets, athletes, stellar adversity/personal stories, military, etc, interview well, shoo-in
For the sake of making this a clear mental exercise, I'll now skip to the bottom of the pack:
Rank #8: people who either cannot articulate thoughts well enough in English to make it, or people who come across as smug, pompous, otherwise deceitful
Rank #7: people who had a terrible interview, regardless of which of the 1st 3 ranks they came from above
Rank #6: people who had a so-so interview compared to the 1st 3 ranks above, didn't make a connection with the interviewer, didn't display traits of relationship-building, self awareness, etc. I think this is the waitlisted category. But think about it, 75% of 800 is 600, and they accept around 600. The odds are in this group's favor too.
That now leaves Rank 4 & 5. This is just my opinion, but if they accept 550-600 out of 800, it really doesn't matter to dissect these 2 categories because they will likely all get accepted. These categories would be the same as the top 3, except they just didn't perform as well as the folks from the 1st group, ie 1,2&3 did better than 4,5&6. My guess is group 4 has more of the under-represented demographic types, and 5 has more of the high-stats-to-boost-rankings types. Either way they all likely will get acceptances.
The point is this all comes down to did you flub your interview and come across as pompous and aloof? The stats tell me only about 1/8th did so, while 1/16th didn't speak English enough to warrant consideration, and 1/16th came across as lamers who aren't cut from the same cloth as what they're trying to put together to form a class.
I don't think I aced the interview, but I wasn't a disaster either and I think I made a couple of good points while being genuine. This exercise made me not sleep so great last night haha, but at least it gave me reason to think I've got a solid chance. Let me know what you all think about this nonsense, at least it helps pass the time!
12 Mar 2014, 19:42
close
