As I was taking a look at different school's 2007 recommendation forms, I noticed that some schools had very specific questions and formats that they wanted recommenders to follow. That got me thinking, how many recommenders do you ask during a particular cycle? It seems if you asked just two people for recommendations, they would be slaving away for hours because each school was asking a variety of different, specific questions.

I just assumed that a recommender would just write a 1-2 page general synopsis of your strengths, achievements, etc. that you can basically mass distribute to each school? What am I missing?

Thanks!

My recommenders asked me to compile a list of the questions that they would have to answer.

So thats what I'm going to do - send them a list. They'll answer the questions, I'll enter these responses on the recommendation links and ask them to review. They'll make final corrections, fill in the tables (if any), and submit.

Ta da!

It's better if you can convince them to write each recommendation as required.

I asked 2 main recommenders and then added recommenders 3 & 4 for the schools that required 3 recos only. Recommenders 1&2 were former and current boss and 3 & 4 were peers (one of them an alumn from one of the schools, so that's why I chose him for that school and the other one a co-worker).

L.

Is this process a bit cumbersome for the recommenders? I mean, I understand that schools don't want to standardize the application b/c they all want to feel special, and discourage students from copying and pasting 15 applications, but that's fine for the essays, b/c it's the students that are doing the work. However, for the recommendations it is absurd that that part is not standardized. I really don't know if I feel comfortable asking my boss, who is super busy, to write 5-7 recommendations.

Well, it sucks, but don't discount the importance of recommendations.

I've read and heard that the reasoning is: if the applicant has not been able to build meaningful relations with people who are willing to dedicate their time to recommending the applicant, then why should we admit him/her?

Additionally, all applicants claim to be overachievers, but let's look at how their co-workers (ideally their managers) see them. After all, recos are the only objective non-academic data we have. Is this applicant an overachiever? Or is he/she just arrogant?

Just make sure you get adequate commitment from recommenders and make sure they understand the importance of the process and the data they should consider. Give them enough time and provide them with backup data (general data on recommendations, not specific pointers) if they are not familiar with the process.

L.

Obviously the product of a career academic, who doesn't know what it's like to work a 65 hour week.

Well, if what you meant is that adcoms don't know any better because they don't work 65-hour weeks, then I disagree, because:

1) They do work long hours (at least during the peak of the admissions season).

2) Most applicants' (managers) work 65-hour weeks and still manage to dedicate time to recommend applicants.

L.

65 hour week or 40 hour week, it finally depends on the recommender if he wants to give the time to go through each of the college recommendations seperately.

Call me a cynic, but filling in a recommendation is a repetitive task. It is very likely that the recommender will copy across his own responses from one application to another. It is therefore likely that the first recommendation is likely to be the only place where some thought is given to the actual questions. The rest are probably going to be modifications of the first.

There are other factors - are recommendations commonplace? has the recommender done this before? In many places, the answer to both is likely to be 'No'.

Yeah, I'd agree that ideally, the recommender should attend to each individual application. Real world, it may not work quite out that way. Best way is to discuss with the recommender and try to work out something that works both ways.

Well, you could always adapt Aau's recommenders guide to your case and then discuss with them the importance of recommendations, etc. Don't just send them the link and hope for the best, unless you completely trust their recommendation writing proficiency and intentions.

http://www.gmatclub.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=41085

Truth is, if your recommender really appreciates you, his or her attitude will be: ok, what do I need to do for you to succeed in your applications?

If he or she is not happy to let you go, you need to gauge whether his or her unhappiness will make it through into bad recos or he or she will be professional and objective about it regarless of his or her feelings.

I don't intend to make it sound easy, I still recall the uncertainty and fears from the application process, but I feel it's better to know that we can influence most of the applications components (including recos) and act accordingly than leave some parts unattended.

L.

If you know the problem before hand, then address it! Talk to them about the issue and influence their actions. That's what leadership is all about!

(btw, if I had read the phrase I just wrote a year ago, I would have thought the author was an @$$hole, so I'll understand if you do.)

Cheers. L (AKA "converted cynic").

recommendation is the best way to limit the number of application done by people to different schools.... it thus limits the job that should have been done if the recommendations were not existing.... To me, it could be 2 to 3 times what it is now for admission offices at the top b schools without recommandation.... Hard to tackle

As PaddyBoy said, I fairly believe that recommenders have a limit of work & energy that they can devote to their recommendations... the first 3 recommendations done by a recommander are logically the best shots that he can give (apart specific cases)... and so, one should well consider which recommender is fitted for which school, respecting the recommendations already done.

Now thats an original Ha ha... nice observation, fig

*** Edit: Removed unwarranted comment ***

One of my recommendations came from someone that doesn't speak English and has no idea at all about MBA admissions. Unfortunately, all of my current contacts are more or less like this, and I felt it was necessary to get a recommendation that reflects my current business experiences. I had to get these recs translated, and given the source, they were pretty generic.

My other recommendation came from a prior boss who I have a great personal relationship with. I did 10 applications and I was shocked by how much effort she put into each individual recommendation. I bet she spent 50-60 hours on my recommendations. I didn't read her recs, but I do know that she is one of the best writers that I know (litigator and English major). I spent some time buttering her up (telling her she's the best writer that I know and that I needed her help, etc.) and laying out areas where she could help me in my application. I have no doubt that her recs made huge impacts at certain places.

I believe that, by and large, most recs are pretty generic; and I think that schools know to expect this. Most managers look at rec writing as a necessary chore - but they also know that the person they are supporting will likely be gone in 6-12 months. A solid, generic recommendation will not kill your application. On the other hand, a beautifully written persuasive recommendation can separate you from the crowd. These are rare, and I have no doubt that it reflects very positively on applicants that get them. Obviously, it would be a great benefit to get one or two of these for your app package.

As deadlines approached last year, there was some discussion about how recommendations limited applications. With my applications all in R2, after a couple of rejections I definitely felt like turning in a few more. I didn't because it would have been too much to ask of my recommenders. On the other hand, as I was preparing my applications initially, I got kind of burned out, and I didn't feel like completing all the apps I originally planned. But since my recommenders had put in so much effort already, I felt obligated to put forth my best effort and complete all the apps I requested recommendations for. It works both ways I guess.

My current team lead does not speak English as her first language, and I am a bit wary about asking her for a recommendation. After reading her evaluation for my performance review I got the sense that her writing is not terrific. Not to say it is poor, but rather unsophisticated. I think I will ask my previous team lead instead. He has already written a reference letter for me, and it was excellent.

While the recs from each school are all different, I think recommendation writers will find that the first one takes the longest - sort of like the applications we all did. Many of them have check-boxes, which obviously don't take much time.

And I'm sure they re-used stories as appropriate. My recs didn't gripe about it. And I did what someone already suggested: each application required 2 recs, and I had 3 writers, so it was spread out. I knew one of the three, a CPA I've worked with a lot, was the weakest writer so I had him write the recs for the schools I felt most confident about.

I had a question:

Some recommenders ask you to draft a letter that he/she will edit and add their own insights and modify anything they believe is not true or vice versa. But on the Stanford GSB website, they mention that it is strictly prohibited to write a draft that the recommenders will edit. Add that to what Moutak's book says about helping your recommenders (he suggests that you can draft a letter for the recommenders), I'm facing a dilemma of whether to draft a letter for my recommender or just supply a detailed outline for him/her to create his/her own letter.

Any suggestions on this topic? Does it violate the "Honor Code" to draft a letter that the recommender will edit?