arcticTO wrote:
I was recently at a prep admissions session where the speaker was talking about Harvard Business School and Wharton and mentioned that
1) the way adcoms look at applications separates applicants by industry so if you are a marketer you're really only competing against other marketers for spots in HBS - he said the same holds true for healthcare, finance, and consulting.
2) If you have a lower GPA but the same GMAT, you would have a better chance at Stanford than Harvard from a pure admissions rate perspective and he cited MBAdataguru....So in this case with a GPA of 3.1-3.3 but a GMAT of 700+ --> would this mean that chances are better with HBS than Stanford despite the fact that overall admission rates are almost double at HBS vs. Stanford?
I wanted to check here if this is really accurate, are there any truths to this from your experience? thank you
Sooo
1) Yes, but its not that simple. Its true that your most direct competitors are in the same industry in the sense that theres not one school that wants to have ALL marketers so it will balance out. But its not as if there are REAL QUOTAS. Not at all. the evaluation process is a lot more holistic. So the question that the Adcom will come against might be "Do we want yet another pretty strong Big 4 guy? Or should we take a chance on this startup guy with weak acads?" And every year there is a different pool of applicants with a different breakdown.
2) This does not seem to be the case. Stanford has and has had the highest GPA average of any MBA school. Bow it is something like 3.73 whereas HBS is 3.66. Close, but still... Im not sure what the basis for this idea is.
Best,
Jon
close
20 Nov 2016, 08:36
