|
People vastly overrate how important the GMAT score is too. Getting a 700 GMAT, which isn't even remarkable, isn't going to help you at all if you don't have a rock solid resume.
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2013 23:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 12:56 |
|
|
Vomik posted:People vastly overrate how important the GMAT score is too. Getting a 700 GMAT, which isn't even remarkable, isn't going to help you at all if you don't have a rock solid resume. Very much agreed, but a low GPA score paired with an "average" GMAT means that I definitely won't get in. Getting a high score on the GMAT is a way of saying "I know my GPA is low but look, I can take on the course load you'd be throwing at me." It obviously doesn't guarantee anything, but it's definitely a step in the right direction. ONEMANWOLFPACK posted:As someone who is interested in these programs, has done a lot of research, and is in a worse boat than you: Yeah, I get what you're saying about the "diversity" thing. Instead of "someone with low grades," I meant more "someone with a different background than the regular applicant." Basically, I'm hoping that since my background is NOT all business/finance, they *may* take a different approach in evaluating me. I could be super wrong, though. Someone could totally correct me if they're more in the know, but by diversity, I was referring more to schools wanting to have students with different backgrounds representing them once they've completed their MBA. I've been under the impression that they'd want a wider range of industries being represented by their newly-minted alumni, instead of only having people in traditional business/finance sectors once they've graduated. Again, I could be super wrong. You're also right about your own definition of "diversity" though truth be told, maybe it'll simply elevate my competition either way. As far as big name companies go, I've worked for Fidelity Investments. The companies for film stuff aren't really worth mentioning, though I did do a graduate course in Feature Film Producing at UCLA back in 2011. My two references for the application will be the film producer I've worked with the most (he knows my strengths and weaknesses best) and an upper tier manager at Fidelity Investments in their Canadian branch. Whether that's good or bad, I guess we'll see in a couple of months! Frost000 fucked around with this message at 03:15 on Jul 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2013 03:06
|
|
|
Frost000 posted:Just wanted to sign in and say that I'm in the process of studying for the GMAT. Where are you looking? Full time ? I wouldn't worry about lack of a pure business background, Good programs look to build a diverse group of students from different industries. Main thing is to get the point across that you are driven and in whatever field you have worked in you have made an impact.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2013 13:33
|
|
|
J4Gently posted:Where are you looking? Definitely looking for Full Time. Programs I've been looking into so far: UCLA, McGill, Concordia... There's a few others I'm mulling over. UCLA would be my top choice but I know it's next to impossible for me. I'm still going to try, though. The latter two are more because they're local, though McGill's program sounded really great when I went to their information session and a cocktail they were hosting with current students. In all honesty, I need to study so much for the GMAT that I'm trying to focus more on that right now so I can do the exam in September and get the best score possible. I'd be open to studying elsewhere in the world (Europe, Asia), though I haven't made nearly enough research in those areas so far. I have a friend who's completing her MBA in Berlin and she mainly targeted that school due to them not asking for a GMAT score when applying. She's told me that the result so far is that a lot of the students aren't able to keep up with the course load...
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2013 13:53
|
|
|
Frost000 posted:Programs I've been looking into so far: UCLA, McGill, Concordia...
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2013 19:45
|
|
|
Small White Dragon posted:Out of curiosity, why UCLA? Because my ultimate goal is to work on the business side of film, whether it be in the studio system, for a production company, for a bank to evaluate projects for bridge loans, etc. Being in LA, it's easier to jump into that from UCLA. Plus, after having met with and discussed my situation with the admissions director for Anderson, she mentioned to me that some students can choose to work at studios as part of their Summer internships. In Summer of '12, some students worked for Warner Brothers as part of their effort to create a digitized platform for the distribution of their catalogue.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2013 19:57
|
|
|
I would suggest USC as a related program if film is your goal and you are also looking at Concordia.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2013 20:05
|
|
|
Mandalay posted:I would suggest USC as a related program if film is your goal and you are also looking at Concordia. I've definitely considered and should've probably added it to my list earlier, though in mind it's definitely UCLA > USC. I haven't met any representatives from there yet, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2013 20:14
|
|
|
In my view people worry too much about the specific school, unless it is one of the elite HBS, Wharton etc.. (those open a lot of doors) it doesn't make a massive difference. USC UCLA both have good reps for film.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2013 22:01
|
|
|
Mandalay posted:I would suggest USC as a related program if film is your goal and you are also looking at Concordia. USC also has a certificate you can get from their cinema school while you're during your MBA and the way the units are set up, you'll actually finish a little bit faster than normal. Feel free to email me if you have USC specific questions at my username at gmail dot com. Currently wrapping up my first year in the PM program there.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 23:49
|
|
|
FWIW my former colleague did the USC MBA with a concentration in film and really struggled to find a relevant job, with a lot of his colleagues still unemployed. I think I saw they had a 25% unemployment rate out of their class. The economy could be better in a few years. I worked in film finance for 3 years, message me if you want to talk a little about it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2013 22:45
|
|
|
Actually your original definition of diversity isn't that far off. These days top schools get so many people who are "awesome" in terms of GPA, GMAT and traditional work experience that differentiating yourself by those criteria alone becomes very difficult, even if your scores in these areas are objectively "awesome". Having seen this process first hand (many of my friends at Wharton were readers), the real differentiator on getting in is often the "soft" part of your application: the interview and the essays, where you get to tell the school about who you are and what you are like. Discussion-based MBA programs don't work if you will your class with introverted study-hards. So MBA programs look to fill their classes with people who are smart, but also dynamic, outgoing, engaging AND have a variety of professional and life experiences to share. Assuming you have some acceptable academic proficiency, as measured by your GPA and GMAT (and yes your GPA is low so study hard for the GMAT), what will get you in is whether the way you describe yourself catches a reader's eye. Keep in mind, that an average applicant will not get in. So when applying, it will be to your benefit to follow a "high-beta" strategy, when crafting your essays - "put it all out there" in film speak . It's ok if 5 school's hate your application, as long as the sixth loves it. In this case, 1 5-star & 6 0-star reviews beats 6 4-star reviews. (Hope that analogy doesn't come across as too cheesy.) Frost000 posted:Yeah, I get what you're saying about the "diversity" thing. Instead of "someone with low grades," I meant more "someone with a different background than the regular applicant." Basically, I'm hoping that since my background is NOT all business/finance, they *may* take a different approach in evaluating me. I could be super wrong, though. Someone could totally correct me if they're more in the know, but by diversity, I was referring more to schools wanting to have students with different backgrounds representing them once they've completed their MBA. I've been under the impression that they'd want a wider range of industries being represented by their newly-minted alumni, instead of only having people in traditional business/finance sectors once they've graduated. Again, I could be super wrong.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2013 00:44
|
|
|
Oliax posted:Actually your original definition of diversity isn't that far off. These days top schools get so many people who are "awesome" in terms of GPA, GMAT and traditional work experience that differentiating yourself by those criteria alone becomes very difficult, even if your scores in these areas are objectively "awesome". Not cheesy at all! It's basically what I initially thought... As long as I can kick rear end on the GMAT. The studying continues! Thanks for confirming my thoughts. I've also been told in the past by admissions people that one of their criteria when evaluating someone's package is to think about if said individual will positively affect the school's "image" once they've graduated and re-entered the work force. In other words, "Do we even want this guy/girl to flash around our school initials once all is said and done?" Thanks for all the help, guys. Much appreciated!
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2013 12:44
|
|
|
Frost000 posted:Not cheesy at all! It's basically what I initially thought... As long as I can kick rear end on the GMAT. The studying continues! One more quick thought on "diversity" for MBA applicants with non-traditional backgrounds. To a certain degree, you are actually competing with other candidates with non-traditional backgrounds instead of the hordes of ex-IB and consulting analysts. Each program will set aside a certain percentage of its spots for non-traditional candidates who add different and interesting perspectives to the class and the collective learning process. As long as you are one of the best of that sub-group, you've got a good chance, even if your application isn't as "strong" as that of the 100th McK analyst that also applied. As for the representing the school well idea, that should be a given for anyone they admit, as is "likely to donate to us once he makes it big". Good luck, it's a tough road but well worth the effort IMHO Oli
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2013 05:19
|
|
|
Oliax posted:One more quick thought on "diversity" for MBA applicants with non-traditional backgrounds. To a certain degree, you are actually competing with other candidates with non-traditional backgrounds instead of the hordes of ex-IB and consulting analysts. Each program will set aside a certain percentage of its spots for non-traditional candidates who add different and interesting perspectives to the class and the collective learning process. As long as you are one of the best of that sub-group, you've got a good chance, even if your application isn't as "strong" as that of the 100th McK analyst that also applied. I pretty much agree. Diversity in the world of MBA applications = industry experience. One of the things that makes MBA classes "good" is the ability to draw on case studies and compare with student's experiences. If you bring some of that then it is fantastic. Frankly they don't care about diversity from an affirmative action perspective. By the time you get to apply, your 'diverse' background has either worked for you, in which case you have what it takes to get in, or it has not in which case you'd typically be doing something else like a bachelors degree or some CPE in which case they don't care so much.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2013 12:34
|
|
|
Another question for those who may be in the know: For people with non-traditional background (i.e. not necessarily fully business-related), is there a certain application round that might be better than others? Note that I'm more interested in my chances of getting in than in the chances of receiving a scholarship/aid. Frost000 fucked around with this message at 21:22 on Aug 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2013 17:02
|
|
|
Frost000 posted:Another question for those who may be in the know: Not sure - I suspect it is the main intake, I more strongly suspect it depends on the uni. I do know it is easier to transfer in within a university than it is to apply from outside the university- again this is very university dependent.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2013 02:11
|
|
|
Frost000 posted:Another question for those who may be in the know: When I was applying the rule of thumb was always earlier = easier. To over-simplify a not totally exact science: at the early stages the question that is being asked of your application is "does this candidate meet our standard", as the rounds get farther along, they are not only comparing you to "the standard" but also to other candidates they have already admitted. As a result, you have to pass the additional test of "does this candidate add something that we do not already have (enough of) from the folks we have admitted".
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2013 16:11
|
|
|
Hypation posted:Not sure - I suspect it is the main intake, I more strongly suspect it depends on the uni. Are you approaching this from a non US perspective? A few of your posts don't really match how the US works.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2013 19:11
|
|
|
Is there a point where interviewers or business schools might start regarding an individual as too old? Are the job offers out of a top-tier school for someone with a few years of experience vs. someone with a decade or more of management experience likely to be similar or different?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2013 00:13
|
|
|
MiltonSlavemasta posted:Is there a point where interviewers or business schools might start regarding an individual as too old? Are the job offers out of a top-tier school for someone with a few years of experience vs. someone with a decade or more of management experience likely to be similar or different? When you get too old you do an executive MBA and the idea is you get accepted under the assumption it's the last piece you need before being a c level executive as opposed to being able to transfer industries. I think with executive MBA you need to be sponsored by your company.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2013 00:30
|
|
|
generally, part-time MBAs are older as well. I have no idea how that works for admissions %'s. they're usually younger than executive candidates.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2013 03:31
|
|
|
Vomik posted:Are you approaching this from a non US perspective? A few of your posts don't really match how the US works. Yes - my experience is Australian.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2013 09:54
|
|
|
How different is the UK MBA scene to the US? Can I still take the advice given here (except for tiers etc.) and it transfer sensibly and usefully? I work project managing for a successful small (rapidly becoming medium sized) design and online marketing firm want to eventually transition to running a whole digital division for a big company or agency; is an MBA a good idea for me? I have 7 years of experience and shedloads of big FTSE-100 client names on my CV. A CRAB IRL fucked around with this message at 10:22 on Aug 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2013 10:20
|
|
|
Clamps McGraw posted:How different is the UK MBA scene to the US? Can I still take the advice given here (except for tiers etc.) and it transfer sensibly and usefully? I work project managing for a successful small (rapidly becoming medium sized) design and online marketing firm want to eventually transition to running a whole digital division for a big company or agency; is an MBA a good idea for me? During my MBA days (15 years ago now) the only "internationally recognized US-style MBA" school in the UK was LBS. (And INSEAD and IMD on the continent.) AFAIK that hasn't changed much, but of course by "internationally recognized" I am writing from a US perspective.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2013 06:04
|
|
|
So, in regards to GMAT scores and the other factors: I'm currently an Officer in the USN and will be until I actually go back to school for my MBA (in a few years). I had above a 3.0 GPA in undergrad, but not by much. Some things that play into that are the fact that I was in NROTC at the time and often spent a lot of time going cross-town for that, and also the course load (took on average 18 credits a semester including Calc I/II, Chemistry I/II, Calc-Based Physics I/II, etc...) and also I didn't really apply myself like I should have. I'm not worried about recommendation letters, because I can probably swing an Admiral or two, at the very least a Captain (Colonel for non-Navy types). What is the admissions process like for something like this? What gets considered? I realize there is no way to discuss what I do in my job on any admissions except in the vaguest of terms. Boon fucked around with this message at 04:13 on Aug 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 04:11
|
|
|
I'm not an expert but from what I've read Officer experience is pretty good especially if you know how to relate it to business and don't come across with any full metal jacket weirdness. They consider everything and you'll have to do your own research for what you need for your target schools but Navy officer with a technical background is pretty strong.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 04:54
|
|
|
We had lots of US Military Officers at Wharton. The leadership experience is generally viewed very favorably. Same rules apply as mentioned for other non-traditional career backgrounds - to some degree you are competing against other people with a similar background for admissions, so think of how you can differentiate your self from them through your essays, recommendations, etc. Obviously if your grades are mediocre then the GMAT will matter more for you. One general point of caution for ex-military types: make sure you clearly communicate (and internalize) that while the military taught you tons of useful stuff, you recognize that you are not in the military anymore. MBA programs (and the business world) are all about collaboration instead of command and control. Some former members of the military struggle with this concept, and it is a "risk-factor" that admission folks will look for during the application process.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 05:31
|
|
|
I crushed the GMAT (770, 99th percentile) and am now working my way through essays. The extremely general topics such as "Give a candid description of yourself" and "Is there anything additional you would like us to know?" should be such a breath of fresh air but goddamn if it isn't hard to even put down the first word on something so open-ended.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2013 14:42
|
|
|
I applied to HBS/Stanford/Wharton last year only to get dinged outright by HBS and waitlisted at Stanford & Wharton. I'm in the process of reapplying this year and I hate my life right now. Advice to future applicants: Spend more time the first go-around and get it loving right, because reappplying absolutely sucks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2013 21:27
|
|
|
Smeef posted:I crushed the GMAT (770, 99th percentile) and am now working my way through essays. The extremely general topics such as "Give a candid description of yourself" and "Is there anything additional you would like us to know?" should be such a breath of fresh air but goddamn if it isn't hard to even put down the first word on something so open-ended. Editing is always easier (and arguably more important) than writing. Just put down whatever comes into your head for a first draft. You will have PLENTY of chances to edit it. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 04:38
|
|
|
J4Gently posted:In my view people worry too much about the specific school, unless it is one of the elite HBS, Wharton etc.. (those open a lot of doors) it doesn't make a massive difference. USC UCLA both have good reps for film. This, if its not a top school it is pretty much irrelevant. I can't remember anyone actually asking me where my MBA was from. (it was a pretty average school)
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 10:27
|
|
|
What if you're only interested in a specific region?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 14:48
|
|
|
I know for my region there are def some schools viewed as "better" even when their stats don't actually seem all that superior to other local universities. However, that may just be the perceptions of the people I hang around and not reflected in real jobs. I have an obvious question: I am least a year out from applications so I don't know how this is going to shake-out but I'm starting to see some programs I would like to attend full-time but others I'd prob do part time and keep my current job. Is it common to apply to some schools as a part-timer and others for full time? I would really like to get into a product owner/product manager role and it seems like a masters is a big help for that (plus moving beyond if that happens) but my current career track sort of lines up with that goal anyway so I don't need to realign my field. I feel like I could leave my current job and try to jump in somewhere else at that level right after school, or stay here and work with my boss to try and move up (he recognizes my interest and supports it). However, if I stay there isn't a clear job lined up its more that in 2-3 years we should grow enough that a post opens for me. Xguard86 fucked around with this message at 16:20 on Aug 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 16:17
|
|
|
http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2013/08/20/why-an-m-b-a-isnt-good-enough-anymore I wonder if this is due to recent inflation in all degrees or if its MBA specific as the journal implies. My current thought is its a problem with education in general.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 17:11
|
|
|
How are you recent graduates fairing post-graduation? I've noticed a lot of my fellow alumni have decent jobs but none of them are making a serious amount of money. I dropped out of corporate and went self-employed and I am doing much better.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 18:12
|
|
|
Any thoughts on INSEAD/LBS versus the top US schools? The HBS/Wharton/Stanford alum at my firm are snooty toward the European schools but I'm interested in spending time in Europe given my entire education/career until now has been around the States...
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2013 16:02
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:Any thoughts on INSEAD/LBS versus the top US schools? As a Wharton alum I honestly share a certain snootiness toward the European schools. In my mind Wharton/Stanford/HBS are "better" (whatever that means). While my opinions were largely formed 15 years ago when I went there, people of my generation are now the ones hiring newly minted MBA's, which is why reputations matter so much among top MBA schools and change so slowly. At this level MBA degrees differentiate themselves more by their reputation and the opportunities their networks generate for you throughout your career than by whose academic programs are better (hint: they're all fine). If you really have the opportunity to choose between different schools, think about where you want your career to play out long-term. If that is anywhere other than Western Europe, the top American schools will be far more well known and will provide the best possible differentiator for you. INSEAD and LBS are certainly well known, but the American schools have a great reputation also. If you were to attend an American school, you would certainly still have plenty of opportunity to try living/working in Europe, either through a summer internship, as your first job post MBA, or through an early career rotation as part of any of the companies that typically recruit from these schools.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 01:42
|
|
|
Do schools look at graduate/postgraduate degree, or is the first university degree the one that matters? For instance, if I have a bachelor's degree with a GPA of 2.5 and a master's with a GPA of 3.9, will that make a difference? Or will my bad grades of many years ago haunt me forever like a bad facial tattoo? Rogue AI Goddess fucked around with this message at 14:02 on Sep 1, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 13:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 12:56 |
|
|
I have a pretty poor undergrad GPA of around 2.6 at a state school with a BS in business. The same school offers a 6 year old MBA program- I was considering going for it since it is pretty much my best shot and it is a 1 year program full time since my business classes are the same as the pre-reqs. Does AACSB accreditation count for anything right now?
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 23:02
|
|