The GMAT test, Introduced in 1954 by The GMAC (Graduate Management Admission Council) for admission to graduate business and management programs has undergone several changes. Now efforts are on to make it more innovative and stress free for the candidates, says GMAC President & CEO Sangeet Chowfla.
Chowfla, in an interview with Joe Fox, Associate Dean and Director of Graduate Programs at the Olin Business School, Washington University at St. Louis, said while GMAT does a wonderful job in evaluating cognitive capabilities, it lacks in providing information about behaviour and experiences.
“Given things like gamification, big data, predictive analytics and all the technologies available now – are there other ways that we can develop tools to initially supplement the GMAT exam, but maybe even in the long term replace standardized testing? That is an important thing that we are looking at,” Chowfla said.
The GMAC, which started with nine member schools today stands at about 213 member schools. The growth and the globalization of the membership base has strengthened it considerably.
“Given things like gamification, big data, predictive analytics and all the technologies available now – are there other ways that we can develop tools to initially supplement the GMAT exam, but maybe even in the long term replace standardized testing? That is an important thing that we are looking at,” Chowfla said.
“One of the things we have been doing is redefining the GMAC brand. And like most brand initiatives, you start by looking at your history. We were founded by nine business schools 63 years ago to solve a common problem. And that manifested itself into the test, which then became GMAT exam. What unfortunately happened is that we shifted from an association of business schools to a testing organization,” he said.
“So one of the things we are doing as part of this redefinition of GMAC is to create a sense of balance. We are a global testing organization, there is no getting away from that, but we can balance that testing organization with the association of business schools. And if we do that then we can actually start bringing people together again to start solving common problems,” he added.
“A recent example is what we call the Application Process Advisory Group, where we started bringing I think 13 different schools together to again solve a common problem. In this case, the common problem is the application process, which creates incredible amounts of stress on the candidate population. If we can work together, we start hopefully creating this renewed sense of community” Chowfla said.
Asked whether the GMAC had shifted its focus from its three equally important missions – the test, research, and professional development, he said, “The three legs to that particular stool still hold true, but they are also evolving.
“The test (GMAT) continues to be our primary asset. But the question that we are beginning to ask ourselves is, what next? Are there other technologies that enable us to solve the same problems? So the test itself is beginning to evolve,” he added.
Chowfla said even the GMAC’s role in research as the premier provider to the community, needs to start evolving. He pointed out that not only have research technologies changed, but also the scope of the research.
“It can no longer only be about research around the GMAT testing base, which is a particular segment of a particular type of student applying to a particular type of school. If we really want to represent the global GME community, we have to expand our reach,” he pointed out.
“For example, we have to expand our research to include people who are testing domestically in China. That person is making a decision between a local Chinese school and one of our member schools either in China or elsewhere in the world,” he said.
Asked about the changes in the GMAC board that used to comprise mainly admission directors and program managers in the 1990s and which now have an influx of independent members from the corporate sector, he said, right now apart from he himself, there were seven dean directors, four representative directors and four independent directors.
“Even though we are a nonprofit organization, we run our board according to the standards of a public company. The reason is we generate significant revenue from around the world and as a result of that must hold ourselves to the compliance standards of a global corporation from a governance point of view. It is important that we have these independent directors who bring in perspectives of governance, which otherwise might not have existed,” Chowfla said. (Image Courtsey : twitter.com)
