We've been reading applications and spending a lot of time thinking and discussing both individual files and building a summer program for this group for next year. The applications are simply great - everything we hoped for and plenty of them.

This is probably an opportune time to address another frequently asked question: "Is Harvard Business School looking for a younger class?"

Here's how the incoming class looks: we have 912 people expected to matriculate in September. 371 of these are what we call "within three years of college graduation" which means that they have graduated in 2008, 2007, 2006 and 2005. We keep track this way, not by age. About a dozen are coming right from undergraduate school - and another dozen were admitted directly from college but elected to delay matriculation in order to get some - or additional - full-time work experience. Many of the directly admitted college seniors have worked full-time already - all have had significant roles on campus or entrepreneurial experience. All directly admitted seniors are welcome to postpone their date of matriculation.

Back to the class profile and the original question. Do the numbers and I think you'll find that 541 members of the class of 2010 have been out of college for more than 3 years. That's more than the total enrollment in many business schools.

Are these numbers "quotas" or "targets"? No. We'll still do our evaluation and selection the old-fashioned way: one folder at a time. Lots of attention to the written application and mandatory interviews by invitation only. We ask the same questions about every candidate we consider: Is this person a leader? Does he/she give evidence of ability to engage enthusiastically in serious intellectual and analytical work? Will this person invest as much in the educational experience of others as in his/her own?

So the answer would be that we think you can come to Harvard Business School and thrive earlier in your career than you might have heard via the grapevine. That doesn't mean that those with more experience should be discouraged: apply when it's optimal for you. When you can look at the questions we pose and feel eager to respond, that's a good indication of readiness.

Back to the 2+2 files... enjoy summer and watch our website for our information session dates and locations. As always, I hope this is helpful.

That's really all I need to say but here's a quick note:

Please keep in mind that while it's wonderful to finally hit that "submit" button, we only begin to review applications after the October 15 Round One deadline. The Admissions Board has no knowledge of whether you submitted your application today or in October. To put it another way, we consider applications in three distinct decision rounds; within rounds, it is not a "rolling" admissions process.

Something will be lost without the visuals - in person, I do a combination of a wince and a sympathetic shrug because the answer is: "gee, I don't know - but I understand how anxious this issue makes you and I will try to help". Let me back into the question and tell you how we review the recommendations. All written applications are read by the Admissions Board. All the materials you submit are compiled into folders and circulated to Board members for their comments. Your three recommendations, of course, are included.

The first thing I do when I read a recommendation is to ascertain how the recommender knows the candidate. Have they worked closely? When? In what context? Then I move to the actual responses to the questions we pose. Has the recommender taken the time and care to answer the actual questions? The Board puts a great deal of thought into these questions and we value a direct response. This is different from asking for a standard format "letter of reference" which, in most cases, would be 100% praise.

We don't expect the ratings grid to be all at the extreme positive end of the scale. It's hard to imagine the value of a Harvard education for someone who is "perfect". We prefer our candidates to be "normal" with opportunities for growth and development.

We are very pleased with the wording of the question: "what constructive feedback have you given the applicant?" We are finding this yields responses that are more productive than language around "weaknesses" or "areas for improvement" which can be manipulated to look like strengths, i.e. "Sally simply doesn't know how to stop working at 100%". Actually, that would be a real weakness, but you can imagine that it is meant to have a positive spin.

When it comes to "who should I select as my recommender?", there is no right answer or prescription. Candidates simply must use common sense and trust that we on the Admissions Board are reasonable and understanding. There are many successful candidates who are unable to provide recommenders from current supervisors. Also there are many candidates who are new to companies or roles and the current supervisor would not be able to be very helpful. We get it. Make your best judgment call and stop worrying. If we are struggling with understanding why a strong candidate made a curious choice of recommenders, we'll ask you - either we'll pick up the phone or we'll ask you during the interview. It is also not uncommon for us to pick up the phone and call a recommender for clarification. A simple test might be that if a recommender doesn't know you well enough to answer the questions we pose, he/she is not a good choice.

College seniors: don't be hesitant to ask for recommendations from college professors with whom you have worked closely. We do not expect you to have the same relationships in the professional world as those who are applying from the work force.

Now that I've tried to reassure you that choosing recommenders shouldn't be stressful, here are a couple of categories that I'd have to call "not a good idea". I have rarely seen a helpful recommendation from a fifth grade piano teacher. Likewise, family members simply cannot be viewed as objective enough for this task. We are very eager to see candidates from family businesses, but you should find recommenders who can substantiate your role and contributions who are not your relatives. This year we will be, for the first time, openly discouraging of informal input from current HBS students which are submitted outside of the three required recommendations. Of course we value their opinions and are deeply appreciative of their efforts to find wonderful new admits to the MBA Program. However, it is not comfortable to send any signal that those who are not fortunate enough to count HBS students as friends or former colleagues are in any way disadvantaged in the admissions process.

As usual, I hope this level of candor is helpful.