AlexMBAApply wrote:
SUGGESTED CHANGES TO THE MBA APPLICATION
Over the past eight years, I have been an admissions consultant, having reviewed thousands (if not tens of thousands?) of applicant profiles on various discussion forums as well as with clients who elect to sign up for my service.
And I know that some admissions committee members also read these boards as well as my blogs.
There have been gripes from admissions committee members that applicants are being "over coached" or that that it's more difficult for them to really get a sense for who the applicant is as a person (i.e. that the applicant's essays are inauthentic).
And there's a straightforward fix to that:
1. STOP ASKING THE WHY MBA/WHY NOW/GOALS QUESTION.
Theoretically, this may make sense. However, the reality is, everyone knows that b-schoolers don't know what they want to do. They are going to school to figure that out. Furthermore, having been an MBA student myself and know a lot of MBAs, having a strong narrative for this question has ZERO bearing on that person's caliber as an MBA student or in the recruiting process. In reality, we take it as it comes - it's not entirely in an applicant's control, because what job they take is as much a function of the job offers they get. That is why so many applicants trip up on this question because it forces them to make stuff up, or to be more specific than they really are about their goals.
Same with the "why MBA" - what are you adcoms hoping to get from this that won't sound cliche, boring, or simply just BS? And if they do say something truly original - it's likely gimmicky. There are only so many reasons why someone wants an MBA -- and the *real* reasons you don't want to hear are often personal ones: they are lonely at work and want to be around folks their own age; they want to find a soulmate; they want to re-live their college years, last chance to feel like a young student again before settling down post-MBA as a soon-to-be-married adult, etc. They feel stuck or bored in their careers and lives and want a change.
As for "why now?" - because they want to go... now! I want to go now because I hate my job. I want to go now because you adcoms don't like older candidates. And so forth. If you don't want applicants to bullsh*t you, then stop asking this question, because for 99% of the applicants who actually do get in - their responses to this essay was mostly BS or some standard issue narrative that doesn't really reveal their "authentic self." If adcoms don't bullsh*t answers, then stop asking questions like this.
Ironically, b-schools seem all about ethics these days, and yet, they ask a question that puts many applicants in a position to misrepresent themselves in order to "play along." Or they end up admitting the best bullsh*tters. Again, speaking from real experience as a b-school grad, the why MBA/goals narrative has ZERO to do with caliber, talent, or focus.
Thankfully, HBS and Sloan don't ask this anymore. It's about time other schools stop as well. It's a waste of time for everyone involved.
2. STOP ASKING THEM TO KISS YOUR ASS
Essays about "how will you fit into our culture" or questions about how the school's mission and values fit with the candidate's own history will naturally lend itself to plenty of ass kissing. It ends up being this BS story parroting the school's so-called values (give me a break... what's next - "mission statements" and "mantras"? Or "pillars"?).
I understand that adcoms want to identify candidates who may be a fit for a school. But you don't find that out by asking them directly to comment on your silly catchphrases that you call "values" or "culture," because you'll get plenty of empty platitudes and insincere compliments about how amazing the school is.
I mean, are the essays more about applicants telling the school how wonderful the school is, or is it more about finding out more about the applicant?
3. STOP ASKING ABOUT LEADERSHIP.
I know b-schools like to think they are training leaders, but come on, most people applying are in their mid-20s in junior positions at work. And even if they do volunteer somewhere outside of work, they aren't exactly General Patton. I know, there are different "models" of leadership or whatever linguistic gymnastics you use, but the fact is - you're dealing with YOUNG ADULTS. Or those in their 40s and above like to say - THEY ARE KIDS.
The more you push them to talk leadership, the more BS, embellishment and so forth you will get. Most of the incoming students don't have much *real* leadership experience simply because they're young and very early in their careers (and frankly they are *barely* adults). And whether they do or not at this point in their lives has little to do with the kind of leader they will be in their 40s should they be senior execs by then.
So cut this crap about leadership. It's pure BS, or you end up with students with their head up their ass talking about the kind of "leaders" they are (while they troll for undergrads at sorority parties on the weekends). These applicants are not CEOs. They are kids a few years out of college. Even those in their later 20s - they are still young in the grand scheme of things.
Asking b-school applicants about leadership is akin to asking high school kids about marriage. The overwhelming majority are not in a position to really know that firsthand, and that's okay. They very well could be amazing leaders later on, but there's no way of judging that right now because they are young, and they will not be the same people in their 40s.
4. ESSAYS SHOULD FOCUS ON WHO THEY ARE OUTSIDE OF WORK.
Thankfully, more schools now are doing this, but they could go further by getting rid of essays that deal with work entirely.
Why?
As an admissions consultant, I can predict reasonably accurately where people tend to get into based on a raw profile alone. And frankly, so can most adcoms. A resume, GMAT, GPA can pretty much tell you whether the applicant is even in range. I'm sure there are "diamonds in the rough" but even then you can probably spot that in their resume (i.e. they have something that makes them unique or intriguing).
You don't need to hear about yet another work project about how they worked in cross-functional teams and went above and beyond, led a group of people towards a common goal, blah blah blah. Again, you can pretty much get a gut feel for their career progress and overall caliber as a professional based on their resume (and a quick read through of their reference letters).
The essays should ideally focus on finding out who they are outside of work. It's not just about "extracurriculars", but about their personal backgrounds, what they love doing (even if it's a hobby), some important or formative moments in their lives.
By asking these questions, you will get the opportunity to really see the person behind the resume/profile -- and likewise, the applicant can write from a place of expertise - THEMSELVES. They are writing about their own personal history and what makes them tick, what their priorities are. You are then giving the applicants the opportunity to truly reveal more about who they are.
For example:
What are the three most joyous moments in your life thus far and why?
What have been the two lowest moments or biggest setbacks personally - how did you deal with it and what did you learn about yourself?
Aside from family, who or what is most important to you and why? (a version of "what matters most and why").
What personal experience in the last five years has changed you, and in what way?
What have you done or experienced in your personal life that you're most proud of?
If there was one moment that you could take back, what would it be and why?
What has been the biggest surprise (good or bad) in your life, and how has that surprise shaped who you are or your values?
And so forth. If schools want to build a class full of mature, thoughtful people with integrity and a sense of values, ask them to talk about who they are outside of work. The level of depth (or lack thereof) shown in these essays can be revealing. Adcoms can gain insight into who the applicant in ways that no resume can (but is a good complement to the resume, or "professional profile"). Also, asking them about their non-work self allows each applicant to reveal more of their personality, which gives the adcom a better sense of whether they are a fit for the school or not, because the applicant is *revealing* who they are (through the tone of their writing and what they are writing about), and not *telling* the adcom or parroting what they think the school's culture should be. It's about the applicant, and not about the school. A lot of the kinds of things adcoms are looking for (personality, team/people orientation, curiosity, exposure to different kinds of people, etc.) can be inferred or revealed in these kinds of essays in a more meaningful way.
Finally, adcoms hate jargon. Asking about non-work stories has a way of cutting out jargon entirely (because jargon is often used in work contexts).
5. CUT DOWN ON THE REC LETTER QUESTIONS
Some schools (Haas and Columbia in particular) ask way too many questions which often seem to be repetitive.
HBS, Stanford and Wharton are a good model to follow. 4-5 short questions is all you need. Maybe even 2-3: in what capacity do they know the applicant; what is their greatest strength or talent, and what is their weakness.
If you want rec letters written by the recommenders that are substantive, make it easy for them to do so. Cutting down on the question and/or even better - standardizing them so they are similar across all schools will ensure that recommenders can spend the quality time to be thoughtful, rather than rushing to submit 6-7 different rec letters for the 6-7 schools the applicant is applying to.
The written application and the essays in particular can still be useful -- so long as they are asking the kinds of essay questions that minimize BS in the first place.
This is a great read.. Would you mind putting this up as a new thread??.. I think it might be easily overlooked otherwise since it is so deep down into this thread..
close
24 Dec 2012, 10:22
