holly

I don't think that they will even know which version you take without looking it up. A GRE score is a GRE score.

Yeah I think you'd kind of have to strech it to be elligible. I looked into it too.

Basics: female, white, American Undergraduate: senior at Ivy League university without buisness school GPA: around 3.7 GRE: 165Q, 168V unofficial Research experience: RA at T50 business school in entrepreneurial strategy; writing senior thesis Publications: coauthor of paper from RA position with well-known faculty that will be submitted over the winter Research interests: organization theory, structure of new ventures, technological & design competitive advantage Referees: Faculty from RA position (highly enthusiastic), university sociology professor (almost as enthusiastic), and thesis advisor Dream schools: MIT Sloan TIES, Stanford MS&E STVP, Maryland Smith Management, and so on How do I look?

I would chalk this up to neurosis. If you feel worried about being too good at math (lol), stick this in as a one-sentence addendum to your resume or course list, or if there's no place for that, in a one-sentence explanatory note in your application (there is usually a box to add "unusual circumstances" on your application). But yeah, don't waste your time with classes whose material you know and instead spend the time on research or whatnot. Addendum: If one of your math/stats teachers is writing a letter of recommendation, you could ask nicely to have them cover this matter in the letter.

No, but my prof Sonali Shah will be there. She might be presenting awards for the TIM division.

EFH, you ought to be charging for that.

Good thing you're not a psych PhD applicant! I think the research is expected of applicants to the sciences, but not as much of the applicants to fields like business -- mainly because it's harder to get research experience that directly pertains to business, and because many of the applicants develop their interest in a PhD outside of a research context (i.e., in a related course or at a job). Your research serves primarily as an indicator that you understand what a PhD/research lifestyle is, and secondarily as evidence that you can accomplish high-quality academic thought.

OP, I am quite jealous of your profile. You have a lot of research experience and you seem to know what's up. This means you're better prepared than nearly all applicants you'll come up against. Why not aim high and then pad with some "easier"-to-get-into schools?

I respect the desire to aim high. But note that "top 10" isn't a defined thing (and you already understand that prestige of a university isn't an excellent indicator). You get to define that yourself. So what are the top 10 schools doing the research you want to do too? Clearly that's the "top 10", and 10 applications seems like a reasonable amount. So if you don't limit yourself to other people's conception of the "top 10", you do have a chance! (Also, boo negativity.)

Honestly, if you graduated college you should know how to do 60% of the math correctly, less a few errors. Now, is the minimum to apply a 140, or is that the required score? Some schools have minimums to apply that are far, far lower than the scores needed to be accepted. Your school might be different. Also. Yes PowerPrep II is a long test. That's how long the GRE is! How can you expect to know how you'd do after 3 hours of examination and effort without actually doing the full thing? Your made-up practice score can't possibly reflect a full-effort attempt during real test conditions.

Looks like we might be applying to a lot of the same programs. Hi, competitor! :playful: When you look into individual schools, make sure the interests of the faculty seem to be aimed at subjects interesting to you. I have personally found that most "Top 20" schools don't do too much of what I'm interested in. Perhaps you will have better luck. I would say your background seems good, and the real thing tying together your application will the the Statement of Purpose and those three letters of recommendation.

Ok, so maybe your undergraduate GPA won't help you. But basically all GPA is is a testament to your academic stick-to-it-iveness... which obviously has improved since your undergrad days. You need research experience of some type to be a serious contender. Consider working under a professor for a year (even part-time) to learn what it means to be a researcher, and start reading up on academic journals in subjects that interest you. This kind of familiarity will show that you are a strong candidate. But unfortunately that means putting the application off another year.

Stagename's advice should be followed, the outcome of which should be the basis of your Statement of Purpose. As mentioned earlier, the only major element missing from the OP's list is the series of letters of recommendations. They should be from professors (or others who can attest to your abilities in academic research), and the time to ask them to write these letters is now, not later!

Do you want to do research in finance or accounting? Then it might be worth it to work your way up to a PhD. Otherwise... maybe you just dislike finance and accounting (I know I would!) and should be in some other line of industry?

My thought was more that not all strategy research has to do directly with the creation of economic monopolies, and takes a more micro view of the field (including product development, for example, or HR practices for cost-competitiveness). I'm sure if you ask any consultant or merchant banker if the creation of monopolies is moral they'd have even more violent hemming and hawing. Additionally, morality isn't quite the basis of our economic system, you know?