As the 2020 admissions cycle draws to a close and many well-deserving applicants get disappointing news this admissions cycle, I wanted to emphasize that all is not lost and share my two cents about successfully reapplying in EA/R1 next year.
Background:
Indian Male Engineer -- so you know I'm screwed even before reading the rest of the debrief. Applied in 2019 to US T-20 B-Schools with a 740 GMAT (
debrief here.). Received 8 dings in R2 despite good professional achievements. Crushing humiliation followed.
Outcomes in 2020:
Applied to 7 schools across R1 and R2.
- Dinged without Interview by 2 (Kellogg and Anderson),
- WL Admit by 2 (Duke and Tepper - no scholarship),
- Admitted with Fellowship to 3 (Kenan Flagler, Kelley, McDonough/Georgetown) - $250k scholarship
Changes made sequenced by the degree of importance (IMO):
Revise ST and LT goals:
I applied last year with unrealistic goals (VC -- with no pre-MBA background in VC/PE). As an international applicant, it was critical that my goals be super-relevant to my pre-MBA work experience. The job market for internationals is very unfavorable -- roughly 1 out of 5 companies sponsor internationals; schools don't want out-of-work internationals graduating from their programs. I re-aligned my goals (PM in Big Tech) to tie into my pre-MBA work experience (tech start-ups). This made me less of a liability and gave B-Schools a clear picture of what my career trajectory would look like.
Glowing Letter of Recommendation:
This is atypical; however, as a tech-founder, one of my letters of recommendation came from my ex-co-founder. This doesn't seem super credible. Business schools strongly suggest that recommendations be written by direct supervisors. Since I had only had one direct supervisor until 18/19, my second recommendation had to come from a peer. In 19/20, I took up a new role in a well known, fast-growing start-up and sought a recommendation from the CEO (with whom I work directly). I'm sure this added a tonne of credibility.
Promotions and Achievements:
I was promoted twice in four months and received an award for being in the Top 1% of the performers in the company. In all, I was able to influence $20MM revenue in about 8 months. Given the context (a well known, growing tech start-up), the number is fairly impressive. This rapid professional rise probably allayed fears that my earlier start-up successes were repeatable and not a fluke.
Application Strategy:
Instead of applying to a random selection of schools in R2 like in 18/19, I applied to 5 schools in R1. The results of that round told me that T-15/20 schools was more likely to happen instead of M7/T-10 schools. So, I dropped my plans of applying to Haas in R2, and applied to 2 T-20 schools instead. I was admitted with a significant scholarship to both.
HBX CORe:
I Graduated with Honors. The program is super-intense, especially if you have a demanding job, so this shows the ad-com that I can manage the rigors of business school. Also - I had an average GPA that I suspect this course help off-set a little bit.
Networking:
I attended every school event that I could and reached out to and connected with 70+ MBA Candidates on LinkedIn. I really got to know the school's values and what it looks for in its admitted students. This helped me better plan my essays and interviews. Further, in my informational interviews, I noticed a pattern of acceptance. For instance, people who received admits from School A were also likely to receive admits from School B and School C. Having been admitted to School A in R1, I applied to Schools B and C in R2; I was admitted to both and received $170K in fellowships!
Rework Optional Essay:
The Optional Essay I wrote in 18/19 (to give context to my grades and choice of recommenders) was stand-offish and could be interpreted as "making excuses". I re-worked this essay, took responsibility for the grades, and demonstrated why it wouldn't repeat. It seems to have worked.
PS. I did NOT retake the GMAT. This is what most applicants would have done, given the disappointing outcomes in 18/19. However, if there's anything to be learned from my story, it's that there's much you can change/fix rather than aiming for a 99.9th percentile score. Even with a 770/780, I do feel the outcomes would have been the same as in 18/19 had I not reworked the aforementioned parts of my application.
PPS. That's not to say that the GMAT score isn't relevant. With a 760, I feel I would probably have at least received an Interview Invite from Kellogg (rather than a "Reject without Interview" decision.) But Admissions, as most things in life, is about making trade-offs. You need decide which activities to spend the most time on, and in this prioritization, you will end up missing a few. Retaking the GMAT is one such activity that I missed, but I am happy with the prioritization choices I made and I wouldn't change a thing.
A brief note on admissions consultants:
I worked with Admissions Consultants in both 2019 and 2020 and in my experience, a good admissions consultant does not guarantee an admit but a bad one definitely guarantees a rejection. My 2019 application outcomes were partly a result of my own immaturity but also partly the result of the poor advice I received from my consultant. At several moments in our engagement, I felt uncomfortable to act on the advice given (as it felt senseless and counter-intuitive to me) but I went against my better judgment and acted on it anyway. My thought process was, "Hey, this guy (Consultant) is a Booth-grad, he must know what he's talking about!" In retrospect, I feel much of the advice was detrimental to my candidacy.
So, here's a checklist to consider when screening Admissions Consultants to work with:
1.
Involvement: There are several graduates from Top B-Schools who use their B-School brand to make easy money doing Admissions Consulting. For them, Consulting is a side-gig. This is a terrible configuration for the client because admissions is a very dynamic world. You need to be in constant contact with the Schools, Admissions Officers, Other Consultants, etc. to know the latest trends in Admissions. The knowledge of these trends helps ensure the best outcomes for clients. Someone who treats Consulting as a side-gig is unlikely to know all the latest developments, and therefore, will do a sub-optimal job for his/her client.
Ask the consultant: What is your day job?
Expected reply: Admissions Consulting.
2.
Support: The support and advice provided by the Admissions Consultant are critical to a well-defined Applicant Story, which in turn is important to successful admissions outcomes. Some consultants provide limited, charged-by-the-minute support, while others provide comprehensive involvement tailored to the needs of the client - more of an admissions companionship than a consulting engagement. Obviously, the latter is much preferred. Your admissions journey is bound to be accompanied by unforeseen complications and it's just better not to have your support system counting each minute of your engagement.
Ask the consultant: What can I expect if there is an unexpected complication with my application and I need urgent help?
Expected reply: Just get on a call, silly! I am here for you when you need me.
3.
Testimonials: Several consultants publish client testimonials without disclosing the clients' names, citing the need for anonymity on the clients' part. I have always been uncomfortable with this. After all, if I truly believe in a good review, I want to sign my name to it. Hence, I am untrusting of nameless reviews and you should be too. Ask the consultant to disclose names. Reach out to former clients to discuss their experience working with the consultant. If the consultant has been critical to their success, they will be excited to connect with you and share their experience. If the consultant didn't help all that much, the lack of excitement will be painfully obvious.
Ask the consultant: Please send me the contact details of 5 former clients (preferably clients you worked with the year before) I can connect with.
Expected reply: Yessir!
4.
Success Metrics: This is more a hygiene check as metrics can be easily falsified. However, ask the Consultant what their success rate was the year before. Ask them about the number of people that didn't get an admit and what their best guess is for the lack of admit. Ask them the total scholarship money their clients won from schools. Any self-respecting Consultant should know these things and should be willing to discuss them with you. If they aren't, this shows ignorance on their part. If they are ignorant about their own successes, can they be expected to be fully invested in yours?
In 2020, I worked with Crack The MBA, a boutique New Delhi-based Admissions Consulting firm run by Nupur, a Wharton alumna. Our engagement checked all the aforementioned boxes and was comprehensive and in-depth to the degree that I found myself trailing submission deadlines often. I didn't need to activate her to be invested in my success; she already was from the very beginning of our engagement. She was a creative sounding-board for when I needed to define and re-define my application and an emotional support for when I received my dings from the aforementioned schools. I cannot recommend her enough!
I also used
Applicant Lab for a few essays (schools for which I didn't work with Nupur) and had an incredible experience - it is a detailed, well thought out admissions platform that provides more support and personalized advice than you'd think was possible from an online application.
Thanks for reading my 2 cents and good luck!
close
Updated on: 25 Jun 2020, 23:03
