Chart & data interpretation - start with presenting the "facts"?

Both are wrong! 

You start by presenting the impact in terms of the recommendation. Then you share the insights. And then point out the facts that inform those insights.

This how you should approach exhibit reading:

1. Read the slide by yourself (take your time, ask questions if you need to understand the slide)
2. Consider the case objective when analyzing the slide
3. Tell the impact of the slide in terms of the recommendation
4. Explain the insights and support with the evidence from the slide.

Candidates usually do three mistakes:

1. They just describe what the slide says (e.g. segment X is growing by 10%"). There's no “so what”, no insight".
2. They bring up an insight… but it is unrelated to the problem you are trying to solve.
3. They just don't know what to say.

In all of these situations the real problem is that they are not analyzing the exhibit in the context of the problem they are trying to solve.

So the first question you have to ask yourself is: how does this influence the case recommendation? (e.g. “should we invest in market XYZ”?)? Is this supporting evidence or not? Once you find the supporting evidence, you have an objective-driven insight.

Then when you say: this does (not) support entering market X, because of [insight XYZ], which is based on [ABC evidence/fact]".

Hey there, really good question!

This depends, of course. Generally speaking, I wouldn't jump straight into the insights, because the interviewer wants to understand your thought process. However, I also wouldn't start at pointing out all the facts as they're written on the paper, because you don't want to waste the interviewer's time either.

There is something in between, whereby you “paraphrase” that which is shown and highlight the facts in a synthesized and sophisticated way (I say “paraphrase” because it reminds me a lot of case prompts, where candidates often start repeating word for word as opposed to synthesizing).

Once you have done this, could be anywhere between 5-20 seconds, you quickly move to insights and show the interviewer how you connect the two.

Hope this helps a bit! Best of luck!

Hi there,

Most answers lie somewhere in between :)

What you certainly need to avoid is just regurgitating the chart/exhibit and reading it word for word. You also need to avoid just stating an insight without logic/explanation.

Ultimately, you need to share and insight, and explain how you came to the insight from the exhibit.

Make sense?

Hello!

We cannot give you a categorical answer here, since it depends. 

There is nothing wrong in having a first part in which you describe what you see, which doesn´t mean reading it literally, and then providing your interpretation. 

Furthermore, I think it´s rather unrealistic thinking that you can start always with the point and key take aways, without hving some time to digest and interpret what you have in front. 

Hope it helps!

Cheers, 

Clara