Early
smkrn,
Yes I had over 40 hours and had the role of Managing Director. I recreated a company, you seem to have missed this.
If this is the case, then I think you've got a decent shot at convincing some of the admissions committees that your undergrad work experience qualifies as "professional work experience." It will still be difficult to do this, but from the information you've provided, I think you've got a chance. And like I said, some schools will be more willing to accept this than others.
Early
I saw that you stated that you were a white average joe in a previous post. I think that that is a very far depiction from what you are stating about your (impressive) academic background.
Unfortunately, you seem to fall perfectly into applicant category that most of us (undergrad to MBA's) do, which is that of a perfect GPA & GMAT, some academic involvement, but a lack of uniqueness in the adcoms eyes. From what I've gathered from my intensive readings (it seems the guys here are around my knowledge level of the schools generally), you usually need your academic background to be accepted as an undergrad + something unique.
My problem is that I have the unique factor many times over, but thoroughly lack the extreme academic competition among early career candidates.
What are your unique characteristics? They could be found in research or career aspirations if they aren't in your background (Im just assuming since you called yourself a white average joe).
Well thanks.
You're right, the biggest problem with my application is the "unique" factor. I've got a couple of things that are ok, but not great. Between my freshman and sophomore years of college, I took 2 years off from school to volunteer for my church (although once you're familiar with the culture that I come from, this isn't quite as unique as some might think). As I mentioned before, I've also played a fairly significant role and been a catalyst in creating a new degree at my university. And I think I've got some decent direction for my career path (which is at least not the typical banker/consultant path, for sure). So like I said, I don't have any jaw-droppers, but I've got a few decent things. That's why it's a long shot for me to apply now (but I still think worth it to try in my case).
Early
By the way, I'm sorry for the rejection. If you are planning to go into the job force and come back anyway, why do you want to apply with a lesser application now? Do you expect the application to have less of an impact later?
What have you planned for MIT? I've had a very hard time tailoring my brand for them as they seem to participate in interviews less (the adcom I mean).
Wharton somehow scared me off more than Harvard did. I think it's Harvard's strategy to appeal to everyone and not specify what their exact standards are that gets us applying, while Wharton sometimes scares people off with their direct statements from the adcom on quantitative stuff and sometimes somewhat against early career applicants. But I guess, thankfully, the quantitative issues arent there for you.
Have you taken any regression courses? Optimization?
Thanks, but rejections are a part of life. And I certainly learned a lot from doing that application.
That's funny that you say that about MIT - I think that school and application is going to fit me the best. They seem to be very college-senior friendly if you've got a solid background. MIT is my #1 priority and choice. They put a lot of weight on showing that you've been successful in the past (from what I can tell) as an indicator of your future success. So I'm trying to be sure to emphasize those types of things.
As for regression/optimization courses - only in an engineering context, so probably not what you're thinking of.