@
randombetch
What do you guys think of Sandy (HBSGuru)'s comment on a recent interview with P&Q where he says Stanford interviews don't matter?
Quote:
What are the basic differences between interviews at Harvard vs. Stanford, or Wharton?
Alumni do up to 90% of the interviews at Stanford and it’s well known that the interview is more of a marketing device to get alumni involved. You have to do something really dramatic to commit suicide in a Stanford interview. Basically, it does not count. The Wharton interview is now this group grope and it is easier to come off the rails, especially if the chemistry in your group is a bit toxic. But most people are hip to that. My guess is, the jerks come out in the wash at HBS and Wharton, so the process works in each case, although I prefer HBS because it is less likely to result in a false negative.
https://poetsandquants.com/2014/10/07/ho ... terview/4/I take Sandy's words w a grain of salt bc I think he's seen way too many applicants over the years and is a bit jaded,
in theh sense that he's got a very large pool of data with which to generalize and is therefore somewhat numb to the individual variances.
But there's definitely some truth in what he says:
people I know have aced (at least that's what they say, but hey, it's not easy to come out of an interview and feel you've aced it)
GSB interviews but got a ding, while others have gotten in despite being very shy, having weak English, etc.
That said, at the end of the day, it doesn't affect our approach as applicants.
I mean, so what are you going to do - screw the interview if you decide to believe him?