I’d love to see evidence that the feeling of rejection (and self-loathing and all the other bad stuff) is meaningfully different if it’s “stats” vs. something else.
I was rejected from several companies I applied to from B-school after the first cut-- aka the stats. No interview, no cover letter… just my GMAT scores and GPA.
No chance to show off my writing skills or talk about why I’m a perfect fit for the company and the role. Just a rejection.
It felt lousy. It was a stupid combination of score/GPA . That is not a good kind of rejection. Students who were-- let’s call them empty suits for lack of a better term-- were getting interviews and then offers. They had NO depth whatsoever, their work experience was shallow (I had managed 30 people, all older than me, I had dealt with a combative labor union with great success, managed through a strike… blah blah blah…) And their work experience- supposedly to prepare them for general management? The 1970’s version of a desk jockey.
So if you think a statistical rejection feels good- it does not. It calls into question every decision you’ve made- spend an extra hour doing meaningful volunteer work or study for an extra hour to get a fractionally higher GPA?
Nope. not buying it.