closeEvents & Promotions
| Last visit was: 03 May 2024, 17:28 |
It is currently 03 May 2024, 17:28 |
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
06:45 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
12:00 PM EDT
-01:00 PM EDT
12:00 PM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
10:00 AM EDT
-10:30 AM EDT
08:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
10:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
16 Mar 2016, 09:01
| FROM FINAL HOUR MBA: The Waiting Game…and First (likely) Ding |
|
At this point all my applications have been submitted and I am in the territory that MBA and any college applicants dread…the doldrums of waiting for an interview. The admissions blogs give all sorts of advice for this time period: don’t bug the adcom, improve your profile, take a math class, don’t do anything at all, etc. Of course, none of it helps. Us poor applicants are in the purgatory of the application process, our emotions in the hands of the overlords known as the admissions committee. Each email from a school starts our heart fluttering, only to find out that it’s just a notice that our application materials are complete, or interview invites will be sent out February 8th (you know who I’m talking about). Luckily, I have been busy looking at additional schools to apply to and finishing my Hawaii application that I didn’t have much time to worry. I have only logged into the application web sites like 3 times since hitting that submit button. I am sure there’s some out there that check daily. Here’s some advice:
It turns out that Michigan sent out their final wave of interview invites on January 22nd. I didn’t receive an interview request so I didn’t make the cut. After reading further I learned that I am in one of two categories: waitlisted, or denied. Of course, I still have to wait until March 18 for the results. So, this looks like my first official Ding! This is going to be a long two months. Looks like I’ll have time to get some work done on the rest of this site!  
|
16 Mar 2016, 09:01
| FROM Pulling That MBA Trigger: Hello Los Angeles! |
|
I started this blog in 2014 and it’s taken till 2016 for me to come full circle. After a wait of 517 days (1 year, 4 months and 29 days, but who’s counting?) since I first started this process, I’m ecstatic to announce that I’m going to be a proud member of the UCLA Anderson Class of 2018. *SQUEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE* Okay, back to business. I couldn’t be happier with my choice and I now realize that there is nowhere else I’d rather be. Throughout the ups and downs of the entire admissions process, I’ve always believed that I would end up where I was supposed to be. Life has a way of working out, you know? I mean it’s hard to keep sight of that when you’re staring at your third rejection letter and your career is looking bleaker than Leo’s prospects of winning an Oscar – but you just gotta keep the faith and motor on (which is what I did plus a lot of binge eating, binge watching and binge regretting). I chose not to document the entire process this time around – to be honest, I was sick of doing it without having anything to show for it. But now that I’ve actually gotten in, I’m going to dissect everything I did differently this time around for the benefit of applicants and reapplicants everywhere (I feel your pain). I also have this faint idea of continuing to blog during the MBA, although I’m not sure how realistic that would be. In the meantime, anyone looking for help, advice or a shoulder to cry on, go ahead and send me an email at pullingthatmbatrigger@gmail.com. I would be more than happy to help!  
|
16 Mar 2016, 09:01
| FROM Pulling That MBA Trigger: So what changed this time? |
|
Okay, so let’s look at the cold, hard facts. My GMAT score stayed the same (710) My GPA is the same as well (9.03) The last time I checked, I was still an Indian engineer My work experience moved up from about 19 months to 26 months My job title is now “Product Manager” and not the dreaded “Software Engineer” it was before My post MBA goal looks legit now because I have the experience to back it up A senior colleague at my new job wrote what I can only assume was a stellar letter of recommendation Let me tell ya, I had to work my butt off to transition from being a code monkey to someone making actual product decisions. I must have applied to nearly a 100 places and interviewed at about 25 until I finally got the job I wanted. But I persevered because I knew that MBA or not, this was where I wanted my career to go. I guess the lesson here is: don’t let the fact that you got rejected bring you down (if you are a reapplicant like I was). The lofty goals that you’d written about in your essay? You can still get closer to achieving them without an MBA. By self-selection, most applicants are ambitious, go-getters who honestly don’t need an MBA to get where they want to go. Of course, if you still think business school is right for you, then your application will be stronger than it ever was before. Apart from switching jobs, I also narrowed down my goals even further. Previously, my short-term goal was to “work in company X as a PM”. I changed that to “work in company X’s Y division as a PM”. I backed it up with very relevant experience that I had and tied it in neatly to my long term goal. I’m sure it wasn’t a huge distinction, but it became super relevant during my interview, where surprisingly enough I spoke to a 2nd year student who had a ton of knowledge about my field of interest (odd because it’s quite a niche area). I believe that this worked in my favour since I was immediately able to establish common ground and our conversation centered more around the latest developments in that industry than the usual “tell me how you…” stuff. Finally, in my reapplicant essay, I called out what I believed were the weaknesses in my application. I addressed the age/work experience thing head on, I made a stronger connection between my short term and long term goals and finally, I mentioned in passing the gazillion students, alums and admissions officers I’d spoken to over an entire year. Now, I do want to caveat this by saying that I did pretty much the same things I mentioned above in my reapplication to Fuqua as well, but surprise surprise, I got dinged without an interview. There is a pretty big element of luck involved, plus the relative quality and composition of the applicant pool, so there is no “fool-proof” method to this madness. It’s just doing the best you can and hoping for the best.  
|
17 Mar 2016, 08:01
| FROM MBA For Tech: UCLA Acceptance and Tuck Interview |
|
Since my last post a lot has happened in terms of my path towards my MBA, so I will summarize these events and bring my blog up to date in 1-2 posts. The Dec 14, 2015 week was quite rich on decisions for me as evident from my previous post. But no day during that week was more memorable than Monday, the day of my UCLA decision and Tuck interview. Most schools schedule the calls based on geo locations of admitted students, so Asian and European students are among the first to see that magical +1 … on their phone screens, so I was quite confident that my Skype interview with Tuck will not conflict with my UCLA call (if I was to receive one). So after coming back from work I set up my Skype, got dressed up and added my Tuck interviewer, in a few minutes the call was made and I was facing my interviewer, a member of adcom. Very sweet and friendly lady was looking at me, while being located on the other hemisphere (just think about that, progress is an amazing thing!), but the picture froze and then again, we had difficulty hearing each other, so we decided to turn off the video, then tried to call again, then again, then I called her from my phone, then she called from hers, this was quite a challenging interview, and I would lie if I tell you that I can write good enough to sparkle in you that feeling of frustration that I had in the beginning. On top of that, when we finally overcame technical issues – I got another call, I tried to cancel it, but my phone decided otherwise and answered it while putting my first line on hold, and guess what, it was a call from Anderson! They informed me about my acceptance and congratulated me on it, I had to rush that call so that my interviewer didn’t have to wait for me listening to god know what kind of music. I think that I’ve noted a bit of disappointment in my Anderson caller’s voice, as I didn’t sound very exciting though I truly was, but on top of that I was trying to figure how to rush the call without hanging up. Now that’s some juggling I had to do. Not the best experience in theory, but thanks to my interviewer being so nice and positive what should have been a horrible memory turned out to be a very exciting and fun interview to remember and by the end of it I was relaxed, though worried that I couldn’t fully demonstrate who am I and why they should take me. Tagged: Interivew, Progress, Tuck, UCLA Anderson  
|
17 Mar 2016, 09:01
| FROM MBA For Tech: Week of decisions: calls from Anderson and Kellogg |
|
By the time this week started I already was accepted to Booth, my top 1-2 choice (with Kellogg), so I was quite relaxed and confident. First, I received an acceptance from UCLA Anderson, I tried not to visit GMATClub live thread too often and spend most of my day doing usual things (+Tuck Interview), so I they caught me off guard with their call and it was such a relief! I don’t have a lot of MBA’s among the people I work with, so it was difficult to assess my chances, especially considering the ding from Wharton, where I believe my app was quite strong. So actually receiving 2 admits was very important and powerful for my confidence, I knew that Booth acceptance wasn’t an anomaly but rather a reflection of my real standing in this process and with that Wednesday came and guess what: another accept! Northwestern Kellogg extended me an offer to join their class of 2018! Kellogg was my top choice actually, so this was a great call and I was ecstatic. The rest of the week wasn’t as fruitful in terms of admits: I got WL by Duke Fuqua and has withdrawn my app, and Haas has dinged me without an interview. This actually raised some questions concerning my applications; I used different strategies that I would group as follows:
It seems that my second strategy was a disaster, I had time and I submitted what I wanted, but something was missing. And I think it was the ‘essence’ that was missing, stories were about me, but they didn’t really draw one true picture of me, it was ‘a bit of this, a bit of that’, while my Booth/Kellogg essays were all linked by a common theme, that was present throughout the essays and I think these essays drew a single picture in the readers mind about who is that person they are reading about. But that’s just one theory, and I think it’s important to not confuse correlation with causation.  
|
19 Mar 2016, 10:01
| FROM Tech MBA Girl: HBS vs Haas for Technology MBAs |
As you all know, Stanford is a done deal for my applications in Round 3. I’ve made a lot of progress with my app so far. Oh btw, there’s a second Stanford GSB Just In Time Webinar for Round 3 on March 22 at 09:30 AM Pacific Time. Shoot me an email for the password if … Continue reading HBS vs Haas for Technology MBAs →
|
23 Mar 2016, 01:01
| FROM MBA For Tech: US News and World Report 2017 MBA ranking |
|
When number of options is huge, it is important to have some tools that will help you with your decision. More often than not prospective students learn about their options through MBA rankings, but that’s only one of the steps, after taking a look at the rankings students need to research each of the schools separately, employment reports, regional placements, curriculum, quality of student body, flexibility, potential impact on you as a person and a professional etc. So it only follows, that after students look at the rankings and chose 5-7 schools close to each other (a few stretches, reaches and safe schools), they should not be surprised by differences when they look into employment reports and other detailed data. And that’s one of the reasons US News and World Report ranking is the most popular ranking tool – there are not a lot of fluctuations and similar schools are grouped together (when I just started looking at MBA programs I didn’t know about how strong Kellogg is because I used FT rankings, which have very little to do with reality, so if not for further research I wouldn’t have known that Kellogg is a top 5 school). But this year it might be different, at least in top-20. A few upsets made me question this ranking and reassess its value. Booth tied with Stanford at #2 This is the first thing that will catch an eye of someone familiar with top schools’ reputations. Yeah, HBS took #1 again, but that’s not something that will surprise, but Booth having a largest leap among M7: it surpassed Wharton and tied with Stanford, is interesting. Seems like placement % has a huge impact among top-5 schools. If we take a look at their reports, it seems that Stanford students take more time to look for jobs:  MBA Employment reports 2015 Booth / Stanford 18% of students looking for jobs accepted offers in the 3 months after graduation. In case of weaker schools I would have suspected that these students just had to look for jobs after graduation, because they couldn’t secure an offer earlier, but in case of elite schools, that reasoning is most likely not correct. This anomaly, I suspect is explained by PE/VC/HF and start up recruitment, they are the last to hire and require some additional time commitments from students, and if that guess is correct, than it tells us that Stanford students are not afraid of taking risks, which speaks volumes about their confidence on employment opportunities. Unfortunately that is not measured by US News report, making it a bit less trustworthy. I know for a fact that Booth career office encourages students to not accept offers they don’t like, as they are confident they can get their MBA’s better ones. It follows that not accepting an offer doesn’t necessarily mean a bad thing. Yale jumps 5 places to #8 or Ted Snyder is at it again I think this is the most talked change this year. I mean a lot of us predicted that Yale will enter Top-10 within a few years, but they did it in 2016 and not only did they enter top-10, they tied for #8 with Tuck and surpassed CBS at #10. I personally think this change was a bit premature, yes the school is great, but here is the data I extracted from employment reports and LinkedIn for the class of 2015:  MBB/Consulting ratio at top schools (GSB and HBS probably have even better results) As homage to Big Mac Index, I used MBB/Consulting index to put employment reports in perspective. I didn’t do the same for IB due to decline in placement; I think in 2016 Consulting rules the MBA employment. And this small and a bit flawed report (can’t fully trust Linkedin, hence the lack of Wharton) shows the difference in QUALITY against quantity, something that MBA rankings don’t take into account, but they should. Yale is a great program, but it is not better than CBS, it should not be tied with Tuck and it is not that far ahead of Darden (if at all) this year. Probably, by 2020 Yale will be among top-8 schools due to merit, not flaws in rankings. Especially considering that rankings are self-fulfilling prophecies, if before Yale admits often were choosing between M7 and Top-15 school, now they will be choosing M7 vs Top-8, and while in first case it was a difficult choice to make, now it seems much easier and add to that Yale’s name, a name that is much better known than other M7 schools, with the exception of Harvard, Stanford and MIT. New York schools drop in rankings, CBS #10 (-2) and Stern #20 (-9). Though both schools are placed lower than they should be in my opinion, the reasons are quite different, CBS was poorly performing in this ranking for quite some time now, so they just continued drifting lower, though their employment reports are quite clearly top-8. As of NYU Stern, their dean wrote this article: https://www.stern.nyu.edu/experience-stern/news-events/us-news-2017-rankings and it kinda raises certain questions about US News ranking, is it really right to knowingly release wrong data? What if HBS or Stanford were in that situation? Are there other data points that were filled in using flawed ‘estimation’ process? This situation with Stern is a good example of why people shouldn’t take rankings at face value, even they are prepared by US News and World Report, and considering that Bloomberg BW guys are not afraid of adapting and fixing flaws, I think they can take the place of most prestigious rankings for MBA’s if this year they will avoid mistakes similar to those listed. Tagged: Careers, rankings, thoughts  
|
01 Apr 2016, 21:02
| FROM Tech MBA Girl: How I Got Waitlisted at Tepper |
So this is what it feels like to be waitlisted. I feel like the geek at school who asked Anna to go to the prom with him but she’s gonna ask Jimmy to go with her instead cuz he’s more awesome. If Jimmy says no, then she just might give me a chance but I have to wait till … Continue reading How I Got Waitlisted at Tepper →
|
04 Apr 2016, 04:34
| FROM Tech MBA Girl: How I Got Waitlisted at Tepper |
|
So this is what it feels like to be waitlisted. I feel like the geek at school who asked Anna to go to the prom with him but she’s gonna ask Jimmy to go with her instead cuz he’s more awesome. If Jimmy says no, then she just might give me a chance but I have to wait till … Continue reading How I Got Waitlisted at Tepper →
|
05 Apr 2016, 07:02
| FROM Tech MBA Girl: Work-MBA Balance? |
It’s happening. The thing they tell you might happen but you shrug off. I’m being edged out at work! I’ve been on this MBA admissions brouhaha since last year and my boss knows, my boss’s boss knows and so does HR. Why wouldn’t they? I used them all as references. We’re a such a small company … Continue reading Work-MBA Balance? →
|
05 Apr 2016, 13:01
| FROM The MBA Manual: 50,000! |
|
Well, the year’s tally is in and we had 50,000 page views on the site! As someone who tries to create tools that other people find useful, I cannot stress how rewarding it is to see how much use the site is getting (and Behaviorals.com is starting to take off, too!). The thanks and compliments I’ve received make it even more worthwhile. I hope that the next wave of applicants finds the site just as helpful as you guys have. See you at 100,000.  
|
10 Apr 2016, 10:01
| FROM MBA For Tech: Week of decisions: calls from Anderson and Kellogg |
|
By the time this week started I already was accepted to Booth, my top 1-2 choice (with Kellogg), so I was quite relaxed and confident. First, I received an acceptance from UCLA Anderson, I tried not to visit GMATClub live thread too often and spend most of my day doing usual things (+Tuck Interview), so I they caught me off guard with their call and it was such a relief! I don’t have a lot of MBA’s among the people I work with, so it was difficult to assess my chances, especially considering the ding from Wharton, where I believe my app was quite strong. So actually receiving 2 admits was very important and powerful for my confidence, I knew that Booth acceptance wasn’t an anomaly but rather a reflection of my real standing in this process and with that Wednesday came and guess what: another accept! Northwestern Kellogg extended me an offer to join their class of 2018! Kellogg was my top choice actually, so this was a great call and I was ecstatic. The rest of the week wasn’t as fruitful in terms of admits: I got WL by Duke Fuqua and has withdrawn my app, and Haas has dinged me without an interview. This actually raised some questions concerning my applications; I used different strategies that I would group as follows:
It seems that my second strategy was a disaster, I had time and I submitted what I wanted, but something was missing. And I think it was the ‘essence’ that was missing, stories were about me, but they didn’t really draw one true picture of me, it was ‘a bit of this, a bit of that’, while my Booth/Kellogg essays were all linked by a common theme, that was present throughout the essays and I think these essays drew a single picture in the readers mind about who is that person they are reading about. But that’s just one theory, and I think it’s important to not confuse correlation with causation.
|
10 Apr 2016, 10:01
| FROM MBA For Tech: US News and World Report 2017 MBA ranking |
|
When number of options is huge, it is important to have some tools that will help you with your decision. More often than not prospective students learn about their options through MBA rankings, but that’s only one of the steps, after taking a look at the rankings students need to research each of the schools separately, employment reports, regional placements, curriculum, quality of student body, flexibility, potential impact on you as a person and a professional etc. So it only follows, that after students look at the rankings and chose 5-7 schools close to each other (a few stretches, reaches and safe schools), they should not be surprised by differences when they look into employment reports and other detailed data. And that’s one of the reasons US News and World Report ranking is the most popular ranking tool – there are not a lot of fluctuations and similar schools are grouped together (when I just started looking at MBA programs I didn’t know about how strong Kellogg is because I used FT rankings, which have very little to do with reality, so if not for further research I wouldn’t have known that Kellogg is a top 5 school). But this year it might be different, at least in top-20. A few upsets made me question this ranking and reassess its value. Booth tied with Stanford at #2 This is the first thing that will catch an eye of someone familiar with top schools’ reputations. Yeah, HBS took #1 again, but that’s not something that will surprise, but Booth having a largest leap among M7: it surpassed Wharton and tied with Stanford, is interesting. Seems like placement % has a huge impact among top-5 schools. If we take a look at their reports, it seems that Stanford students take more time to look for jobs: MBA Employment reports 2015 Booth / Stanford 18% of students looking for jobs accepted offers in the 3 months after graduation. In case of weaker schools I would have suspected that these students just had to look for jobs after graduation, because they couldn’t secure an offer earlier, but in case of elite schools, that reasoning is most likely not correct. This anomaly, I suspect is explained by PE/VC/HF and start up recruitment, they are the last to hire and require some additional time commitments from students, and if that guess is correct, than it tells us that Stanford students are not afraid of taking risks, which speaks volumes about their confidence on employment opportunities. Unfortunately that is not measured by US News report, making it a bit less trustworthy. I know for a fact that Booth career office encourages students to not accept offers they don’t like, as they are confident they can get their MBA’s better ones. It follows that not accepting an offer doesn’t necessarily mean a bad thing. Yale jumps 5 places to #8 or Ted Snyder is at it again I think this is the most talked change this year. I mean a lot of us predicted that Yale will enter Top-10 within a few years, but they did it in 2016 and not only did they enter top-10, they tied for #8 with Tuck and surpassed CBS at #10. I personally think this change was a bit premature, yes the school is great, but here is the data I extracted from employment reports and LinkedIn for the class of 2015: MBB/Consulting ratio at top schools (GSB and HBS probably have even better results) As homage to Big Mac Index, I used MBB/Consulting index to put employment reports in perspective. I didn’t do the same for IB due to decline in placement; I think in 2016 Consulting rules the MBA employment. And this small and a bit flawed report (can’t fully trust Linkedin, hence the lack of Wharton) shows the difference in QUALITY against quantity, something that MBA rankings don’t take into account, but they should. Yale is a great program, but it is not better than CBS, it should not be tied with Tuck and it is not that far ahead of Darden (if at all) this year. Probably, by 2020 Yale will be among top-8 schools due to merit, not flaws in rankings. Especially considering that rankings are self-fulfilling prophecies, if before Yale admits often were choosing between M7 and Top-15 school, now they will be choosing M7 vs Top-8, and while in first case it was a difficult choice to make, now it seems much easier and add to that Yale’s name, a name that is much better known than other M7 schools, with the exception of Harvard, Stanford and MIT. New York schools drop in rankings, CBS #10 (-2) and Stern #20 (-9). Though both schools are placed lower than they should be in my opinion, the reasons are quite different, CBS was poorly performing in this ranking for quite some time now, so they just continued drifting lower, though their employment reports are quite clearly top-8. As of NYU Stern, their dean wrote this article: https://www.stern.nyu.edu/experience-stern/news-events/us-news-2017-rankings and it kinda raises certain questions about US News ranking, is it really right to knowingly release wrong data? What if HBS or Stanford were in that situation? Are there other data points that were filled in using flawed ‘estimation’ process? This situation with Stern is a good example of why people shouldn’t take rankings at face value, even they are prepared by US News and World Report, and considering that Bloomberg BW guys are not afraid of adapting and fixing flaws, I think they can take the place of most prestigious rankings for MBA’s if this year they will avoid mistakes similar to those listed. Tagged: Careers, rankings, thoughts
|
10 Apr 2016, 15:01
| FROM My Journey to Business School: Research, Design, Build – The Power of Design Thinking |
|
As I hunched over my bathroom sink for the umpteenth time recently, I wondered why it was acceptable for most adults to bend over to about half our height multiple times a day. “Adjustable sinks – Why aren’t they a thing yet?”, I thought to myself. I then went online to dig deeper and research the same question. This is the effect internalizing design thinking has had on me. I no longer accept the status quo because it exists; I question how a product might be if I could design it on a blank canvas in a new, unbiased way that satisfies user needs. Kellogg’s Research-Design-Build class simplified the design thinking process into three major buckets: Research It is important to identify the right problem to solve. We learned we need to first recognize if there is a problem, and then define the scope of the problem. We don’t want to ask people outright what they want, because as Henry Ford said, “If I had asked my customers what they wanted, they would have said a faster horse.” Our class was asked to solve a problem, any problem, for Northwestern. And to do this, each team in our class spent two weeks on research — doing interviews with students and faculty, shadowing people, taking pictures and videos, and generally observing how people interacted with the Northwestern environment. Teams refined their research objectives and project focus over the course of those weeks based on some interesting, relevant and actionable (IRA) insights we derived from our user research. Design Once we had our problem statement and insights, it was time to start brainstorming and designing solutions. Each class was structured such that there would be a gallery walk where all teams presented their last week’s work to receive feedback from peers and professors, and in the remainder of the class we learned tactical tools and frameworks that would aid us in designing possible solutions. We used Post-its and sticky notes while brainstorming to record our ideas, and were open to moving those around or just discarding them and starting with a fresh board. We were encouraged to think beyond the obvious and to come up with ideas that pushed boundaries, were innovative and grounded in insights. We learned the “Yes, and” approach to idea generation. One of the first things Professor Greg Holderfield told us at the beginning of the class was: ‘Ideas are not precious. Experiment with them.” And that’s what we did during this phase. The focus was to generate lots of ideas and enjoy the process of idea generation. Build We were asked to evaluate and validate the ideas we generated during the Design phase. We thought about the desirability, feasibility and viability of our proposed concepts. Would our solution solve a problem for people? Would users want our product or solution? How easy is the solution to implement? Is it scalable? I was struck by the power of simple prototyping and the use of storyboards to tell a story and present an innovative solution instead of a PowerPoint presentation, and how much more interesting and compelling these presentations were. I have since used storyboards to present product concept ideas even in job interviews, and they were well received! ———————————————————————– In the second half of the course, our class had the opportunity to apply the design thinking frameworks we learned in the first five weeks to address problem statements set by a client — Protein Bar. It was challenging and exciting to visit different Protein Bar stores in Chicago, interview customers and staff and observe people’s in-store behavior to come up with innovative solutions rooted in insights to the problem statements set by Protein Bar. Each team presented interesting new ideas and got feedback from Protein Bar executives who visited our class during the midway mark; this gave teams a chance to validate ideas and course correct (if needed) in preparation for the final. We presented our final solutions to Samir Wagle, the CEO/President of Protein Bar, and this was an invaluable exercise in bringing all we learned to life and pitching potential ideas to a top-level decision maker receptive to innovation. A few months after our presentations, thiswas in the news. It will be interesting to see how the ideas we pitched will be adopted into Protein Bar’s new stores. Overall, this was a course that validated my decision to apply to Kellogg’s MMM Program, and I know I will have the opportunity to apply this newly gained design thinking toolkit in my upcoming internship as well as my post-MBA endeavors.  
|
26 Apr 2016, 12:01
| FROM Grant Me Admission: My 3 Biggest Mistakes Studying for the GMAT (updated) |
Last time I took the GMAT, I got a 710. As I study to take it again, I reflect on three mistakes I made last time…
|
26 Apr 2016, 12:01
| FROM Grant Me Admission: Want to meet the Top Schools all at once? |
Hello everyone! Researching, networking, and understanding the “feel” for a school are all part of the essential journey to a top MBA. Wouldn’t it be great…
|
29 Apr 2016, 06:01
| FROM TopDogMBA - A Reapplicant's Tail: There’s a place |
So, my final tally is in. I applied to three b schools in total this season: INSEAD – admitted MIT Sloan – admitted Wharton – waitlisted and dinged No MBA application process is complete without at least one ding – I know people who secured H/S/W admits and were still dinged by other schools! – […]
|
29 Apr 2016, 06:01
| FROM TopDogMBA - A Reapplicant's Tail: Ticket to ride |
It’s been a while since I updated my blog. Sorry for that but I’ve been kinda busy packing up ready for this whole MBA thing I’ve been getting a lot of inquiries from folks starting out on their application journey (or thinking about it) and I hope I’ve given some food for thought to the next […]
|
05 May 2016, 08:32
07 May 2016, 15:02
| FROM Tech MBA Girl: Haas Interview Invite! Some Light In The Long Long Tunnel |
I sunk into a sea of depression after I discovered I was waitlisted at Tepper. I had turned down my Rotman offer and only had the waitlist offer to hold on to. I panicked. I wasn’t going to let my future depend on one yes or no decision so I applied to every decent program that was still … Continue reading Haas Interview Invite! Some Light In The Long Long Tunnel →
|
|
|
||
Hi Generic [Bot],
Here are updates for you:
ANNOUNCEMENTS
AGSM at UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE
Tuck at Dartmouth
GMAT Club REWARDS
|
