Every January, CAT aspirants begin with a sense of urgency. New books arrive, past papers are downloaded, and students dive straight into problem-solving. Questions. Sets. Mocks. Even more questions.
The rhythm looks undeniably productive and scratches the itch of momentum.
But the risk with this approach is that aspirants end up preparing for the exam they think CAT is, rather than the exam it actually turns into once the clock starts. They work harder, yet their performance stays stubbornly inconsistent because the exam is filtering for a greater skill than most realise, something much more fundamental.
CAT tests choices, not techniques: How well a student can judge what to attempt and what to avoid, how quickly they can recognise when they are heading in the wrong direction, and how calmly they can realign under pressure.
Knowing what choices to make comes from reading situations accurately and responding without panic. When students misunderstand this, preparation becomes a race rather than a discipline.
Prof Vasanth Kamath V P, Associate Dean - Academics, at T A Pai Management Institute (TAPMI), sees this pattern every year. “Many aspirants believe CAT is a test of speed or how many questions they can attempt,” he says.
He explains that this is where strong profiles begin to falter. Students with excellent academic backgrounds can underperform simply because they refuse to let go of difficult questions.
“Candidates with slightly lower ability but better judgement, who identify their strengths early, skip wisely, and manage time calmly tend to do far better. This ability to make rational choices under stress is exactly what we look for in future managers.” he reveals.
Understanding this changes how aspirants should think about the year ahead. Instead of beginning with speed or attempting large quantities of questions, the first step is to build the behaviours that support good judgement.
These behaviours are slow to develop but powerful once absorbed. They influence how a student reads a passage, how they solve a puzzle, how they approach a variable-heavy QA question, and how they react when a section does not go according to plan. Preparation becomes a way of training the mind to recognise patterns, filter noise, and stabilise under constraints.
These skills carry forward into the post-CAT stages as well, where clarity and structure matter more than fluency. Panels respond to how candidates organise thoughts, not to the number of ideas they produce. Prof Kamath notes this difference clearly.
“Good communication is about clarity and coherence, and not vocabulary or fluency,” he says. Strong candidates begin by stating their position, then explain their reasoning with a grounded example. Weaker candidates speak at length without structure or rely on jargon that collapses under follow up questions. What stands out in interviews is not perfection but steadiness.
“Panels are far more impressed by a candidate who pauses, listens carefully, and responds in a clear, organised manner even if the language is simple,” he explains.
The ability to structure thoughts does not appear overnight. It is the result of deliberate early habits that compound for months. One of the simplest and most effective is regular reading with summarisation. Prof Kamath has watched this transform interview performance. “Candidates who read editorials and then summarise them in a few lines learn to identify core arguments quickly,” he says.
Over time, they become comfortable presenting a balanced view on complex topics within a minute. This habit directly strengthens WAT responses and PI answers, because it trains students to focus on what truly matters in any piece of information.
Another differentiator is how students handle feedback. Many work hard, attend coaching sessions, take mocks and analyse errors. But effort alone does not guarantee progress. Reflection determines how far the effort goes.
Prof Kamath recalls two students with similar profiles and work ethic. One spent time understanding each piece of feedback and adjusted his method.
The other continued practising while defending his existing approach. Months later, the contrast was clear. The first student grew in clarity and confidence, while the second plateaued. “Improvement comes from reflection and adaptability, not effort alone,” he says.
More than chasing speed or high volumes, the challenge is to build the mental conditions that allow good decisions. A student who reads regularly builds stamina for VARC. A student who summarises arguments becomes sharper in WAT and interviews.
A student who reviews mistakes without defensiveness grows faster than one who protects old habits. These actions create the judgment that CAT rewards under time pressure, and they prepare students for the kind of thinking expected in management classrooms, where the ability to articulate, adapt, and choose wisely matters more than how much one knows at the beginning.
With CAT 2026 roughly ten months away, there is time to train judgment early so that when the exam arrives, choices become sharper, reactions become calmer, and performance becomes more stable. That is where strong CAT attempts come from, and that is where the year ahead should begin.
