The reader will go through and read all the pieces of the file, as well as anything else submitted by the candidate or others with regard to their candidacy. This can be anything from an email thank you from the applicant to a note from an alum about the candidate. We capture every interaction with the candidate throughout the process, and the reader can see those as well.
By following the template, the reader creates a summary of the candidate, beginning with name, gender and which program he/she is applying to (one- or two-year) and then a quick description. The next line would most likely be your test scores. Then where you went to undergrad, your major, your GPA.
The next part in the template is about work experience. Your position, industry, salary if you’ve listed that, how long you’ve been in the role. Here the reader provides a little synopsis of your work experience, but not going into great depth beyond your current job, since we obviously also have your resume.
The next part is your short-term goals. Here we may try to cut and paste that from your essay. What is it that you say you want to do? Now, if you were a liberal arts major and you say that your short-term goal is to work in private equity, you would need to explain how and why you plan to make that transition. You need to make it all make sense to me. A brand manager I would get—coming from a liberal arts background. But if you want to shift to private equity, I would really read your essay very closely to see if you’ve thought this through. Finally, we will make notes about your leadership and extracurricular activities, often adding a descriptor, such as “exceptional,” “really good” or “fine.”
In terms of how we assess the essays, we are looking first at the quality. Are you a good writer? Have you provided very well written essays, thoughtfully answered? Or are they boring, do they not really answer the question? Or did your career plan not make sense? We also cut and paste the fun fact you shared—these are fun to read.
And then for the letters of recommendation we will summarize and make relevant notes. So we might write “SR (strongly recommend) from boss” or “only recommend from coworker” or, heaven forbid, “does not recommend.” That’s pretty much a death—that’s bad.
The interview report will include a number that was given by the interviewer—this is on a 1 to 5 scale. Basically 3, 4 or 5 is fine. Most people who are admitted score a 4 or a 5, and we do have gradations within than scale. We’ll also indicate who conducted the interview. So the report might say “4.2 from Julie on October 2nd” as well as anything noteworthy about the interview. “A must have!’ or “Odd mannerisms but really great work experience,” for example.
At the end of the report, the reader writes a short summary with his or her recommendation. “This candidate has great work experience for X company, demonstrated a great deal of leadership both in college and since, based on rec letters and interview she would be a good member of our community. Even though she was an English major, GMAT scores are strong.”
In most instances, because there are so many components to the file, the reader feels confident in a decision one way or another. But every once in a while—say if a file is absolutely super duper but then the interview didn’t go so well—the first reader might send it to a second reader. Generally, though, the interview will be in line with the rest of the file and the first reader will decide whether or not the candidate goes to committee or to a sub-committee.
The sub-committee reviews files that are recommended to waitlist or deny. That committee is made up of myself, the head of the two-year program, the head of the one-year program and the head of operations. We sit together for about four hours every Monday morning and we either confirm—yes, we agree with that decision that they should be slated for deny, or we’ll say, “Wait a minute, I don’t know about that, let’s take another look.” Then we might put it on hold or waitlist the candidate. Sometimes we’ll decide to take the file to committee. But in most instances the decision in subcommittee is to waitlist or deny.
And then there is the group of files where the reader has said this is a strong applicant. In those cases, then the full committee reads it. The full committee is made up of all four in the subcommittee, as well as the person who works with our international students and the associate deans for the MBA program and career services. These files we discuss in committee every Wednesday morning from October through May. And for those who are admitted, we’ll also review them for scholarships at this point.
