Michigan Ross MBA Deadlines Round Application Due Decisions Released Round 1 Sep 20, 2021 Dec 8, 2021 Round 2 Jan 10, 2022 Mar 18, 2022 Round 3 Apr 4, 2022 May 11, 2022 Essays Part 1: Short-answer questions. Select one prompt from each group of the two groups below. Respond to each selected prompt in 100 words or less. Group 1 I want people to know that I: I made a difference when I: I was aware that I was different when: Group 2 I am out of my comfort zone when: I was humbled when: I was challenged when: Part 2: Career Goal Essay What is your short-term career goal and why? (200 words)

TWIC genuine curiosity Polsky Center and Batten are great entrepreneurial resources, which schools are better ? Can you share some admits?

Hi All, Just got a mail saying that the issue has been resolved. I was able to successfully get the interviewer details as well. Do check it out now. Posted from my mobile device

Its off topic but I'll answer here anyway. While I agree that the Polsky Center and Batten are great entrepreneurial resources, in my opinion from going through the admissions process, researching the schools, attending the webinars, and speaking to students, these centers stand adjacent to the core propositions of either school and not at the center. For example, Darden is a consulting powerhouse, which matches very well to its case method of teaching. The Batten Institute seemed almost the antithesis of the case method, and while it does offer programming in entrepreneurship, technology, and innovation, those courses were few and far between compared to their general management courses. I spoke to students, and those that recruited into technology said that they did a lot of the work themselves (which is also a function of company focus and location). So it felt like Darden was trying to diversify their proposition to applicants but not really stray too far from their consulting strengths. With Booth, things were a little different. The Polsky center looks great, and quite integrated with their entrepreneurship and innovation concentration. Their curriculum was also quite wide and very flexible, so I would be able to take a number of courses in the areas of entrepreneurship and innovation. But Booth's strengths lie in finance and by extension, consulting. As an international making a case for technology as my short term goal and entrepreneurship as my long term objective, I can see that being a risk from Booth's perspective. From the tech side, only ~20% of the class goes into tech vs. ~70% going into consulting/finance, so I would need to work hard to get into tech, from the entrepreneurship side I haven't had much experience previously in the field so maybe I wouldn't be able to leverage the Polsky Center as well. Contrast this to my other admits - Berkeley Haas and MIT Sloan. MIT's focus and by extension Sloan's is innovative leadership, its building either the next innovations, the next innovative leaders, or the next innovative startups. All the messaging around Sloan is about innovation. When I spoke to students, I couldn't write down the entrepreneurial resources fast enough. Technology, entrepreneurship, and innovation are intertwined with MIT Sloan's focus - they are the core, and not adjacent. With Haas, its much the same but I would say more because of its location in San Francisco - its so much easier to connect to the start up scene, to network with the leaders of new innovative startups, to access the VC space as well. Its so much easier to make a believable case for technology/entrepreneurship/innovation at either of these schools vs. Darden or Booth