michanchou wrote:
for the lady/gentleman reducing most of the applicants to 2 words consulting & IB and calling us boring, here is a tip that I got from multiple GSB alumni:
Stanford admits individuals, not profiles. The diversity that the GSB looks for is across multiple levels which includes leadership style, life ambitions, and motivations in addition to WE.
Not to be insensitive to your wait but you should really spend some time to reflect on why you want to shell out 200K on an MBA that promotes its peer-teaching environment given that a significant portion of the class will come from these backgrounds that you are calling boring...
I didn't say that this is big3 and IB applicants who are boring, but the process. As a person who received an invite from Stanford you should be able to see the difference. The world is much more complex, diverse and interesting to restrict to easy-to-understand career and life templates. It is not because I am not a big3 applicant that I say so; I would have said the same if I were one.
Stanford admits individuals according to alumni. Hmm, I would be surprised to here something different from an interested party. Who would admit that he is just a "template guy". Individuals, exactly that is why there are 20% of applicants only from big3:
https://poetsandquants.com/2012/05/15/to ... -stanford/Not to mention those who worked in these companies right before they changed their work and applied (check on Linkedin).
Regarding the peer experience. We all know that this is a vanity fair. Signalling effect plays here a far greater role for employers than any particular skill, especially one obtained from peers and not from the acedemics. This is just how it works. And yes, this signal worth 200k.
Not to be insensitive to your wait, but you should really spend some time challenging popular templates. (Again these templates!)