Cold Hard GMAT: Lessons from fat chicks, black belts, and the 4-minute mile.

As I showed last week, following commonsense GMAT strategies sometimes gets you hosed.

One example of a popular but very bad strategy: “Don’t go it alone.” In other words, your common sense probably suggests that you use the GMAT community to get oriented and figure out what it’s all about. Then you cop their strategies. You commiserate when you fail. You use them as your support group.

Of course we want to be able to think and act and study like the bottom 99%... but all of us want to somehow magically land in the top 1%. This is bogus. You study in a herd, you fail in a herd.

If you’re a chick, be doubly vigilant about this kind of thinking. Ever notice that the chicks who eat lunch together (in groups, not just 2-3) often seem to gain weight together? It’s because this herd becomes our reference point, and it tells us what’s good enough, rich enough, thin enough. This is slightly more common for chicks than for dudes, but it goes for both genders: where willpower is concerned, friendship (often) facilitates failure.

So how do you use this fact to land in the one percent?

I don’t know how many of you guys have studied martial arts, but you’ve all probably seen someone break boards. There’s a trick to it. If you punch the board, you typically hurt yourself and get nowhere. If you punch four inches beyond the board, it breaks.

What’s that have to do with the GMAT? Let’s say you go on some forums and notice that a whole lot of people (at least some of whom must be smarter than you) say that they can’t get through some big notional wall at 720 or 750 or whatever. And you check the official averages and see that there does appear to be a cliff at 720 or 750.

Should that worry you? No. Be happy about it. Your 99th-percentile strategy depends on a majority of very smart people perceiving that there is a wall there. The wall has to be real for them. But not for you.

Performance barriers are viral. This is a critical basic lesson for performance in almost any area. Take the four-minute mile. A ton of people could have broken the four-minute mile before 1954, but didn’t. They were all focused on how much they had to do in order to get from 4:14 to 4:06.

After Bannister broke 4:00, everyone started breaking it, even high school kids. So I don’t think he was truly the world’s fastest middle-distance runner in ’54. He just didn’t stop at the wall.

And neither will you. Because focus directs force; whatever’s on your mind becomes part of your strategy.

Most people will hear about performance barriers from other GMAT students, then train against it and typically lose to it.

But you are going to quarantine yourself and play a pure 760+ game. Don’t read advice or questions targeted at the sub-750 set. The strategy that helped that guy get from 680 to 710 could knock you from 790 to 740 (this happened to me in practice tests).

And don’t talk to or count/measure people who got into top programs but had low scores. Those people are irrelevant because you will never be like them. They were checking their email every twenty seconds on the day decisions went out. On the other hand, you'll probably do what I did: wake up two hours late, remember what day it is, read admit decision on phone, then roll over and go back to sleep.

To sum it up: Punch the wall and it hurts you. Punch four inches behind the wall and it breaks clean. There’s no pain.

 
Best Response

Ok, I think four essays on the gmat is enough.

Bankerella, I am happy you did well on your GMATs and got into b-school. However, if you keep making posts like this, folks will assume that you got in on test scores rather than professional success or on being an interesting person.

Test scores are helpful, but they aren't something worth a four or five post series. Buy a Kaplan GMAT 800 book, spend a good 60-80 hours practicing for the exam, get a 780, and go home.

Standardized tests are worth studying for. But if you're obsessing over it, you're doing something wrong. I spent a week and a half of vacation studying for the GREs in between waterskiing and wakeboarding, I got a 780 GMAT equivalent, I forgot about them for two years, I applied to a few graduate programs, I got into my top choice. It shouldn't be this hard.

The Q section is incredibly easy. All you have to do is understand every question they can throw at you and know how to solve them. There is really no excuse for not getting a perfect score on the Q if you are a highschool graduate and know basic algebra.

The V section is a little bit tougher, but you just get out the flash cards and go over words and definitions, then cover the analogy problems over and over again. Again, not too hard to score in the top 1%.

 
IlliniProgrammer:

The Q section is incredibly easy. All you have to do is understand every question they can throw at you and know how to solve them.

Thanks for clearing that one up. I think a lot of posters here were missing the fact that to do well on the GMAT you have to know how to solve the problems. Good insight.

IlliniProgrammer:

There is really no excuse for not getting a perfect score on the Q if you are a highschool graduate and know basic algebra.

The V section is a little bit tougher, but you just get out the flash cards and go over words and definitions, then cover the analogy problems over and over again. Again, not too hard to score in the top 1%.

These kind of statements (Abdel made a similar comment) astound me in their ignorance. If everyone with a high school diploma could walk in and get a 760, it wouldn't be a top 1% score then would it? And whether the content is basic algebra or not, the upper range questions are designed such that 99% of test takers will get them wrong essentially EVERY time. Things get even more ridiculous when you start talking about "no excuse for not getting a perfect score." You are basically saying "no excuse for not doing better than all but like 100 guys on the GMAT." Get real.

 
labanker:

Thanks for clearing that one up. I think a lot of posters here were missing the fact that to do well on the GMAT you have to know how to solve the problems. Good insight.

This is considered a difficult question from the GRE Qs. Please tell me how this problem is so tough to solve in less than 45 seconds:

  1. Of the following, which is greater than ½ ?

Indicate ALL such fractions.

A. 2/5 B. 4/7 C. 4/9 D. 5/11 E. 6/13 F. 8/15 G. 9/17

IlliniProgrammer:
These kind of statements (Abdel made a similar comment) astound me in their ignorance. If everyone with a high school diploma could walk in and get a 760, it wouldn't be a top 1% score then would it? And whether the content is basic algebra or not, the upper range questions are designed such that 99% of test takers will get them wrong essentially EVERY time. Things get even more ridiculous when you start talking about "no excuse for not getting a perfect score." You are basically saying "no excuse for not doing better than all but like 100 guys on the GMAT." Get real.
You work in BANKING. You look at numbers all day long. You can look at equity vs. assets and calculate the liability ratio in your head. You ARE the top 1% when it comes to quant problems. These questions should be very easy.

When we were in fifth grade, most people smart enough to work in banking learned to estimate fractions in terms of percentages in their head. For instance, you should be able to compute a percentage for the numbers above by observation in less than 3-4 seconds to within 5%, or at least be able to tell me whether the denominator is more than twice the numerator in a second or two.

If you can do that and follow Kaplan's rules for quantitative test taking, the quant section is a very easy exam. Learn the model and apply it consistently, and you get an 800.

I have compassion for the folks who can't consistently answer 100 algebra questions. What I don't have compassion for is folks who think they belong in a top MBA program and can't do the same. Getting an 800Q on the GRE is the equivalent of a six minute mile. About 2% of the US population can pull it off. Meanwhile, YOU as a banker are already in the USMC- by definition you can already run a seven minute mile- and you are trying to qualify for the Navy SEALs. You should be struggling with the log roll and hell week, not the six minute mile.

 

I enjoy the motivational essays Bankerella,

IlliniProgrammer is probably jealous he didn't read your posts before he took the GMAT.

"Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid"
 
onedumbmonkey:
I enjoy the motivational essays Bankerella,

IlliniProgrammer is probably jealous he didn't read your posts before he took the GMAT.

Eh. I got into my top choice program. I am all for studying for the GMAT. I studied for the GREs. What I am not for is obsessing over the GMAT. It's one exam that helps provide a decent basis for your intellect if there are any questions about it.

It is fairly easy for a banker to get a 780 and have a shot at an 800 on the exam. You learn to do the quantitative questions carefully, you spend about 50 hours studying words, and you're there. Then you get on with your life. Go kitesurfing. Buy a motorcycle and learn to race it on the track. Volunteer with inner-city kids. Run a marathon.

A couple posts on the GMATs are helpful. A series of four posts pretending it is the most important factor in b-school admits is an unhealthy obsession, IMHO. This is a banking forum that happens to care a little about b-school admits, not a GMAT forum. Let's not obsess too much.

 
IlliniProgrammer:
onedumbmonkey:
I enjoy the motivational essays Bankerella,

IlliniProgrammer is probably jealous he didn't read your posts before he took the GMAT.

Eh. I got into my top choice program. I am all for studying for the GMAT. I studied for the GREs. What I am not for is obsessing over the GMAT. It's one exam that helps provide a decent basis for your intellect if there are any questions about it.

It is fairly easy for a banker to get a 780 and have a shot at an 800 on the exam. You learn to do the quantitative questions carefully, you spend about 50 hours studying words, and you're there. Then you get on with your life. Go kitesurfing. Buy a motorcycle and learn to race it on the track. Volunteer with inner-city kids. Run a marathon.

A couple posts on the GMATs are helpful. A series of four posts pretending it is the most important factor in b-school admits is an unhealthy obsession, IMHO. This is a banking forum that happens to care a little about b-school admits, not a GMAT forum. Let's not obsess too much.

I see your point IlliniProgrammer, however I would agrue that your situation is different than a lot of other people reading posts about the GMAT. We have not yet applied to business school and I know that for my personal situation I will have to get a great score to go to my top school. I feel that if I obesse over the GMAT I will accomplish my gmat score.

I am not even sure why you would choose to waste your time reading this post if you already got into your top school? Sounds like an inefficient use of your time IMHO.

"Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid"
 
IlliniProgrammer:
onedumbmonkey:
I enjoy the motivational essays Bankerella,

IlliniProgrammer is probably jealous he didn't read your posts before he took the GMAT.

Eh. I got into my top choice program. I am all for studying for the GMAT. I studied for the GREs. What I am not for is obsessing over the GMAT. It's one exam that helps provide a decent basis for your intellect if there are any questions about it.

It is fairly easy for a banker to get a 780 and have a shot at an 800 on the exam. You learn to do the quantitative questions carefully, you spend about 50 hours studying words, and you're there. Then you get on with your life. Go kitesurfing. Buy a motorcycle and learn to race it on the track. Volunteer with inner-city kids. Run a marathon.

A couple posts on the GMATs are helpful. A series of four posts pretending it is the most important factor in b-school admits is an unhealthy obsession, IMHO. This is a banking forum that happens to care a little about b-school admits, not a GMAT forum. Let's not obsess too much.

Wait, are you talking about your GRE score as if it were a gmat score equivalent? Because you study words on the GRE, not the GMAT.

IMO, there's no comparison. I never studied for the GREs but took them while studying for my GMATs to keep me sharp. Got a perfect GRE long before I broke the 99th percentile in GMAT. They are extremely easy in comparison. There's just no time pressure, and the verbals follow far simpler rules.

 

I think your comment here is really helpful to my point. It seems like you're saying it's a lot easier for these kids to do the GREs and submit them for b-school. (Most of the MBA business schools ">M7, including HBS, Stanford, and Wharton, accept GRE scores instead of GMATs) It's fairly easy to get a 760 GMAT equivalent on the GREs- I spent about 60 hours studying for them, and the schools go off of ETS's GMAT algorithm:

http://www.ets.org/gre/institutions/about/mba/comparison_tool

Standardized tests aren't that complicated. Study for them, get a good score, and go home. Folks can use the 140 hours they save to do something they enjoy, write their essays, or become more interesting people.

 
IlliniProgrammer:
So then why not just save yourself all the hassle and take the GREs? Most of the MBA business schools ">M7, including HBS and Stanford, accept them for GMAT equivalency these days, anyways.

Take the GREs, get a 780 GMAT equivalent, go home and work on your essays. Why spend 200 hours trying to get a 760 GMAT when you can spend 60 hours getting a 780 GMAT equivalent? You can spend those other 140 hours on something a lot more fun.

Actually your comment here is really helpful. If you're saying it's easier to get a 760 or 780 GMAT equivalent on the GREs, that's great. Let's steer these kids that way. There's no more need to obsess over this and devote weeks of your life to an otherwise meaningless exam. Spend a week studying for the GREs, get a 760 GMAT equivalent, go (hang gliding) (kitesurfing) (volunteer) for the 140 hours you save.

Interesting point here...so do adcoms view the GRE as favorably as the GMAT though? Isn't that a risky assumption...maybe things have changed since I graduated in 2010, but at Wharton I don't think there were too many people that just took the GRE.

 
WallStreetOasis.com:
Interesting point here...so do adcoms view the GRE as favorably as the GMAT though? Isn't that a risky assumption...maybe things have changed since I graduated in 2010, but at Wharton I don't think there were too many people that just took the GRE.
I dunno. I see an increasing trend towards allowing the GRE by schools- with my favorite school- Booth- being one of the few holdouts. I think it is sort of turning into an ACT/SAT thing.

They all use ETS's algorithm as a basis for comparing scores. ETS had a similar algorithm for ACTs to SATs. But frankly, I'd much rather submit a 750V/800Q GRE (770 GMAT equiv) than a 750 GMAT, and it looks like ETS is already factoring some conservativism on the conversion (Converting an 800Q/800V GRE as a 790 GMAT).

 
IlliniProgrammer:
I think your comment here is really helpful to my point. It seems like you're saying it's a lot easier for these kids to do the GREs and submit them for b-school. (Most of the MBA business schools ">M7, including HBS, Stanford, and Wharton, accept GRE scores instead of GMATs) It's fairly easy to get a 760 GMAT equivalent on the GREs- I spent about 60 hours studying for them, and the schools go off of ETS's GMAT algorithm:

http://www.ets.org/gre/institutions/about/mba/comparison_tool

Standardized tests aren't that complicated. Study for them, get a good score, and go home. Folks can use the 140 hours they save to do something they enjoy, write their essays, or become more interesting people.

Hey, Illini. First off, total respect for you and your contributions. I think your points are good, but I don't think that the GREs are good differentiators for someone from a wall street background. If you're a programmer (are you?) or en engineer, or from some other technical background, or if you're going into an alternative program, perhaps the GREs would be the way to go.

Regardless of whatever algorithms are being bandied about, I don't personally believe that you can reach a 780 GMAT equivalent (which is what I think you were first mentioning) on the GREs.

My data is obviously limited -- I compare the GRE sitting in which I got a perfect score to the GMAT sitting in which I got a 750, and I feel that the GRE sitting was a bit easier than that specific GMAT sitting.

I propose the theory (not stating a fact here) that adcoms know that the GRE is easier and thus that the GMAT is a more powerful differentiator. Thoughts?

 
bankerella] My data is obviously limited -- I compare the GRE sitting in which I got a perfect score to the GMAT sitting in which I got a 750, and I feel that the GRE sitting was a bit easier than that specific GMAT sitting.[/qyuote] Hey Bankerella. ETS studied 893 students, including several who got 790s on the GMATs. Running a linear regression, they found that an 800Q + 800V roughly translates as a 790 GMAT with a significant number of data points north of 760.</p> <p>More importantly, though, is what the b-schools think. They have decided to accept the GRE and use ETS's conversion algorithm.</p> <p>[quote:
I propose the theory (not stating a fact here) that adcoms know that the GRE is easier and thus that the GMAT is a more powerful differentiator. Thoughts?
Well, again, the B-schools are using ETS's conversion algorithm, and ETS's analysis shows that for every bankerella who gets an 800Q/800V on the GREs and 750 GMAT, there are other folks who get a 790 on the GMATs and a 750Q/650V on the GREs. Note from the algorithm that a lot of the impact comes from the verbal section on the GREs.

So a 750 GMAT is going to beat a 750 GRE equivalency, but probably not a 760 GRE equivalency.

Had HBS accepted GRE scores when you were applying to school, you might not have needed to spend that extra time on the GREs.

Furthermore, most of the top finance and econ PhD programs have a 1-2% admit rate while still requiring GREs rather than GMATs. So you can get a much tougher selectivity than the top b-schools off of programs that require the GRE. I had always thought that the GRE/GMAT was one component of a big picture. The GMAT can be used to weed out 95% of the applicant pool if you want it to, but then you do most of your selection on personal attributes and professional/academic background anyways.

 
IlliniProgrammer:
It's fairly easy to get a 760 GMAT equivalent on the GREs- I spent about 60 hours studying for them, and the schools go off of ETS's GMAT algorithm:

If it's easier to get the same type of score on the GRE vs GMAT, then why would an admissions person treat it the same? Are they just clueless and haven't stumbled onto the trick?

 
Going Concern:
If it's easier to get the same type of score on the GRE vs GMAT, then why would an admissions person treat it the same? Are they just clueless and haven't stumbled onto the trick?
ETS's analysis of nearly 900 test-takers, including large numbers who scored a 700+ on the GMAT, shows otherwise.

My view is that work on the trading floor is a lot tougher than anything you'll have to do on any standardized test, short of maybe the GRE II Math exams. If you can price a call option in your head while folks are shouting at you, high school algebra in front of a quiet computer screen really isn't that difficult.

My point is that the function of test scores to time spent studying for the exam is a logarithmic function. Sure, you can spend an extra 140 hours to get an extra 10 points on the exam, or you can just spend 60 hours to get a 50 point boost from a 720 GMAT to a 770 and be done with it.

If you're a banker, you're already starting with a pretty high basis for the exam- you could probably walk in and get a 700+ after practicing for eight hours. So it may be difficult for the public, but for someone qualified to work in banking, hitting bankerella's 760 threshhold is pretty darned easy. The fact that the GMAT has no vocab requirement actually may make things even easier.

An 800Q on the GRE is a joke- the figurative equivalent of tying your mathematical shoelaces. An 800V is a bit tougher and requires a ~100K+ word vocabulary (I am a bit surprised Bankerella got that without studying.) Both are used on the conversion, and an 800Q alone with a 600V only gets you a ~700 GMAT conversion.

So my view is that if the GMAT is really that difficult compared to the GRE, just take the GREs instead and use the statistical equivalency. I think they're both very easy exams- the GREs just give you more opportunity to differentiate your vocab; the GMATs give you more opportunity to differentiate your quantitative skill.

 
Yeah, I guess my question is if allowing the GRE really giving it the same weight/importance/trust? even after using the ETS algo to compare (in the minds of the adcoms).
I think so. ETS gives a reasonably rigorous statistical analysis of their comparisons:

http://www.ets.org/s/gre/flash/bschool/comparison/17302/rsc/FAQ_and_Tec…

I also don't think the GMAT is the most important factor in a b-school application for most programs. The core of your application is probably your professional experience. I guess the next thing the eastern schools look at is some combination of how interesting a person you are and your academics. I guess the reason Chicago keeps the GMAT requirement is that the school is very focused on metrics while many of these other programs are less concerned about that.

 
bankerella:
To sum it up: Punch the wall and it hurts you. Punch four inches behind the wall and it breaks clean. There’s no pain.

I think the focus on the GMAT overshadowed the actual lesson here. Humans were made to do amazing things. Every day people go on to achieve new firsts. The important thing isn't wanting to get first or to be the best. The important thing is thinking about "what is the best I can do" and then doing more.

When you're running a 10k, and your legs start to burn with 2k left, don't slow down. Run faster, and get a personal record. When you're about to jump off the 20 foot cliff into the lake, don't just run and jump. Do a flip, stick it, and laugh at your friends who only jumped.

People aren't impressed by 99.99%. There is a reason we have the phrase it's all or nothing.

My WSO Blog "Unbelievably Believable" -- RG3
 
21 Lives:
bankerella:
To sum it up: Punch the wall and it hurts you. Punch four inches behind the wall and it breaks clean. There’s no pain.

I think the focus on the GMAT overshadowed the actual lesson here. Humans were made to do amazing things. Every day people go on to achieve new firsts. The important thing isn't wanting to get first or to be the best. The important thing is thinking about "what is the best I can do" and then doing more.

When you're running a 10k, and your legs start to burn with 2k left, don't slow down. Run faster, and get a personal record. When you're about to jump off the 20 foot cliff into the lake, don't just run and jump. Do a flip, stick it, and laugh at your friends who only jumped.

People aren't impressed by 99.99%. There is a reason we have the phrase it's all or nothing.

No, people care about results. If you can deliver results that blow the competition out of the water without trying too hard, why go above and beyond? Save your effort for personal stuff.

Spend three weeks studying for the GMATs. What do you get to carry away? A bigger vocabulary?

Spend three weeks learning hang gliding. What do you get to carry away? A lot of fun stories. An understanding of aviation. A rollercoaster without a track. The human experience.

One of these pursuits, you aim for everything you are capable of. The other pursuit, you simply aim to beat the competition and devote the energy you save to the pursuit you care about.

Get a 780 on the GMATs. But only spend 60 hours studying for it. That's enough to be in the top decile of HBS admits and devote the rest of your time to something you are more passionate about.

When you're about to jump off the 20 foot cliff into the lake, don't just run and jump. Do a flip, stick it, and laugh at your friends who only jumped.
My point is that a 770 GMAT is the equivalent of a two and a half twist against a 720 GMAT average, and for a banker, you're like an olympic diver when it comes to taking these exams. That two and a half twist is only at 80%, not 99.99% let alone 100%.

Use the 20% of the energy and effort you save for something more fun than GMATs. You don't need to get an 800.

 
IlliniProgrammer:
Get a 780 on the GMATs. But only spend 60 hours studying for it. That's enough to be in the top decile of HBS admits and devote the rest of your time to something you are more passionate about.

LOL you're basically asking me to be smarter than i am.

Money Never Sleeps? More like Money Never SUCKS amirite?!?!?!?
 

Illini - thanks, interesting points....although I wouldnt say it's easy to hit 760 for most bankers, even those that study a lot. I studied a LOT more than 4 hours to get a 730 (90%V, 95%Q), but that wasn't 99%. If I had improved my verbal, sure I could have gotten there, but given how much I had already studied, I think I was really hitting diminishing returns.

Remember Bankerella and Illini, not everyone can sit down and score a 680+ cold. :-)

One thing I've noticed on the GMAT is that scoring really high does on the quant section doesnt boost your overall score as much (because more people score ridiculously high there - thanks engineers). So I got a 730, but I think it would have been 760+ if my percentiles had been reversed.

Maybe my score would have been more impressive on the GRE? Or would my verbal weakness been exposed more?

 

hey bankerella~

thanks for another great post. these are actually pretty motivating now that i'm finally starting my GMAT journey.

keep 'em coming!

Money Never Sleeps? More like Money Never SUCKS amirite?!?!?!?
 
IlliniProgrammer:
For the record, women make up the majority of b-school applicants and students these days. So what is this affirmative action thing everyone has been supporting again? :-D

At what b-school - that anyone here cares about - are women the majority of students? I'm sure this may be true when we lump in every school from Alcorn State to U of Phoenix, but for the programs (i.e., M7) that are discussed on this board that's just not the case.

 
charlie 09:
IlliniProgrammer:
For the record, women make up the majority of b-school applicants and students these days. So what is this affirmative action thing everyone has been supporting again? :-D

At what b-school - that anyone here cares about - are women the majority of students? I'm sure this may be true when we lump in every school from Alcorn State to U of Phoenix, but for the programs (i.e., M7) that are discussed on this board that's just not the case.

I thought women even hold a slight majority at HBS these days. Maybe I misread it.
 

Absolutely agree that differentiation of career experience and background and an OK to good gmat score is more important than just a bland background and good to great GMAT score. However developing that unique and awesome background takes a long time (months and years) while getting a good to great GMAT score merely takes a few weeks to a few months of hard work. so why not get that great GMAT score if all you have is a short amount of time? or get a great GMAT score AND develop a great background if you won't apply to b-school for years?

I also highly doubt that adcoms view GRE at the same level as the GMAT. as it's a relatively new development, i think the GRE acceptance was driven by the rise of dual degree students who had already taken the GRE. if you're just an MBA applicant with no prior grad school experience, taking the GRE instead of the GMAT is probably going to be viewed as gaming the system

 
keensetofpeepers:
Absolutely agree that differentiation of career experience and background and an OK to good gmat score is more important than just a bland background and good to great GMAT score. However developing that unique and awesome background takes a long time (months and years) while getting a good to great GMAT score merely takes a few weeks to a few months of hard work. so why not get that great GMAT score if all you have is a short amount of time? or get a great GMAT score AND develop a great background if you won't apply to b-school for years?

I also highly doubt that adcoms view GRE at the same level as the GMAT. as it's a relatively new development, i think the GRE acceptance was driven by the rise of dual degree students who had already taken the GRE. if you're just an MBA applicant with no prior grad school experience, taking the GRE instead of the GMAT is probably going to be viewed as gaming the system

But having a good background pays a lot more dividends than just getting into b-school.

The Navy Pilot who had to ditch his plane over Iraq does not spend all day thanking his lucky stars that those interesting stories from the Navy got him into HBS.

My view is that B-school should really be a 15 month+ application process for a lot of people, not a 3 month one. Or better yet, just resolve from here on out to do fun and interesting stuff and be a person with good stories to tell, regardless of whether you plan to go to b-school. The next time someone has a crazy idea that isn't unethical and has a reasonable risk/reward ratio, just say "yes" and push your boundaries. The dividends of this approach to life dwarf a B-school admission, even professional success.

My tolerance for risk ends beyond riding a motorcycle in Manhattan traffic. If the risk is within those boundaries, I am all for it. So the only things really off-limits for me are smoking, BASE jumping, and rebreather diving. Your tolerance for risk might be different. But whatever it is, push yourself to try new things within those boundaries.

And if you're worried about your chances of admission to school, push back your application a year and do some fun stuff in the meantime.

 

If you have a crappy story but nail the GMAT, you're still not getting into a top program - full stop. So if you have a short amount of time and a crappy story, your strategy shouldn't be to nail the GMAT and apply to b-school. It should be to put off applying for 1-2 years so you can develop leadership experience, get involved in extracurriculars, etc.

 

Veritatis et amet porro libero aperiam minima quisquam asperiores. Laborum delectus provident quis consequatur sit sed omnis. Dignissimos inventore non ratione nihil est ducimus. Sit quo aliquid est natus dolore provident nemo laborum.

Laborum consequatur at autem illo. Distinctio dolore delectus id enim est quae quas. Est eos et nemo expedita et quibusdam modi.

 

Rerum et esse in esse autem. Labore est molestiae qui.

Aut quia reiciendis ut quas quis dolores quibusdam ipsa. Tempore minima enim dolorem ullam animi fugiat et.

Eos sint voluptatem alias maxime. Dolores eos omnis pariatur sapiente amet. Incidunt non et optio qui quis omnis voluptas. Officiis dolorum eveniet est qui tempore laudantium deserunt. Aut aut sit odio aspernatur. Laboriosam natus a enim aut.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
3
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
6
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
9
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”