Inspiring MBA admission statistics!

Dear comrade!

Very, very useful post. Thank you for bringing in all the essential data points. Incredible job.

I've made another rankings based on your data - for me, it shows the relative desirability, loyalty and selectivity (snobbishness, if you will) of the schools. Couple of surprises there:

Desirability (no. of dreamy applicants ready to pay the admission fee):

1. Harvard Business School
2. University of Pennsylvania: Wharton
3. Stanford University GSB
4. Columbia Business School
5. Northwestern University: Kellogg
6. New York University: Stern
7. University of Chicago: Booth (Surprise! Explains the aggressive marketing of Booth in the recent years).
8. MIT Sloan School of Management
9. HAAS UC Berkley
10. UCLA: Anderson
11. Cornell University: Johnson
12. Duke University: Fuqua
13. University of Michigan: Ross
14. Dartmouth College: Tuck
15. Yale School of Management
16. University of Virginia: Darden

Loyalty (staying in the school once admitted - based on yield):

1. Harvard Business School
2. Columbia Business School (Surprise? A finance school, even if admitted to a higher ranked school, people prefer staying close to Wall Street?)
3. Stanford University GSB
4. University of Michigan: Ross (Surprise! Loved school, looks like king of sub-ultra-elite. Those applying know their strengths, maybe even didn't apply higher and stay at Ross once admitted?)
5-6. University of Pennsylvania: Wharton (Strong candidates' safety school, if possible, prefer to desert to H/S?)
5-6. MIT Sloan School of Management (Strong candidates' safety school, if possible, prefer to desert to H/S?)
7. University of Chicago: Booth (Surprise! Explains the aggressive marketing of Booth in the recent years).
8. Northwestern University: Kellogg
9. New York University: Stern
10-11. Dartmouth College: Tuck
10-11. HAAS UC Berkley
12. UCLA: Anderson
13. Cornell University: Johnson
14. Duke University: Fuqua
15. University of Virginia: Darden
16. Yale School of Management (No surprise: Ivy has its charm, but if possible - desert to a higher-ranked school).

Selectivity (snobbishness: based on % admitted):
1. Stanford University GSB
2-3. Harvard Business School
2-3. HAAS UC Berkley
4. New York University: Stern
5. Yale School of Management (Unjustified "ivy" snobbishness, explains the muddling in rankings years upon years, not building alumni base able to bring recruiters - but a nice explanation for US News generally "old money"-loving MSM surge in rankings).
6-7. MIT Sloan School of Management
6-7. Columbia Business School
8-9. University of Pennsylvania: Wharton
8-9. Dartmouth College: Tuck
10-11. Northwestern University: Kellogg
10-11. Cornell University: Johnson
12-13. University of Michigan: Ross
12-13. UCLA: Anderson
14. University of Chicago: Booth (Surprise! Looks logical, though, given the relatively low number of applicants and self-selection bias of strong candidates).
15. University of Virginia: Darden
16. Duke University: Fuqua


Neat job!

The most difficult assumption, for me, is that the aggregated results of 15K applications are in any way representative of our own applications' chances. What we really need to assess on an individual basis is how far away from the mean we are, one way or another, which isn't easy, especially since so much of the success of the application rides on attributes beyond a candidate's intrinsic worthiness (execution of essays, mood of the adcom, schools' insecurities, etc.).

This analysis is useful inasmuch as it shows that getting in to a top school is doable, but how much it pertains to any one of us is really anyone's guess.

great data!!
thanks Yeltsina and Pkit

Hi Pkit,

I appreciate the job you did in calculating the acceptance rate for top schools. This is a very good figure for people who are just interested in reading statistics about US b-schools admission. But i think it is an impractical figure, with no use to an applicant in deciding which schools to apply.

First of all to realize the acceptance rate of 49% you will have to apply in all 16 schools, which is impossible. Secondly even after applying to all the schools & spending abt 1.5-2 Lacs if you are gonna have a 50-50 chance of getting at least one school or 50% chance of getting no school, do you think anyone will ever apply?? No one.

What is totally missed in this analysis is the fact that acceptance rate differs for different schools & different candidates, depending on their profiles. The average figures is coming out to be 49%, but if we drill down, this figure will be very low for top 5 schools & will increase as we go down in the ranking order. Secondly if we move across candidate profiles from OK to Good & to very good, the rate will vary.

So to sum up we need another statistic that takes in consideration factors like - GMAT score, yrs of work ex, Quality of work ex, Graduation school, GPA, ECA, Other credentials etc, then give a weight to each factor & calculate a net score for each candidate. Then a similar score range for each school, with admit class profile, should be calculated. This can give the real picture.

Note: My scoring logic is only for the argument sake, even i cant calculate it, as collecting data for admit class is impossible for one person...

He's actually assuming a 5 applications/candidate average to arrive at the 49% figure. Some people are taking issue with that assumption because not everybody thinks that candidates actually apply to that many schools (on average - some people might just apply to 1-2 schools, while fewer apply to 5+).

I applied to 5 schools FWIW.

It's an interesting analysis in that it takes a little work to decide if it's relevant to individuals. I'm not sure. I wish I had the energy to really dig in.

yeah this is more of a tally of the stats.....if i have a 2.5 and a 600 im not getting in no matter how many places I apply.

THe assumption is that you are the average admitted applicant across all the schools if thats the case (which is impossible) then this hold "true"

I'd be really interested to see what an applicants chances were simply based on their stats. Knowing, for example, that meeting Harvard's average GPA/GMAT raised the acceptance rate to 30% from 10% would be great information to have, but schools probably don't want that information to get out.

Hi,

I appreciate your critisism and points to be considered. You are wvery welcome to challenge the analysis.

Actually there could not be any analysis/statistics predicting the possibility of a candidate to be admitted to top programmes.
Each candidate is unique. Thus there is no reasonable basis for comparison.

Schools are building their core class mathing together students like pieces of puzzle.

If one builds a financial model he/she uses a number of assumptions. Each assumption could be challenged and debated. This analysis is similar to a financial model, which is based on number of assumptions stated and unstated.

As jordanhendrix has mentioned the assumption is that you are an average MBA cadidate, who I suppose has an average GMAT score of 700+, average work experience of 4-6 years at some top firms and has a reasonably interesting extracurricular activities.

As bb has mentioned such analysis may be a bit optimisctic. I agree with him, because I assumed that all MBA applicants either apply to top MBA programms or apply to non-top MBA programmes. As we know there are a lot o people who are applyting to both top and non-top business schools.

So if to assume that half of people (out of 15k) have applied only to top schools and half of them have applied to both top and non-top, the probability of 49% could be reduced to 20-25%, which is more reasonable.

You are welcome to challenge the analysis and propose other assumptions and adjustments to adjust the figures in order to come to more reasonable %.

thanks.

Well what we are BOTH missing in our analysis is the correlation between admissions.

here is my own analysis i think i posted it before, it is not very neat

just type the name of the school in the H column (make sure it is spelled teh same as in the C column)

Simple stuff for GMAT quant section

I like your method but wouldn't you need a weighted average (like 17%) isntead of a pure average?

that's true

I would make a small adjustment to the model. RIght now, it assumes that everybody who is admitted to a T16 business school winds up going (Cell G20). On the contrary, I would imagine that some small but non-zero percentage of people who are admitted end up turning down all the schools they are admitted to because they have found other opportunities. Might be worth adding a fudge factor of a couple percent to the numbers we're looking at.

Still, the indication that these numbers give about how few people get into multiple schools is depressing.

IMO Columbia's 2nd place in loyalty is largely due to the Early Decision scheme.

Hi PTK, where did you get the 5 applications/candidate? My understanding is that in average applicants apply to 3 Schools