Applied 19x to Elite MBA programs.....this is what I learned
My background for context...
Undergrad: Mid-ranked State School/STEM-Business triple major/B-average GPA
Graduate: Masters degree in STEM field from top 30 private (non-IVY) university/A- average GPA
WE: 7+ years at NY sector-focused boutique IB, promoted-twice
EC: Founded non-profit focused on veteran's healthcare; raised $15k+
Career Goal: sector focused HF/AM
GMAT: 740
Indian Male
Since Fall 2018, I've applied 19 times to 10 different MBA programs.....all of the M7's including 3 others. I've been interviewed by three programs and waitlisted at a non-HSW M7 and by one other non-M7 program. I've spent thousands and thousands of dollars on GMAT fees, GMAT tutoring, App Fees, Admissions Consultants, etc. Here is what I've learned about the MBA admissions process...
1) The first and foremost priority for MBA admissions committee is "building a diverse class." This means that the boxes you check for sex and ethnicity are the most important factors influencing your admissions chances because you are competing against people whom look like you. You might be vastly more competitive that the most competitive applicant in a different ethnic group or sex but they will get a spot and you will not.
(Side note: If you are in an over-represented group, you better have strong GPA (major agnostic), solid GMAT and brand-name companies on resume. You may also be able to fool admissions into thinking you’ve done something super unique (guy I know latched onto a successful non-profit founded by his older brother as a “co-founder” and managed to get into HSW on the back of that “accomplishment”)).
2) Admissions committees have absolutely no sense of how to compare the rigor of various majors from various undergraduate institutions so they choose to be agnostic with regards to field of undergraduate study i.e. accept humanities majors, STEM majors, business majors, etc. with little preference for one over the other with obvious preference for degrees from more prestigious institutions.
3) Admissions officers are always going to encourage you to apply. Idk if they are paid by how many applications they read or what…but you will not get an honest assessment of your admissions chances from them.
4) Very few schools offer feedback for rejected applicants as they are likely deathly afraid of being sued for racial/sexual bias in the admissions process. This is also likely why admissions is such a “black box.” No school is transparent about the criteria for admission because they want to maintain the most flexibility in being able to build the class how they want i.e. discriminate on the basis of sex and or race. It seems admissions at elite institutions view it as their mission to cure social disparities on the basis of race and sex and seem to be okay with going about this by de-valuing merit. The SFA vs Harvard supreme court decision is going to have fascinating implications for admissions at both the undergraduate and graduate level.
5) Having taken the both the GRE for grad school and GMAT for MBA applications, acceptance of the GRE in place of the GMAT is a blatant effort by MBA admissions to devalue the Quantitative skills that might disproportionately detract from the applications of certain racial/sexual groups and make them less competitive. The GRE is a complete joke compared to the GMAT.
While I’m sure this comes off as vitriolic rantings of a spurned applicant who maybe just wasn't qualified…I honestly wish someone had told me these things in 2018 when I first set out on this disastrous journey. I’ve spent countless hours studying, writing essays, etc. and thousands of dollars on fees and consultants for nothing. I incorrectly assumed business school admissions decisions were heavily based on merit, that work experience in competitive, grueling positions like IB or consulting was valued and that, as a lot of admissions was supposedly based on “luck”, persistence in the process would ultimately be rewarded (being interviewed and waitlisted enforced this). I was very wrong on all of these and would discourage anyone in a similar position as I was from following my path….
I appreciate the frustrations you feel, but You have limited yourself in a few ways(past and present) and don’t seem to address those things in your post
1) you went to a non target and had a mediocre gpa
2) you limited yourself to applying to elite programs (understandable…)
3) you went to a non target masters and had an ok gpa.. is it related to the sectors you work in/want to work in?
4) you have roughly the average/median +-10-20 GMAT score for the most elite M7
5) Not too sure on the EC situation, but I could write a check to a foundation I setup for more than that at that stage of my career…
6) unsure where your boutique ranks….
So you have a lot going against you plus all the things you said.
Consultants will take your money.. did they not suggest applying to other lower ranked programs?
What are the compelling unique things that make you stand out among the elite of the elite also gunning for these spots?
Not trying to sound harsh.. I’m not sure I’d get into an M7 these days.. I’m not that unique in the scheme of things. Doesnt mean you won’t go on to make a shit ton of money in the future.. just find a path that works for you!.
Appreciate the feedback and the positivity in your response....
1) Yes it was a non-target with a mediocre GPA......while triple majoring in a STEM field and two business fields. My grades in my business classes probably averaged out to a 3.6 while those in my STEM classes were a 2.6-7. Adcoms tout that rigor of courseload is considered so my GPA should be evaluated in that context.
2) Elite programs are the only ones that offer a viable network in the field I want to enter post-MBA
3) Yes the masters is directly relevant to the sector I want to work in and is at a target institution.
6) My boutique is well-known in our sector but its not a large, agnostic M&A firm like Greenhill, Centerview, etc. It was founded by guys with blue chip backgrounds all Harvard MBA's (these guys wrote my recs). Alumni of my firm have gone to MIT and Northwestern.
The consultants did suggest other programs but see answer #2.
As far as compelling unique things that make me stand out among the elite of the elite....I would say the triple major (despite the GPA) is fairly unique and compelling. My "story" also flows as my undergrad, grad, and professional experience are all related to the field I want to enter Post-MBA. Regardless, I have spent a fair amount of time evaluating the profiles of people whom I know personally that were accepted to M7 schools and while a few certainly did some extraordinary things (usually the White/Asian males).....most of them did not have anything particularly exciting in their profile....they just had a solid GPA (usually in a Business major), solid GMAT and worked at a brand-name firm (independent of their actual function which could include accounting, operations, IT consulting, etc. [almost 100% women])
[Just wanted to add that I also did my masters (again in a highly quantitative field) while working full-time in IB at my firm. Think that's pretty unique and compelling, particularly for candidates coming from IB.]
I went to one of H/S for bschool and I want to say some of your claims do hold validity. People act like M7 bschools have these brilliant, top notch students, but in actuality, that’s like a quarter of the class and the remainder don’t have flawless backgrounds. Plenty of non-target alumni and people who have pretty random work experience. In the end, if you don’t fit what they want (and it’s impossible to know what they want), you’re shit out of luck.
You’re putting too much stock in your triple major. Major hardly matters in the US and the only people who emphasize major are those with STEM backgrounds because they want to feel better about themselves. Your GPA is pretty inexcusable. My second major is STEM and I know it’s hard, but not sub 3.0 hard or even 3.3 hard.
My advice is to aim for T15 schools or even T20. You should also get your GMAT a little higher to “make up” for the poor GPA. They want to know that you’re smart and a low GPA and okay/mediocre GMAT (relative to others at the M7 schools) doesn’t quite sell that story.
Your lack of success could be due to other factors. Your undergrad GPA is from an average to mediocre school and is 2.7, which is below 99% of admits at T10 schools. This is already a significant disadvantage. You’re also a bit older than most candidates (I’m assuming you graduates from your Master’s at 23 which would put you at ~30 today), are at a no-name boutique, and are from an over-represented demographic. The only strong part of your application is your GMAT, and even then, it’s above average but not exceptional either. Finally, your career goal doesn’t make much sense given that HFs don’t really look at MBAs.
I don’t mean to twist the knife, but I wouldn’t say that your outcome is too surprising. I certainly wouldn’t say that it brings in question the degree to which elite MBAs are meritocratic. The fact that you got a waitlist at a M7 is honestly pretty good all things considered
Yeah dude it’s definitely diversity efforts that are keeping you down and not the fact you’re a clown with a 3.0 from a bad school and a GMAT that’s below the outright average (never mind the cohort you’re actually up against) who very clearly has a giant chip on his shoulder despite not much going on. Grow up.
Thank you for your response. I will say I certainly feel like a clown. I feel like a clown for taking on challenging coursework as an undergrad. I feel like a clown for choosing to work long hours in a IB job. I feel like a clown for spending so much time studying to achieve a 740 on the GMAT. I feel like a clown for believing that my experience and achievements, such as they were, spoke more about my character than the color of my skin or what is between my legs.
You are wildly missing the point my man. You don't have any achievements that would put you anywhere near the top of the pile, straight up. There is nothing that stands out about you. Nothing to do with your race or your gender. HBS is literally 55% dudes and 25% Asian, and from firsthand knowledge I can tell you probably upwards of half of that Asian stat are South Asian. Stop crying “woke oppression” just because your self-image is too fragile to handle the fact you’re not cut out for the big leagues. Stay mad
1. Why do you keep going on about your "challenging coursework" when you were business major at some random state school? These are literally known for how easy they are. Ok you also took some STEM courses good for you - averaging 2.7 gpa in your stem classes is very much not elite material.
2. The fact that your biggest takeaway from the admissions process is that it wasn't your fault shows a lack of maturity and introspection which programs look for. This probably came across and might be why you were dinged
3. GRE quant is easier but verbal is arguably harder (i also took both), why should schools value quamt skills more than verbal skills? Processing and communicating qualitative info is a large part of many post MBA jobs
For perspective, I went to a super target where I earned both a ba and ms in a stem field with a 3.8+ gpa in 4 years . I took the GMAT once with minimal prep and got a 760. I was also a varsity athlete and at a top BB. I had outstanding LORs from distinguished alumni. I am a white male. I applied to 4 M7 schools. I was dinged at H/S without an interview. I was accepted to W. Only one of my peers was accepted to a M7 (not H/S/W) during the same admissions cycle despite similar qualifications. I’m sorry you’ve wasted so much time and money, but you’re beating a dead horse.
Appreciate the response although I am disappointed in its tone. The post may come off as entitled to you but I hope you can appreciate the context in which it was written. I certainly do not know of anyone who spent as much time and effort getting into an Elite MBA program as I did. While it was ultimately not successful, I certainly learned alot about the process and would like to share that knowledge with others who may be in a similar position and maybe spark a thoughtful discussion about the positives and negatives.
While I don't think my qualifications have necessarily "earned" me a spot, I also do not believe alot of the candidates that do get spots are particularly more deserving. Your right in that life isn't fair but that doesn't mean that people who have the power to, shouldn't strive to make it so. You disparage "[doing] hard stuff AT a mediocre level" but I say that building a base level competency in a highly technical field is preferable to "excelling" in a field that is a dime a dozen.
"who spent as much time and effort getting into an Elite MBA program as I did"
just because you spent so much time and effort doesn't mean you deserve a spot
Carolina blue is going to look good on you. Have fun at Kenan Flagler next fall.
So only M7 (+3)? Really?
Read the room, my friend.
Jesus. I was HYP, varsity letters, 3 years at Goldman in S&T handing $200mm + per day in flow and got a 630 on GMAT (perfect math).
Knew I didnt have ANY shot at the top schools due to the competition...and this was 25 years ago.
Not everyone is cut out to be a BSD at HBS or Wharton. There will always be someone better. Someone with an 800. Someone whose last name is Trump. Someone who saved the manatees.
Managing your own expectations is the most important part of maximizing your career. The system did not conspire to put you down. The system ranked you where you should be.
Hard work does not guarantee sucess. Reality plus hard work does.
Your problem is obviously:
1. your goals make no sense. no hedge fund is gonna hire an IB VP in his 30s out of MBA and adcoms know it. it doesn't make sense, if that was what you wanted to do why did you stay in IB for 7 years? you might get in if you told them you wanted to move to BB IB but even then you're gonna have a problem cus you're too senior. I honestly think this accounts for 85%+ of your problems. you are too senior for an MBA and there is no recruiting track that makes sense for you
2. your GPA sucks
I understand you mean well, but your responses come off as entitled and show you're completely missing the point.
1) Drop the DEI gripe. You sound extremely bitter - I'd be willing to wager that the majority of URM applicants with your profile would end up with similar results.
2) Not exactly sure if your story makes sense here. Sounds like your goal is biotech HF/AM...you should not need an MBA if you have 7+ years of related-sector IB. I saw your previous comment: "However, in the particular sector I want to focus on, many of the PM's have MBA's from Harvard, Wharton or Columbia." a lot of times, this is folks with science/academia background bolstering their profile. Absolutely not essential for you since you have a masters STEM degree. Just look at Peter Kolchinsky for example.
3) Look at where you consistently shift the blame - repeatedly mentioning the AdCom process is at fault. Your profile does not stand out. Look in the Top 15-ish range and you will have much more success.
Best of luck
Hate to say it but this is just wrong. There are ~100-150 black test takers that score >700 on the GMAT in any given year. There are certainly many, many more than that the go to the M7 schools. A black test taker with a 740 is basically guaranteed admission and the question would be H/S or one of the other M7 and how big of a scholarship they are getting.
We do need the lies to stop. Go look at the profiles of DEI candidates at M7. These are often not backgrounds that a white or Asian male would have a chance of getting accepted with.
Before anyone claims a chip on the shoulder—went to W. It is just a fact of life that people want to pretend doesn’t exist and claim people are bitter when it is noticed.
I say this in the least dickish way possible but you're just super salty and its your own fault. In banking on of the keys is managing expectations and you didn't manage yours. Its not because of diversity quotas, its not because they didn't understand your major was hard, its not because of the GRE...its because you were a middling candidate for the programs you applied and the results show. Those "diversity" candidates didn't take your spot...even removing that percent of the class you'd have never made it at the schools you applied. You should have known your GPA basically made you DOA. For top programs you can have one maybe two chinks in your armor but not several, as you did. Really low GPA (this is a big one), unknown firm, unrealistic career goals (your background statistically isn't getting you into AM/HF regardless of the school you attend). H/S/W where clearly zero percent chances. Booth/Kellogg/Columbia/MIT were extreme long shots. Hass/NYU/Tuck also long shots goes do to small class sizes and being in NYC which over indexes their acceptance rates. Then you get to Darden/Fuqua/Ross/Yale where you're likely be more of a coin flip and schools like UCLA/USC/UNC/Georgetown/UT/Cornell, etc. are where you probably had an decent chance. However you only focused on the zero chance to extreme long shots. This is your fault for not doing the proper diligence. The reality is you would have basically been able to get the same job at any of these schools but your blinders let you focus on the "elite" ones. What's odd is despite your hundreds of hours of research this wasn't apparent to you. You need to be more introspective and self aware about this process.
The bright said is this - you have done well in your job and are smart and thus will likely still have a great career. Its deflating not doubt but these programs won't dictate your success you will. With a positive attitudeI'm sure you will do great and one day realize while this seemed like a big deal it wasn't.
Thanks for your encouraging words. I certainly am “salty” as you say but that is only because I spent so much time, effort and money pursuing this path (having been encouraged to in conversations with adcoms/app fees waived) with no success.
I’m not sure how you can suggest that they were extreme long shots given I was interviewed and waitlisted at M7 programs. They do not interview candidates whom have no chance at being accepted. Therefore, it’s not like I was not at all competitive. I’m not suggesting I’m not a middling candidate for those programs. But there are plenty of other middling candidates that get accepted. I thought persistence and profile improvements would work in my favor in this regard.
You say background prevents me from getting into AM/HF and maybe your right. This is exactly why I focused on the stronger programs. The alumni network at those programs was going to facilitate the transition. There are plenty of people in my target sector whom have MBA’s. So there is certainly a path from the MBA. However, we certainly will never know for sure given that I was never given the opportunity it’s to try recruiting from a strong MBA programs.
“However, we certainly will never know for sure given that I was never given the opportunity it's to try recruiting from a strong MBA programs.”
no, we know. We know you’re not good enough because you didn’t get in. Therefore we know you never deserved a shot from an M7 MBA program.
the more you post here, the more it should be obvious: you come up short as a human being. Stats aside, you probably fail to come across well in your interviews which is where your dings are coming from. I’m sure you’d have earned dings pretty much everywhere had you applied elsewhere
Everyone agrees this guy has a mediocre profile and it's no surprise he didn't get in. But what everyone seems to gloss over is that he got waitlisted and told to reapply earlier in the cycle by these admissions officers. They were the ones who gave him the impression he was competitive and now he feels lied to and thus extra salty. Maybe he hopes that by creating this thread he can discourage some prospective applicants and thus exact some measure of karmic revenge on the admissions officers who only care about boosting their applicant numbers.
Guy, I'm sorry you got conned but you've been working for almost a decade. People act based on their incentives and will lie to you. Just because they work at a school doesn't change any of that...
OP. You're brown. So next time tick the Mexican box and the LGBTQA box (emphasis on the B&A), brush up a bit on your Spanish and win in life.
Just wanted to say thanks to everyone that has replied so far. Even if you were derogatory, you're criticisms have allowed me to flesh out the arguments I've been having with myself for the past three years. I hope I've managed to encourage some of you to at least think about the questions my particular experience raises about the MBA admissions process. I'm hoping going forward the discussion can be less about my situation specifically and focus more on the positives and negatives about the MBA admissions process some of which I think have been made more transparent by my experience.
But it's ok for you to be derogatory toward URMs?
It sounds like you're looking at this from the perspective of "I'm really accomplished and the schools should recognize that and accept me." Instead ask yourself, "Why would the school want me and how can I help the school achieve its goals?"
IMO the AdComs want to admit kids who have a good story and a realistic path to their stated goals. They want to take these kids far and they want the kids to look back on their time at HSW fondly so that they donate money, make the school look good, and recruit other students.
If I was an AdCom, I'd probably say to myself "He has good work experience and a good background. But he already studied STEM + business and has an MS. We probably can't teach him much academically. And he wants to work in HF/AM. Those can be hard fields to break into, even for our top students. And besides, what's stopping him from going to HF/IM from investment banking right now? People do this all the time. And if he didn't work as an IB analyst can be really even help him much to make this switch? Will he be a satisfied customer if he strikes out?"
Compare that to a Naval officer who wants to leave USN and work in consulting, or an IB O&G analyst who wants to move to a clean tech company to do corporate development, or a federal consultant working with the CDC who wants to switch to a private sector biotech firm. Those are all very compelling stories because the school can take the kid from point A to B pretty easily and add serious value to his/her career. The student wins and the school looks good.
You have stiff competition not just because you're an Indian male but because you're competing against folks with really good stories.
This is my 3rd comment on this particular post. Every time I post - I learn something new. But this particular topic has been on my mind quite a bit.
There are two things that I wanted to talk about.
1) MBA Admissions
2) Personality.
So let's dive into MBA Admissions.
We all know that diversity plays a role in admissions. Not just in MBA but other programs as well. But is it really that big of a deal as the OP is suggesting? I don't think so. Asian applicants account for a large number of international applicants. So to keep the class 'diverse' - there has to be a limit of how many you can admit. To throw numbers out there (these are not accurate) - but let's say 10% Indian, 10% Chinese, 10% rest of Asia. Within the "10%" Indian - I would assume that these have to be diverse as well. Can't have all men. Can't have all IITians. Can't have all Engineers. These categories are very popular among Indians. Now IIM A/B/C are extremely hard to get into. unless you have a CAT score of 98 Percentile and above, you won't even get an interview. Sometimes being in the 98th percentile also gets you dinged. Can you imagine? In this case EXTREMELY smart candidates who have scores 95th, 96th, 97th, 98th percentile look for a secondary option. That is to take their GMAT and pursue an MBA at either ISB (Indian MBA) or in the US/EU. This is where it gets tough for fellow Indians applying to US/EU MBAs. They score a very high GMAT - merely making the 740 look below average. The OPs GMAT is slightly above average, but below average if he is an Indian. You see these IITs/BITs/NITs that couldn't get into IIMs - score an extremely high GMAT - limiting your chances. Now is it fair to you? probably not. But since you are Indian you should be well aware of the "reservation" system. The system for low-caste individuals to get a chance to compete that the top level. Merit wise you could be better off than them, but you may not get a chance if you fall below the general category's admission list. Think about the same here. You have a decent profile - but just got overshadowed.
Second thing under MBA Admissions topic is you getting dinged. I am going to ignore the fact that you could've went for Georgetown, UNC, Cornell, UCLA, etc... Since you had the goal of these "10" schools and you re-applied to 9 of them with a better GMAT of 740, something isn't setting well with me. For someone with an average GPA in undergrad and 3.8 in GRAD. No-named work - but still in IB. Okay ECs. Not even getting an interview at majority of the programs? The GMAT alone should be making them look at your application. But there seems to be a huge gap/hole in the application. I don't know what it is, but it is definitely not diversity. If this was a case for diversity - you would at least have an interview in most of those places. There is just something that is missing out of the picture.
2) Personality -
There are many individuals on this post that are well accomplished. An MD in consulting, Associate in PE, Principal in PE, VP in PE, Senior VP in AM to list a few. It is a bit surprising that you are playing down most of their comments by saying you have done "extensive" research. By saying you know a certain individual going this route, or these are the only schools that can get you somewhere, etc. If anything take this as an opportunity to learn and network. A lot of individuals here are downplaying your GPA but do appreciate your experience and your persistence. No matter how good or bad your profile was - you tried and you failed. Not once, but twice. I have it to give it to you for trying, but having an answer for every individuals comment here is not the way to go. You may have rode a high horse or not, I don't know. What I do know this is a good learning opportunity rather than pointing fingers.
it's been 3 years since you started this process, at this point - you can either go for low tiered schools or aim to achieve your goal without an MBA. Good luck!
This thread has really blown up since I looked at a couple of days ago. I think the posts above generally touch on all of the relevant points. To give my quick take, to the OP, it's a shame you didn't get into the schools of your choice and that you've spent a number of years getting continued rejections. You certainly don't have a bad profile and although the M7 is probably a reach, there's a world where you do get into one of them with luck, timing, and proper execution on essays.
With that being said, I think you're placing a little too much emphasis on the unfairness of the process, especially when it comes to diversity. Fortunately or unfortunately, the class needs to be diverse, so folks with the highest scores, best jobs etc, don't always get in. Both narrative and diversity of ethnicity, skillset, prior jobs/ future jobs is important to these schools. Either you or your consultant should have taken this into account. The bar for ORM groups such as males, financial professionals, asians is higher than it is for females, teachers, etc. To look at that group and to think that because your tests scores are higher and your job is better, that you're more qualified for a spot in the class is silly and although you probably wouldn't admit that openly on this forum, that seems to be the ultimate crux of your unhappiness. Is it 100% fair, no, is it life, yes.
Secondly, I think for better or worse, you're a little too high on your own accomplishments, especially as they relate to the caliber of the students at the M7/Top 10 schools. As some other posters have pointed out (perhaps harshly),
I'm not sure what your consultants were advising you on, but it sounds like there was a slight lack of honestly and introspection throughout the processes, which is probably why you're struggling. If nothing else, I would have dropped the HF narrative and tried to differentiate you from the other bankers.
The honest truth is that while you might suffer minor bias due to being an ORM, the admissions process is fairly merit based and on your merit, you're just not a strong candidate for an M7 school. As I said, over time and deepening on the year, folks like yourself could get lucky and slip into the class, but 90% you get rejected, which means the adcoms are doing their job. I think with an overhaul to your approach, you might still have a shot at some of the M7 or you should open the aperture on the schools you're willing to look at and find another route into the world of HF/IM. Plenty of schools have more regional strengths and could place into those roles, schools like UT Austin come to mind.
Keep your head up, and I wish you the best.