An old post that I had drafted long back, but never got to posting. Guess it's never too late, so here it goes...
Throughout my college days, I was astonished by the clear distinction of people on the basis of CGPA. CGPA ranges were like castes and each range was given a treatment typical to their GPAs. Not only was their behaviour stereotyped, but there were certain expectations of each GPA group. For example, people with 9+ cg are expected to attend classes regularly and be done with the entire syllabus atleast a day before any exam. On the contrary, 7 pointers or less were not to be seen anywhere near classes and they have to knock on a 9p's door one day before exam to find out the syllabus for the test. 9 pointers like ghotting and they just need a reason to do so. I clearly remember the time during my 3-1 when I had to take Parallel Computing as an elective (to finish my degree early) as nothing else was available at my priority number and I was told that I chose this in a bid to camouflage my love for ghotting!
Throughout my college days, I was astonished by the clear distinction of people on the basis of CGPA. CGPA ranges were like castes and each range was given a treatment typical to their GPAs. Not only was their behaviour stereotyped, but there were certain expectations of each GPA group. For example, people with 9+ cg are expected to attend classes regularly and be done with the entire syllabus atleast a day before any exam. On the contrary, 7 pointers or less were not to be seen anywhere near classes and they have to knock on a 9p's door one day before exam to find out the syllabus for the test. 9 pointers like ghotting and they just need a reason to do so. I clearly remember the time during my 3-1 when I had to take Parallel Computing as an elective (to finish my degree early) as nothing else was available at my priority number and I was told that I chose this in a bid to camouflage my love for ghotting!
This 'expectation' was just not limited to your current behaviour, but to your future actions as well. If I am a CS student with a cgpa of 9.67, which I made by cracking a lot of CS courses, I must like CS a lot and therefore I am going to pursue M.S. in CS after my graduation gets over. Can you believe it? A whole series of baseless assumptions made on a single fact that my cgpa is high. To them, possibilities like 'I study because I am concerned about my career' or even 'I study because I like to crack exams' don't make sense at all. I won't even present the argument that some people are just sincere enough to study because that will be like banging my head against a wall.
During the time when I decided to finish my degree early to prepare for civil services (the idea which I completely dropped before leaving BITS, just for the record), there have been numerous times when people used to ask me You have high cgpa, why are you not going for Masters? There was not even a single person who asked me why am I not going for an MBA. Why? Because MBA was something which is left for the low cgpa people. Why? I really have no idea!
Trying to find an answer, when I analyse the trend above, I find that this is actually something that we have brought upon us. Take for example, a guy who does not like his branch much, he knows for sure that he can never do good in a core job and thus wants to pursue an MBA. Now here is where the problem lies, since he knows that he is not going to continue in a core job, he has given up on studying his core subjects and thus continues to decline on the cgpa scale. Sounds a familiar argument? Well, get in line.
I distinctly remember two people who told me that since they are going to do an MBA after college, they don't find much use in studying. I am pretty sure there are plenty more.
What these guys miss is that today's world has such a cut-throat competition that you just can't afford to be mediocre. When there are more than two lakh people applying for CAT, scoring a 99% alone is just not enough. Even though the number 99 makes you feel like you almost topped, you need to realise that there are still 1% of those two lakh- two thousand people above you. Shocked? you must be! The admissions' committees of IIMs also realise this fact and instead of calling top x performers on the basis of this single exam, they choose to have a cut-off for 2x and then choose consistent performers out of these.
IIM-A had an 80% cutoff for 10th, 12th and graduation for even sending out a call this year. IIM-B won't even look at you if you are anything less than a 90% in boards and 85% in graduation. Two of the top three institutes in the country gone, straight.
If you somehow even manage to get a decent institute, your past does not leave you just yet. For example, shortlists for summer interns has nothing to do with your performance at the IIM and are solely based on your past performance (atleast at IIM-A).
So, the point I am trying to make here is that MBA is no longer a choice of just low cgpa people or CS traitors, it results in lucrative jobs and that only is enough to attract the best of talent to this field. Being a mediocre will just make people run over you!
If you have talent and you are not utilising it to its full potential, there can't be a bigger waste than you!
Trying to find an answer, when I analyse the trend above, I find that this is actually something that we have brought upon us. Take for example, a guy who does not like his branch much, he knows for sure that he can never do good in a core job and thus wants to pursue an MBA. Now here is where the problem lies, since he knows that he is not going to continue in a core job, he has given up on studying his core subjects and thus continues to decline on the cgpa scale. Sounds a familiar argument? Well, get in line.
I distinctly remember two people who told me that since they are going to do an MBA after college, they don't find much use in studying. I am pretty sure there are plenty more.
What these guys miss is that today's world has such a cut-throat competition that you just can't afford to be mediocre. When there are more than two lakh people applying for CAT, scoring a 99% alone is just not enough. Even though the number 99 makes you feel like you almost topped, you need to realise that there are still 1% of those two lakh- two thousand people above you. Shocked? you must be! The admissions' committees of IIMs also realise this fact and instead of calling top x performers on the basis of this single exam, they choose to have a cut-off for 2x and then choose consistent performers out of these.
IIM-A had an 80% cutoff for 10th, 12th and graduation for even sending out a call this year. IIM-B won't even look at you if you are anything less than a 90% in boards and 85% in graduation. Two of the top three institutes in the country gone, straight.
If you somehow even manage to get a decent institute, your past does not leave you just yet. For example, shortlists for summer interns has nothing to do with your performance at the IIM and are solely based on your past performance (atleast at IIM-A).
So, the point I am trying to make here is that MBA is no longer a choice of just low cgpa people or CS traitors, it results in lucrative jobs and that only is enough to attract the best of talent to this field. Being a mediocre will just make people run over you!
If you have talent and you are not utilising it to its full potential, there can't be a bigger waste than you!
Comments
Post a Comment