# Leadership and Impact Essay Workbook: [School name], [Round] > A workbook for the MBA essay prompt type that asks for leadership, > impact or influence: a time you led, a contribution you are proud of, > a moment you changed how a group worked, or the difference you made to > a team or organisation. It takes you from a story inventory through > story selection, structure (STAR and CAR), showing influence without > formal authority and quantifying impact, to a scored self-edit. It is > for full-time, part-time and executive MBA applicants to leading > international programmes. Source basis: the structured behavioural > description method from selection research (Janz 1982), leadership and > influence research named in Sources, and the published application > instructions of business schools, described by type only. Prompts are > never quoted: read your school's current wording on its own admissions > page. Replace every `[bracketed]` value and every row marked *Example*. > This is a planning aid, not admissions, legal or financial advice, and > it gives no promise of admission. ## Document control | Field | Value | |---|---| | Document ID | [ESS-LEAD-001] | | Applicant | [Your name] | | School and programme | [School name], [Full-time MBA / EMBA / Part-time MBA] | | Round and deadline | [Round N], YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM [time zone] | | Prompt type | Leadership and impact (see section 2) | | Prompt wording | [Paste privately from the school's current application, or link to it] | | Word or character limit | [N words / N characters] | | School AI-use policy checked | YYYY-MM-DD, [link to the school's page] | | Version | [0.1] | | Status | [Inventory / Selected / Draft N / Final / Submitted] | | Reviewed by | [Mentor, coach or colleague name, and what they reviewed] | | Last updated | YYYY-MM-DD | ## Contents 1. Purpose and when to use 2. What this prompt type is asking 3. Process 4. Timeline 5. Worksheet A: story inventory 6. Worksheet B: story selection 7. Structure: STAR, CAR and word budgets 8. Showing influence without authority 9. Quantifying impact honestly 10. Drafting workbook 11. Technique fragments and before-and-after 12. Self-edit rubric 13. Quality checklist 14. Common mistakes 15. AI-use and ethics rules 16. My notes and next steps ## 1. Purpose and when to use Admissions committees at leading programmes read leadership essays to answer three questions. First, can this person move other people toward a result, with or without a title? Second, does the applicant understand why the result happened, including what others contributed and what did not work? Third, will this person make a study group, a club and later a team better? The essay is evidence for those questions, not a list of achievements. Your resume already lists achievements, and your recommenders will describe your behaviour from the outside. The essay is the only place where the reader hears your reasoning from the inside: what you noticed, what you chose, what it cost and what you learned. Use this workbook when a school asks any of the following prompt types (described, not quoted): a specific time you led a team or a change; your most meaningful contribution or impact in an organisation; a time you influenced people who did not report to you; a time you built or improved a team, a process or a community; or an open question where a leadership story is the strongest answer. It is also useful for interview preparation, because most behavioural interview questions at business schools ask for the same kind of story (see `mba/mba-interview-prep` and `mba/mba-fit-stories`). Do not use it alone for prompts about failure or setbacks (use `mba/mba-setback-growth-essay`), about values or identity (use `mba/mba-values-essay`), or about goals (use `mba/mba-goals-essay`). Those prompt types reward different evidence, and a leadership story forced into them usually reads as a disguised success story. ## 2. What this prompt type is asking Leadership prompts share a core, but the verbs differ, and the verb tells you what evidence to emphasise. | Prompt variant (described) | What the reader looks for | Evidence to emphasise | |---|---|---| | Led a team or initiative | Direction setting, decisions, people management | Your choices at decision points, how you divided work, how you handled conflict | | Made an impact on an organisation | A change that lasted after you | Before and after, adoption by others, what still runs today | | Influenced without authority | Persuasion, coalition building, trust | Who resisted and why, what you offered each stakeholder, how minds changed | | Contributed to a team or community | Service, enabling others, judgement about where to help | What the group could do because of you that it could not do before | | Open question, leadership story is your best answer | Self-knowledge, priorities | Why this story, out of all your stories, says the most about you | Two features are common across leading programmes. First, word limits are short, usually somewhere between about 150 and 500 words for a leadership-type question (check your school's current limit). Short limits reward one story told well over three stories summarised. Second, many schools now ask for reflection inside the same answer: what you learned, what you would do differently or how it shaped you. A story with no reflection reads like a resume bullet; a story that is all reflection reads like an opinion piece. Section 7 sets the balance. Write down the prompt's verbs and any explicit sub-questions here before you choose a story: | Item | Your notes | |---|---| | Main verb(s) in the prompt | [led / influenced / contributed / changed / other] | | Sub-questions the prompt asks explicitly | [for example: what you learned, what you would do differently] | | Constraints | [time period, setting, number of examples, word limit] | | What the rest of my application already proves | [scale from resume, behaviours from recommenders] | | What this essay must add | [one sentence] | ## 3. Process The process has two loops. The selection loop sends you back to the inventory when no story is strong enough; the editing loop repeats until every rubric criterion reaches 3. The policy check comes last as well as first, because schools sometimes update instructions during a cycle. ```mermaid flowchart TD A["Read the prompt and underline the verbs"] --> B["Build the story inventory (Worksheet A)"] B --> C["Score stories against the prompt (Worksheet B)"] C --> D{"Top story scores 4.0 or more?"} D -- "No" --> B D -- "Yes" --> E["Outline with CAR and the word budget"] E --> F["Draft 1 without editing"] F --> G["Add influence evidence and quantified impact"] G --> H["Score with the rubric (section 12)"] H --> I{"Every criterion at 3 or more?"} I -- "No" --> G I -- "Yes" --> J["Reviewer read and fact check"] J --> K["Check AI-use policy and disclosure question"] K --> L["Final read aloud and submit"] ``` ## 4. Timeline | When | Step | Output | |---|---|---| | T-10 weeks | Read the prompt, check the word limit and AI-use policy | Section 2 table and Document control filled | | T-9 weeks | Story inventory: list 8 to 12 candidate stories | Worksheet A | | T-8 weeks | Recover evidence: emails, reports, metrics, dates; ask former colleagues to confirm facts | Evidence column complete | | T-7 weeks | Score and select; test the top two stories aloud on a friend in 90 seconds each | Worksheet B, one chosen story | | T-6 weeks | Outline with the word budget, Draft 1 | Draft 1 | | T-5 weeks | Draft 2: influence, impact and reflection | Draft 2 scored with the rubric | | T-4 weeks | Reviewer read (structure and clarity only) | Reviewer notes | | T-3 weeks | Draft 3 and cross-check with resume and recommender brief for consistency | Draft 3 | | T-1 week | Cut to limit, read aloud, final fact check | Final | | T-0 | Submit, save a PDF copy for interview preparation | Submitted copy | Dates: [Deadline YYYY-MM-DD]. Example: for a deadline in early September, T-10 weeks is late June. Check the school's current deadline on its admissions page; do not rely on last year's dates. ## 5. Worksheet A: story inventory List every candidate story. Do not judge yet. Aim for at least eight, from at least three settings (work, community or volunteering, education, family or personal projects, military or public service). | ID | One-line story | Setting | Year | My formal role | People involved | Result (one line) | Evidence I can recover | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | LS-01 *(Example)* | Persuaded three regional warehouse teams to adopt one handover checklist | Work, logistics analyst at a mid-size distributor | 2025 | Analyst, no reports | 3 shift leads, 40 operators, my manager | On-time handover rate from 71% to 93% in four months | Weekly dashboard exports, shift-lead emails | | LS-02 *(Example)* | Rebuilt a failing volunteer tutoring programme after its founder left | Community | 2023 | Volunteer, then coordinator | 14 tutors, 60 students, a school principal | Programme kept running, tutor retention improved | Sign-up sheets, principal's letter | | LS-03 *(Example)* | Built the pricing model that won a large account | Work | 2024 | Analyst on a team of five | Sales lead, finance | Contract signed | Model file, deal memo | | LS-04 | [Story] | [Setting] | [Year] | [Role] | [People] | [Result] | [Evidence] | | LS-05 | [Story] | [Setting] | [Year] | [Role] | [People] | [Result] | [Evidence] | | LS-06 | [Story] | [Setting] | [Year] | [Role] | [People] | [Result] | [Evidence] | | LS-07 | [Story] | [Setting] | [Year] | [Role] | [People] | [Result] | [Evidence] | | LS-08 | [Story] | [Setting] | [Year] | [Role] | [People] | [Result] | [Evidence] | For each of your top four stories, answer these recovery questions in one or two lines each: 1. What was the situation before you acted, in a number or a concrete observation? 2. Who had to change their behaviour for the result to happen, and why were they reluctant? 3. What did you decide that someone else in your position might not have decided? 4. What did it cost you (time, relationships, credibility, risk)? 5. What happened after you left or after the project ended? 6. Who could confirm the facts if the school or a recommender were asked? ## 6. Worksheet B: story selection Score your top stories against five criteria. The weights reflect what leadership prompts reward: fit to the prompt's verb first, then your own agency, then evidence. Change the weights if your school's prompt stresses something else, and record why. | Criterion | Weight | Question | |---|---|---| | Prompt fit | 0.30 | Does the story answer the prompt's main verb directly? | | Your agency | 0.25 | Were the key decisions yours, and would the result have differed without you? | | Evidence of impact | 0.20 | Can you show a before and after, or a lasting change? | | Distinctiveness | 0.15 | Would this story be hard for another applicant from your industry to tell? | | Recency | 0.10 | Is it recent enough to show who you are now (usually the last three to four years)? | | Story | Prompt fit | Your agency | Evidence of impact | Distinctiveness | Recency | Weighted score | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | LS-01 *(Example)* | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 4.40 | | LS-02 *(Example)* | 4 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 4.10 | | LS-03 *(Example)* | 3 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 3.10 | | [LS-0N] | [1-5] | [1-5] | [1-5] | [1-5] | [1-5] | [score] | Excel: with weights in `B2:F2` and scores in `B3:F3`, the weighted score is `=SUMPRODUCT($B$2:$F$2,B3:F3)`. The example rows were computed this way: LS-01 is 0.30 x 5 + 0.25 x 4 + 0.20 x 4 + 0.15 x 4 + 0.10 x 5 = 4.40. Reading the example: LS-03 has the strongest numbers but the weakest agency, because the applicant built a model inside a team and the sales lead closed the deal. It belongs on the resume, not in the leadership essay. LS-01 and LS-02 are both strong. The applicant chose LS-01 for this school and kept LS-02 for a community or contribution question elsewhere, so the application as a whole shows two settings. Selection rule: use a story that scores 4.0 or more. If none does, go back to the inventory: the strongest story is often one you dismissed because it felt small. ## 7. Structure: STAR, CAR and word budgets Two structures dominate. Both come from the behavioural description method in selection interviewing, which asks candidates to describe what they actually did in a specific past situation rather than what they would do in general (Janz 1982). **STAR** (Situation, Task, Action, Result) separates the situation from your task. It is useful when your assignment differed from what you ended up doing, for example when you were asked to fix a report and discovered the real problem was a process. **CAR** (Context, Action, Result) merges situation and task. It is more economical and fits most essays of 250 to 500 words. For an MBA essay, add a fourth element to either: **Reflection**, meaning what you learned about leading and how you lead differently now. Many prompts ask for it explicitly; when they do not, one or two sentences of reflection still separate a thoughtful applicant from a capable one. Word budget by part (rounded to the nearest 5 words, remainder on the Action part): | Part | Share | 250 words | 400 words | 500 words | |---|---|---|---|---| | Context (and task) | 15% | 40 | 60 | 75 | | Action | 50% | 120 | 200 | 250 | | Result | 20% | 50 | 80 | 100 | | Reflection | 15% | 40 | 60 | 75 | | Total | 100% | 250 | 400 | 500 | Excel: for a limit in `B1` and a share in `B3`, `=MROUND($B$1*B3,5)`; the Action row is `=$B$1-SUM(other parts)` so the column adds up exactly to the limit. Why half the words go to Action: the reader is testing behaviour. Context is necessary but cheap; most first drafts spend 40% of their words on context and leave 20% for action. The Action part should include at least one decision point (what you chose and what you rejected), at least one person whose mind you changed and the specific means you used. Outline template: | Part | My outline (bullets, not prose) | |---|---| | Opening line: the moment of tension | [One sentence that places the reader inside the problem] | | Context: what was at stake, in a number or a concrete image | [ ] | | Task (STAR only): what you were asked to do vs what was needed | [ ] | | Action 1: first decision and why | [ ] | | Action 2: the person or group you had to win over, and how | [ ] | | Action 3: the obstacle or setback inside the story, and your response | [ ] | | Result: before and after, plus what lasted | [ ] | | Reflection: what you learned about leading, and evidence you apply it | [ ] | ## 8. Showing influence without authority Most applicants to full-time programmes have three to six years of experience and limited formal authority. That is not a weakness for this essay. Leading people who do not report to you is the core skill of a study group, a club and most post-MBA roles. Research on lateral influence treats it as exchange: you identify what the other party values and find something you can offer in return, such as information, help, recognition or a share in a result (Cohen and Bradford 1990). Research on persuasion adds that people respond to credible evidence, to commitments they have made in public and to what peers are doing (Cialdini 1984). You do not need to name these ideas in your essay; you need to show them in action. Five ways to make influence visible: 1. **Name the resistance and its reason.** "The shift leads disliked the checklist" is weak. "The shift leads had been blamed for the last two process changes and saw the checklist as a way to blame them again" shows that you understood people. 2. **Show what you offered each stakeholder.** Different people needed different things. Say what each received: time saved, credit, a problem solved, a voice in the design. 3. **Show the sequence.** Influence usually moves one person at a time. Who did you persuade first, and how did that person help you with the next? 4. **Show what you gave up.** Letting someone else present the idea, changing your own design, accepting a slower timeline. Concessions are evidence of judgement. 5. **Show adoption, not compliance.** The strongest result is that others carried the change forward without you: they trained new staff, extended it, defended it. Worksheet for your chosen story: | Stakeholder | Formal relationship to me | What they valued | Initial position | What I offered or changed | Final position | Evidence | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | Shift lead, site 2 *(Example)* | Peer, different site | Not being blamed, fewer late trucks | Opposed | Co-designed the checklist with her team; her name on the rollout note | Champion, trained site 3 | Her email to site 3 lead | | Operations manager *(Example)* | My manager's peer | On-time metric for quarterly review | Neutral | Weekly one-page dashboard | Sponsor | Dashboard added to review pack | | [Stakeholder] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | | [Stakeholder] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | If you did have formal authority, the same worksheet still applies: show that you used persuasion and judgement, not only your position. Readers notice when a manager's story is "I decided and the team executed". ## 9. Quantifying impact honestly Numbers make impact concrete, but they also invite scrutiny. Use them for scale and for change, and always say what was measured. | Type of number | Use it to show | Example (fictional) | Check | |---|---|---|---| | Baseline and outcome | Change you caused | On-time handover rate from 71% to 93% | Same definition before and after? | | Change in percentage points | Size of change | +22 percentage points | Points, not percent, for rates | | Scale | Scope of responsibility | 3 sites, 40 operators | Would your recommender agree? | | Time or effort saved | Efficiency | About 6.5 analyst hours a week, roughly 312 hours a year over 48 working weeks | Show the basis | | Money | Commercial weight | [Currency and amount, with basis] | Is it confidential? Use ranges or ratios if so | | Adoption | Lasting change | Rolled out to a fourth site by the site 2 lead | Did it happen after you left? | | People outcomes | Development of others | Two operators promoted to shift lead | Was it your doing, or are you borrowing? | Computations used in the example: the change from 71% to 93% is 93 - 71 = 22 percentage points (Excel `=(0.93-0.71)*100`), not 22%; the relative change would be 31% and should not be confused with it. Hours: 6.5 x 48 = 312 hours a year (Excel `=6.5*48`). Rules: - **Attribute honestly.** Say "we" for the team's result and "I" for your actions. A result that depended on six people is still a strong story if your part is clear. - **Prefer rates to absolutes** when the base is small or confidential, and absolutes to rates when the rate would look inflated (from 1 to 3 clients is "+200%", which sounds like spin). - **Use one or two numbers well**, not five. More numbers make a 250-word answer read like a dashboard. - **When you cannot quantify**, show impact through behaviour: who now does something differently, what decision was made because of your work, what still runs. Community and creative work often has no clean metric; a concrete before and after is enough. - **Check confidentiality.** Do not disclose client names, unpublished financials or anything covered by an agreement with your employer. ## 10. Drafting workbook Answer these in your own words. They are the raw material for the draft. 1. In one sentence, what changed because of you? [ ] 2. What is the single moment where the story turns, and what did you decide at that moment? [ ] 3. What option did you reject, and why? [ ] 4. Who was hardest to persuade, what did they care about, and what did you do about it? [ ] 5. What went wrong inside the story, and how did you respond? [ ] 6. What would a skeptical colleague say about your role, and how do you answer them? [ ] 7. What did you learn about how you lead, in a sentence you could not have written before this experience? [ ] 8. Where have you applied that learning since? Give one concrete example. [ ] 9. How does this story connect to the rest of the application (goals, resume, recommenders)? [ ] 10. If the reader remembers one image from the essay, what should it be? [ ] Draft log: | Draft | Date | Words | Rubric average | Main change | Reviewer | |---|---|---|---|---|---| | 1 | YYYY-MM-DD | [N] | [score] | First full draft | Self | | 2 | YYYY-MM-DD | [N] | [score] | [Added stakeholder sequence, cut context] | [Name] | | 3 | YYYY-MM-DD | [N] | [score] | [ ] | [Name] | ## 11. Technique fragments and before-and-after **Technique 1: open inside the tension.** Instead of starting with your job title, start at the moment where something had to change. > *Fictional fragment.* The third late truck that week left with a missing pallet, and the site 2 lead told me, in front of her team, that my checklist would be the fourth process change to fail that year. She was not wrong about the first three. **Technique 2: show a decision and the rejected alternative.** > *Fictional fragment.* I could have asked my manager to mandate the checklist across all three sites. I asked the site 2 lead to rewrite it with her team instead, knowing it would cost a month. **Technique 3: reflection with evidence.** A lesson is only credible when it is followed by a later action. > *Fictional fragment.* I learned that people adopt what they help design. When I took over our quarterly forecast process last spring, I started with two workshops with the regional planners before I touched the model. **Before and after (one sentence each, fictional):** | Weak | Why it is weak | Stronger | |---|---|---| | I led a cross-functional team to improve operational efficiency significantly. | Abstract, no number, "led" without authority explained | Without authority over any of the three sites, I persuaded their shift leads to adopt one handover checklist, and on-time handovers rose from 71% to 93% in four months. | | I am a natural leader who brings people together. | A claim, not evidence | The site 2 lead, my loudest critic in March, was training the site 3 team on the checklist by July. | | This experience taught me the importance of communication. | Generic lesson anyone could write | I learned to ask who will be blamed if a change fails, and to design the change with them first. | ## 12. Self-edit rubric Score 1 to 4 on each criterion. Target 3 or more on every row before the reviewer read, and 4 on at least three rows for the final. | Criterion | 1 Weak | 2 Developing | 3 Strong | 4 Excellent | Draft score | |---|---|---|---|---|---| | Answers the prompt | Story fits only loosely | Fits, but the verb is not addressed directly | Directly answers every part | Answers every part and the choice of story itself says something about you | [ ] | | Agency | Unclear what you did | Your actions listed, decisions vague | Clear decisions with reasons | Decisions, rejected alternatives and trade-offs visible | [ ] | | Influence | No other people in the story | Others named but passive | Resistance and how you addressed it shown | Sequence of persuasion and adoption by others shown | [ ] | | Evidence of impact | No result or vague result | Result stated without baseline | Before and after, measured honestly | Before and after plus what lasted | [ ] | | Reflection | None, or a generic lesson | Lesson stated, no evidence | Specific lesson linked to the story | Specific lesson plus later evidence of applying it | [ ] | | Clarity and economy | Hard to follow, over limit | Clear but padded | Clear, within limit, no filler | Every sentence earns its place, reads well aloud | [ ] | | Voice and honesty | Sounds like a brochure | Some personal voice | Sounds like you, credits others | Distinctive, credible, humble without false modesty | [ ] | ## 13. Quality checklist - [ ] One story, not a summary of several. - [ ] The prompt's main verb is answered in the first third of the essay. - [ ] At least half the words describe your actions and decisions. - [ ] At least one person whose mind you changed is named by role, with their reason for resisting. - [ ] Every number is defined, sourced and consistent with your resume and recommender brief. - [ ] "I" and "we" are used accurately. - [ ] Reflection names a specific lesson and a later example of applying it. - [ ] No confidential information. - [ ] No jargon or acronyms a general business reader would not know. - [ ] Within the word or character limit as counted by the application system (paste a test into the form). - [ ] Read aloud once without stumbling. - [ ] The school's current AI-use policy checked and any disclosure question answered truthfully. - [ ] A copy saved for interview preparation. ## 14. Common mistakes 1. **The resume in prose.** Listing several achievements instead of telling one story. Fix: choose one story and go deep. 2. **Title equals leadership.** Assuming that managing people proves leadership. Fix: show persuasion, judgement and development of others. 3. **Context overload.** Spending a third of the words explaining your industry. Fix: one or two sentences, in plain language. 4. **The invisible team.** Writing as if you achieved the result alone. Readers distrust it and recommenders may contradict it. Fix: credit others and make your part precise. 5. **The heroic rescue.** A story where everyone else was incompetent and you saved the day. It signals poor judgement about people. Fix: show why others behaved as they did. 6. **Numbers without meaning.** Large figures with no baseline or definition, or percentage and percentage-point confusion. Fix: before and after with a defined measure. 7. **Generic reflection.** Lessons such as "communication matters" or "teamwork is key". Fix: a lesson specific enough that only this story could have taught it. 8. **No obstacle.** A story where everything went to plan reads as a project report. Fix: include the moment that was hard and what you did. 9. **Old story.** Using a university story when you have five years of work. Fix: prefer the last three to four years unless the older story is clearly stronger and you say why. 10. **Recycled essay.** Reusing an essay written for another school's different prompt without re-answering this prompt's verb. Fix: re-run section 2 for each school. 11. **Inconsistency.** Dates, titles or numbers that differ from the resume or recommendations. Fix: cross-check with `mba/mba-resume` and `mba/mba-recommender-brief`. 12. **Polished but not yours.** Over-edited drafts, by people or tools, that lose your voice and can breach school policy. Fix: section 15. ## 15. AI-use and ethics rules **Dated fact (as of October 2026; checked 2026-10-28 on secondary sources, because several school pages could not be read directly).** Published policies of leading business schools on AI in applications differ. Some treat an essay written by another person or by a tool as a violation of the application terms. Some allow AI for brainstorming ideas and for editing but not for producing complete responses. At least one leading school is reported to state that it may use detection tools and review flagged applications further. Some application forms reportedly include a question asking whether and how you used AI, and some schools had no published policy at all. Check each school's current application instructions and honour code before you rely on any of this, and record the result in `mba/mba-ai-use-policy-check`. Rules for this workbook: 1. **You write the essay.** Every sentence in the submitted essay is drafted by you. The story, the reasoning and the reflection must be yours. 2. **Check each school's policy** for the cycle you apply in, and follow the strictest policy that applies to the essay you submit there. 3. **Disclose when asked**, truthfully and in the form the school requests. Keep a short note of how you used any tool so you can answer accurately. 4. **Use the same standard for human help.** A coach, colleague or friend may comment on structure and clarity; they must not write sentences for you. Many schools apply the same rule to people and tools. 5. **Facts must be true.** Do not let any reviewer or tool add achievements, numbers or quotations. Everything must survive an interview question and a recommender's account. 6. **Protect confidential information.** Do not paste employer or client confidential material into third-party tools. Uses that are usually low risk where a school permits them (check first): checking grammar and spelling, asking for questions a skeptical reader might ask, testing whether the prompt is answered, and counting words. Uses that are usually prohibited or high risk: generating a draft or paragraphs, rewriting your draft into "better" prose, and inventing or embellishing details. ## 16. My notes and next steps | Item | Notes | |---|---| | Story chosen and why | [ ] | | Backup story for interviews | [ ] | | Facts to confirm with former colleagues | [ ] | | Consistency check with resume and recommenders done | [YYYY-MM-DD] | | Interview follow-up questions I expect | [ ] | | Next template | [`mba/mba-setback-growth-essay` / `mba/mba-short-answers` / `mba/mba-interview-prep`] | ## Sources and further reading - Janz, T. (1982). Initial comparisons of patterned behavior description interviews versus unstructured interviews. *Journal of Applied Psychology*, 67(5), 577-580. Basis of the behavioural "specific past situation" approach behind STAR and CAR. - Cohen, A. R., and Bradford, D. L. (1990). *Influence Without Authority*. New York: Wiley. Exchange model of lateral influence. - Cialdini, R. B. (1984). *Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion*. New York: William Morrow. Principles of persuasion. - Bass, B. M. (1985). *Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations*. New York: Free Press. Transformational leadership, background for describing how you lead. - Kotter, J. P. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. *Harvard Business Review*, 73(2), 59-67. Background for change stories. - Your school's current application instructions, essay prompts and AI-use policy on its official admissions page (read in full; not reproduced here). - GMAC, mba.com, applicant resources on the application process: https://www.mba.com ## Revision history | Version | Date | Author | Change | |---|---|---|---| | 0.1 | YYYY-MM-DD | [Your name] | Inventory and selection complete | | 0.2 | YYYY-MM-DD | [Your name] | Draft 1 | | 1.0 | YYYY-MM-DD | [Your name] | Final, submitted | ## Standard and licence note Based on the behavioural description method from selection research (Janz 1982), published research on leadership and influence named above, and the publicly described essay prompt types of business-school applications, summarised by type and never quoted. The text, worksheets, rubric and fictional fragments are original and written for this collection. No school is affiliated with or has endorsed this template, and no school's essay prompt, model essay or admissions material is reproduced. AI-use rules change: check each school's current policy before use. Template licence: MIT.