Board scores don't fully reflect management potential, but Indian B-schools weight them heavily as proxies for consistency, discipline, and effort over time. The Reddit thread critique "What correlation is with management potential and marks at the age of 16 years or 18 years?" is valid but the system values consistency over peak performance.
The reasoning B-schools use: management requires sustained effort across years, and 10/12 performance signals that habit. Academic research shows 10/12 correlates more strongly with career outcomes than CAT score alone because it spans 8+ years of sustained effort vs one exam day. At IIM Ahmedabad (Rs 27.
5L fees, Rs 35.22 LPA avg, 99%+ CAT cutoff), the admission committee believes the combined profile (boards + UG + CAT + interview + work-ex) is more predictive than any single metric. Counter-arguments: scoring 99+ percentile in CAT requires significant intellect and dedication; 10/12 scores are influenced by socioeconomic factors (tutoring, schooling, family stability) independent of management talent.
The global trend: US MBAs (Harvard, Stanford, Wharton) weight GPA (undergrad) and GMAT/GRE but essentially ignore high school grades. ISB follows this model (Rs 43L fees, Rs 34 LPA avg, GMAT 710+). Indian B-schools lag global practice in this respect.
For aspirants who disagree with the system: FMS lightly weights boards for shortlist, XLRI via XAT rewards current performance, ISB ignores boards entirely. If the system frustrates you, take the ISB/GMAT route after 3+ years work-ex - you can completely bypass board scrutiny. Check your eligibility at collvera.