Harvard (HBS) Calling all applicants - Class of 2016

YES that's the spirit.

Sad thing is when I read threads in the past year I always look at the people who stay hopeful after the first wave and think - poor bastards...

Sure enough, 80% of them would get dinged.

BUT THIS YEAR IS DIFFERENT!! RIGHT?

having been a silent viewer for almost 2 years and finally registered for this post. I like it

Hi. I'm an international applicant and hope to secure admission in the 2+2 program. However, I am swamped with various entrance and semester exams right now which is why I probably won't get the required score on the GMAT. Would it be a really bad idea for me to apply during Round 3, by which time I should be having adequate time to have a good score on GMAT? Any advice appreciated

Posted from my mobile device

I doubt that the selection process is a crap shoot - some giant casino kind of thing enshrouded in a mysterious black box that is turned by the whims and caprices of the adcom members. NO definitely not. The admission guy wants people with solid stats quite alright - Rhodes scholar, and other stuff like stratospheric GPAs and GMAT scores, but that is just the starting line. Many candidates would probably become overconfident and do very little to craft a story, believing that their stats and resume will get them into the dream school. Big mistake. Many candidates with lower than average GPAs and GMATs have successfully cracked the Harvard code, and it makes you wonder. Somehow, the adcom guys can smell your personality off your essays, and if you are not a fit, you will not even get a whiff of an interview invite.

Out of curiosity...

To those of you who did get invites on Oct 9.

Are time slots for Skype interviews listed in the interview scheduling system?

Or do you have to reach out to AdCom by email to request for a Skype interview.

Can you see if there are any available interview time slots in London and where exactly these take place?

I doubt the adcoms are clairvoyant and can smell the personality by a 300 to 400 words essay. They look at the total package. The canditates I mentioned had very compelling stories - The major scholarships do take into account the personalities and the leadership qualities with essays and multiple interviews with a full committee (not one person reading your essay) and the process is more rigorous than an single essay. The adcoms process is more about the number of applicants (based on statistics - like STEP, Economics etc) in a pool as they try to balance the class in addition to legacy canditates. Look I am not trying to find flaws just mentioning the fact that people should not be disheartened as there are others like them who did not get an interview. There is the next round and if not other schools

I totally get your point. The process is certainly not flawless and these kind of stuff do happen. Would you agree that I have read less than 300 words from you but I can smell your personality from your posts? I am definitely not clairvoyant but I know you are an empathetic person and probably the go to guy in times of trouble. Am I right, or right?

I think too many people are confusing expectations with potential.

To tie this to a sports analogy, getting into Harvard is like winning a medal in the Olympic 100m final. There are three medals and 8, highly accomplished athletes fighting for it, all of whom have the potential to win. A 750+ GMAT McKinsey consultant/ibanker/etc. who wrote solid essays is like a person with a best time of something like 9.85 seconds. That is an amazing time and that person has the potential to win, but winning is far from a certainty. You have to be the best on the day that counts. For example, maybe your application was reviewed at the end of the day by a tired, grumpy adcom. Had you been reviewed in the morning, you would have made it through. But those are the breaks.

Even the person who is clearly the best doesn't always win a medal (i.e. Usain Bolt did not win a medal in the 2011 World Championships). People have off days. Other people are like Tim Montgomery - less talented, but they still can win because they use steroids (i.e. kids whose parents are alumni / CEOs of fortune 500 companies, etc.).

The bottom line is that its Harvard. People with great GMAT scores, above average essays, and solid professional pedigrees are the norm, not the exception. Harvard does not "need" any particular person with such stats. If Harvard wanted to, it could fill a class with a GMAT average above 750. But they don't. So there is clearly a lot more to it.

People fretting over not getting an interview invite should take solace in the fact that they are incredibly smart and talented and are going to succeed at whatever they want to do regardless of whether or not they get an MBA from Harvard.

For those who’ve received interviews: how many interview slots do you see available/already-taken when you sign up? That may be the best indicator of all on what % of interviews have been given out.

First time poster, but have been a reader for awhile now.

I'm also curious about the number of interview slots from wave 1. I didn't get an invite on the 9th and am hoping that this year's wave 1/wave 2 invite splits are more evenly distributed than the last two years'.

I wish I can give 10 kudos to this post. HBS has stressed over and over again that their main job is SELECTION, not EVALUATION - their priority is to build a diverse class, not to just admit the people with the highest stats. Diversity is also defined in many other ways - sure, I can claim myself to be a unique individual and I can tell a very authentic story about myself, but on paper, I probably look like a lot of other applicants.

I totally understand the obsession over how many interview slots are left, but what does that really have to do with our chances of being interviewed at the end of the day? Even if the majority of the invites are to be sent out next week, and you still don't add to the diversity of the class, you are still not getting in. Perhaps you believe that if there are more seats left, so you might have a bigger chance of claiming an invite. But if a bigger interview selection group is the only reason you are getting an invite, then you are a marginal candidate at best - the interview only has the potential to hurt you, not help you.

So, I'm not discouraging anyone from dissecting the number of invites sent out this week versus next week - but I think it is somewhat pointless.

...

I get the sports analogy. However there is a point you missed - that is if the last 10 runners are picked based on the continent they live in say 2 in each ( which is what most schools do) instead of the best timed runners - The system does not pick up the best.

I find it hilarious that you are comparing a sprinter taking steroids - who is a liar, fraud, cheat and thief - to Alex Blankfein and all the other guys who are very well qualified candidates and have done nothing to deserve those types of accusations. I get that you want to infer that they have the upper hand on the lowly peons from more modest backgrounds, but to call them cheaters and imply that they are otherwise unqualified is ridiculous.

Perhaps the analogy was taken too far, but the point was salient. There are some in the applicant pool that have an "unfair" advantage. Most people winning gold even with the aid of PEDs had to be pretty well qualified as well. I very much doubt that the point was to linearly compare or accuse any applicant to cheaters or of cheating. Regardless, here's hoping for some good news next week, and good luck on the other schools!

Guys do we know if the skype interview that HBS holds will be a video or audio interview?

Pretty sure the Skype interviews are video. Otherwise no need for Skype -- you could just do it by phone.