Why Are Interviews Important?
• The paper application informs us about work experience and academic aptitude, but not about emotional intelligence—
interpersonal skills, how you get on with others. Our interviews cover the usual basics, such as why you want to go to business school and why Stanford, but they have a behavioral component at their heart. Thus, we might ask: Tell us about a time in your life when you failed; give us an example when you let a team down; give us an example when you managed very well; tell us about a manager who was very good; or, conversely, tell us about a manager who was not. We expect you to reflect on your professional experiences and draw conclusions about yourself as a result. SHARON HOFFMAN, STANFORD
• Because we weight personal characteristics very heavily in our admission process, interviews are very important. Interpersonal and communication skills are most easily assessed in interviews, not on the basis of a written record. We ask a lot about why they’ve made various career and professional decisions, to understand their maturity and motivation. Thus, we ask why they chose the college they did, the major, the job and company, why they changed jobs, and so on. We ask less about what they’ve done. DAWNA CLARKE, TUCK
• Interviews are one of the best ways for us to assess fit, perhaps the most important criterion for admission here. It’s the chance for candidates to tell their story, demonstrate their interpersonal skills, and show their knowledge of the school, the program, and why it’s right for them. It’s also a chance for them to ask questions and learn from a current student. DAN MCCLEARY, FUQUA (DUKE)
• We’re trying to evaluate people, not pieces of paper. Although you may do a stellar job on paper, the reality is that how you present yourself and communicate with people is also a very important determinant of whether someone will be successful or not.
You can’t tell this from pieces of paper, so the interview is extremely important. LINDA MEEHAN, COLUMBIA
• For international applicants, this process is extremely important for us, given this is an English-speaking program. So if you have a difficult time speaking and understanding English, you’ll have a difficult time taking advantage of what Columbia has to offer.
LINDA MEEHAN, COLUMBIA
• I can’t imagine not interviewing. You learn so much when you ask probing questions while looking candidates in the eye. DR.
SIMON LEARMOUNT, JUDGE (CAMBRIDGE)
• First, because students come from such varied backgrounds, this gives us an important common tool for evaluating them. (We interview all our applicants.) Second, we want to have people who can contribute to our case-based program. If you can’t articulate who you are in the interview process, you’ll probably not be a good contributor in class or study group. Third, we’re interested in fit. For example, we want to be sure your goals fit with the strengths of the program. DAVID BACH, INSTITUTO DE EMPRESA (SPAIN)
• The interview is a very important step of the selection process. It allows the school to know the aptitudinal profile of the candidate, his or her personality traits, strengths and weaknesses in terms of soft skills. All these are elements that cannot easily be assessed through only, for example, the GMAT. Also, the interview gives the candidate the opportunity to better understand the school, its offer, and peculiar features. ROSSANA CAMERA, BOCCONI (ITALY)
• We want to see if they are the right fit for the program, but applicants need to do the same, and the interview is a good opportunity to do that. STEPHEN CHADWICK, LONDON
• Because we have a very small program, it’s important to make sure that an applicant will fit. For example, someone who is really competitive and wants to be ranked in the class—which we don’t do—won’t fit. MARY GRANGER, ESADE (SPAIN)
• We interview people to see how interested in the program they are. We want to know how enthusiastic they are. It’s hard to know this sort of thing from the application alone. GEA TROMP, ROTTERDAM
How Many Applicants Do You Interview?
• We’re now interviewing on an invitation-only basis. After multiple readings of an application, we’ll interview about 50 percent of the pool. We won’t admit anyone without an interview. ROSE MARTINELLI, CHICAGO
• We aim to interview 40 percent of applicants and then admit about half of those interviewed. ANNE COYLE, YALE
• We interview about 50 to 60 percent of applicants. LINDA MEEHAN, COLUMBIA
• Our interview rate varies from year to year. It is typically between 30 and 50 percent of all applicants. J. J. CUTLER, WHARTON
• We interview approximately 1,800 per year. DEE LEOPOLD, HARVARD
• We have a two-month period in the fall when anyone can come to campus and interview. After that, we have an invitation-only policy. Our goal is to interview 100 percent of those who might matriculate as students. In all likelihood we’ll invite about 30 percent of applicants to interview, and another 10-20 percent will have taken advantage of the open interview period. DAN McCLEARY, FUQUA (DUKE)
• It varies a bit from year to year, but it averages about 30 percent. About 60 to 70 percent of those we interview are granted admission. ISSER GALLOGLY, STERN (NYU)
• About 35 percent. DR. SIMON LEARMOUNT, JUDGE (CAMBRIDGE)
• We interview all applicants, some of them more than once. DAVID BACH, INSTITUTO DE EMPRESA (SPAIN)
• We interview almost all of our applicants. The applicants who come from remote parts of the world are interviewed over the phone, if necessary. KIRT WOOD, ROTTERDAM
• We interview one-third of applicants and admit about half of those interviewed. Some 89 percent of those receiving offers enroll.
KATTY OOMS SUTER, IMD (SWITZERLAND) Format
• On-campus interviews are forty-five minutes; off-campus interviews with admissions officers are thirty minutes, but those with alumni have no specified length (although we recommend they be 45 to 60 minutes). SALLY JAEGER, TUCK
• Our interviews are strictly thirty minutes; the first twenty-five minutes are reserved for our questions, the last five for applicants’
questions. ANNE COYLE, YALE
• They are meant to be between half an hour and an hour. They’re usually done in the interviewer’s offices, but are sometimes done in restaurants or cafés. They are casual but evaluative, and should be handled as though you’re being interviewed for a job. They are not, however, case interviews. LINDA MEEHAN, COLUMBIA
• A thirty-minute conversation with a member of the admissions board who has reviewed your written application carefully and wants to get to know you better. DEE LEOPOLD, HARVARD
• The majority of interviews on campus are done by admission fellows, current MBA students. For people who live in other parts of the world, we also use alumni to conduct interviews. The interviews tend to be about forty-five minutes long. DAN McCLEARY, FUQUA (DUKE)
• We have a thirty-minute blind interview. THOMAS CALEEL, WHARTON
• We have a set of criteria we apply in evaluating applicants, but we don’t have a set interview format. KIRT WOOD, ROTTERDAM
• The interview is carried out on a one-to-one basis and takes place after the application form has been received and read.
ROSSANA CAMERA, BOCCONI (ITALY)
• There is no standard length or format: Interviews can be formal or over a drink—it varies by culture. We don’t want our interviewers to review the applicant’s CV or ask questions we’ve already asked. Instead, we want them to determine whether the applicant is easy to talk to, communicative, personable, and so on. Alumni inevitably ask themselves whether they would have wanted to study with, be in a group with, or be part of the alumni network with this candidate. JOELLE DU LAC, INSEAD
What Do You Look for in the Interview?
• In reviewing an application, we look for individuals with strong interpersonal skills and the ability to communicate effectively; we also try to enhance our understanding of the candidate’s goals, interests, and passions. Is this a person who would be a good
“fit?” Would he or she make a positive impression as a corporate recruiter? PETER JOHNSON, HAAS
• We try to see if the candidate has more to offer than was apparent on paper. We connect a face/person with the application and hope that we can learn more about the individual in the face-to-face interview. LINDA BALDWIN, UCLA
• It’s not meant to be an adversarial process. We want people to be as relaxed as possible. We look for people with strong interpersonal skills. When someone’s extremely nervous, they may act out the nervousness in typical ways—stumbling through answers or talking too much or too little. I ask myself how a recruiter would view this person (if this were a job interview). I also consider how the candidate would interact with a team on group project. PETER JOHNSON, HAAS
• We try to assess whether someone is assertive yet personable, and likely to work well with other people in the program. JAMES HAYES, MICHIGAN
• The ability to articulate business understanding—for our case method classes. SARAH E. NEHER, DARDEN
• Fit is very important to us, and interviews play an important part in helping us determine whether an applicant will be a good fit in the Stern community. Also, because our interviewers have read the file in advance, they have the chance to ask about areas of concern—and applicants have the chance to address them and eliminate any doubts in person. ISSER GALLOGLY, STERN (NYU)
• Ability to thrive in and enjoy our classroom experience, which values curiosity, ability to think on your feet, initiative, interest in others, and bizability. DEE LEOPOLD, HARVARD
• Our interviews have been structured to help us determine how capable a candidate will be in engaging in classroom discussion and debate. We also seek to test their commitment to team learning and people skills. Finally we want to assess how much research they have done on the Cranfield MBA—evidence of commitment—and their plans for post MBA careers. SÉAN RICKARD, CRANFIELD (UK)
• We use an interview guide, which changes slightly month on month, to ensure consistency. On the basis of the initial screening of the candidate, we’ll come up with issues we want to explore. We use this to develop a script for the interview. DR. SIMON LEARMOUNT, JUDGE (CAMBRIDGE)
• It’s important that someone fit well into a learning team. That means they need to be good communicators. It’s also helpful if they have appropriate experience. We probe their team experiences. If they say they didn’t have any problems in a team, they probably have never been in a team. There are always problems—it’s how you handle them that’s key. JOHN MAPES, CRANFIELD (ENGLAND)
• We want to test their ability to engage in an argument and to withstand a challenge. We want to see if they can express their views clearly. We also look at the reasons someone wants to do an MBA, why more specifically at the London Business School. We’ll
look at his interpersonal skills. A lot of the work we do at London Business School is in a team environment, so we want to know whether someone will be able to cope with that. We want to be sure London Business School represents a good fit for him. And, at the end of the day, we want to know whether someone is going to contribute to the school and then, having done an MBA, go out and sell it for us. STEPHEN CHADWICK, LONDON
• We eliminate about half the applicants on the basis of their written applications. We then look to interview the remaining half. We want to give substance to the paper profile and get beyond the elements that represent good coaching of someone. JOELLE DU LAC, INSEAD
Who Does the Interviewing?
• Our interviews are conducted exclusively by alums. We try to offer them on a global basis. The goal: All those admitted in the future will have been interviewed. SHARON HOFFMAN, STANFORD
• Student interviewers do not attend admissions committee meetings. Instead, they give an interview write-up to us. PETER JOHNSON, HAAS
• They’re done primarily by our alumni. Some are also done by a select few well-trained students. The smallest number are done by admissions committee members. LINDA MEEHAN, COLUMBIA
• Invited applicants can interview on campus with a second-year student, in their own city with an alum, or at a hub city with a member of the admissions committee. There is absolutely no difference among the different options, no advantage to choosing one over another. THOMAS CALEEL, WHARTON
• Over 90 percent are done by admissions board members; a small group of alumni are active in international locations. DEE LEOPOLD, HARVARD
• Our interviews are conducted almost exclusively by admissions professionals. We think it’s important to have trained assessors of talent. ISSER GALLOGLY, STERN (NYU)
• Our standard approach is to have two faculty members, one from a quantitative subject like finance, one from a qualitative subject, interview a candidate for thirty to forty minutes. DR. SIMON LEARMOUNT, JUDGE (CAMBRIDGE)
• SDA Bocconi interviews all its candidates either on campus by admissions officers or abroad through our alumni interviewers.
ROSSANA CAMERA, BOCCONI (ITALY)
• In contrast to U.S. schools, the admissions officers don’t do the interviewing. Alumni and faculty do it. STEPHEN CHADWICK, LONDON
• We give selected applicants one or two interviews; each is conducted by an alum. JOELLE DU LAC, INSEAD What Information Does the Interviewer Have About the Applicant?
• Candidates may request an interview at any point in the process. Typically, the interviewer has only the résumé the interviewee brings to the interview. (There are a few exceptions—people who have been unable to interview earlier are reviewed at the end of the process, in which case we will have reviewed their entire file.) We like the interviewer to approach the process without any preconceived notions of the candidate. MICHELE ROGERS, KELLOGG
• The interviewer has read and reviewed a candidate’s written application before the interview. DEE LEOPOLD, HARVARD
• Interviewers have your résumé and some notes from the initial review of your file. These notes may suggest specific issues or questions to the interviewer. ANN W. RICHARDS, JOHNSON (CORNELL)
• When admissions officers interview candidates, they usually have the candidate’s file. Student interviewers, however, will have only the résumé. PETER JOHNSON, HAAS
• Our interviewers have only the applicant’s résumé; they haven’t read the application. Our interviewer typically goes through the applicant’s résumé in chronological order, asking what the person did (and how and why). We usually start at college, asking the reason he chose it. We then ask why he chose his first job—and why he left it. And so on. Applicants often make the mistake of trying not to duplicate what they said in the essays when responding to questions, not understanding that their interviewer is unfamiliar with the essays they wrote. ANNE COYLE, YALE
• They are blind interviews, so the interviewer has just the applicant’s name and résumé, not the undergraduate grades and GMAT scores or essays. LINDA MEEHAN, COLUMBIA
• It’s a blind interview; we don’t have your information in front of us. Because the interviewer doesn’t know a thing about you—and hasn’t formed an impression of you—it gives you a chance to drive the interview. SARAH E. NEHER, DARDEN
• The interviewer has only a résumé. THOMAS CALEEL, WHARTON
• Our interviews are not blind. So in addition to the readers reviewing the applicant’s application, the interviewer gives it a thorough review. So the interview is not just an alumnus/a at Starbucks looking at a résumé for the first time. This is a trained admissions professional who has reviewed the case in its entirety. The applicant has already explained in the application why he wants Stern and why he wants an MBA, so we can have a much deeper, more personal conversation. Applicants have the chance to tell their story in greater depth than they would if we had to take the half hour to cover the basics about their candidacy. We already know the basics. ISSER GALLOGLY, STERN (NYU)
• The interviewer has the candidate’s full file. DAVID BACH, INSTITUTO DE EMPRESA (SPAIN)
• The interviewers have the full file available, without the financial aspects (since this is a need-blind process). DR. SIMON LEARMOUNT, JUDGE (CAMBRIDGE)
• Generally our interviewer has the whole application file. MARY GRANGER, ESADE (SPAIN) Advice
• Be mindful of the time available and the breadth of what you want to cover. If you take twenty minutes to answer the first question, you’ve undermined yourself. You need to be concise. ROSE MARTINELLI, CHICAGO
• Our interviews allow us to get to know candidates better, but they are also designed to let candidates get to know us better, too.
To prepare, be sure to research the school well. It’s also a good idea to have begun work on your application materials, because this will crystallize many points for you and help you articulate your views. MICHELE ROGERS, KELLOGG
• If you view interviews as information exchanges, you will be more relaxed and sound more sophisticated than if you prepare yourself only for the purpose of responding to questions. LINDA BALDWIN, UCLA
• Arrive on time. Dress professionally. Shake the interviewer’s hand. Answer the questions. And try to relax. Have a question or two
in mind for the end of the interview, but do not ask something easily found in the catalogue—for instance, “Do you have any joint degree programs?” ANN W. RICHARDS, JOHNSON (CORNELL)
• Think through how you’d address some questions you can expect. For example, how will our program help you achieve your professional goals? PETER JOHNSON, HAAS
• Listen carefully to the question that’s asked. Don’t try to take over the interview. Provide vignettes to illustrate your points. Rather than simply stating that you’re a team player, for example, relate a story showing yourself to be one. (This is good to keep in mind for essay writing, as well.) DAWNA CLARKE, TUCK
• Try to inject some personality and demonstrate a sound knowledge of our program. Don’t dominate the interview; let the interviewer set the pace. Be respectful of the interviewer’s time; don’t make it impossible to conclude the interview in thirty minutes by trying to ask a hundred questions. Ask two or three targeted specifically to Michigan.
If interviewed by telephone, don’t read your answers. Written responses are often not quite on point. Not only that—it’s obvious to us when you are reading rather than talking. JAMES HAYES, MICHIGAN
• Step back and think about what you’re trying to accomplish. Reread your application. Be ready to answer typical questions, such as why you want an MBA. Do your homework; know a bit about the school. Be ready to be concise, since our interviews are only thirty minutes long. And don’t get your answers off chat boards. Hearing the same answer to a question for the twentieth time isn’t positive. Finally, relax a bit. This is primarily a chance to get to know you. We don’t do stress interviews or anything like that.
THOMAS CALEEL, WHARTON
• This is your chance to sell yourself to the admissions committee, so given that you’re probably passionate about your story and Stern, it’s OK for you to express some excitement. If you’re not excited about who you are and what you have to offer, why should we be? ISSER GALLOGLY, STERN (NYU)
• Don’t try to impress us; be yourself. We want a real dialogue with you. Having already reviewed your file and knowing that you are a viable candidate, we won’t have to ask the obvious questions (“Why do you want an MBA?”). Instead, we can learn what you’re passionate about—whether it’s what’s in the news, what the government just did, or something else. We’ll see how you synthesize information, which is extremely valuable to us. Make sure that you’ve written your own essays so that nothing in the conversation will come as a surprise. ROSE MARTINELLI, CHICAGO
• Be yourself. Don’t approach it believing that we have some ideal applicant in mind, because we don’t. We’ve found over the years that there are many ideal people. KIRT WOOD, ROTTERDAM
• Candidates should try to be themselves and “unique,” thus allowing the school to truly understand their profile and motivation.
Strong coherence between what has been said and expressed in the essays and what is carried out in interviews is essential. It’s also important that candidates have well researched the school and program, which helps us to be convinced of the applicants’
motivation and choice. ROSSANA CAMERA, BOCCONI (ITALY)
• Reading the interviewer is critical. For instance, you can tell by the interviewer’s body language whether you’re providing enough information. DR. SIMON LEARMOUNT, JUDGE (CAMBRIDGE)
• First, it may be obvious, but really prepare. This is a one-time chance, and you have to shine throughout the day. Second, be yourself. We’re not looking for a prototype. KATTY OOMS SUTER, IMD (SWITZERLAND)
• We are impressed when someone has done his homework and knows about our program—someone who obviously wants to come here. ANDREW DYSON, MANCHESTER (ENGLAND)
Unusual Interview Formats
• We look for personality, flair, and interesting ideas—and our approach to interviewing reflects these desires. Each interviewee is required to do a ten-minute presentation, preferably on an interesting subject. We’d much rather hear about the escargots de Bourgogne than another engineering project. Some of the excellent topics applicants have chosen include an analysis (by a pilot) of a recent, major airplane crash; how to enjoy scuba diving the first time without being frightened; and a Gaz de France fellow, employed to bribe and coerce people not to report environmentally dangerous or embarrassing things, discussed his job.
PANTÉA DE NOYELLE, HEC (PARIS)
• We invite applicants to participate in a group discussion of a case. We hand out the case in advance. (It’s a small case, which we change regularly.) The groups range from six to ten applicants. We observe how they respond to questions and how they work together. The people who will interview them later in the day also observe their performance. This gives the interviewers an additional perspective on them and also provides a useful discussion point for the interview. In addition to the admissions dimension, this case discussion also gives applicants a taste of what it’s like to be working in a cross-national group at LBS.
STEPHEN CHADWICK, LONDON
• Our interviews take place at IMD in Lausanne and last a full day. We try to get six candidates here at one time. Each one has a one-hour interview with an admissions committee member. Then they have one half hour to prepare a five-minute presentation, often on a consulting-type case. This is done in front of two or three members of the admissions committee. We want to get a feel for their thought processes. Afterwards, they have lunch with a current student. Not only can they ask what they like but this also builds links for future communication. We then bring all six together for a case discussion, based on a case they were given two to three weeks in advance. We see how they interact with one another, work as a team, and analyze the case. We see their interpersonal, team, communication, and perhaps analytical skills. KATTY OOMS SUTER, IMD (SWITZERLAND)
• We like, if possible, all candidates we are interested in to attend Cranfield for an interview conducted by an academic. In order to test their likely contribution candidates are required to make a three-minute presentation on a subject of our choice and then defend their position—no visual aids are permitted. If a candidate can’t get to Cranfield we will first try and arrange an interview with a Cranfield academic who is visiting their country. If this does not prove possible to arrange they will be interviewed by Skype or telephone. SÉAN RICKARD, CRANFIELD (UK)
• We have an “observed group” situation as part of our interview day. We’re not looking for someone to take over the group, to be aggressive and a leader; we’re looking for someone to encourage other people, bring out the best in others, be a good team player. Five or six people would be asked to deal with a problem as a group. They’ll be observed by an organizational specialist on the faculty (typically). It lasts for an hour. It’s the process more than the result that interests us. HELEN WARD, MANCHESTER (ENGLAND)
Biggest Mistakes