How to use the Essay Pillaring Technique to influence the MBA Admission team

When I began reviewing movies for Fun, I noticed that the ones that hold my attention the most used a narrative technique that I call Pillaring. The threads of the story run parallel, each one adding a sub-plot, providing new information or introducing a character through action. Good movies rarely use a background narration to describe a character or a motive. Maybe, they spell out information that offers context on the motives of the secondary characters. Martin Scorsese does that often when he mentions the quirks of a supporting character. The main character’s motivation and values are never told. Background voice of the protagonist is always a reflection of what the person is going through more than what he will do next.

If you are writing MBA Application Essays, remember you are the main character. Never spell out your motivation through words. Use actions to convey motivation and values.

Instead of writing, “Leading comes naturally to me,” you can write,

“From younger days, whenever there was a request to lead a team, I raised my hand. The fear and excitement of taking a group to a common goal meant that for a small duration of time, we get to share an experience, discover new dynamics, and learn through the uncertainties of the task.”

How does Pillaring work in Essays?

Pillaring works for narratives, more than explicit statements like the example above. Instead of linearly writing one sentence that connects one thought to the next, this technique purposefully leaves gaps in comprehension between one sentence, the next, and maybe even the next, but catches up at the fourth sentence to connect with sentence one. If you leave too much gap between sentence 1 and 4, the Essay reviewer will lose interest.

Sentence 1 -> Sentence 2 -> Sentence 3 -> Sentence 4

Let us say Sentence 1 and Sentence 4 is describing or covering the same sub-topic, but Sentence 2 and Sentence 3 are new information that has nothing to do with Sentence 1 and Sentence 4. If you are a good writer, you will find information that challenges the reader’s belief or opinion, creating cognitive dissonance in the mind of the reader. We don’t recommend writing about events that challenge the common principles of decency, but the admission team is highly influenced by the world view or stereotype of your profession, college (undergraduate degree), state/city (if you are a US applicant), nationality or race.

Sentence 2 and 3 should challenge the prevailing worldview of your profession or the personality traits that the admission team expects from a person of your profile

For Example

Trader – Outgoing, high testosterone, risk-taking, borderline unethical, and somebody who always has an eye on the numbers

Engineers – introvert, analytical, process-oriented, high threshold for failure and poor people skills.

Write both positive and negative beliefs that are commonly associated with your profession. Challenge the negative beliefs with new information in Sentence 2 and 3. Repeat the process for each paragraph, and you would have created a few pillars that offer context on your values, beliefs, and motivations.

Sentence 1 -> Sentence 2 -> Sentence 3 -> Sentence 4

Pillar 1 (First Paragraph) = Sentence 2 + Sentence 3
Pillar 2 (Second Paragraph) = Sentence 2 + Sentence 3
Pillar 3 (Third Paragraph) = Sentence 2 + Sentence 3
Pillar 4 (Fourth Paragraph) = Sentence 2 + Sentence 3

Pillar 1 = Challenge the Belief
Pillar 2 = New Information
Pillar 3 = Challenge the Belief
Pillar 4 = New Information

Mix and match the sequence for Pillars 1 to 4.

Not all pillars have to be exclusively made of statements that challenges the reviewer’s impression of you, but by sporadically including information that creates enough gap in comprehension while challenging the reviewer’s stereotypical belief about your profile, you can create an engaging narrative. The sentences are not restricted to four, but you get the idea.

Pillaring works on Leon Festinger’s Cognitive Dissonance Theory (1957) where we influence the reviewer by creating a dissonance between action and belief. The admission team might be required to reject applicants who have a below GMAT 680 or GPA 3.0 score. This requirement is based on the belief that applicants with a low score cannot learn complex management concepts.

Let us say you have a GMAT Score of 660 and a GPA of 2.9. Your chance of getting into that dream school is low with a standard narrative. When you introduce academic competency achieved by top 1% in Sentence 2 and Sentence 3, the reviewer’s belief is challenged.

According to the Cognitive Dissonance theory, there are three possible actions that the admission team will take when there is cognitive dissonance  –  change the belief to support the evidence, change actions to support the belief, or rationalize an action – both positive(shortlisted) and negative (rejected).

Change the belief to support the evidence
If you have used our persuasive essay writing tips (shared in Winning MBA Essay Guide), you will be successful in changing the belief of the reviewer.

Change actions to support the belief
The new belief is that not all applicants should be rejected based on GMAT and GPA score. You will be shortlisted for an interview.

Rationalize an Action
If the words and narratives were not persuasive enough, you would be rejected, and the reviewer will rationalize that your profile is an exception and it would be too time-consuming and risky for the school to consider you for an interview.

If the reviewer changed her belief to support your candidacy, she would again rationalize the reasons. Your resume will be the first place that the reviewer will scavenge for evidence to confirm the new belief. That is why we recommend that you should invest heavily in your resume rewrite process. Start here by filling out the consulting service request form.