The Changing Of The MBA Guards At Harvard & Stanford
Maria |
October 1, 2022

Just like a lightning strike, how bizarre is it for two of the most prestigious b-school chief MBA admission officers to announce their departure on the same day?

In this episode of Business Casual, let’s hear what our hosts have to say about this event as they discuss some of Chad Losee’s and Kirsten Moss’s contributions to their respective institutions over the course of their careers as chief directors of MBA admissions and financial aid at Harvard Business School and Stanford Graduate School of Business, respectively.

Is there truly a connection between these events, or is it just a coincidence? What other factors might exist besides the large number of stakeholders and its crucial role being accentuated by its prominent position? What possible influence did the pandemic have on their decision to depart?

Episode Transcript

[00:00:06.970] – John

 Well, hello, everyone. This is John Byrne with Poets and Quants. Welcome to Business Casual, our weekly podcast with my co host Maria Wich Vila and Caroline Diarte Edwards. This week has been quite an interesting week in the field of MBA admissions. On one day, we had the announcements from both Harvard and Stanford that they were going to lose their chief MBA admission officers. How rare is that? It’s like lightning strikes. And not only did they announce their departure on the same day, they also outlined their same timetables for their departures. Both Chad Losee, the managing director of MBA admissions and financial aid at Harvard Business School, and Kirsten Moss, who holds a similar title at Stanford Graduate School of Business, will be leaving their jobs by year end. So I want to ask, let’s go to the former Head of Admissions at INSEAD for her thoughts about why in the world would these two people leave on the same day and on the same timetable? And what does it say, if anything, about MBA admissions at top level these days?

[00:01:24.280] – Caroline

We could speculate that there’s something fishy going on, given the bizarre timing, but I think that most likely it’s probably a coincidence. It’s interesting that we have seen quite a changing of the guard in MBA admissions over the past few months right. With several key staff resigning from other schools and moving on to other positions for MBA admissions at top schools, I think the pandemic was an extremely stressful period for MBA admissions. Traditionally, MBA admissions is not a business that changes incredibly rapidly from one month to the next. Right? I mean, they have some predictable cycles and there are changes and trends that come and go, but it’s not something that is subject to such rapid change as many other industries. And the pandemic was a huge shock and made life very stressful with the sort of uncertainty in the pipeline. And it’s still a difficult time. Right. It’s come out of the pandemic, but now there’s a downturn and application volume. So I think that it has been a challenging period. And also whilst working in MBA missions is fantastic. And I absolutely loved working at INSEAD. And when I was thinking of moving on, I looked at other opportunities in the school and there was really nothing else that I wanted to do at business school.

[00:02:56.600] – Caroline

Right. I mean. To me. MBA admissions is such an exciting position to be in and I really loved the different aspects of the role. But there can be stresses. And I would imagine that those could be amplified at a school like Stanford. GSB and HBS because you do have so many stakeholders to deal with and it’s a very visible role and such a critical function for the school. And there are lots of stakeholders faculty. Alumni. Current students. Et cetera. Corporate partners. Who all have different views about what you should be doing and what you should be doing and how you should be doing it. And get cross when things change. And then other people get cross if they don’t change and so they all come knocking at your door and that can be difficult to deal with. And I do think that whilst you note in your article about this, John. Kirsten was someone who is very visible in the market and very happy to engage with the public. Chad was someone who’s much more discreet and might have felt more uncomfortable in a role that has such high visibility and requires dealing with so many different stakeholders.

[00:04:16.020] – Caroline

And so perhaps the role that he’s going into, which may be a little bit relates more to his previous experience in consulting and perhaps doesn’t have the same requirements of organizational politics and stakeholder management that might be more comfortable for him than such a high visibility role at HBS.

[00:04:41.570] – John

Yeah, that’s really a good point. And I should point out that Chad Losee is going to Yale University to work in the Provost office in a strategy role, which of course, is more of a behind the scenes kind of job as an advisor to the Provost on big time strategy for the university. It’s a great job and also follows very clearly his desire to do that because while he was Managing Director of Admissions at Harvard Business School, he was also earning a doctorate in Higher Education Management from the University of Pennsylvania. They have a rather unique program that in fact, the dean at the Garden School at the University of Virginia went through to help him transition from McKinsey, where he was a senior partner, into academia. And as you pointed out, there’s been a lot of turnover. Kate Smith at Kellogg, Amanda Carlson at Columbia, Soojin Kwon and Diane Economy at Michigan Ross now Chad Losee and Kirsten Moss. It’s like, no one wants this job. Maria.

[00:05:55.310] – Maria

We still got Blair. We still got Blair at Wharton. God bless you, Blair. Absolutely. One of the schools is keeping an amazing bit of admissions. Sherry Hubert is still at Duke. Anyway, there are lots of people that are incredible in this job. But yeah, it sure does seem like a whole bunch of people are resigning all at once. And it’s so interesting to speculate, right, because I feel like to sort of build on what Caroline was saying. Yeah, I think that it’s probably a job with so many different stakeholders, but I can’t help but wonder if you also feel like your hands are tied in some way where if you come in and you’re like, I’ve got this great idea, guys, like, let’s get rid of the typical interview and replace it with a team based discussion. Maybe some schools are like, okay, cool, let’s try it. And maybe other schools are like, no, this is the way we have always done admissions. And I wonder sometimes if people do want to make changes in the admissions process and their hands are tied. Or like Caroline said, maybe we want you to change more and you’re not changing enough.

[00:06:59.660] – Maria

And I’m sure it’s probably a lot of politics. And I also wonder if after a while I think what’s interesting about the job that Chad is taking is that I wonder if you deal with so many, he’s going to be dealing with a lot of different strategic issues that the entire Yale University as a whole is facing that might be a little bit more variety. I wonder if as the head of admissions, like after a certain point you’re like, okay, it’s this again. Like, okay, the same kids, the same resume, the same person who’s been at bay for two years and then did private equity for two. Like, there’s a part of me that wonders if after a while you start to obviously there are going to be unique people in every applicant pool, but after a while I wonder if the job just sort of gets to be like, okay, here we go again. And if that’s the case, if there might be especially for someone like Chad who is young and driven, maybe after a point he’s like, okay, you know what? I got this check. Do I understand admissions? I understand admissions.

[00:07:57.410] – Maria

Check. I got the admissions thing down. Now let me look at how I can make a bigger impact on a university as an institution as a whole, looking at other topics.

[00:08:07.110] – John

True. He’s going to go to a great job. I also wonder how aggravating is it to get the call from the senior partners at McKinsey, Bane, BCG, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, J. P. Morgan, who say, hey, I recruit all these students. I wrote this recommendation for this incredible person and you rejected them. How the hell could you do that? So you got the pressure from a major employer, from a very senior level executive who obviously wrote a very positive recommendation for a candidate that they believe in, and you can’t accept all of them. You’re trying to craft a diverse class, but you’ve got to catch out for it and you got to entertain that phone call and you got to appear understanding and sympathetic. Caroline, imagine you were in this position at times when you’re head of admissions at INSEAD.

[00:08:58.570] – Caroline

Yeah, for sure. There are recommenders who think that they know who you should have taken. And it could be that you’ve taken someone from the firm but not somebody else, and they think that you took the wrong person. Right. That can happen. But they don’t necessarily have the full picture of what admissions is evaluating. They have the perspective of the current employer and they see that person in certain contexts, but they don’t have the same information necessarily that the admissions office has. And also at a school like in Seattle, do you get pressure as well from the admissions interviewers? Because there’s 3000 volunteer alumni who do the interviews at INSEAD, and that’s not the case at Harvard, but it is the case that stands for GSB. And they can get very upset as well if you don’t admit someone who they recommended for admissions. Right. Sometimes they feel like they are the gatekeeper and they’re not. It’s one data point that is being evaluated. We look at a lot of information from the discussion that transpires from the interviews. Right? But that’s one piece of the puzzle that is evaluated by the admissions committee. And so the interview is not the final deciding factor, but sometimes the interviewers think it is.

[00:10:24.360] – Maria

Right?

[00:10:24.630] – Caroline

And that can be complicated at schools like in Sierra or Stanford, where the alumni is so heavily involved in that process.

[00:10:31.860] – John

And at many schools you have what is often referred to as the Dean’s list. Now, whether this is apocryphal or not, I think it does exist in many schools. It’s basically the dean sends a list to the head of admissions and there are people on there he wants into the class. Now, if it’s Phil Knight son or daughter at Stanford, or if it’s Michael Bloomberg’s son or daughter or nephew, and they’re on the Dean’s list and you just got to swallow your pride and let them in, because that’s the game. Let’s face it. Yes, people are evaluated on the merits mostly, but there are some where I think it’s fair to say that’s not true at all. And that’s kind of additional pressure. And all of this has occurred also at a time which you mentioned earlier through the pandemic, which has been a difficult time at Harvard Business School. Chad made what I considered to be a courageous decision to allow unlimited deferments of anyone who was accepted in 2020. And so many people accepted that basically that invitation, that he enrolled the smallest incoming class at Harvard Business School in decades. And then when the worst of the Pandemic was over and those deferrals came to roost, he had to enroll the two largest incoming classes in history this fall and last fall, which puts a lot of pressure on the faculty, on the curriculum, on the schedule, on the facilities.

[00:12:15.710] – John

And obviously it’s going to make some people less than happy when you have to teach over 1000 MBAs incoming instead of $900. So there’s all that and then there’s the increased pressure on diversity and inclusion with whatever the result is. There is no doubt that this has become a major priority for US. Business schools. In particular. Stanford has taken a really leadership approach in this field by publishing annual reports about their progress on this dimension, the diversity dimension. Harvard has taken a lot of lumps and a lot of criticism from former black African faculty members who have basically lambasted the school for not doing enough. So there’s this pressure from all these different quarters, and I can imagine that you can only read so many applications and feel good about it. Maria, do you have some other theories as to why we would lose two Harvard and Stanford on the same day? Do you think they were talking to each other and saying, hey, let’s do this together, right?

[00:13:31.270] – Maria

Like Stelma and Louise driving Alfa to the sunset onto new, exciting adventures. Except it’s not a cliff, it’s a better job. No, I think it is just a completely weird coincidence. I can’t imagine that the two of them have enough free time on their hands to just be I mean, I’m sure that they probably I would think that they might maybe talk to each other from time to time. I have friends who are other admissions consultants and I know that we regularly will at least vent to one another, sort of off the record about peculiar stresses of the peculiar thing that we do for a living. And so I’m sure that admissions officers themselves might sort of secretly vent to one another about this donor is pressuring me to take this candidate and I can’t stand it. Who knows what. But in terms of saying, okay, I’m going to quit on this day and you’re going to quit on this day and let’s hold hands and jump together, I don’t know that necessarily happened, although that would make for like a good script of some sort. One of my take on it is that now that the admissions process was changed so much by COVID to a point where I think a lot of the previous sacred cows and admissions that are sort of unquestionable.

[00:14:52.100] – Maria

Like. Okay. You have to send your staff out to attend these MBA fairs all over the world and you have to spend hours in a hotel ballroom behind your little table with your little brochures. And you have to send people to every city. And maybe, like during COVID, all of a sudden you didn’t do that anymore because you didn’t have that. You couldn’t do it. And maybe now, as the world is sort of getting back to, quote, unquote, normal, maybe I don’t know, if I were in their shoes, I’d be like, wait a minute. We just proved for two years that we didn’t have to, and now you’re sending me out on the road again. And don’t get me wrong, Kuala Lumpur is a wonderful city, but I kind of want to be with my kids and I want to be with my family or my pets or whatever it is. And so I almost wonder if part of it is sort of looking at the world, going back to, quote, unquote, normal and seeing what sort of a sense of maybe dread. But I’m also probably just projecting entirely when it comes to that.

[00:15:46.390] – Caroline

I think that’s quite possible, though, that in the admissions team there is sort of a big site. The thought of all the travel starting again because it can be exhausting, global travel, and it’s not the only industry it wouldn’t be the only industry where there’s resistance to going back to life, how it was prepandemic. So it may not be the case, particularly for Chad or Kirsten. I don’t know how much travel they did individually, but I would imagine that in some admissions teams, there are a lot of discussions happening right now about how this is managed going forward, and there may be some resistance to going back to how things were prepandemic.

[00:16:32.090] – John

And Chad is a family man. He has four sons, all young. He himself is pretty young, having gotten his MBA from Harvard, I think, in 2013. So he demands of the job are pretty serious, even if you’re not doing a lot of traveling. I wonder how many hours a week you put in Caroline and INSEAD. I bet you were 60 to 80 a week, easy, right?

[00:16:58.850] – Caroline

Well, it depends on the deadlines and so on.

[00:17:03.640] – John

INSEAD always has deadlines.

[00:17:05.830] – Caroline

Yeah, it does. And so, yes, it can be extremely demanding, and it’s not always the most sociable hours, for sure. I was quite glad I didn’t see that we did have several deadlines because it spreads things out more over the year, whereas at schools like Harvard and Stanford, where Harvard doesn’t even have the Round Three right. But the pressure is all in a more concentrated period of the year. So I would imagine that that is more challenging in some ways than my life was at inferred where we had now the school has eight deadlines, right? And we used to have seven deadlines, and it’s been extended to eight. I like to be able to spread things out more evenly over the year because it’s sort of a constant process rather than this build up and then this crazy, overwhelming volume that you have to deal with in a very short period.

[00:18:02.840] – John

Let’s talk about the impact that both of these officers had on admissions at their schools. So one of the things that Chad did early on was eliminate Round Three deadlines. And the argument is that you get very few people and it doesn’t really matter all that much. I disagree. I think Chad, by eliminating Round Three, he lost access to a lot of exceptional candidates who, for one reason or another, couldn’t apply in Round One or Round Two, and therefore applied to other schools. And he had lost the chance to get some very good candidates, and he lost it to Stanford, to Wharton, to Kellogg, to Columbia, to Chicago Booth, MIT as well. I don’t think that that was a smart decision. This is me being the Monday morning quarterback, admittedly, but I think that was really not a great idea. The other thing that I think he did that was very stellar and it occurred in the past year, and sure, it’s a decision that really had to be made by higher ups, is that Harvard Business School made a commitment to provide an MBA for free, all costs covered for 10% of its incoming student body every single year.

[00:19:22.710] – John

Obviously, that 10% is composed mainly of deserving students who really need the money to take advantage of the education. On the plus side, that’s what I would put there. Now, I wonder, in terms of actual admissions and the essays being required, I don’t think there was really any change of substance other than the fact that he imposed a word limit on the one essay that Harvard has, which is, tell us more about yourself that we may not know, based on the application that you filed. Am I missing something?

[00:19:58.310] – Caroline

Not that I can think of. I do think, as you mentioned, losing the Round Three, you may have regretted that, especially with a pandemic. Right? And that was probably why they had to reduce the class size so much, because so many schools were still accepting people very late in 2020, and Harvard wasn’t able to do that because they had lost that Round Three. So I think that probably laid out right.

[00:20:28.500] – John

Wharton extended their deadlines, Kellogg extended their deadlines. Some of these schools were more willing to experiment with test optional policies during the pandemic when it was difficult to take a test. Harvard did not. Stanford did not either.

[00:20:43.370] – Caroline

And as you mentioned, I think it’s great for the students that they gave people that flexibility to defer, and therefore they had to cope with that fluctuation in class size. And that was, as you say, quite a brave move at the time. And other schools weren’t doing that, and other schools were criticized by students and admits for digging in their heels and being less flexible at a time when admits and students were suffering with the consequences of the pandemic. But as you said, it does create a huge number of logistical challenges to have that class size fluctuation. Right. Schools, program management, the faculty, all the logistics, it makes everything so much more complicated if you have a lot of fluctuation in the class size, career services, recruitment, everything. So I would imagine that that was challenging to manage, and possibly it wasn’t terribly popular internally.

[00:21:51.110] – John

Yeah. Maria from your standpoint. What about Kirsten Moss at Stanford?

[00:21:58.010] – Maria

Yeah, I’m pretty sure that Kirsten one of the things she introduced was the optional three essays in which, as an applicant, you can submit anywhere between zero to three additional little mini essays about leadership impact that you’ve had. And I think that that was a really smart move, although I’m sure it gave them a lot more work to do. But I think prior to that. When it was just primarily what matters most to you and why. And then the why Stanford question. I think a lot of people then felt a lot of pressure to make what matters most to me be my work accomplishments. Because I would think. Well. This is my chance to show off how amazing I am. And there’s no other place in the application for me to do it. And so I suspect that by giving people this outlet, kind of like this valve in which like, okay, don’t worry, you can tell us all about your leadership, just put it over here. I like to think that that made a little bit more room for the what matters most answers to be more authentic and more reflective and not let me use this as like a Trojan horse to try to sneak in what my accomplishments are by pretending that it’s some sort of deeply held value.

[00:23:04.710] – Maria

But really what I’m trying to do is to get my accomplishments across. So I thought that was a really big improvement to the application because I think it also gave some of the applicants to Stanford. I think some of the people who apply to Stanford might not necessarily realize I think a lot of people apply who aren’t necessarily qualified. But I also think conversely, there are some people who are super qualified who might not realize that they’re qualified. And I think forcing themselves to write a couple of specific little essays about leadership makes them, in some cases, realize, like, oh, maybe I actually have had quite a bit of impact on my community and my company and the world already. So I personally have seen that, I’ve seen some people get some more confidence in their candidacy once they sort of lay out those three essays and they’re like, oh, wait a minute, I’m like, See? You are amazing. And they’re like, oh yeah.

[00:23:53.630] – John

And it does coincide with her passion for leadership that she has worked on before at Egon Zender, the executive search firm, and elsewhere with her own consultancy, before returning to Stanford in the admissions role. And it is apparently what she wants to do in the future. A spokesperson at the school, when we ask what’s the reason for this decision? Simply said she wants to pursue her passion and that is leadership. So it makes sense that she would have added those questions. And I think it does provide more insight into an applicant’s motivations and preparedness for a rigorous and elite MBA program. Who is going to replace these two people in these two very important jobs? Any guesses? Maria, let’s start with you.

[00:24:48.960] – Maria

I don’t know who will, but I have some ideas of who I’d like to see. Okay, well, first of all, I think one of the nice things about HBS doing so much of its admissions internally, for example, as we mentioned before, the interviews are all done by internal staff, is that I think that I would like to think that they train up. That means that instead of having like 200 potential interviewers by only having like, a smaller group, I like to think that any one of those folks could presumably kind of step in in an interim role if needed. So there are a lot of folks that have been on the admissions team for years. Right? I mean, lives on the West Coast, but Hillary Caplan, some more drive, for example. I don’t know if you’ve ever heard of her or met her, but she’s on the West Coast. She does a lot of the West Coast interviews. She’s been with APS for 15 years or so. I don’t think she would move to Boston in terms of I would love to see Sherry Hubert from Duke. I have encountered Sherry when she was at Georgetown and when she was at Duke.

[00:25:48.910] – Maria

She hosted the AGAC conference a couple of years ago before the Pandemic. And I think she’s very good at what she does, and I would love to see her bring her perspective and the lens and her thoughtfulness to the role at HBS. And in terms of GSB, I don’t know, but maybe I don’t know if you guys know. So Luke Penia, who used to run admissions at Tuck, is now he went to go to Night Hennessey, which is a very specific sort of fellowship that Stanford offers overall, and a lot of business school students happen to get it right. It’s a very prestigious fellowship for graduate study there. And I almost wonder if maybe that was sort of a stepping stone and maybe he could transition over and maybe we’ll see Luke Penia again. And he’s also very good at being public. Right. When he was in charge of admissions at Tuck, he was active on social media. He was very open working with yeah, I think he would fill those shoes. Not that anyone could replace Kirsten, but I think he has the right sort of public persona, perhaps, to take that role.

[00:26:59.940] – John

Those are really good guesses. Maria, I have to say, you could.

[00:27:03.380] – Caroline

Have just saved the search committees a lot of time.

[00:27:07.170] – Maria

Please send check to Maria.

[00:27:10.710] – Caroline

Exactly my address.

[00:27:12.410] – Maria

I take venmo.

[00:27:16.690] – John

Let me also just say I want to give some credit to both Kirsten and to Chad during their time in the job. Six and a half years for Chad, five and a half years for Kirsten. They did improve the percentage of women enrolled at both Harvard and Stanford. Harvard, it went from 41% to 46% this year. Stanford, it went from 40% to 44% last year. Stanford’s class profile doesn’t come out for another week. I imagine we would see even another improvement in that 44% at Harvard with the 46%. That’s a record number this year. There’s also a record number of international students in the class at Harvard, 38% this year, compared to 34% before he took the job. And then you have at Stanford, the international crew is much higher, 47% last year compared to 40% when Kristen took the job. And I would suspect that 47% will actually increase as it has at all schools because of the decline in domestic apps. So this is a tough, grueling job. As we pointed out, there’s a lot of pressure on you. You disappoint more people than the numbers of people that you make happy, because at Stanford, 94% of the people who apply are getting turned down.

[00:28:59.030] – John

At Harvard, it’s roughly 90%, 89% getting turned down. And then you have those damn rankings. The rankings have worked in the favor in these recent years. Harvard has been a laggard for given its prestige and reputation and rankings for whatever that matters. But it may matter to people who are dual admits, because Stanford tends to win over Harvard and dual admits, that wasn’t always the case. So, really tough jobs, tough times. I think one thing that can be said for sure is that the quality of the students that both Chad and Kirsten admitted over their tenure as the heads of admission, terrific, fantastic quality, exceptional students, and great graduates. And that’s something that doesn’t tend to change when you’ve got a brand like Harvard and Stanford. How do you go wrong? How do you mess it up? I don’t think you can, really. Maria, you can’t mess that up, can you?

[00:30:11.590] – Maria

Are you asking if Maria could benefit?

[00:30:25.130] – John

She’s on the west coast. You can take over that role and do a hell of a job. And, Caroline, maybe you want to get back into this role yourself, down the road.

[00:30:38.360] – Maria

Yeah, I know you live really very short commute.

[00:30:41.410] – Caroline

I can just roll down the hill.

[00:30:42.570] – John

And Caroline, you can just move me on down to Stanford. You can move back to the East Coast, to your alma mater and take over. How about that?

[00:30:53.470] – Maria

Nothing.

[00:30:54.060] – Caroline

Another tip for the search committee. Their job is done.

[00:31:00.940] – John

There you have it. All right. Hey, thanks for listening, everybody. This is John Byrne with Poets and Quants. You have been listening to Business Casual, our weekly podcast with my co host, Caroline Diarte Edwards and Maria Wich Vila. Thanks again. See you next week.

The Economist Dis on MBAs: Is the Degree Still Worth It?
The Changing Of The MBA Guards At Harvard & Stanford
Maria |
October 1, 2022

[00:00:00] John Byrne: Well hello everyone, this is John Byrne with Poets and Quants, welcome to Business Casual, our weekly podcast with my co-hosts Maria Wich-Vila and Caroline Diarte Edwards. Today we have a special guest, Heidi Hillis from Fortuna Admissions. She is based in Australia, is a senior expert coach for Fortuna, and has three degrees, all from Stanford, a BA in English literature, that’s my degree, an MA in Russian studies, and an MBA from the Graduate School of Business. And we have Heidi here to discuss some really fascinating research. Here’s what Fortuna did. They dug into the last Two class profiles of the Stanford Graduate School of Business.

That’s the class of ‘23 and the class of ‘24. They looked up all these folks on LinkedIn to identify a little bit more about their backgrounds, including their former employers and their places of undergraduate education to come up with an incredible analysis. Heidi, welcome.

[00:00:46] Heidi Hillis: Thank you. I’m glad to be here.

[00:00:48] John Byrne: Heidi, what is, what are the big takeaways from your deep dive discovery?

[00:00:54] Heidi Hillis: It’s hard to know even where to start. I think there’s a quite a few interesting kind of trends that we’ve seen that have taken place over the years. We were mentioning before the call that traditionally there hadn’t been, 10 years ago, if you’d looked, you wouldn’t have seen so many tech companies represented, but now there’s a big presence of tech companies who are feeding a lot of these MBA programs in Stanford in particular.

I think that the thing that was really interesting was, looking, not just at where the companies that were feeding the students, the applicants to Stanford. When they were working there, when they were applying, but actually the paths that they took prior to their current job.

So how many people were working, if you look at McKinsey, for example, or Bain and BCG, those are obviously companies that feed a lot of applicants to the program, but we found 20%, which seemed to be normal of, the class came from consulting, but if you actually look into the numbers in their background, You would see that actually 37 percent of these two classes had worked at McKinsey sometime prior, or actually in consulting, so it was, it’s The kind of the patterns that are behind, what you would normally see in terms of what Stanford tells us.

So you get a sense of the paths that people have taken. And so that’s something that was really interesting to see.

[00:02:16] John Byrne: Absolutely. And of course, this is this analysis goes so far beyond what any applicant would learn by simply looking at the class profile that the school up because, this level of detail is never available to people.

[00:02:33] Heidi Hillis: No, and yeah, for example, you could see that, Stanford will say that they have around, each year around 50 percent of applicants are international, which is a great statistic and gives you lots of hope if you are an international student. But when you dig into the numbers, you actually understand that.

75 percent of the people who get into Stanford actually went to a U. S. University. So even if you’re international, it does have does seem to have kind of an advantage of having been educated in the U. S. That seems to be something that they look for. However, I think. The concentration of universities in the U.

S. that are feeding to Stanford is something also that, if you’re looking at it, you might find a little bit dis, disconcerting. There’s a few programs that are really, obviously the top. Programs as you would expect places like Harvard, Stanford, Yale, the Ivies but if you look at the international universities very diverse from all over the world, really lots of people from different places, which is also really interesting.

[00:03:38] John Byrne: Yeah I tell you, one of the things that struck me in the data is how consistent it is. 10 years ago, we did the same exercise at Stanford and a bunch of other. Schools from Harvard and Dartmouth and Columbia and talk and a few others and back 10 years ago, we found that 25. 2 percent of the class of 2013 were from Ivy League colleges.

And the Ivy League 8 schools, not including Stanford. And if you included Stanford, it would have been 32. 6%. So now, let’s move forward to your data. And in 23, 30. 7 percent went to Ivy League schools, even above the 25. 2. And in 24, 27. 9 percent went to Ivy League schools. So it looks like Stanford has gotten even a little bit more elitist than it was.

Yeah,

[00:04:41] Heidi Hillis: It’s, it is it’s what the data says, right? Obviously, this is a sample. We have 80 percent of the two classes. So we don’t know where those other people went. And that might skew the data a little bit in another direction. But it is, if you look at there’s 15 schools, that include the Ivy’s and then you have UC Berkeley and obviously Stanford that really are contributing, 49 percent of the class of 23, 47. 3 percent of the class of 24. So that is a pretty heavy concentration and But, if you actually look into the data, you see a lot of people also, each of these is actually an individual story.

You see a lot of people who come from other schools as well. So it’s not like you have to give up hope if you come from a different school. I see a lot of individual stories that, from the whole range of U. S. schools that really are feeding into Stanford. So I think what the data doesn’t also tell you, unfortunately, is how many of these Of people from these backgrounds are actually applying.

So

[00:05:39] John Byrne: good point.

[00:05:40] Heidi Hillis: It’s it’s hard to know. And sometimes I think people this is. A path that a lot of people who go to these schools plan to take from the very beginning. So I would see, it would be interesting to know that I don’t know that we will ever find that out. But, um, that’s something to keep in mind as well.

[00:05:56] John Byrne: Yeah. And that’s a fair point. Because how reflective are these results of the applicant pool reflective of an elitist attitude probably a combination of if I had to guess, but, it is what it is, and these institutions obviously are great filters, so you come from McKinsey, Bain, BCG, and you go to Harvard or Stanford or Penn, and you pass through a fine filter, and it makes you less of a admissions risk than if you went to, frankly, the University of Kentucky and worked for a company that no one knows of.

That’s just the reality of elite MBA admissions, right?

[00:06:40] Heidi Hillis: Yeah. And so you will see that the people who are not going, you’ll see a lot of the people who you would, the profiles that you would expect, the Harvard undergrad that then goes to Goldman that then was working at a PE firm.

That’s a really typical profile that you’ll see. But you’ll also see some really, unique and interesting ones, which I think, Okay. Helps you understand that if you don’t have that path, you also have a real chance at these schools, and maybe even more of a chance, again, not knowing, how many of those Goldman P.

E. Harvard grads are applying. So I’m thinking of the guy that I saw who he went to UPenn undergrad, studied engineering, started out a kind of pretty typical path working in private equity, but then made a big pivot to work for go to Poland where he was working in a real estate investment firm and the head coach of the Polish lacrosse team.

So you have really interesting profiles like that, that you can see that. aren’t necessarily taking that typical path. And sometimes that really does help you stand out.

[00:07:42] John Byrne: True. Maria, what surprised you most about the data?

[00:07:48] Maria Wich-Vila: Wow. I think we already covered, the, one of the biggest ones was the number, the percentage of people who would had some sort of either their undergraduate or graduate education within the United States.

Intuitively, I had felt that was true. And sometimes when I try to, give some honest, tough love to applicants from certain countries, and they’ll say, oh, but Maria, I think you’re being a little too pessimistic. After all, X percent of the applicants at these schools are international, and Y percent are from a certain geography internationally.

I’ll say yes, but that doesn’t mean that they’re all Solely from that area. A lot of them are, do have significant international educational experiences. I think another, speaking of the international piece the percentage of people who had significant international work experience as well was something else that really jumped out at me.

Because it would signal to me that Stanford really does value this global perspective both within probably its domestic applicants and also its international applicants. So I thought that was also a really interesting piece of data that jumped out at me.

[00:08:52] John Byrne: Now remind me what percentage was that?

[00:08:56] Heidi Hillis: People who are international

[00:08:58] John Byrne: who have had international work experience.

[00:09:01] Heidi Hillis: I think it was 30%.

[00:09:02] Caroline Diarte Edwards: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, it’s pretty

[00:09:04] John Byrne: impressive.

[00:09:04] Caroline Diarte Edwards: 30%, which I was thrilled to see. As well as coming from in Seattle and Europe. Obviously the international schools put a heavy emphasis on international experience and I hadn’t fully appreciated that. A school like Stanford would also.

really value that to the same extent. And it’s great to see that candidates are making the effort to get outside of the U. S. and get international experience because I think you gain so much from that exposure. And you bring more to the classroom if you’ve got that experience. I know that both Maria and Heidi.

I’ve worked outside of the home countries as well. Pre MBA and I think that you just have so much more to contribute to the whole experience. And it was great to see that 30%.

[00:09:50] John Byrne: What else struck you, Caroline?

[00:09:53] Caroline Diarte Edwards: We talked about the concentration of academic institutions, and I was also surprised about the concentration in employers.

So while there is a very long list of employers where the students have worked pre MBA when you dig into the career paths that they’ve taken there is some interesting concentration. Heidi had noted that the reports that There are 26 companies that account for nearly one third of the class in terms of where they were working right before Stanford.

But when you look at their whole career history, those same 26 companies represent over 60 percent of the class. So that is, yeah, that’s quite extraordinary that so many of the class have experience of working at quite a short list of companies.

[00:10:46] Heidi Hillis: I think that’s reflective of, if you really think about it, you have a lot of these companies.

You’re talking about the Goldmans and the Morgan Stanley and McKinsey that have really large programs that recruit out of undergrad that are really training grounds for. A lot of people that then on to do, work in industry or go on to work for in finance in particular, a lot of people starting out at some of these bulge bracket banks and then going into.

Private equity or smaller firms. So the diversity within finance in terms of where they were working prior to MBA is quite large compared to consulting because there just aren’t as many consulting firms, but a lot of people in financing, a lot of different firms, but they, a lot of them really do start out in these training programs, these analyst programs that are so big and popular.

[00:11:34] John Byrne: Yeah, true. And looking back, I did this exercise as well. The feeder companies to Stanford 10 years ago in the class of 2023, 22. 8 percent from McKinsey, Bain, BCG, and your data, 22. 5 percent work there. Incredible consistency over a 10 year period. When you look at the top six employers 10 years ago, they were McKinsey, BCG, Bain, Goldman, Morgan Stanley, and JP.

Morgan Chase. They accounted alone for 34 percent of all the students in the class of 20, 2013 at Stanford. In your data for 23 and 24 they account for 29. 8%, just a few percentage points less. So remarkable consistency. And I think you’re right, Heidi, this is a function of the fact that these firms bring in a lot of people who are analysts and actually expect them after 3 to 5 years to go to a top MBA school.

So there’s a good number of them in the applicant pool to choose from and let’s face it, they’re terrific candidates.

[00:12:46] Heidi Hillis: Yeah. I think another pool of really terrific candidates that you see, and I don’t know what the 2013 data was saying, but is the US military, which is really, I think, again, something that I felt having worked with lots of military candidates myself, understand that, Yeah, intuitively, I would have expected, but to see it in the data is actually really interesting.

You just see Stanford in particular, I think, is really looking for leadership potential, and it’s so hard to show that as an analyst, as a consultant, but as in the military, these people have such incredible leadership experience that it really helps them to stand out.

[00:13:23] John Byrne: Yeah. And let’s tell people what the data shows.

How many out of us military academies,

[00:13:28] Heidi Hillis: In all in total, we had, 20 over the two years. So that’s in the two classes that we found. So that’s, a pretty large number. And they come from all the different academies, right? So you’ll find them from different, not academies, in the army, navy and the marines.

So you’ll see that. And you also see quite a few, in the data we’ll, we see a lot from the Israeli military as well, but that’s actually a little bit difficult to because every Israeli does go into the military. So it’s they have that in their background. Any Israeli candidate would have Israeli military background as well, but again, that’s.

Place that people can really highlight their leadership. So you had eight people from who had been, who were Israeli and obviously had military experience where they were able to demonstrate significant impact and leadership prior to MBA.

[00:14:18] John Byrne: Yeah. In fact, 10 years ago, roughly 2%. of the class went to either West Point or the U.

S. Naval Academy. Good number of people actually from the military. Maria, any other observations?

[00:14:34] Maria Wich-Vila: Yeah, I was also surprised at the fact that within those top employers And when we look at the tech companies, it was Google and Facebook and Meta with a pretty large showing. Google was actually the fourth largest employer after the MBBs and, but then, I was expecting there to be an equal distribution amongst those famous large cap technology companies.

So I, I would have expected even representation amongst Google, Meta, Microsoft, Apple, Nvidia, Amazon, et cetera. And yet. Apple and Amazon only had one or two people each versus Google at 25. So I thought that was really fascinating and it makes me wonder if perhaps it’s a function of maybe Google and Meta might give their younger talent more opportunities to lead impactful projects, perhaps.

I’m just guessing here, but maybe Apple and Amazon perhaps are more hierarchical. And maybe don’t give their younger talent so many opportunities, but I was really surprised by that. I would have expected a much more even distribution amongst the those famous those famous tech companies.

[00:15:40] John Byrne: Yeah. You’re right. And I crunched the numbers on the percentages and Google took three and a half percent of the two classes and that’s better than Goldman, Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan Chase. Facebook had 2. 7 percent and Microsoft at 1. 5, and I was shocked at Amazon because, Amazon is widely known as the largest single recruiter of MBAs in the past five years.

At one point, they were recruiting a thousand MBAs a year, but in, in one sense, maybe Amazon quite doesn’t really have the prestige. For Stanford MBAs who might rather work elsewhere, I think that might be is, you look at the employment reports at a lot of the other schools and Amazon is number one at a number of schools and very low percentage of people from Amazon going to Stanford.

We don’t know, of course, how many. Leaving Stanford and going back to Amazon, but it can’t be that many.

[00:16:41] Heidi Hillis: I wonder if there’s something about just a proximity effect here. You have the plate, like the meta and Google just being so close to Stanford, maybe it just, attracts more people applying because they.

They’re almost on campus and maybe, just being Amazon all over the world and different places could be not attracting as many. I don’t know.

[00:17:03] John Byrne: Yeah, true. The other thing, the analysis shows, and this is what you also gather from the more public class profile is really the remarkable diversity of talent that a school like Stanford can attract year after year.

It is, it blows you away, really. The quality and the diversity of people despite the concentration of undergraduate degree holders or company employers, it’s it’s really mind boggling, isn’t it?

[00:17:33] Heidi Hillis: Yeah, they come from everywhere and really interesting paths and even the people I think that, have those kind of typical paths, you see a lot of diversity within them as well.

So I think, even if you’re coming from a Goldman or a McKinsey having lived in another country or gone to done a fellowship abroad or running a non profit on the side. These things are actually what helped them to stand out. But you do see some really interesting, I think, profiles, too, of people who’ve just done, you get a sense of what it would be like to be in the Stanford classroom.

People from really unique and different backgrounds. People who come from all different countries and lawyers, doctors people who have run, nonprofits in developing countries people running large programs for places like Heineken or Amazon too. But, it’s a real diversity of backgrounds.

[00:18:27] John Byrne: Now, Heidi, I wonder if one is an applicant. Is this discouraging to read and here’s why if I’m not from Harvard, Stanford, Penn, Columbia, Brown, Cornell, Dartmouth, and if I didn’t work for McKinsey, Bain, BCG, Goldman, Google am I at a disadvantage and should I even try? Some people look at the data and come away with that conclusion.

[00:18:52] Heidi Hillis: I think it’s a reality check for a lot of people. I think it’s just, it’s really, it just helps people understand, what it, the difficulty of this, why it’s so competitive, but I think that there is, again, behind the kind of the percentages, you do look at these individual profiles and I would get, I would actually take a lot of hope from it if I were looking, as an applicant, because especially if you are.

Maybe a little bit more of a big fish or small fish in a bigger pond or big fish in a smaller pond you go to Rice or you go to Purdue or, and you do really well, those are the people who, they’re definitely looking for that diversity of background as well as the international.

I think that’s really neat. think that, instead of looking at the data and saying, why not, why I shouldn’t even apply, it’s why not me look at these other profiles of people who have taken really unique paths that that do get in. So I think it is actually a Kind of a mix of both, it is a reality check for a lot of people, but it’s actually, there is so much diversity in the data as well.

I think also one thing that we haven’t really covered is about is just the prevalence of social impact in, that’s really taken hold of the class. I don’t, again, going back to your 2013 analysis, I’m not sure how easy it was to tell that, but a lot of you can see reflected in the both the types of organizations people are working for, but also their titles and the kinds of work that they’re doing that that there’s a huge 40 percent of the class of the two classes had some kind of social impact in their background.

Whether that’s, running their own nonprofit on the side or volunteering or. Running trans transformational kind of programs within companies that are, either in finance or consulting or in industry. That’s a big trend. I think that people can take heart from as well.

So if you’re working if you feel like you’re in an organization where you’re not getting the leadership that you. can use to highlight your potential for Stanford, that’s definitely a place you can go is working for in volunteer capacity for a non profit or on the board of a of some kind of foundation.

Those are the kinds of places that you can highlight your potential

[00:21:00] John Byrne: true. And I know we have a overrepresented part of every applicant pool at an elite business school are software engineers from India. And I wonder in your analysis, how many of them did you find from like the IITs?

[00:21:18] Heidi Hillis: That’s a good question. The IITs, it was again, it was one of these you have about 50 percent of classes internet, so 25 percent of the class. was educated outside of the US. The IITs are going to be up there. Let’s see from India, 2. 1 percent of the class came from India. So probably, I don’t know offhand exactly how many of those were IITs, but

[00:21:43] John Byrne: I’ve had a lot of them.

[00:21:45] Heidi Hillis: Yeah, probably a lot of them. Although I think, that’s the other thing is that people who come, to work with me from India, they feel like if they haven’t gone to IIT, then that’s going to be a disadvantage. But I think, you’ll find that there are, there’s representation of other universities as well.

Definitely.

[00:22:00] Caroline Diarte Edwards: Yeah, I was just looking at the list of undergrad institutions. And for example, you’ve got Osmania University from Hyderabad. So it is not, it’s not all IIT. Okay.

[00:22:12] John Byrne: Yeah, exactly. And Caroline, 1 of the things about the institutions that are really represented here and that I don’t really see unless I missed it.

I didn’t see a Cambridge or an Oxford. Two of the best five universities in the world. And I wonder if that’s just a function of fewer people in the applicant pool or what? What do you think that could be about?

[00:22:36] Caroline Diarte Edwards: I had a look through the uk Institutions and you have got cambridge in there.

I think I also noticed. Bristol university there are a few different universities. So i’m aston university, which is not it’s not on a par with Oxford or Cambridge. So I think that speaks to the point that Heidi made that you don’t have to have been to an elite school to get into Stanford.

Aston is a good solid university, nothing wrong with Aston, but it’s not it’s not one of the top UK universities. So there’s definitely some interesting variety in the educational backgrounds of the students going to Stanford. And

[00:23:16] John Byrne: then, yeah, it is if you’re a big fish in a small pond, like Afton, you’ll you could still stand out in the pool.

[00:23:26] Heidi Hillis: Absolutely. There’s a lot of really interesting background, you have look hard on blue and you have Miami University and some really smaller universities abroad. I think. Again, it’s really, if you look at that, it does give you hope because it’s really what you do afterwards and if you, obviously, if you come from one of these schools, you probably want to be in the top, 5 percent of the graduating class, you want to show that you have the GPA that can support an academic background that they feel comfortable that you’ll be able to compete academically, but, and maybe that’s what you’re Offset by the, the GMA or the scores, you don’t know, we don’t have those on here.

But, um, the path post university really becomes much more important in those cases. What you’ve done since then where you’ve, how you’ve risen from starting at a entry level position to, running a division or heading a country group or something like that.

[00:24:21] John Byrne: And as far as Cordon Bleu goes, every good business program needs a Cordon Bleu, for God’s sake, right?

You want to eat well at those NBA parties, don’t you?

[00:24:32] Heidi Hillis: Absolutely.

[00:24:35] John Byrne: Maria, I’m sure that was true at Harvard.

[00:24:38] Maria Wich-Vila: I wasn’t the one doing the cooking but I certainly, I was certainly a member of the wine and cuisine society where I happily participated in the eating and consuming a part of that.

But to, to the point that we were just recently talking about. regarding being a big fish in a small pond. Not only have I seen it personally with applicants that I’ve worked with who did not attend these elite universities, but even many years ago, I attended a, an admissions conference where Kirsten Moss, who was the former head of admissions at Stanford, she actually told stories about how they’ve accepted people who even attended community college.

But within the context of that community college, they had really moved mountains. And she said that one of the things that they look for is, Within the context and the opportunities that you’ve been given, how much impact have you had? So maybe you don’t have an opportunity to go to Yale or MIT or IIT for your undergraduate, but whatever opportunity you have been given, have you grabbed that opportunity and really made the most of it and really driven change?

So she specifically called out, I believe, I believe there were two students that year at the GSB who had both started their educations, their higher educations at community college. Anything is possible. It really is about finding the people who, wherever they go, they jump in and make an impact.

[00:25:55] Heidi Hillis: Yeah, I think that to that point, I think it can almost be a more difficult if you’ve gone to Harvard and then worked at one of these, gone on one of these paths because we know that there’s, that’s an overrepresented pool in the applicant pool to stand out among those to have had that, that pedigree sometimes can be a disadvantage, right?

If you haven’t done as much as you should have with that, or if you started at that high level to show that level of progress over the course of your career is actually a little bit more difficult. Okay. And coming from a community college and rising to, a country level manager in some places is actually puts you at a significant advantage, I would say.

[00:26:31] Maria Wich-Vila: Because it’s hard for those people, it’s hard for those people to stand out, but also I think some of them go on autopilot, right? I think some people are on this kind of achievement, elite achievement treadmill, where they’re not even really thinking about what do I want to do with my life?

They’re always reaching for whatever that next, what’s the best college to go to? It’s Harvard Princeton. Yeah. Okay. Now that I’m here, what’s the best employer to work for? It’s McKinsey, Bain, BCG and without actually perhaps stopping to think about what is my passion? What impact do I want to make in the world?

And so I feel sometimes those autopilot candidates, I feel a little bit bad for them because they’re doing everything quote unquote and yet sometimes when you speak with them, that passion just isn’t there. And I do think that may ultimately harm them in the very, very elite business school.

Admissions because business schools want people who are passionate because at the end of the day, in order to do hard things, you’re going to need passion at some point to get you through those low periods. And so I think that’s something business schools look for. And I do think that sometimes these.

These kind of autopilot candidates might sometimes be at a disadvantage.

[00:27:29] Heidi Hillis: Yeah, I think that, to that point look in the data, when you look at it, you see so many people who’ve gone to McKinsey, Bain, Weasley, or Goldman, but then there’s a, you see a lot of success for people who’ve actually pivoted.

So those pivots that are post The second or third job really do show you that, if you’re if you get a candidate who’s coming from, still at McKinsey, okay, that’s fine. They have to be the top 5 percent of McKinsey, like they have to be going to get so many McKinsey applicants that the only the, you can look at the data in a couple ways.

One is, oh, my God, they took 12 people from McKinsey and the others. Oh, my God, they only took 12 people from McKinsey, right? That’s So if you want to be one of those 12, you have to be the top 12 in the world, right? Whereas if you’ve gone to McKinsey and then done an externship at a health care startup and then moved on to be a product manager at for health at Google, that kind of a path is definitely showing a little bit more, maybe risk taking, maybe ability to follow your passions.

So I think that. When I see candidates who come to me, for example, and they’re like, not thinking about applying now, but maybe in a year or two, I say, look for an externship, maybe think about pivoting out of one of these places and looking for some operational experience.

And because you see in the data that works.

[00:28:42] Maria Wich-Vila: And they’re doing themselves a service not only in terms of enhancing their admissions chances, but even just in terms of determining, what do I want to do with my career? If I do eventually want to go into industry, what functional role do I want to have?

What industry do I want to work in? So it’s, it actually benefits them in the long term to do that as well, even if they don’t go to business school. I think those secondments and externships and second job, post consulting jobs are extremely valuable. Totally agree with you.

[00:29:06] Caroline Diarte Edwards: And I’m sure they also bring more to the classroom as well.

I would think that’s also why Stanford is selecting some of those candidates, because not only have they worked at McKinsey, but they’ve also led a non profit in Africa or worked in private equity or whatever it is. So they have much more breadth that they can bring to the classroom. And I think that It’s seen as a very valuable contribution

[00:29:29] John Byrne: in Heidi.

Did you see that? The majority of the candidates to examined actually did work in more than one place, right?

[00:29:37] Heidi Hillis: Yes, most of them did. There were very few that, you see working at one place. And I would say that those are people that would have really risen through the ranks.

Someone who’s worked at Walmart and become, started in, I don’t know, in one state, but then to become a regional manager and things like that really are going to onto a global role. The people who have stayed at one place really have shown significant career progression within that.

And then the other people I think you do see a lot of movement. The big. The most typical would be from investment banking to private equity and then you do find in finance, there’s a little bit less kind of movement into other industries. You see a lot of people staying within finance, but within finance.

Yeah. Yeah. The other industries, especially consulting or other, tech, people are really moving into other places and it’s becoming, it is a little bit difficult. We have these categories that we’ve talked about, for example, healthcare, but it’s hard to categorize some of these companies.

Are they healthcare? Are they tech? There’s a lot of overlap. And so everything’s a little bit of tech in something nowadays. So whether it’s finance and fintech or education and ed tech or health care and health tech, these are all merging and combining. It’s hard to categorize them.

[00:30:53] John Byrne: So looking at the data here I wonder if you’ve seen your old classmates in the sense that these new people are very much like the people you went to school with at Stanford. I

[00:31:05] Heidi Hillis: put this out and it’s really interesting to a lot of my classmates downloaded the report and read it. And a lot of them came back and said, oh, boy, I would never get in now.

It’s these people are super impressive. I think that you see a lot of. It’s just become more and more competitive. And I think that with more information and more people every year applying, it is becoming really difficult. I think that you do see a lot of, I am encouraged by the diversity part of it that you see still Stanford.

I feel like they do take risks on some really interesting profiles and candidates that maybe some other schools are less likely to do. And so that’s what does give me. A lot of hope when I get some kind of really nontraditional candidate who wants to, their dream school is Stanford. I feel like, I say all the time, there’s a 6 percent chance.

You’re going to get in, but there’s 100 percent chance. You won’t get in if you don’t apply. So you’ve got to, you got to give it a go. And that’s, the attitude that we take to it.

[00:32:04] John Byrne: Indeed. So for all of you out there read Heidi’s article on our site, it’s called who gets in and why exclusive research.

Into Stanford GSB and I’ll tell you one conclusion I have about this is that, man, if you really want to get into Stanford, you need a Sherpa, and and Heidi would be a great Sherpa for you because the, just the profiles of these folks, where they’ve been, what they’ve done, what they’ve accomplished in their early lives is so remarkable that To compete against, in this pool for a spot in the class you need every possible advantage you can get.

And and having an expert guide you through this trip probably would be a really big advantage. So Heidi, thank you for sharing your insights with us and the research, the very cool research.

[00:33:01] Heidi Hillis: Thank you

[00:33:03] John Byrne: and for all of you out there. Good luck. And if you want to go to Stanford, you got to check out this report.

Okay. It will inspire you to up your game, even if you are from Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, or wherever McKinsey, Bain, BCG, Goldman, Google, you want to look at this report and you want to really think about. What it will really take to get in. I think it will inspire you, motivate you to really put your best foot forward.

Thanks for listening. This is John Byrne with Poets& Quants.

Maria

New around here? I’m an HBS graduate and a proud member (and former Board Member) of AIGAC. I considered opening a high-end boutique admissions consulting firm, but I wanted to make high-quality admissions advice accessible to all, so I “scaled myself” by creating ApplicantLab. ApplicantLab provides the SAME advice as high-end consultants at a much more affordable price. Read our rave reviews on GMATClub, and check out our free trial (no credit card required) today!