Quote:
Originally Posted by doriangray2009
(4) The GMAT is not that important. The GMAT gives adcoms their only "objective" measure of your intelligence. For this reason it has a degree of usefulness. In the elite programs however, I have been led to believe that the GMAT is a non-factor after the initial cutoff of applicants. If you make 700 or better, stop worrying about it. If you make better than 650, you are still probably fine. Your academic record - grades + courses taken - is far more important than the single GMAT score. Want to impress them with your quantitative ability? Get an A in calculus, or some other tougher math course. Increasing your GMAT-Quant score by a few points does not pay dividends.
(5) Continuing that last note, quantitative skills are absolutely essential in every business discipline. Even in the worlds of consumer psychology, organizational behavior, & strategic management, math is crucial. Your record must show - beyond the simple GMAT - that math is no obstacle for you. More mathematical research streams - marketing modeling, financial economics, operations management - obviously require a love of these skills, but this point is not really intended for applicants in those subjects.
|
I agree with (4.) completely. GMAT score tends to be a myth among Asian students (I am guessing there is a large number of them using this forum based on the profiles posted here), but seriously, it is a complete myth. Top department routinely takes a 730 over 780 for a better overall fit, for example, so don't kill yourself over it. I would say the cutoff point is around 700 (650 is a bit low for top 10, but not impossible), so once you have it above that, stop freaking out.
I would not fully agree with (5.). It depends on what you mean by "math" skills. If you mean basic algebra, statistics, and some basic understanding of calculus, ok, fine, of course a doctoral students need to know all that. But if you mean to suggest that even for consumer behavior major, you need to master linear algebra, or real analysis, then I'd say you have been fooled by those who like to make top departments sound like rocket science departments. We are talking about business research, not designing the next generation of space shuttle. Those math tools don't help you much in this area. You need to be able to do good, solid statstics, yes, but I don't think that's eninggering math level.
Moreover, your point 5. seems to suggest that quantitative method is the ONLY method in business research. That is not true. It might be the dominant paradigm, but there are people who've managed a highly successful career doing purely qualitative research (based on interview, content analysis, historical archival research, etc), it would be hard to imagine those professors (who themselves might not know those math that well) care about that kind of skills in admission decision. But of course, qualitative type of research is not mainstream here. It's almost uniquely European type of research, but many here in US incresaingly think it's "sexy."
I am not trying to de-emphasize the importance of basic math skills, or advanced math skills for those who would like to pursue a quantitative or highly empricial/staticiscal type of research career. I am merely stressing that there are other options that do not require such emphasis, albiet not the mainstream here and now. I personally know of one MIT strategy graduate whose disseration has no number other than page/section number. She placed very well and should get tenure soon. So it's not IMPOSSIBLE.