What was the IIM Sambalpur online PI experience like on March 16, and how do baby IIMs conduct interviews?

For a candidate who appeared for the IIM Sambalpur online PI on March 16, the session lasted approximately 15 minutes with two male panelists in their 20s–30s. The interview covered technical questions on digital modulation types, SCR, and zener diodes — directly tied to the candidate's ECE background — before moving into general knowledge territory: newspapers, Iran's leadership, and MBA specialization interests. The candidate's overall impression was that the questions felt more aligned with MTech admissions than an MBA process, and the experience came across as unprofessional.

This experience isn't isolated. From what we've tracked across student conversations, baby IIMs — Sambalpur, Amritsar, and others in that tier — follow a broadly consistent pattern when it comes to interview conduct. The picture that emerges is that these interviews function largely as formality checkboxes, with merit lists serving as the primary selection criterion. That framing has come up repeatedly from experienced professionals and recent applicants alike, and we think it's worth taking seriously.

The quality of individual sessions, however, varies considerably. From SPJIMR and IIM-tier alumni perspectives we've encountered, negative experiences in baby IIM PIs aren't rare. One candidate described an Amritsar panelist who became visibly angry and accused them of "bullshitting." Another detailed a Sambalpur interviewer who shouted throughout the session, made false accusations about camera positioning, and displayed obvious frustration. These aren't cherry-picked outliers — we've seen this perspective surface consistently enough to treat it as a structural observation rather than individual bad luck.

The likely explanation is volume. Baby IIMs conduct high-volume interview rounds where panelists are cycling through dozens of candidates, and interviewer fatigue becomes a real factor. In our experience, this creates sessions where engagement is low and the evaluation weight genuinely does sit elsewhere — in CAT scores and academic profile — rather than in what unfolds in those 15 minutes.

That said, the selection methodology for large merit lists does remain opaque. Even candidates who convert these calls aren't always clear on how differentiation happens among qualified applicants beyond written scores. There's no clean answer here, and we won't pretend otherwise.

One practical note worth carrying into any baby IIM interview: avoid revealing your priority list rankings. A useful approach that has worked for candidates is deflecting with something like, "I haven't decided yet. I will decide after results are declared" — which keeps your options open and avoids signalling low intent to a panelist who may use it against you.

The honest summary is this: baby IIM interviews are inconsistent in quality, often more administrative than evaluative, and the experience you have on the day depends heavily on who's sitting across from you. Go in prepared, stay composed, and don't let a disengaged or hostile panelist rattle your assessment of your own candidacy.