Each August, thousands of MBA applicants ask the same question: “Is it better to apply in Round 1 than Round 2?” Conventional wisdom says the earlier, the better. In Round 1 every seat is open and there is no waitlist to consider. Furthermore, applying in Round 1 conveys that attending b-school is a true priority for the applicant.
But what about situations where the candidacy could be stronger and more competitive by taking another 3 months to add, change or fix key aspects? If the extra time can be used to improve a GMAT score by 20+ points, achieve an “A” in a rigorous extension course, get a meaningful job promotion, assume leadership of a non-profit, etc., then the applicant may be better off applying in Round 2.
Another consideration is whether the candidacy is “traditional” (e.g., a consulting or PE associate with the above-median GPA and GMAT) vs “nontraditional” (e.g., founder of a cool startup with sub-median GPA and/or GMAT and more than the average duration of experience.) It’s logical to believe that b-schools use R1 to capture the best of the traditional applicants, knowing that they can “round out” the class with the best of the nontraditional types in Round 2.
So, determining the ideal time to apply is really a question of competitiveness – when will your chances for admission be highest? And that’s a decision that needs to be made with an understanding of the types of applicants who have been admitted by round over time. That’s the kind of perspective that comes from a professional admissions consultant like The MBA Exchange. And answering that question begins with an objective evaluation of your candidacy before you commit to Round 1 or Round 2.