Harvard or bust? - serious question
Have you guys heard of anyone who just applies to Harvard, with the intention of re-applying the following year if they don't get in?
For instance, Wharton students in finance who really don't need the b-school education and just want the brand name?
I have a number of friends who either only applied to HBS or only HBS/GSB. All went to a top target. I think the rationale is: 1. they've only gone to the best schools, so they feel like it's only worth their while if they continue to do so, especially since b-school is viewed these days as less and less of a requirement and (related) 2. they don't want to dilute their personal brand. So someone that went to HYP or equivalent undergrad wouldn't want to go to, say, a top 10 but not M7 business school. I don't agree with this logic, but that's how some people think.
Maybe not just Harvard, but only the top 5 HBS/Wharton/GSB/Columbia/Booth.
There are plenty of people who went to H/Y/P or other top universities and had to 'settle' for a top 10-20 MBA. Most people at these top UG schools don't get a job at MBB/BB IB/top PE/HF/VC since there are far fewer spots than there are grads. Bschool adcoms view your education as part of the whole package and your employer/position is often more important than your school.
I know numerous people in China who only applied to Harvard. One guy I knew who got dinged and was dumbfounded (bain -> baincap) gave in and decided to apply to GSB later in the year and went there. But the other guy who got dinged decided that he wasn't going anywhere but HBS and would try again next year or maybe not at all (another megafund Chinese guy)
I'm curious about statements like these. Does your place of employment really have that big of an affect on your chances to get in? As a kind of useless theoretical example, would someone with equal academic credentials from a place like GS => Bain Cap expect to get in over someone with equivalent grade/ECs who decided to work at a less traditional place (NGO, start-up, or something off the beaten path like that)?
I understand that finance is heavily represented, but I always thought that had more to do with the fact that 1. people at prestigious financial firms out of undergrad generally tend to have done very well academically and 2. a huge amount of people in finance apply, when compared with other industries (don't have the numbers to back up #2, so correct me if I'm wrong).
Anyway, I've just been reading a lot of "this successful guy from Bain Capital/KKR/XYZ buyside firm was astonished they didn't get in," and I thought that was strange because I was under the impression that the application is a lot more than just a place of employment on their resume. And especially given the backlash against finance-types HBS seems to have of late.
One of the biggest bullshit that admissions officers at HSW MBA tell people is that your place of employment does not matter. It's what you do that counts. This is only half-true and awfully deceptive, in my opinion. Generally speaking, students at HSW (especially HBS) tend to fall into one of two groups: the first is the blue-chip folks, the one with top undergrad, strong grades and gmat, and big-name companies on their resumes while the second group are the more "non-traditional" types who did interesting work and/or worked in a niche field that the school feels can add value to the incoming class. Examples of the latter include military, startups, non-profit, government, fashion, engineering, etc.
If you're a typical white or asian guy in finance or consulting and want to get into HBS or Stanford, it will be VERY tough to do so without at least one big name company on your resume. Poets and quants actually did a rather comprehensive breakdown of the first-year at class at wharton by looking at the students' undergrad schools and places of employment. To no one's surprise the blue chips and ivy league schools were disproportionately represented, and for the students who did not to go top schools, almost all of them worked at a name brand firm.
basically, if you get through the KKR screen you're likely to get through the HBS screen, cause they screen on some of the same things.
^this person would get in every time, I'm sure... unfortunately, this person doesn't exist. people that competitive and hardcore do not go to ngo's, they go to goldman. (generalization, but generally correct)
Not at all true. Not the norm by any means, but does happen - maybe not at Wharton where everyone is 100% focused on finance, but at a place like HYP it certainly can and does. Know plenty of people who did similar things - they may not be "hardcore," but thankfully you can still do very well academically without being hardcore. Especially those who come from wealthier backgrounds who have the luxury of not having to be motivated by money.
But all of that is beside the point - I didn't mean to harp on the NGO part. Just someone who is on a different path where "prestige" levels aren't comparable. Like someone who goes to be a product manager at Microsoft or something. I really just want to know where people at buyside firms get the idea that they are shoo-ins for admission, given how competitive these places are.
So what are the costs of applying to only HBS and, if you get rejected, applying again next year? Would you have a higher chance of getting in?
@otter - I do agree that those people exist but I've found that most 3.8 GPA engineering majors at ivies are fairly intense... you are correct in saying they are not all that way though. I suppose here in China i'm friends with a bunch of those type of overacheiving summa HYPers who are doing "princeton in asia" fellowships and all that (working for ngo's, teaching english, etc.)
I am seriously thinking of only applying to Stanford in a few years, I realize i have about a 2-3% chance of getting in but honestly thats the only school I'd leave work for. I love working on a clean tech portfolio and as we move more into traditional PE, i'd jump at the chance to learn in Palo Alto.
Friend of mine only applied to Stanford and is waiting to hear back (R1). Another friend only applied to HBS and GSB last year and got into both. Matriculated at GSB.
What were your friends' credentials like in terms of numbers and work experience?
For the one at GSB now; Oxbridge Economics Undergrad GS Trader for 3 years
Both are female.
Et praesentium ullam accusantium sed. Accusantium ex non rem et fugit dolores quidem. Tempora aut voluptatum accusamus tempora.
Quas vel rerum facere voluptatem. Est ea sint beatae dolorum quia ipsa. Officia aliquam voluptatum praesentium soluta voluptas velit culpa aspernatur. Soluta qui eum id sed totam sit.
Autem perferendis et velit eaque non vitae. Illum veritatis voluptate nihil et. Vel qui laboriosam voluptatem.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...