Case structure: comprehensive vs. simple?

Question

I have been taking “Crafting Cases” online course for a while. The course quality is great but the case structure examples are usually very "comprehensive".

In my case prep, sometimes I get feedback that my case structure is not “prioritized” enough and covers too much topic. For instance, in an M&A case, to assess the target I included a bucket discussing whether the target can maintain its competitive edge. My case partner said I should directly jump into calculating the potential profit of the target instead.

In a nutshell, my question is:

1) What would be the ideal timing to present a case structure? Is 2.5 - 3 min too much?

2) Is it better to be comprehensive (of course, being relevant at the same time), or should I try to keep the case structure as simple and streamlined as possible (only covering critical areas)?

Answer 1

Hey there,

It depends.

For most firms / candidate-led interviews, shorter is better. See the answers for that by Pedro or Ian.

For McKinsey / interviewer-led cases, it's different as you need to demonstrate exhaustive and creative structures. At the core, McKinsey wants to see creative ideas communicated in a structured manner, the more exhaustive the better.

Your goal should be to come up with a tailored and creative answer that fits the question. The framework should - broadly speaking - follow these three characteristics:

Broad
Deep
Insightful

You can take a couple of minutes to guide the interviewer through your approach. For McKinsey specifically, I have written this article that explains it in a bit more detail: https://www.preplounge.com/en/mckinsey-interview

Cheers,

Florian

Answer 2

Your structures needs to be MECE - which is another word for comprehensive (somewhat).

Your issue appears slightly different - it is around customisation of the framework in accordance with the case. Most candidates when they make a ‘comprehensive’ framework - they go too generic. Product, pricing, promotion, customer, competition etc. etc. This is not how it should be done.

Your frameworks need to be customised around the client in the case. e.g.

‘mobile phones’ instead of ‘products’,
‘selling price of a phone' instead of ‘price of products’
‘number of mobiles sold’ instead of ‘volume’
etc. etc.

The second issue I believe is around over-engineering the comprehensiveness of the structure. And this will get resolved by tackling the above customisation problem. If you are making generic frameworks - you will err on the side of excessive buckets and details. If you customise your thinking - you will be able to eliminate some of the issues already based on case facts and hypotheses.

NOW, answering your 2 sub-questions:

Ideal time to present structure: 2-min max. Anything longer and you need to practice your pyramid principle discipline.
What should you do: You need to be simple, streamlined, comprehensive, and relevant. Thats the hallmark of a good caser.

Answer 3

1. More than 2 minutes is too long…

2. The issue here is that a lot of times candidates are being generic. They are very comprehensive as they are trying to cover everything because they don't know what they really want to cover…

In a real case, you want to be efficient. It's not about covering everything. It's about covering what is really needed in order to be able to make a decision with a good degree of confidence. Let me stress again: it's the information that will lead you to make a decision.

Answer 4

Hi there,

The answer to this question (and any written response regarding structuring/frameworking) is incredibly nuanced - just note that a verbal explanation is generally best here.

1) What would be the ideal timing to present a case structure? Is 2.5 - 3 min too much?

Generally speaking yes. Try to keep it to 2 min. There are a lot of ways to get more concise in your articulation (one technique, say “for example” and just list!)

2) Is it better to be comprehensive (of course, being relevant at the same time), or should I try to keep the case structure as simple and streamlined as possible (only covering critical areas)?

It is better to be objective-driven. Every single thing you say should clearly be about solving your objective. If you can't say why it's there and how it will get you closer to answering the problem, it shouldn't be there.

This takes a lot of practice, so patience as you drive towards this!

Answer 5

Hi!

1) 2.5-3 min is ok for structuring and exposing it. Sometimes you might need more, sometimes less.

2) It's better to be comprehensive and concise :)

Hope this helps.

Best,

Anto

Answer 6

Hello!

To your questions:

Yes, indeed, that is a good proxi. However, don´t get obsessed about this either, since there are also complex cases with follow-up questions in which you are supposed to take a bit longer than that
MECE and as comprehensive as you can (which is not the same as noisy and crowded)

Hope it helps!

Cheers,

Clara

Answer 7

You need to priortise AND be comprehensive, just like you would on a real consulting project. Presenting your structuring should never be a monologue but an initial 2.5-3 min presentation sounds about right.