|
How can you admit a failure
and still offer an answer that strengthens your
application? Of course, showing what you learned and how
you recovered is absolutely essential, but many people
don't realize the importance of discussing a real,
substantive failure.
Applicants believe that the
slightest hint of weakness will ruin their chances. In
reality, admissions committees know that you have flaws,
even if you don't disclose them. You're better off being
candid for the following reasons:
-
Your readers will
appreciate your honesty, and this perception will
affect their opinion of your other answers.
-
You show a stronger
self-awareness when you can identify real mistakes.
-
Only by engaging with a
substantive failure can you offer meaningful
insights into the lessons you learned.
Instead of being forthright,
most applicants will either choose a topic that hardly
qualifies as a failure, or they will write something
generic or irrelevant to avoid admitting any substantive
flaws. As an example that suffers from both problems, an
applicant might describe a situation in which
extenuating circumstances caused the failed outcome. The
problem with this approach is that it leaves no room for
self-examination and offers no insight into the
applicant's character.
So how do you choose a topic
that is substantive but won't make you look too bad?
First, avoid any failure that reveals irreversible
faults. In other words, it should be a mistake that
results from inexperience and therefore can be addressed
for future scenarios. For example, you don't want your
conclusion to be that you are simply a poor leader or
communicator. On the other hand, you could admit that as
a leader you have pushed people too hard, because that's
a specific point upon which you can improve.
Second, aim to find a failure that results from a good
quality. For example, perhaps you failed because you're
too independent and have difficulty delegating
responsibilities to other people. Again, be careful that
your topic leads to self-examination even if it's based
on a typically positive quality.
Once you have a topic, you still have to reflect
insightfully on it. The best way to avoid generic,
obvious lessons is to demonstrate what you learned
through action. Show how you acted differently in a
subsequent, similar scenario. If you can only derive
abstract insights, aim as always for complexity rather
than relying on prepackaged ideas. "The importance of
hard work" is simply no longer interesting, whereas "the
limits of hard work in a mutually dependent
relationship" can be.
This applicant
describes a failure that resulted from lack of
foresight. It was a mistake that had to do with
immaturity rather than a severe shortcoming in any
professional area. Nevertheless, there is a clear
mistake that was made and relevant lessons to be
learned.
This applicant
describes a failure that has several dimensions.
Although the focus is on one result, he addresses the
flawed expectations and ineffective leadership choices
that led to that outcome. As in the previous case, the
failure has to do with inexperience rather than any
irreversible character flaws. He therefore can
demonstrate how he has improved upon his inexperienced
choices, which he does through concrete examples of
changes he made. |
