eastcoastchamps wrote:
Hi,
I interviewed with HBS this year and was wailtisted post interview. HBS is definitely my number 1 choice and dream school. I thinking about not going to Wharton this year and just reapply to HBS next year, either with a new job or same job but in a different country/ continent. Since I was waitlisted R1 and released in R2, I think applying R1 next year is too soon, hence I will be applying R2, or Jan 2020.
Do you think this makes sense? Is 9 months too soon for reapplication? Does this warrant enough change/ improvement for adcom to consider my application? Since I was waitlisted in R1, I assume nothing was very wrong with my application, and that it just came down to luck (HBS rounding their class via their different metrics). I was thinking if I can signify growth in my career (my promotion is coming up), risk in moving to a new environment, and that I will be placed in a different cohort from last year, that might warrant me trying for another year.
What you think?
Hi eastcoastchamps:
Your question is a very difficult one to answer with the information you provided me. Overall, I would take a step back if I were you and try to ascertain why you were waitlisted in the first place. Only then can you determine the appropriate course of action. Right now you ask me questions that tell me you might just be throwing darts.
Frankly, there are many reasons why you may have been waitlisted. Once you have a better grasp on that, then you can determine the appropriate course of action. If you don't have a good sense for why you were waitlisted, it's hard to pinpoint what you could improve. So right now, for the various courses of action you put forth, it's really hard to tell which one is going to actually help get you into Harvard, if any of them.
You asked – "Is nine months too soon for a reapplication?" My answer – it depends on what you do in those nine months and if whether or not what you do in those nine months addresses the root cause of why you were waitlisted. I hate to sound that blunt, but if you're just looking solely at a number – in this case "9" - then that's a bit misguided. It wouldn't matter if it's six months or 16 months. You also asked – "does nine months allow for enough change?" Again, I have no idea what you plan to do in those months. If you can address your weakness in those months, then I would do it.
Right now, I can tell you with a high degree of certainty that your rationale for applying in round two (based upon what you told me) is rather misguided. If you think it's hard to get in round one, do you think it's easier getting in round two? Do you think the benefits of waiting until around two and getting those two or three extra months of work experience are going to make a difference? Maybe they will, but right now you and I have no idea. In fact, we don't even know what the root cause of the problem is. In short, I I believe you would create new problems by attempting to solve old ones.
Another point about the "nine months" – from the date you submitted your application for round one to the date you will submit your reapplication for a subsequent round one will be one year. You state nine months. It's actually a year. The information Harvard is relying upon when you interview is the information you submitted at the round one deadline. So you in fact have one year to improve and not nine months. This is a minor point because it's all about the improvements that you make and not the sheer number of months. Certainly 10 months gives you more time than one month to make realistic improvements to your profile, but you're getting hung up on the sheer number and you seem to be prioritizing that, which I believe is folly.
You stated - "and that it just came down to luck." I believe you are alluding to "randomness" when you say "luck." Certainly there is always a bit of that in the process. For example, perhaps there were an overwhelming number of applicants to HBS who applied with backgrounds similar to yours, whatever your background may be. However, I'm not comfortable agreeing with that assumption based upon the data you report. Here is an alternative thesis – perhaps your interview was the problem. Certainly, you may think you had a great interview, and you may be right. But with all due respect, you could be absolutely wrong. You may have had a lackluster interview, and because of your awareness – again with all due respect – you just don't realize that you made several gaffes or rubbed the interviewer in the wrong way with one of your answers. As we know, the interview with HBS is absolutely critical. They can make or break you. This is not the same situation at other top business schools where interviews tend to be akin to "checking boxes."
If you get a promotion here in the next few months that is something that may improve your profile. If you do elect to apply next year, I would take a look at the students with similar profiles who did get in. What titles did they have? What firms did they work for? What undergraduate did they attend? What were their majors? Get a sense for how close you are to those who did manage to get in. You may even reach out to them to get their thoughts on your background. The worst they can do is not respond or say no.
One last point here – you need to handle Wharton carefully because if you deny them this year, you will be applying to them next year. And should you don't handle it well – and I have every reason to assume you will handle it well and this will not be an issue – they will remember.
Respectfully,
Paul Lanzillotti