-
mohitmj
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2012 10:29 pm
- Location: New Delhi, India
- Thanked: 9 times
- Followed by:6 members
- GMAT Score:730
I had decided to take the plunge and apply for MBA. However, I did not realize how unfair this game is going to be. As the time for pushing the apply button gets close, I am realizing what a billion (maybe trillion) dollar industry this MBA really is. And it is more like Al Pacino's empire in Devil's advocate!
Just look at the few things I have observed recently:
- There seems to be pavlovian conditioning at play. I believe Adcoms and prospective students salivate every time they hear these words - diversity, community service, entrepreneur...
- The other beneficiaries of this MBA industry, the great consultants, the ones with infinite wisdom, would have you believe that Adcoms are the Gods and Goddesses on Earth. "Adcoms will look right through you, if you lie", "you must present yourself as unique". It is interesting then that when I am speaking with most students they tell me they lied on their admission essays. Now you can pull integrity crap on me but I think that it is MBA schools who are fault here. Looks like they have made narration more important than any other aspect of the application. The only ones who benefit from current state of things is the consultants - I mean do you think that you are going to be great leader or visionary if you hire someone to do your spell check!
- When I speak with Adcoms (especially those of second tier colleges) they present themselves as very creative ones. But all they do through their selection process is kill creativity. Whatever they say, it all comes down to a set filtering mechanism.
- As Nicholas Taleb (of black swan fame) would say - if you had no leadership position (or charity work for that matter) in past five years then it only means that there IS NO EVIDENCE that you could be a great leader. However, most schools seem to understand the situation as - if you had no leadership position in past five years then it only means that there IS EVIDENCE that you CANNOT be a great leader. Well, they would have rejected Warren Buffett (he showed his evidence for charity pretty late in life!)
- Now coming to interviews - didn't Cialdini mention long time back that we (subconsciously) prefer people we like i.e. good looking types. The interviews are inherently unfair.
Just look at the few things I have observed recently:
- There seems to be pavlovian conditioning at play. I believe Adcoms and prospective students salivate every time they hear these words - diversity, community service, entrepreneur...
- The other beneficiaries of this MBA industry, the great consultants, the ones with infinite wisdom, would have you believe that Adcoms are the Gods and Goddesses on Earth. "Adcoms will look right through you, if you lie", "you must present yourself as unique". It is interesting then that when I am speaking with most students they tell me they lied on their admission essays. Now you can pull integrity crap on me but I think that it is MBA schools who are fault here. Looks like they have made narration more important than any other aspect of the application. The only ones who benefit from current state of things is the consultants - I mean do you think that you are going to be great leader or visionary if you hire someone to do your spell check!
- When I speak with Adcoms (especially those of second tier colleges) they present themselves as very creative ones. But all they do through their selection process is kill creativity. Whatever they say, it all comes down to a set filtering mechanism.
- As Nicholas Taleb (of black swan fame) would say - if you had no leadership position (or charity work for that matter) in past five years then it only means that there IS NO EVIDENCE that you could be a great leader. However, most schools seem to understand the situation as - if you had no leadership position in past five years then it only means that there IS EVIDENCE that you CANNOT be a great leader. Well, they would have rejected Warren Buffett (he showed his evidence for charity pretty late in life!)
- Now coming to interviews - didn't Cialdini mention long time back that we (subconsciously) prefer people we like i.e. good looking types. The interviews are inherently unfair.
I think its not just about gaming the system. We can all do that. Just for example, I once actually appeared for a job interview for which I had absolutely no skills. However, I bluffed my way through and was selected. Though I did not join, it was useful experiment 
