To all 700+ GMAT scorers

Question

To all 700+ scorers who have either graduated or are currently in MBA:

Did you ever feel, or was told, your GMAT score helped you secure interviews with top firms? I know that scores alone can't give you a job, obviously, but I wondered how much it'd help you to make it past the initial filter for employers. I'm specifically talking about MBBs and IBanks (but if you have other experiences in other industries, please share as well!).

I'll be attending a decent "target" in the sense that big names recruit there (meaning they will only take a few people, but NOT like at Harvard/Wharton/Stanford where they might take dozens). However, my score is above their 80% middle range (so I'm in the top 10%).

The reason I'm hoping for this is that my work experience is decent, but not quite as strong as I'd like.

bb · Answer

Hopefully moving this to a more relevant forum/home for this post. 
The score does get taken into account, but my experience has been the recruiters saying, unless you have 700+, don't apply. Which in most top 20 programs is NOT an issue and frankly seems a silly metric when you are considering the caliber of applicants with low GMAT scores... but those guys probably don't care anyway.

So, to answer your question, I think it is a metric for the initial round/selection process but it won't help in further rounds and definitely will not be used in lieu of work experience or proven track record.

MBAStudent2015 · Answer

Thanks.

Well, I can see how at schools like Harvard, where the majority of the class has over 700, this doesn't really matter at all. However, when the majority of the class is sub-700, I hope it stands out a little more. I just need to get past the initial screens, and then it'll all be about wooing them with my winning combination of wits and charm.

dtse86 · Answer

From my understanding, if you're coming from a school that tends to place lower numbers into your target firms, but has a population with decent GMAT scores, then you have to stand out in a different way. From properly networking and following up at company events to putting together a good resume ( https://workingwithmckinsey.blogspot.com/2012/11/5-tips-for-McKinsey-resume-screens.html ). Once you get the first interview, your performance on the case and the PEI will determine whether or not you will continue onto the next round. It's a multi-faceted approach, but at this point I don't think worrying about GMAT scores will do anyone any benefit. However, it does sound like your score helps you stand out among your peers and we've been told to put it on your resume if it's something that's deemed impressive. At the end of the day developing the other skills that they are looking for and networking with recruiters is probably the best use of your time at this point given that I doubt you're going to take the GMAT again to improve your scores. :gl

!

Fielding · Answer

If recruiters only want a +700 score, why do business schools bother accepting people with lower scores?

A GMAT score can't be as important as some say it is. Perhaps McKinsey and Goldman care about it, but everyone else? Doubtful.

MBAStudent2015 · Answer

Business schools value diversity, so scores matter less if you have compensating factors. Note that the attributes of getting into Bschool might not be the same attributes as getting a job, depending on the firm.

Not all recruiters care about 700+ scores, obviously, but I was referring to top firms. The other 90% of recruiters just care you got an MBA from the school they're looking at. However, the difference between top 5-6 schools and the rest is that nearly everyone has over 700 GMAT scores, so obviously no matter what GMAT score you have it is not possible to stand out that way. In schools where the median is...lets say...650 or so...then a 700+ will stand out quite a bit more.

In my general opinion, the top tier of students at ANY business school secure jobs with the most prestigious firms. Strangely enough, this also makes the argument that for the average person, it is better to be a big fish in a small pond than vice versa unless you really have what it takes to be a star.

What I mean is that if I take strong applicants (700 GMAT, 3.5 GPA, 4 years decent Work Exp) and send them to Harvard, it'll be really tough for them to stand out because everyone is pretty spectacular and have high GMATs and GPAs. If I send them to a top 20 MBA instead, they will end up being in the top tier of the school and might have an easier time getting jobs from top firms that recruit there. Caveat being firms like McKinsey might take dozens of Harvard grads, but only a couple from another school...still I think my argument stands.

dtse86 · Answer

I think from the perspective of the student/firm hopeful, there are a few factors that they'll need to weigh when deciding on which school will give them the better opportunity to get an offer from a prestigious firm:
  Whether or not you have the base skillset that will include you in the consideration set for the firms. Many recruiters from the firms plainly state that if you don't have the raw intellectual and analytical horsepower they're looking for, you're out regardless of the school  https://gmatclub.com/forum/gmat-score-use-in-employment-21669-20.html#p1249434 . That being said, if you have a 700+, you likely already check the box for that attribute. 
 Whether or not you think that you can actually stand out above the rest of the class at a "lower ranked" school. Do you actually have the skills and the work ethic to perform and stand out above the rest of your peers at a school that you deem "lesser". Some of these schools provide incentives in the form of scholarships to high potential candidates. Even if you are part of this group, do you really believe that you can be the 1-4 individuals that a particular top firm takes each year? Perhaps the greater number of interactions and opportunities to network at other schools will serve you better or you know that given a greater probability of getting a first round interview (due to larger number of interview slots and open list opportunities) you will have a better shot. 
 Does one school "prepare" its students better for top tier recruitment and performance better than others? Perhaps one school offers more resources to help students more than the other

Regardless, the top firms won't hire someone that is not capable. It's been said many times that once a candidate gets the first round interview, he or she is on a "level" playing field with the rest of the potentials. However the probability and effort to get to that first round may differ depending on one's circumstances.

There are several posts around this forum that describe the mindset of some of the individuals involved in prestigious firm recruiting.
i.e.  https://gmatclub.com/forum/question-to-those-at-mbb-post-mba-126776.html#p1249411 
 https://gmatclub.com/forum/ask-beyondcaseprep-consulting-information-from-mbb-alumni-156850.html#p1250899

MBAStudent2015 · Answer

Actually, those links are quite helpful, thanks dtse86.

You bring up some good points. Of course, the firms aren't going to take someone who isn't capable, and I guess you are right in that if one is invited to interview, it won't matter for the interviewers which school.

To all 700+ GMAT scorers

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards