BCG R1 Feedback - Unable to cope with ambiguity

Question

Hello PrepLounge Community,

I recently received some feedback from the Project Leader and Partner at the BCG SEA office after being rejected in Round 1. They shared their thoughts on my performance during the interview:

What they liked:

1. They appreciated my clear communication skills and my ability to create a structured approach to tackle the case.

2. They liked my background and thought I understood what it takes to be a consultant.

What they think I could improve:

1. I did not follow the initial structure I proposed to solve the problem. Specifically, I could not pivot to a different branch of the solution tree when my current approach was challenged.

2. As an MBA candidate, they expected me to have more flexibility in my thought process. They felt that I still needed some work to think through ambiguous situations. Their advice was that it's okay to switch courses if my thinking is not leading me to a solution.

3. They considered me coachable but I needed help to adjust course quickly enough. This might be a red flag for handling changing hypotheses in practical situations.

I'd like to know if anyone else has received similar feedback and what they did to improve. A little background about me: I come from a risk consulting background, and I tend to struggle with casing by wanting to explore every possible solution and finding it hard to change my approach when it's not working.

Answer 1

Hi there,

This is super common feedback! Don't worry in the sense that you're not alone - this is the hardest thing to improve and what I work on most with my candidates.

Ultimately, you're struggling with frameworking, being objective-driven, and case leadership.

Here's a bit of reading to help:

https://www.preplounge.com/en/articles/how-to-shift-your-mindset-to-ace-the-case

https://www.preplounge.com/en/articles/candidate-led-cases-what-to-expect-and-example-cases

======AMBIGUITY/FRAMEWORK/CASE LEADERSHIP====

you need to have a hypothesES-driven or, rather, and objective-driven approach. Your entire framework is a set of hypotheses and views as to how to solve a problem.

In my view, the more natural the better. I tend to say things like "My thinking here is x". or "Based on what I know about x and y, I think this'll likely happen" or "My inclination is x".

Please get away from saying any generic, i.e. hypothesis, framework, buckets, clarifying questions, etc.!

This Q&A Describes Better Hypothesis Thinking

https://www.preplounge.com/en/consulting-forum/at-what-point-in-the-case-does-the-interviewee-state-hypothesis-9356

Remember that your framework is essentially a set of hypotheses. That's why I prefer to call this "hypotheses-drive approach" or "objective-driven approach"

You don't need to state it explicitly, but remember that 1) You need to always be thinking about one and 2) You need to be demonstrating your drive towards one.

Also, remember that a hypothesis isn't necessarily "I believe x is the cause". Be better hypothesis is "If we can see what's happening with A, and A is going up, and then we look into B and B is big, then x is likely the case".

A hypothesis is much more about what questions do I need to ask/answer and how, in order to see what's happening.

Another way of viewing it:

Your framework is your structure for approaching the problem. It consits of a few main areas you'd like to look at. Inherent in your framework is a view that "If I answer A, B, and C, then we have an answer"

So, for market entry:

1) If the market is big, and it's growing, then we still want to considering entering

2) If #1 = yes, then let's see if it's attractive...can we win there? Is our product good/better than our competition's? Etc. If yes, let's definitely consider entering.

3) If #1 and #2 = yes, then, when we do enter, are we sure we can win? I.e. do we have the right plans. Will implementation actually pan out? Do we have the expertise, capital, etc.? In other words, if #2 is the thearectical, #3 is the reality.

Then, your summary becomes "I believe we should enter the market, if we can prove it's a good market, the it's attractive to us specifically, and that we will win it".

^Now this is a hypothesis :)

Read these 2 Q&As for some great context + discussion:

https://www.preplounge.com/en/consulting-forum/interviewer-led-case-interview-hyposthesis-and-ideas-7390

https://www.preplounge.com/en/consulting-forum/forming-a-hypothesis-case-in-point-vs-victor-cheng-7311

Hope this helps! This is a tricky topic that's difficult to properly answer in writting...if you want a more thorough explanation, and training in the mindset shift required here, don't hesitate

Answer 2

Hi there,

Sorry to hear it didn't work out but don't give up! As for as rejections go, this is a ‘good' one because they do indeed consider you firm material with a bit of coaching.

Given the above, I would absolutely recommend working with a coach. This will allow you to boost your performance in just a short amount of time.

As for your specific observations, here's some thoughts:

1. I did not follow the initial structure I proposed to solve the problem. Specifically, I could not pivot to a different branch of the solution tree when my current approach was challenged. This is not uncommon and happens for a variety of reasons e.g., interviewer ‘distracts' you, case is going in a different direction, etc. It's actually OK to abandon your structure, so long as you have a good reason to do so and articulate as to why you're doing in (thinking on the spot is a valued skill). In your case, it seems as though you abandoned your structure for no good reason and/or didn't communicate the departure well.

2. As an MBA candidate, they expected me to have more flexibility in my thought process. They felt that I still needed some work to think through ambiguous situations. Their advice was that it's okay to switch courses if my thinking is not leading me to a solution. This links to the above and requires great conceptual skills, which is about connecting the dots and deriving insights/actions from this. This is particularly challenging when there's plenty of dots being thrown at you. In that case, it's important to take a moment to think through your approach. Lots of candidates get nervous and flustered and nothing good will come out of that situation if you don't pause and think.

3. They considered me coachable but I needed help to adjust course quickly enough. This might be a red flag for handling changing hypotheses in practical situations. As I said above, there's plenty of coaches on this platform and I would absolutely recommend you working with one. Don't rely on peer coaching at this point, which only gets you to 70% and not 100%.

If there's anything I can do to help, feel free to reach out.

Best of luck!
Moritz

_______________________________________________________
>> Need a specialized McKinsey coach & mentor?
See my full profile
>> Need real McKinsey cases?
Zero Carbon Mine (hard)
Car Convenience (Intermediate + brand new)

Answer 3

Hello,

I appreciate you sharing your experience, and it's clear that you are on the right track with a positive attitude toward improvement. Receiving feedback is a valuable step in the learning process, and your willingness to address the identified areas is commendable.

Considering your observations:

Pivoting Structure: It's not uncommon for candidates to face challenges in pivoting their approach. Make sure to articulate your thought process clearly when deviating from the initial structure, emphasizing why the adjustment is necessary.

Flexibility in Thought Process: Handling ambiguity is a skill that comes with practice. Work on scenarios with increased uncertainty to enhance your ability to think flexibly. Taking a moment to gather your thoughts during pressure situations can make a significant difference.

Adjusting Course Quickly: Recognizing the need for quick adjustments is crucial. Consider working with a coach who can provide tailored guidance and help you navigate changing hypotheses effectively.

Remember, improvement is a continuous journey. If you'd like to explore further practice or discuss strategies, feel free to reach out. Best of luck in your continued efforts!

Warm regards,

Frederic

Answer 4

Hi there,

Sorry to hear you didn't make to round 2. On the other hand, this is a frequent feedback and it is coachable in general. My advice is you either partner with a consultant or get a coach to guide you on how to improve this feedback.

Happy to keep talking about this in private, just send me a message.

Best,

Alberto

—

Check out my latest case based on a real MBB interview: Sierra Springs

Answer 5

Hi!

First of all, congrats on getting this far and most importantly, getting feedback and understanding it.

That's an amazing sign in and of itself.

In short, it sounds like you're struggling with building first principles-based structures and integrating live the feedback from the interviewer.

Practically, I'd recommend you work with somebody on this - either a coach or a senior consultant that you might know. But this isn't the sort of thing that you can just power through on your own.

Good luck!
Cristian

———————————————

Practicing for interviews? Check out my latest case based on a first-round MBB interview >>> CodeWave