Mr. Renewable Energy
- 720 Verbal, 800 Quant GRE
- 3.65 GPA
- Undergraduate degree in economics from Santa Clara University
- Attended Lewis and Clark Law School, concluding studies after the first year with a 3.0 GPA
- Work experiences includes an energy policy internship at a well-known Washington, D.C., think tank; high level energy utility regulation experience in the Bay Area for four years planning for renewable generation and running a $500 million energy efficiency program
- Extracurricular involvement as the vice president of my undergraduate student body; volunteer with local San Francisco political candidates; co-author of numerous papers on the status of electricity in California and presented at world renowned events on renewable energy
- 26-year-old white male
Odds of Success:
Harvard: 30% to 40%
Stanford: 20% to 30%
Sandy’s Analysis: Dropping out of law school was better than completing it for B school purposes because you only spent a year there and can say with some authority that it was not for you. A 720/V and 800/Q GRE is real solid, whether schools consider that the equivalent of a 760 GMAT is an open question with two prongs:
1. They consider that score as proof that you are a real smart guy who is not going to have any problem with the quant stuff that is going to be thrown your way in B-school.
2. They do not consider it a prize that will raise their own GMAT average (even incrementally, as would a real 760 GMAT). So for instance, just as a crazy hypothetical, suppose you had a twin brother with the exact same life except the twin has a 760 GMAT for real. They might take the twin on that count alone. Of course, you don’t have a twin brother, and there is never a twin like that, but you get my drift. A last issue is how consulting firms, which are interested in GMAT scores consider the GMAT v. the GRE. I don’t know, but my guess is, they will like yours, especially the 800Q. Any consulting firm experts out there (as there have been in the past), please post.
Your posted profile is a bit unclear. You say, “Experience:– energy policy internship at well-known Washington, DC think tank– high level energy utility regulation experience in the Bay Area for 4 years (work includes long-term planning for renewable generation and running a 500 million dollar energy efficiency program . . . .”
Are you working for the guv’ment of California? It sounds that way. Or are you a consultant. Viz, “Co-authored numerous papers on the status of electricity in California. Presented at world renowned events on renewable energy in California.” If you are working for state government, or even the Feds, and have been successful, as it appears, that could be a good platform to apply to B-school.
Anyway, it all knits tightly as a past and present, and even the law school flirtation fits in given the regulatory background. Working for a state government is usually not a good gig for elite schools on the theory that those jobs are not selective. But whatever the case was with your gig, you have made it sound selective, and if it resulted from your internship at the Washington Think Tank then the only question a very cynical adcom might ask is how you got THAT job out of some 3.6-ish performance at Santa Clara (not that there is anything wrong with that school, I was just wondering how many kids it sends to elite think tanks).
Anyway, you did it, and it worked, so at the moment, you are in contention at elite schools (H/W/S) and pretty solid at other Top-10 frequent flyers (Chicago Kellogg, Columbia, Sloan). “Volunteer work with local SF political candidates . . . .” is an added plus, especially getting your hands dirty with local politics, since a good deal of energy regulation is political.