The Application Process

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.

Hey Mohit--

This post is really interesting and thoughtful. I agree with that this this is an insane industry and that it is crazy how many consultants there are making a ton of money off the warped system.

The good news though is that you seem like a really observant and intelligent guy who knows the rules of the game. That is an important advantage-the rules of engagement are clear, and now it's just a matter of proving you can play the game. For me at least, I'm playing the game under the adcom's terms, but I am going to be completely honest in my essays because I want to go to a school that would choose me for who I am. That might be unique, I'm not sure, but it's served me well in the past and I'm hoping it serves me well during this process.

Capitalism is unfair, why would this be any different? Just a rhetorical question, doesn't mean it shouldn't be!

I love your observation about "diversity, community service, and entrepreneur." Cracks me up.

Thanks man 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

Anyway, I was wondering whether integrity is valid for desperate times? I know we have been taught what is the right way but we have also been taught to question every assumption (ask why? - oh that was Enron's ad campaign..he he). Question is would you prefer to die honorably as Ned Stark does in GOT or rather ditch all rules and just concentrate on winning. Also, in time who remembers your slightly grey decisions ? Do we remember or concentrate on slightly unethical moves of Bill Gates?

I am not making any point here. Just raising questions? Any good books on Integrity out there...

mohitmj wrote:Thanks man 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

Anyway, I was wondering whether integrity is valid for desperate times? I know we have been taught what is the right way but we have also been taught to question every assumption (ask why? - oh that was Enron's ad campaign..he he). Question is would you prefer to die honorably as Ned Stark does in GOT or rather ditch all rules and just concentrate on winning. Also, in time who remembers your slightly grey decisions ? Do we remember or concentrate on slightly unethical moves of Bill Gates?

I am not making any point here. Just raising questions? Any good books on Integrity out there...

Integrity is most important during desperate times. It's those times that test our mettle. If we don't have integrity then, then our integrity during the easy times is meaningless.

I think it's possibility to still "win" and "die honorably"--the two aren't mutually exclusive.

If people aren't concentrating on slightly unethical decisions made by Bill Gates, maybe it's because we don't know what they are, not that they don't exist or don't matter.

Kant's Metaphysics is a great read. It is more about moral absolutism, but integrity is about the follow-through on morality, so I think it's related. I also like Kierkegaard (sp?) and Sartre for ethical dilemmas.

mohitmj,

Your experiment seems like it was interesting, bluffing your way through an interview is one way to get to the top and skip the long haul. However, I'm surprised with how much of this is actually going on. Especially with larger organizations who precisely choose not to investigate all reasoning revealed by each future candidate in the application process. In my opinion, it is because the corporation's are so large that there is no choice but to allow a space cushion to that regard. Another thing that perks my attention is how candidates manage to lie on their admission essays. I'm curious if those people actually do get caught in the process, or if it's considered normal nowadays. I am working on creating my own admission essay soon enough and this information could be insightful.

Mohit,

I think I was little late for the party but this is an interesting question you pose. I really like your comment

I mean do you think that you are going to be great leader or visionary if you hire someone to do your spell check!

You nailed it right there. I think I am going to do some more thinking about the ethical dilemma and come back to this post. Btw, if you will search "Bhagvad Geetha + Kant", a really interesting papaer from 1911 shows up, which talks about how Kant and Geetha were different but it touches on some aspects of ethical dilemma.

Hi mohit,
Nice to see somebody who could speak out loud what all of us feel is true to some extent. In addition to what you've said...I think the whole process has been developed in a way where a single speck of self doubt can convert you into a sleepless freak who, even with great work ex and grades, does not consider himself good enough for the top schools and settles for I year scholarship at a II tier school. The schools should openly come out to discourage "boutique" apps consultants to have a level playing field.
Anderson has taken some steps:
https://poetsandquants.com/2012/02/01/uc ... lagiarism/

MALD2011 wrote:Mohit,

I think I was little late for the party but this is an interesting question you pose. I really like your comment

I mean do you think that you are going to be great leader or visionary if you hire someone to do your spell check!

You nailed it right there. I think I am going to do some more thinking about the ethical dilemma and come back to this post. Btw, if you will search "Bhagvad Geetha + Kant", a really interesting papaer from 1911 shows up, which talks about how Kant and Geetha were different but it touches on some aspects of ethical dilemma.

Yes, but you should take into consideration non-native speakers and international students who may not be very proficient in writing English (and may even have to take the TOEFL), and may make grammatical mistakes without realizing it. As a non-native speaker myself, I tend to talk a lot when trying to express an idea, while a native speaker can say the same thing with the same effectiveness in 2 sentences, not a paragraph. So if you can afford it, go for an MBA editing service, and if you can't, you can always go for the writing center or an English tutor at your university, who can help out even on pro bono basis.

I think the point here is to try to WIN, by being on the RIGHT side of the ethics debate ... Now if someone can play fair, and be at par or ahead of the pack then you are SET in life...I for one take it as a challenge, to test myself..

I agree on the community service, entrepreneurship bit. And Warren Buffett was indeed dinged at HBS - which turned out to be good for him.
My view on the consultant bit is slightly different. Consultants are not meant to be used for spell-checks. For some non native English speakers and people from different countries, what they are trying to communicate might not come across as intended to the average American reader. This is not just due to an insufficient command over English, but in many cases due to cultural differences. So having consultants do a sanity check and revert with feedback like "I don't quite understand what you are saying here" can be useful.
If you are saying they are overpriced because of so many anxious applicants that's possibly true. Maybe their services are worth $x but users pay $2x or some such multiple because they are anxious.