All posts by Avi Gordon

Best Leaders Have Normal IQs: Implication For GMAT

I’ve written over the years on why a too-high GMAT or GRE hurts MBA applicants, see Myth of 800, and Don’t overcook,  among many times I’ve addressed this. Short story: in general brainiacs don’t make particularly good practical managers, or leaders, or team players. That perception hurts admissions prospects.

So I was interested to see the World Economic Forum (WEF) recently posting: “Being too intelligent might make you a less effective leader,” based on research out of the University of Lausanne, published in the Journal of Applied Psychology.

Here’s the gist of the WEF piece: “Having a very high IQ is not necessarily such a good thing when it comes to leadership – the brightest people are actually less effective leaders, according to new research…

“Intelligence showed a positive linear relationship with leadership effectiveness up to a certain point. But the association flattened out and then started to reverse at an IQ of about 120.

“When the leaders’ IQ scores rose to 128 or above, the association with less effective leadership methods was clear and statistically significant.

“And these leaders demonstrated less transformational and instrumental leadership than leaders with a lower IQ…

“The highly intelligent leaders were not using harmful leadership styles, such as adopting a laissez-faire approach. But they did struggle to adopt the best leadership practices.

“One of the reasons may be that very clever people sometimes fail to communicate clearly enough or explain complex tasks. They may also struggle to see what others find challenging. And if a manager comes across as too intellectual, it may make the leader appear aloof or unapproachable.”

Right or wrong, Einsteins of the world have to manage the unspoken MBA adcom question that arises: is this person not a better professor or scientist, etc?

Were you to have a super-high 750+ GMAT (or GRE) you would need to talk a lot about practical everyday achievements with normal people, in the real world.

If you don’t have this monkey on your back, then really don’t set out to acquire it! Worry about your standard test score until you have a balanced Q/V 700 or so (for top 15 schools), then focus on other parts of your application which are just as important, and which you are probably neglecting due to GMAT prep.

Experience Is Still The New Black In MBA Admissions

More from the files: B-schools with luxury of choice of whom to accept into their MBA classrooms have always valued diversity in the matriculating class. This trend continues strongly as Adcoms show clear intent to accommodate “experience” diversity applicants, including those with part or all of their work experience in non-traditional backgrounds such as social sciences, creative industries, non-profits, real estate, hospitality, urban planning, fashion, and so on.

Male applicants wholly enclosed by cookie-cutter engineering or finance backgrounds are still getting in, but not nearly as easily as before, despite having good GMAT and GPA numbers, good recommendations, and generally having apparently made the “right” career moves. Reading the MBA admissions boards, there are many, many stories that tell of apparently perfect candidates with perfect GMATs getting dinged all over.

Why is this happening? First, schools have always seen and offered valued in diversity in the matriculating pool–which broadens the classroom perspective, fosters real-world peer-to-peer learning enrichment, and which brings MBAs face-to-face with other points of view and thus sharpens their listening and thinking skills. But now, as the business school industry itself gets more competitive, schools need to raise their game on diversity too.

Another force behind diversity in MBA admissions is the slow-burning image problem of business schools and the MBA degree itself. Rightly or wrongly it appears to outsiders that a lot of MBAs from top schools are involved in decision-making that is less than fully ethical. Adcoms are looking for MBAs who will be brand champions of better ethics, and they are not so convinced anymore they will find them in among standard finance, accounting, or consulting-based applicants.

Finally, the perceived value of innovation in industry is at an all-time-high. To build big new businesses, from Bitcoin to Beyond, you have to not just think big. You have to think different. With this in mind, it’s not surprising that Adcom will rate an architect or  journalist or even a racing driver as valuable in the class, in terms of challenging mindsets and staid practices.

The best response? If you are relatively rich in diversity, make sure Adcom “gets it” – what it is and why it offers interest and value to the school. If you are not, that is if you are a standard finance or consulting or IT jock – you have a harder job. But not impossible. The quest is to find an angle (everyone has at least one) in your personal or professional experience that offers a distinctive point of view among the MBA cohort.

When I first wrote this story, I mentioned at the time I had a standard finance-banking background client. For a while I despaired, but in profiling I discovered he had spent six months in a rotation in Perth, working on deals and risk-mitigation in the booming (Australia-China) mining resources sector. This was enough to make him interesting, and combined with the rest of his solid profile, got him the admissions offers he was looking for.

See also this post.

Top 3? Top 6? Among Elite MBA’s Does It Really Matter Where You Go?

One from the files: There was a thread on the Businessweek’s “Getting into B-School” forum when it existed, and the question asked was “Does rank really matter among the top 6?”

I selected extracts to present here because the questions and comments  deal with important and corrective thinking about what matters in rankings and reputation, and which help understand how US program rankings are perceived internationally too. It finishes with common sense conclusion that I endorse.

Original question: “Does rank really matter among Top Business schools? With my European point of view, I consider that there are only 6 Top Schools (in descending order): HBS, Stanford, Wharton, Columbia, Booth and Kellogg. Actually, I don’t really care about rankings here: my only criteria is prestige (which in my view is the only thing you can’t ignore when applying to business schools). In Europe, these schools are famous: if you say Stanford or Columbia, everybody knows what you’re talking about. [But]If you say Tuck business school (at random), very few people will have heard of it regardless of the quality of the school.

“So my question is: among this prestigious top, does is REALLY matter if you go to one or another? On this forum we can often read that if you go to HBS it is infinitely better that if you go to Wharton but Wharton will change your life so much more than Kellogg, and so on and so forth.”

Response: “In France [among] 100 person taken randomly in the street and educated in France, 100 will know about HEC, 90 about Harvard, 3 to 5 about Stanford, Wharton, Kellogg, Columbia and 10 maybe will know about INSEAD. But I would say that 90 will know about Yale, Princeton, 100 about Oxford, Cambridge.”

Response: “As a Frenchman I feel the need to throw in my 2 cents on this one. INSEAD is hands down the strongest MBA brand in France. Does every random person on the street necessarily know the name? No, but who cares? The employers do.”

Response: “I would like also to add that the education at the top business institutions is quite the same. I highly doubt that you will learn better investment management in Chicago or Wharton than in Yale, Haas or Fuqua. If you visit those schools, you might get surprised by the background of the faculty. You might take a class at Berkeley taught by a Yale alumni or even receive Michael Porter at Tuck.”

Response: “Although I agree with the notion that the value of an MBA drops as the ranking drops, I do not agree that there is a substantial difference between similarly ranked programs. Every objective metric I can think of (starting salary, quality of recruiting companies, average salary of graduates after 20 years etc.) clusters most top 15 programs closely together. The main exception seem to be HBS and Stanford. Another objective metric are the GMAT and the GPA. Those two metrics are hardly distinguishable in the top 15 programs, including HBS and Stanford.”

Original: “I’ve reached my conclusion I believe: go where you think you belong regardless of what people say/think. I chose to apply to Wharton and CBS finally even if i totally agree HBS / GSB are more famous and Booth / Kellogg are great schools simply because i think it will teach me what i want to learn in my specific field… And education among them is NOT that different, apart from some specialties that should ultimately lead your choice.”