28,862Leland Reviews

I worked with Ben for a mock interview session and appreciated some of the feedback he provided... there were definitely a few useful insights. That said, the session felt quite rushed and underprepared. He hadn’t reviewed the resume I had shared in advance, which made the conversation less tailored and less effective than I was hoping for. A lot of the questions he asked were quite generic and he just didn't seem "into it". Given the price point, I expected a more thoughtful and personalized experience. Overall, while there was some value in the feedback, I don’t feel the session justified the high price tag.

Context: worked with Ben on 2 M7 (Kellogg and HBS didn’t get admitted) but got admitted to another M7 (MIT) on my own. I’ve also used Leland with different coaches which helped me get more perspective. Strengths: - Ben comes across as an extremely charismatic and intelligent individual — he really is. I think he’s already accomplished phenomenal things and will continue to do so. His story is quite unique and he shares it very well. - He revamped my resume using my content but with his formatting/style, which was very crisp. - Essays: this is his biggest individual strength. He helped a ton with feedback on my writing. He encouraged me to use my own voice and genuinely share my story. - Final review: Ben went through my Kellogg and HBS applications before submission, which I appreciated as a final set of eyes. Concerns: - Recommendations: he reviewed them and gave me feedback. However, one of the letters he said was the worst one written (which I agreed with). In that situation, I asked for more direct editing/writing support, and he responded: “So I can't really ‘craft’ or ‘edit’ LORs, but I've given you some pointers anyway since I know you're in a bit of a spot here — you're technically not really even supposed to even play a part in any of this, but I can give you guidance and help thinking through the right examples or catch a grammar error here and there — so that's the truly legal / ethical limitations of my feedback on this piece.” - Application strategy: outside of essays, I think there should be more thoughtfulness around the overall strategy of the application — i.e. how different components come together beyond just the essays (short answers, career goals, positioning, etc.). This could also include smaller but important guidance points like attending admissions events, interview preparation/attire for HBS, school selection strategy in the first place, etc. The process is very ambiguous until you’ve gone through it, so I now have a lot of knowledge I would’ve loved to have earlier on. - Interview mock: having now done 5-6 additional mocks, I saw how other coaches approached it. Comparatively, I didn’t find Ben’s mock especially helpful or confidence-building for me. I felt he was not very prepared (which I understand to some extent given he already knew my profile, but comparatively it still didn’t feel appropriate in my opinion). His feedback also wasn’t particularly actionable. - Time / cost ratio: across HBS and Kellogg, there were 6 essays total. I did approximately 3-4 drafts per essay, for around ~24 drafts overall. Even assuming each took an hour to review (which feels generous), plus resume editing (~2 hours), the mock interview (45 minutes), and the initial essay session (1.5 hours), it comes to roughly 30 hours total. Maybe that’s all I needed, but the cost for 2 schools and ~30 hours of work felt exorbitant to me. I recognize he was available if I asked for more support, so maybe this is partially a case of me simply not needing more of his time, but it still felt quite expensive. We only met live 3 times total: the 15-minute intro, the 1.5-hour essay workshop, and the mock interview. Everything else was over email, and never on weekends. - Leland+ was actually a very helpful resource center. Ironically, I didn’t expect it to provide as much value as it did. Ben’s recommendation packet, Kellogg essay guidance, and HBS guidance were all prerecorded videos posted on Leland+. I ended up using several resources from there, which somewhat defeated the purpose of having a customized coach. I understand the need to standardize or reuse processes, but at times it felt like I had paid primarily for access to materials and examples from other applicants Ben had worked with. All that said, some of this is also on me for maybe not asking enough questions upfront about what I needed or expected. As I mentioned though, I didn’t know what I didn’t know. Working with several additional coaches showed me the value of having multiple people involved (almost like a consulting team), versus the more dedicated one-on-one support I had initially envisioned with an individual coach.

She couldn't provide clear and actionable advice, rather high level commentary. She is provides more feeling based advice rather than analytical. She also missed a deadline she mentioned she would get back to me by.

After purchasing a package and edits were returned, I found out that the coach heavily used AI tools without my consent. This was super frustrating and upsetting, as I had sensitive information about me and my family. When I brought it up, the coach denied using AI and didn't even attempt to send proof of original edits, even though multiple platforms showed AI usage at over 98%. In addition, it was obvious given the sentence structures, word choices, and overall tone of the passages. As a minority, first generation student, and paying client who trusted this coach with my materials for guidance, this was super disappointing. That said, I want to give a lot of credit to the support team. The stars are for them, as they took the issue seriously and were communicative and supportive throughout the process.

Did a resume polishing with the coach. The advice I received was not very constructive. It was the change of wording from “created” to “designed”. Nothing much more than that. And for the questions that I raised in the intro call, I didn’t receive any clear answers. Expected more.

The session was adequate, but it lacked the energy and depth. The delivery felt flat at times, and the absence of concrete examples made it harder to connect with the material. With more preparation and a more dynamic approach, the session could be more impactful.

I was getting excited to hear from Angela. However the blurred screen made it cumbersome to join in cell phone view.

She shared some really good insider tips. But she wasn’t thorough with her answers in Q&A particularly for international students. The content was at times surface level.