I don't know about HBS, but honor code is a huge thing at my b-school. Our exams, finals and job search are all governed by the honor code. Those that break the honor code are severely disciplined. It's part of the culture of my school and should be part of the culture of all business schools. Glad to hear HBS is taking it seriously. The problem is with the ApplyNow system. Many schools use them, mine included. It's not HBS's fault there was a flaw in the system. All schools who feel this was an unethical act should revoke admissions to those people. I believe we are doing the same thing.
Very interesting read. What would be fascinating is if someone waitlisted at Harvard was able to get into the link and start knocking off those people who had already been accepted, thus pushing him into Harvard after the said candidates had been exiled. He would have to cover his trail, but that would be damn near brilliant plot if it were executed with precision. An insider at Harvard who wanted his friend accepted would be equally as brilliant a story. Add some sex and action and you've got a movie.
You're right, it might just be on the site and not in the code. The article says "source material". If it was stated before hand that trying to learn your status through other means is grounds for rejection, like asking soneone in the know etc., then I get it. If not, then they are they ones who screwed up.
i'm going to say i don't see it as a big deal. they did not attempt to somehow change their results and they saw no one else's results. they were looking at something they would eventually be sent anyway. it's not as if they stood to somehow gain financially or otherwise (outside of satisfying their curiosity) from knowing a month ahead of time whether they were in or not. and it doesn't appear it was a hugely complicated matter to get the info. someone said try this, a few unlucky people who happened to see it decided to try, and now the business schools are professing their almighty righteousness to the world telling us how this clearly constitutes a lack of moral character unbecoming of a business person. jokes about the oxymoronic nature of the phrase business ethics, this just isn't a big deal and to say it doesn't live up to the ethics part of your mission statement when it really has nothing to do with it is just wrong. while Harvard has virtually nothing to lose by rejecting a paltry 119 applicants, grandstanding is still the easy, pc way out. while it may not be completely right, i'm not going to say it's unethical and certainly see no reason to issue a blanket rejection. i like stanford's approach, though we'll have to see how they actually handle the explanations.
I just don't think this is all that big of a deal, they did not change their grades, all they did was look at whether they were accepted. Just goes to prove that people in Ivory towers are WAY out of touch with real life. I liken it to getting an ultra sound and seeing the sex before the baby comes out...harmless. DD
You know, as I read the start of the article, I thought it was a deliberate action by the school, setting up a fake "hack into the website to see if you got accepted" type trap that led to a rejection. And even then, I thought it was fine. I don't see how it would be any different from asking someone an ethical question during an interview and not accepting them if they got it wrong. These guys f'ed up on the ethics question, so they're out. What's the problem? The only problem is the idea of proving it wasn't someone else who did it. Even then, though, you could argue that it's a big mistake to let someone else know your i.d. number.
Jebus interesting. How can the school PROVE it was them who hacked in to their accounts? If the accounts are hackable it could have been anyone. Sounds like lots of lawsuits about to happen. DD
The instructions told people to log onto their admissions Web page and find their identification numbers in source material that was available on the site. By plugging those numbers into another Web page address, they were directed to a page where their admissions decision would be found. This will be somewhat speculative.... If a person has to logon to their admissions page to get their identification number, then it seems that there was at least a password/security barrier to deter any random person from obtaining identification numbers of people. The sabatoge angle by others would be quite difficult as long as the applicant didn't reveal their admissions page login to others. Yes, if the ID numbers were completely numeric and generated/created in a straight sequence.....then a Brute Force sabatoge would be possible. The story never said that the ID database was hacked or revealed the composition of the ID string. If the company that ran the application web site created straight numeric strings for ID numbers....then that is carelessness on their part. In regards to plugging the ID numbers into another web page and then getting directed (redirected?) to a page with the admissions decision..........seems like two possibilties: 1) somebody on the inside leaked the process by telling people what was required (ID number) and what web address to go to. 2) somebody that had gone through the application process previously and decided to help others out by revealing the routine/method used to show the results to the applicants. It just doesn't meet the smell test for a true Hack.
NPR interviewed someone at MIT (I think it was MIT) about it yesterday. MIT also rejected out of hand those that tried to see their status early. The interview cleared a lot of stuff up. First of all, they know (generally) that it was the applicant that gained access because their password is needed. They said they were willing to hear an appeal if the applicant is saying someone else did it -- he cited a hypothetical that the applicant is in Afghanistan, so he gives his brother the password and the brother than uses that password to do this, they'd be willing to grant an exception. He also said the applicants were invited to apply again next year, so it's not like they have a lifelong ban because of it. As for the ethics, I got the impression the schools were upset mostly by the invasion of privacy -- the guy likened it to finding the keys to the office and rifling through their filing cabinets at night. Overall, it seemed like a very well-reasoned approach (but then, I was already on their side).
Our college's anti-plagiarism policy included plagiarising your own work by reusing a paper you wrote for another class (even just substantially reusing the idea by doing a bit of a rewrite but not coming up with anything new to say). Plagiarism, even in that sense, was grounds for immediate expulsion. So it's hard to feel to sorry for these applicants when this won't even be a part of their academic record. And yes, it does strike me as cheating. They knew they were getting information they weren't supposed to have access to.
