Tag Archive


Manhattan Review provides its students with topnotch prep courses that will allow students to tackle the challenges found in the GMAT. For young and aspiring entrepreneurs, entry into a top business school is vital to their future success. You have us on your side and quite frankly, our courses are more than capable of pushing you over the top. Assistance like that is valuable and necessary if you want to enter one of the ten toughest business schools in the country:

School name (state) Full-time applicants Full-time acceptances Full-time acceptance rate U.S. News rank
Stanford University (CA) 6,618 466 7.0% 1
Harvard University (MA) 9,134 1,013 11.1% 1
University of California—Berkeley (Haas) 3,444 420 12.2% 7
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Sloan) 4,490 599 13.3% 4
New York University (Stern) 4,416 601 13.6% 11
Columbia University (NY) 6,669 1,062 15.9% 8
Dartmouth College (Tuck) (NH) 2,744 492 17.9% 9
University of Pennsylvania (Wharton) 6,442 1,209 18.8% 3
Yale University (CT) 2,823 539 19.1% 10
Northwestern University (Kellogg) (IL) 5,305 1,119 21.1% 4

If the school you were seeking a nod from was not on this list, you can expect a 50-50 chance of getting accepted. While that may seem low to you, it does not beat the extremely low acceptance rates that Stanford University, Harvard University, and UC-Berkley are known for. Manhattan Review’s founder, Prof Dr. Joern Meissner, received his Ph.D in Management Science from Columbia University, which currently boasts an acceptance rate of 15.9%. With this in mind, you can use years of knowledge and prep expertise collected by him and his staff to assist you in preparing for the business world.

Much of the information above can be found in the original U.S. News article here.
For more information on a Free admissions consultation and GMAT preparation, contact Manhattan Review today.

Posted on December 10, 2012 by Calvin

This entry was posted in Admissions, Career, GMAT, MBA and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Earlier 2008, Thomas Robertson, dean of the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania and Frank Brown, dean of INSEAD, announced a four-year renewal of the two business schools’ alliance initiated seven years ago in 2001, which they mutually consider has been a great success.


The impetus for the alliance is to promote the internationalization of both schools’ programs in terms of MBA student exchange, faculty exchange, executive education, research collaboration, developing joint PhD curricula, and joint alumni initiatives. With INSEAD’s campuses in France and Singapore and Wharton’s campuses in Philadelphia and San Francisco, students and faculty are able to derive experience from three continents, all of which are vital players in international business.

Joint MBA Program – Size & More

Since its inception, the alliance has educated 800 MBAs, 50-75 from each school per year, through two-month exchanges giving students access to a broader and deeper selection of coursework led by regional faculty and assistance by local career coordinators.

Nearly the same number of executives have taken advantage of the exchange, enrolling in executive education programs like “Strategic R&D Management” and “Leading an Effective Sales Force”, which are taught by faculty of both schools at all the campus locations. The executive training offered by the partnership also makes company-specific curricula available for its multinational clients.

The networking potential for alumni is also immense with 82,000 Wharton alumni spread over 148 countries and 37,000 INSEAD alumni in even more locations.

Research Program

The research opportunities created by the partnership have been substantial as well. Through the creation of the jointly governed and funded INSEAD-Wharton Center for Global Research and Education over 60 faculty members have taken long-term teaching or research positions ranging from six months to two years at one of the partner schools.


What will the next four years bring to the partnership? Robertson says he would like to continue developing a pool of multinational clients looking for global solutions, which he believes the alliance is uniquely situated to provide. Both deans remark that further development of PhDs is desirable given the constant need for excellent faculty. “The more quality academics we can produce, the better off both institutions are going to be and the better off the academic community in general will be,” says Brown.

Near-Term Initiatives

  • A plan to distribute proprietary case studies developed at INSEAD to Wharton;
  • Workshops for staff across campuses that will focus on ideal practice in diverse elements of business ranging from training to diversity management;
  • Continued joint alumni events;
  • Opportunities for peer reviews of alumni work by both alumni populations.

More information regarding the partnership can be found here: http://www.insead.edu/alliance/


EMBA programs tend to be more flexible than MBA programs in terms of their GMAT requirement.Executive MBA programs tend to draw applicants with a large amount of professional experience. EMBA applicants generally occupy leadership roles in corporations both prior to and following their degrees, thus a different skill set than that tested by the GMAT is seen as applicable. These other skills, some EMBA programs find, are best measured not on the basis of GMAT scores, but on the basis of professional and academic experience.

Only a few EMBA programs have opted to eliminate the requirement completely. Among those are the University of North Carolina Kenan-Flagler program One MBA, the EMBA program at the University of Michigan, and the EMBA program at the University of Chicago’s GSB. Michigan, for example, offers an optional refresher course for the EMBA students who need quantitative review.

Other EMBA programs have chosen to waive the requirement in certain circumstances. At Duke University’s Fuqua EMBA program, it is not so easy to get a waiver. Waivers are granted in circumstances where a candidate has proven quantitative skills and attained a highly technical MA or PhD. NYU Stern and the Goosewetta Business School at Emery University accept waivers in certain cases.

Other schools like USC tell applicants that the GMAT is highly recommended, but not required. If a candidate’s experience and/or prior training or study do not prove an applicant’s quantitative capacity, the admissions committee might be concerned about their quantitative skill level without the GMAT to attest otherwise.

The main concern expressed among schools that continue to maintain their GMAT requirement is ensuring a standard of quantitative ability. Some EMBA programs that continue to require the GMAT in all cases include the University of Texas McCombs and the University of Pennsylvania Wharton.

Though requirements do seem to be changing, at the moment it’s clear that a good GMAT score is helpful in EMBA programs admissions decisions, especially when there is any concern about a candidate’s quantitative skills.

While the discussion may be less heated than in recent years, grade disclosure and the associated policies are relevant to MBA students. The debate consists of the following arguments for and against grade disclosure:

- Grade non-disclosure policies (GND) enhance student collaboration and promote extra curricular activities which in turn promote networking opportunities
- Grade disclosure policies (GD) promote rigorous academics. When grades “do not matter,” students may become lazy and the atmosphere may become less competitive

In most circumstances, the supporters of GND are the student bodies, and the supporters of GD are the professors and administrators. The majority of America’s top B-schools seem to have either a GD or voluntary GD policy, where students may share grades with potential employers voluntarily. Now, let’s look at the four schools’ policies and the debate surrounding them:

University of Pennsylvania (Wharton)

Wharton, a member of the top three B-schools on many lists, seems to house the most heated grade policy debate. Prior to 1998, the school had a GD, but the student body overwhelmingly supported a GND. The logic behind those opinions follows pretty closely the logic above. Amazingly, during a 2006 vote to amend the school’s policy, students voted in favor of GND by 94%, with 84% participation.

Wharton has adopted a voluntary disclosure policy, where students are free to share their grades, but are not required to.


Harvard’s grade disclosure policy is especially interesting due to their somewhat unorthodox grading system. As of 2005, students are free to discuss grades in job interviews or other circumstances with potential employers. The administrators have stated that this policy makes them consistent with other business schools and undergraduate programs, as well as the rest of Harvard University. As stated earlier, grade disclosure is designed to promote high quality academics. According to an article in the Harvard Crimson, a school official stated that disclosing grades is also consistent with being a successful business leader: businesses are constantly trying to quantify progress, development and develop ways to measure their performance.

Harvard’s grading system may also necessitate GD being implemented. Harvard’s grading system works by using three categories, rather than an A-F scale. Approximately 75% of HBS students occupy category II status, with the rest occupying category 1 (top tier) and 3 (bottom of the class). The combination of “grades not mattering” and Harvard’s grading system could be deadly to academic morale: the likelihood of being in category 1 is so slim that students may as well just stick with category 2. On the other hand, it is unlikely that they will fail out, which means many MBA students can squeeze by.


Stanford’s administration does not have a particular policy, but the student body policy is non-disclosure. There is an astonishing 99% compliance rate among students.

Both sides of the grade disclosure debate have sound arguments and valid points. It also seems that the only possible compromise is the one that some schools have already put into effect: a policy of voluntary disclosure. The students who feel that it is within their right to withhold grades from employers are free to do so. If the employer demands such information (which they may) the student will have a difficult choice to make, one that very closely reflects many decisions – operational, managerial, and ethical – made in the business world: How do I optimize the result with minimal compromise?

Final Thoughts

On one hand, grades are an important indicator of one’s personal achievement. However, on the other hand, how you translate your learning into behaviors and actions in real life is a better indicator of both achievement and character.

Maybe grade disclosure should carry more importance in college than graduate schools. Different majors should put different level of emphasis on grade disclosure as well. The grade disclosure policy could vary depending on course types, i.e., cores vs. electives.

Graduate business schools focus on practical knowledge and skills, not pure arts or science. A student’s integral ability should have a higher correlation to his/her future success. Certain qualities can not be quantified by grades, in particular, managerial talents such as decision-making abilities, sound judgment, ability to outperform in face of adversity and leadership. Nonetheless, analytical abilities can certainly be tested out and measured by grades.

Posted on March 11, 2008 by Manhattan Review

This entry was posted in Admissions, MBA and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.