For Chinese and Indian MBA Applicants, It’s Time to Step it

For that to happen, first there needs to be more people in India and China to become philosophy or psychology majors

You must be really good at this as one post after the other, you just keep on committing the same mistake again and again.
[*] I never dispute the fact that there are successful Asians and that they lack the necessary soft skills to succeed. - Dont' extrapolate what you have seen. I am not sure whom you met or where you went to school.
[*]I am actually glad that in the Western society we are even allow to debate the merit of "diversity" and what should constitute an acceptable metrics in measuring possible candidates. It is not a subject matter that is debatable in the Eastern culture, nor have I seen any attempt in doing so
How much do you know about eastern cultures? I find it below dignity to comment on someone's society. It just shows your narrow mindedness. Gandhi was the product of the same society. There are many more, but I am sure after reading your posts that you don't know much. So no point in telling about them.



When did being a Westernized society became a measure of greatness? I feel it below dignity to comment on other cultures and beliefs; People are right, we are not taught such skills - whether someone calls them soft or anything else If you ever get a chance, read a few good books on the Eastern cultures. Read beyond what your media projects.

I think what you are largely trying to do is extrapolate your experiences on the entire Asian and Chinese applicant pool. In my opinion that is unfair because there are a lot of people (including myself) who have a completely different experience and point of view than yours.

Never in my schooling life did I spend 8-9 hours in school and I am hard pressed to find examples of people who did that. Another 3-4 hours of coursework? All I see is people spending a max of 1-2 hours doing their homework or attending tuitions. There are enough kids in my extended family and I do not see even one of them spending the kind of time on studies (a min of 11 hours by your account) as you have mentioned.

Extra-curricular activities that I see/have seen are mostly non-academic. While I was at a school I did everything from dramas to flying gliders and what I see kids (or for that matter high-school students) doing these days is playing a whole lot of sports and pursuing other creative interests.

Also I have a two year old daughter and we have not even thought about her playschool yet. Before she was born we were busy preparing and decorating her room.


The length and breadth of activities that I see in schools today (and participated in myself) are enough to enrich a student's overall education and learning experience. Students participate in inter-school art/drama/sports/debating competitions almost everyday. I studied art at school even before I turned ten and my school's corridors are studded with excellent paintings from current and former students.

The teachers in my school helped me find my true interest. Even though I studied Science at the final years of my high-school, I chose Economics for my degree courses. Many of my classmates went on to pursue their own interests. The current student pool I see is also not the one to just 'shut up and listen'


I participated in 3 prestigious debating competitions while I was at school. Each one of those had more than 50 fearless and fluent speakers. Last year I went to hear my nephew at his school and the quality that I saw in the speakers in his age-bracket would easily put an adult to shame. Re. presentations - let's say that my nephew (all of 14 years of age) can give me a run for my money in puting together a presentation.


While I don't want to talk myself up, I do think that I am a highly capable individual and very strongly believe that my schooling played a large role in shaping me. I know scores of other people who are doing exceedingly well in their chosen profession and in their life and who believe that the schools they attended have played a part in their success.

PLEASE do not generalize based on your experiences. It stereotypes people from these communities. You are presenting a very narrow view of the world as you saw it. There is much much more to people from Asia and China than just the academic aspect. There are thousands of academic instituitions in these regions that allow people to express themselves freely and help cultivate the skills needed to succeed in the business and social speheres of life.

What perhaps people might be missing here is that the number of diminishing students at top US business schools may not have anything to do with the abilities of such students but to the way schools in that region are positioning themselves. You have the INSEADs and LBSs of the world rightly marketing their programs as truly international with 80+ nationalities and 95%+ international students represented in each batch. They are in my opinion steadily gaining ground on US schools and are attracting even bright US students who previously would not have looked beyond the Ivy League. Top US schools might be trying to counter their rising stature by increasing the 'international' quotient of their programs and are hence cutting down on any one nationality they think are overrepresented.

That's great to hear, I did not know that


It is true that I am being narrow-minded. I think I was careful enough to make sure everything I had said was my opinion and my opinion only, not educated guess, not as a subject expert, but just from my own POV. As vansh had pointed out there are differences exist within the Asian educational system, and the differences are quite profound and I honestly had not come across that. People seem to be quite interested in this topic, and I just want to share my own personal experience, be it how narrow in scope (my immediate surrounding and the people I talked to) and how erroneous it could be, I still chose to share my POV because I honestly believe this is the kind of stuff that would help facilitate understanding, not just for you and everyone else, but for me as well as vansh had pointed out how much I didn't know.

If I ever came across as generalizing the whole Asian educational experience and demeaning, that was not my intention at all and I do apologize if I ever appeared as such

I completely agree.

I don't know much about Indians. But I know that Chinese students are in general highly homogeneous, because this is the way they have been brought up. If you pick 10 Dutch students and 10 Chinese students randomly, you will see a much greater variance among Dutch students in terms of values, experiences, etc.

So for the sake of diversity, it does make sense to recruit less students from China.

BTW, it is not just their educational system that stifles individuality, it is really their culture.

@Vansh

Out of curiosity where did you do your schooling? Sounds like you went to a "Doon School" type school.

I am sure that China and India have plenty of philosophy and psychology majors.

I know this is not addressed to me: I must say that my experience in high school in India was similar (except the hand-gliding part) and I went to KV, a government school. We had debating, drama, athletics, painting and singing competitions in school and at regional and national levels. Heck, we even had mandatory "sangeet"(music) class in 8th and 9th. There were many camping trips as part of NCC and Scouts & Guides. Any notion that Indian students lack ECs or are not well rounded is utter BS. I am sure there are some students who are bookworms but to brand an entire populace of as lacking in creativity is stupid. I know plenty of studs from IITs (which are often perceived to be nerd-central) who organize awesome cultural events and other ECs.

India is a large non-homogenous country where pretty much each state has its own language. India has been doing for the last 65 years what Europe is trying to do now with its European Union and single currency for the last 30 years or so, and rather unsuccessfully I might add. There is as much similarity between a Sikh gentleman from Punjab and a Tamil gentleman from the deep south as there is between a Scottish highlander and a Russian Cossack.

And imo the reason creativity flourishes in the West is because of a simple: the West can afford to let creativity flourish. If a kid in the West tries to do something creative and fails, there is a backup usually in the form of a welfare state. If you try to be "creative" and get a BA in theater and flop as an actor, you can flip burgers, make minimum wages and still make a decent living. In a poor country if you try something "creative" and fail, you will be stuck in poverty. The safer option is to get a technical degree as these degrees will give you a shot at a job that will give you a middle class life-style. But this is changing as India is becoming richer. I have friends who are are majoring in philosophy et al because their parents are rich and can hook these kids up with a job and/or a trust fund if things don't work out in their intended major.

As for the original topic of the thread: I think people are reading way to much into adcom decisions. IMO, the simple reason could be because non-Americans might find it harder to get a job in the US in this economy. This leads to high unemployment stats and would ultimately hurt rankings of schools. I am sure things will go back to normal when the economy improves.

Btw here is a very interesting article to read about US admissions. The article is about US undergrad admissions, but many aspects are similar to MBA school admissions as well. This article answers many questions that international students might have. Heck, you can even ask your references to frame recommendation properly and highlight those qualities that adcoms look for. The article is long but worth every single line. It pretty much explains why and how top American schools moved from a completely merit based system, not unlike Indian/Asian college entrance exams, to a less meritorious system. This article explains why things such as your references, whether your parents/spouse went to the same school and other intangibles matter. The situation of Indians/Asians today is remarkably similar to that of Jews in the 1920s.

https://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/1 ... at_atlarge

PS: I am not criticizing the American system. I personally prefer it to the Indian/Chinese system.

^That article is pure gold. Hat tip!

I consider Indians as Asians, whether the country is a subcontinent or not. The best system is a mix of both pure numbers and qualitative qualities.

At least with colleges, Asian Americans have tended to be concentrated in certain urban areas of US states, like California, and Virginia for example. Many of the best Asian students either want to attend the elite large universities, like Yale, or the best state universities in their respective state like Berkeley or UVA. At the same time there tend to be fewer Asian Americans at smaller liberal arts colleges, or at top rated Southern universities ranked just below the Dukes and Stanfords of the world. At least historically schools like Davidson, Vandy, and Wake Forest do not have a large proportion of Asian students in their colleges compared with their peers. I don't really know why.

Comparing b-school admissions to the injustices that Martin Luther King and Mahatma Ghandi fought against is insulting, at best.

b-schools aren't stupid. they form classes in a way that maximizes post graduation success. they aren't out to be charitable towards unqualified urms.
if they accept an urm over an indian, it's because they see a broader scope of impact. the indian might be just as (or more qualified) than the urm, but they've already got his potential field covered with others accepted.
sucks for indians and the chinese, but you can't blame the schools.
also, american schools aren't obligated to be "fair" to internationals.

I agree. As with minority representation among Americans, it's a tough call on the AA debate.

How is that? They fought for equity. When you are the beneficiary, it's easy to side with inequity. If the cycle of discrimination continues with elite school admission, what do you think is going to happen? This discrimination still continues into the workplace. I know URM complain about glass ceiling. But statistically, all minorities are underrepresented in the higher echelon of the corporate ladder.

Because candidates aren't being BARRED from admission at elite institutions due to their ethnicity. Because the governor of Massachusetts isn't standing on the steps of HBS saying, "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." Because students don't need National Guard escorts just to walk in the doors of elite business schools. Yeah, those are just a few reasons why there is no comparison.

The fact is that there are limited seats in a class at every school. Sure there may be enough qualified Indian and Chinese applicants to fill all 900 spots at HBS. However, just because someone QUALIFIES it doesn't make them the right fit for that particular institution. There seems to be an attitude of entitlement when it comes to b-school admissions. "I have the highest scores, I'm entitled to at least an interview." "I'm a URM, I'm entitled to get in." It's b.s. no matter who is saying it. The schools know what they are doing when they build a class. And like it or not someone's gender, sexual orientation, and ethnicity can definitely allow them to bring a DIFFERENT perspective to a class. Coming from the US, being an AA inherently provides a unique viewpoint (regardless of socioeconomic background) that cannot be understood unless you've lived it. Just like I am sure that growing up in India or China brings a highly valuable perspective that an AA could not fathom. The issue URMs do NOT face when applying to elite schools is that our #s are so much smaller that it's much more difficult for URMs to morph into a homogeneous group with similar educational and professional backgrounds and identical post MBA goals. It's easier to stand out, so yes it is somewhat easier for us to get in (but not easy). However, it is often much more difficult for us to even reach the point where we are ready to apply. Our pipeline into and out of the top b-schools sucks (and that's putting it nicely).

Real talk, URM numbers are so small at elite institutions that even if you gave half our spots to the Indians and Chinese applicants who are being "discriminated against," it wouldn't raise their #s significantly and I highly doubt it would add anything to a school's quality other than a higher average GMAT.

Discrimination has become a taboo in the “civilized” society, so instead of doing it openly, it’s done under the disguise of “diversity.” Essentially, it’s the same exact thing. If admissions truly carry about diversity, they can look at other factors like work experience. An Indian and AA programmers have in common than with their respective ethnicity.