jlola21 wrote:
If it were me, I would take the outgoing and social person over the 'average' person.
I'm not an adcom member either, but the more I read, the more I get the sense that adcoms are looking for that "certain" person.
That "certain" person doesn't have a strength in any particular area, but is strong in all areas. In other words, they'd rather take someone with a "good" GMAT score (700+) who is also has a good GPA, work experience, social skills, etc, than someone who has a really strong GMAT, but has unimpressive work experience or social skills.
The "well-rounded" individual really is what they are looking for. You don't have to be spectacular, but you have to be strong in every area.
Of course, a well rounded person with a 760 will beat a well-round person with a 700. But well-rounded people aren't that common, so they are often willing to overlook a "good" GMAT or GPA to get that well-rounded individual.
Also, I think the interview carries a lot more weight than most people think. The problem is, interpersonal relationships are completely subjective. If you're interviewer
likes you, it's a big plus. If you're interviewer doesn't like you, not matter what you GMAT, GPA or work experience is, you're not getting in.
RF
I agree - the process is so subjective it's kind of pointless even talking about it, but it's fun at least