This podcast explains why neatness and writing style is so important. It is really surprising how little care candidates take in writing in an appealing way, considering that is all the interviewer can see for the 30-45 minute case. Neat writing will not get you an offer, but it can be an annoying distraction both to you and the interviewer.
Entering BBM with a weak school on your resume can create problems. Though, all of them tend to be created by the candidates themselves. These consultants tend to have so many incorrect preconceived ideas of the firm that even when a McKinsey partner tells them something, they tend to go with their preconceived ideas. As strange as that may sound, that is what we have seen happen in many cases. There are certain things you can do this alter this spiral, should it occur.
As counter-intuitive as this sounds, mathematical precision in cases hurts most candidates. Many candidates focus heavily on being mathematically correct because it is far easier to see if your answer of $230MM is the same as the prescribed answer of $250MM. It is human nature to focus on what can be easily measured versus focusing on what should be measured. Candidates tend to confuse mathematical precision with being analytic. They are not the same and candidates should focus on being analytic...
If you read forums worldwide everyone is obsessed with cracking the case. Yet, most people cannot communicate like a consultant. We hope by reading this post, candidates spend an equal, if not more, time focusing on their communication skills as well. If you cannot speak like a consultant, you cannot be a consultant.
We are not fans of case competitions. They do not teach the skills need by BCG and McKinsey nor do they matter when it comes to interviews. The dean of a European business school recently gave us carte-blanche to design the perfect case competition. This long podcast outlines the approach we took and why we followed this approach.
The rise of Asian female doctoral case candidates is one of the most important trends in management consulting. This is a large and dynamic group of case candidates who are underrepresented in consulting firms, poorly mentored and largely ignored. Consulting firms can do better to manage them, and should. We explain how and why. Since late 2011, Firmsconsulting has actively worked with PhD candidates, females in particular, to understand their unique needs and design techniques to address these ...
Candidates are typically surprised to hear they have been declined for not providing sufficient details in a case interview. It usually surprises them since they believe they have provided more than enough case information detail. The difference comes down to how consulting firms define "detail". They are looking for facts and the relationships between issues, while candidates tend to speak in broader terms and are not very good at identifying and explaining the linkages between issues.
When thinking through a possible FIT / PEI or cover letter response, most candidates settle on the first idea that comes to mind. Future edits of this idea do not alter the idea, but merely rearrange the wording. That is a bad idea. We use the so-what rule when testing candidates. For their responses we constantly ask "so-what" until the candidate arrives at the core reason for their decision / answer. That core reason is what we want candidates to use.
That is true. It is myth interviewers do not hate frameworks in case interviews. Interviewers dislike the way the framework is introduced and used by the candidate. Most candidates memorize a framework, look at a case, see the loose link between both and gladly offer the framework without a proper explanation or even making adjustment to the framework. The best approach is to brainstorm unique structures for each case. However, where this is tough to do, candidates should take time to carefully ...
Your case practice partner is the most important ally you have as you prepare. The problem is that most people completely squander this advantage. They tend to be unclear about their level of preparation and commitment they are willing to make. Many arrive late to practice sessions, prepare poorly and fail to keep track of their partners performance. When a practice partners breaks contact, you are left in the position of having to transfer all that important insight about yourself to a new prac...
Candidates sometimes prefer to be cautious and offer a solution earlier rather than waiting to fully flesh out the drivers and key issues in a case. The problem with this approach is that if you offer a solution before identifying the problem, it raises concerns to the interviewer about your thinking processes - how can you offer a solution before identifying the problem? This podcast describes this issue in much more detail.
In brainstorming the interviewer is looking for your approach to define an objective function, understand the direct drivers of the function, prioritize the drivers and explain how to manipulate them. There is only one definition for productivity and that is formally used in all studies. Productivity is the total value of outputs over the total cost to deliver those outputs. Other definitions are derivations which assess narrow areas only. A candidate will struggle to understand operations cases...
Merging the BCG and McKinsey approach, elegantly. This is a simple discussion on how to merge both approaches so you do not need to worry about learning different techniques. One caveat, as explained in latter podcasts is to assume there is just a simple BCG and simple McKinsey style. It is dangerous to make this assumption. About 50% to 60% of McKinsey cases cannot be solved with any framework at all. Most McKinsey cases require an hypotheses upfront, but not all, and they almost all interviewe...
Candidates always want to show improvement on their resumes in the months leading up to their applications. For those working in industry or rival consulting firms, showing leadership and career development is crucial. This podcast explains that career rotation, a lateral move at the same pay grade, is rarely a good idea unless it takes you to a part of the business where you can show leadership in solving a major problem. Career progression, a promotion to a new pay grade, always looks good on ...
We always teach clients estimation technique first, followed by brainstorming technique and finally full case technique. There is a simple reason for this, which is explained in this podcast. Estimations tend to be, but not always, a brainstorm with very few or just one branch. A brainstorm is therefore an estimation equation with multiple branches. A full case structure is a very large brainstorm with mini-brainstorms at each new branch. We want candidates to see this evolution so they can unde...
If you are thinking through responses to leadership and teamwork questions, the starting point should be knowing the differences between both. At its core, to McKinsey especially, leadership is about influencing a group people to undertake and complete an initiative of importance. Yet, a better definition is that as the leader you tend to be the primary beneficiary of what is happening since you get the credit. As a great team member, you do much of the work but you do not get the great. Ensure ...
Over the course of the case interview training program, it becomes very important for us to change our coaching style. First, candidates become used to solving cases in just this one style and we need to ensure they can adapt to any style. Second, candidates become adept at reading the "tell" in the coach/mentor so they know when they, the candidate, is making a mistake etc. By changing our coaching style and introducing mentors, we can easily avoid this problem and ensure candidates are becomin...
Most candidates would tackle a McKinsey profitability case by presenting a revenue-cost framework and offer options to lower costs and increase revenue. The reality is that such a framework and explanation shows a deep misunderstanding of business and business strategy. In this podcast, we present the correct way to understand profitability cases which require candidates to understand the growth and cost of growth needs of shareholders. This logic never fails to impress interviewers.
This podcast provides a simple set of priority areas that a novice aspiring consultant should focus upon in the building up to the MBA full-time September interviews. It ties together themes from existing podcasts but presents them in the format of a case interview preparation roadmap.
Brainstorming is very difficult and a crucial skill to have when solving cases, especially with McKinsey where the interviewer will constantly ask you to probe and brainstorm different areas of the case. This podcast examines the initial parts of the brainstorming structure. Since brainstorming happens in such a rapid-fire format and appears unstructured, the speed at which it is done creates the illusion it lacks structures. Yet, it does have structure, but is merely done very quickly in the ca...
Candidates good through a lot of trouble finding practice partners and reaching out to current and former consultants. We do, however, find that despite all of this effort, they tend to be very weak at the manner in which they capture valuable lessons. There is far too little planning and it is largely a trial and error process. They reach out to 10 people hoping that at least 3 will provide great feedback and possibly 7 will provide some feedback. We find the best candidates have a list of item...
In this podcast we examine the performance of our clients to isolate best practices you can use in your own math calculations in cases. The best practices focus heavily on the types of math calculations where the candidate must structure an analyses approach, estimation cases, and is then either given data or must make assumptions to arrive at a final answer.
This podcast is about the importance of you, the candidate, never ever giving the interviewer the benefit of the doubt, why this is vital, how to do this in a case and the improvement it will immediately deliver. The main value of adopting this mindset is that you tend to explain everything to the interviewer because you assume he is not aware of all the answers. If you enter an interview, assuming the interview is "perfect" you will tend to make assumptions which hurt your chances and damage yo...
This podcast is about the impact of confidence on cases and the importance of avoiding the content trap. We use simple ratios to explain why you need to be confident and how the content-trap sinks many candidates. The content trap occurs when a candidate tends to have poor knowledge of the first principles of cases and rather relies on completing as many cases as possible in the hopes of memorizing all possible frameworks. This is a losing strategy since they are not learning how to solve cases.
Analyzing customers, competitors and the market: 3 areas which must always be considered in cases, even when it is not clear why. In essence, all businesses exist to serve customers. A business cannot exist without customers and to understand demand you must understand customers. The ability to meet demand is impacted by competitors/substitutes and market barriers like legislation, inflation etc. Therefore, these three areas must be analyzed in cases where demand may be an issue.
The importance of starting estimation cases from a known versus unknown variable cannot be underestimated. This may sound like a strange piece of advice, but makes a monumental difference on the ease of calculations and sanity-checking at the end. Moreover, simple probability theory indicates you dramatically increase your chances of getting a correct answer at the end if you begin your equation with a known variable.
Candidates mess up calculations for 4 primary reasons: missing units, complicated equations, weak visual layout and poor technique. Notice that we ignore speed and arithmetic. There is a reason for that and it is discussed in the podcast. The most surprising one of the lot is missing units. We have trained PhDs who graduated first in their schools and many tend to drop units thereby producing meaningless answers. These are all simple mistakes but the impact is substantial.
Despite the words “framework” and “structure” used so often, most candidates cannot explain what it is and why it is used. Unless you know the latter, you tend to misuse the framework and incorrectly use it in a case. This podcast presents the need for case structures from the viewpoint of the interviewer or engagement partner. It indicates that case structures are not there merely to guide you, but to guide the person guiding you. And if you extend this to its logical conclusion, if the framewo...
We find many candidates drown in feedback. They want as much good feedback as possible and speak to as many people as possible thereby receiving lots of detailed and sometimes average feedback on their performance. There are two problems here. First, much of this feedback will likely be contradictory and possibly misleading. Second, the candidate will literally drown in this feedback usually consisting of a 2-page list of improvement areas. We expect our candidates to always prioritize the top 3...
Candidates sometimes divulge too much confidential details, or too little in interviews, resumes, cover letters and LinkedIn profiles. These are the rules for disclosure. It is important to remember that disclosing confidential information merely indicates to McKinsey that you cannot be trusted with their own client information. Moreover, disclosing information on your resume and hiding it from your LinkedIn merely means you are aware of the ethical breach you are making. It is important to avoi...
