25,647Leland Reviews

It was very clear to me why she is 150 and the other coaches are 400. Despite having worked at KKR she did not seem to know the most basic things about other funds and her input was not very valuable. I was not learning anything new. The session recap notes were cute but not helpful at all.

- Feedback was generic, poorly thought out and hardly actionable -- For example suggested revisions to my intro story, and said that it needed to be shortened -- When I asked what he suggested he literally just read of details from my CV said that I should present myself as such, i.e., just repeating what is already on my CV -- This is extremely poor - Also conflated details from my deals in the feedback and in his suggestions for how restructure answer, giving the impression he was not engaged and not making any effort to actually help me

For context, I am a non-traditional applicant considering grad school after working for 10 years with a lower undergraduate GPA than one would want for highly competitive programs (3.49 overall; 3.8 in major). I scheduled introductory meetings with 5 advisors, one of whom was Kenneth, in order to better understand what work I'll need to do to create a competitive application. Of the 5, Kenneth was the only one who charged a fee for the introductory meeting, which I assumed was an indication of his level of expertise and professionalism. Unfortunately, I was extremely disappointed by his demeanor and coaching ability compared to the other 4 advisors I met with. For example, when discussing my GPA, all the other advisors asked follow-up questions such as "The classes that lowered your GPA related to the program you're applying to?" and "Were there anything extenuating circumstances in your life at that time (medical emergencies, etc.) that can help explain it?", and then suggested concrete actions I could take to help improve my application. Kenneth simply said that my top choices were unlikely and strongly encouraged me to apply elsewhere. When I pressed him further about what I could do now to compensate for my GPA, like taking additional classes for graduate credit or working on research projects, Kenneth said "Look, I'm not a miracle worker." His attitude was that my undergraduate grades are an insurmountable obstacle and also said that he wasn't "like other coaches who will just tell you what you want to hear" - implying that the other coaches on Leland are willing to mislead their clients. I think Kenneth had good intentions and truly believed what he was telling me, but there is a line between being realistic and being unnecessarily discouraging. I don't need to pay someone to tell me that getting into a program will be extremely challenging; I already knew that. There were a few other minor points I found unprofessional - he arrived slightly late and appeared distracted by other things on his computer at points throughout the meeting, especially at the beginning - but it was mainly the "I'm not a miracle worker" comment and the implication about other coaches that I took issue with. I am so grateful that Kenneth is not the only advisor I met with, or else my entire perspective on what is possible might have been severely skewed. My advice to anyone reading this would be to schedule a few introductory meetings with different advisors and carefully consider different perspectives and opinions.

I had an extremely disappointing experience with Lorenzo. I scheduled four separate training sessions with him, and every single time he failed to show up. This happened despite the fact that I messaged him in advance to confirm the sessions. This shows a complete lack of respect for other people’s time. Consistently missing scheduled sessions without explanation is unprofessional and unacceptable, especially for someone who claims to be a trainer. Professionalism and discipline are the basics of teaching or training others. Unfortunately, Lorenzo demonstrates neither. If someone cannot manage their own commitments, it’s hard to understand how they can expect to teach others how to improve themselves.

I was initially excited to work with Brian because of his experience and stated sensitivity to neurodiverse learners. I had a great consultation with him, and he was generous with his time during our first paid session with an at-length intake of where I’m at. Afterward, I reached out with a simple request for a couple of actionable tips so I could stay engaged and productive between sessions. In response, Brian sent a series of messages that were unexpectedly disparaging and personal. He made accusations about my motivation and approach, listing “red flags” about me that did not reflect the tone or content of our single session at all. The shift in tone from constructive to criticism, as well as volume of his messages over the following days was not at all appropriate for a professional coaching relationship. My limited experience with Brian did not reflect the supportive, tailored method he advertises and left me uncomfortable continuing. I would not recommend him for learners seeking a respectful, patient teaching approach.

The session was scheduled to start at 6:30 PM, but unfortunately Zul did not show up. I'm not sure if there was a mix-up with the time, but I was really looking forward to it. Hoping to reconnect and reschedule soon!

I don't mind toughness and being held accountable, but I don't appreciate being talked down to. I felt that she had no confidence in my maths ability and that in turn affected my confidence and performance.

He inexplicably stopped responding to messages and I couldn’t get refunded by the platform.

Not sure what is the issue here but a courtesy message would've gone a long way to let me know he wasn't attending after the first reschedule message.

I was expecting this session to be detailed practical guidance but it was too generic and no market specific path is displayed, not worth the money