Schedule mock interviews on the Meeting Board, join the latest community discussions in our Consulting Q&A and find like-minded Interview Partners to connect and practice with!
Back to overview

How should I structure hypotheses in case interviews?

Hello Experts and Community, I need your help and support with the following

In case interviews, is it better to have one overarching hypothesis from the start or to form and adjust specific hypotheses for each bucket as you go?


In case interviews, should I:

  1. State one initial high-level hypothesis at the start, then present my framework, or
  2. State a specific hypothesis for each bucket as I go deeper?

For example, I might start with a broad hypothesis about the root cause or opportunity, then refine or replace it as I explore each bucket (profitability, market, operations, etc.). I’ve heard BCG favors hypothesis-driven thinking, but I’m unsure if adjusting and restating hypotheses throughout is best practice.

How do you approach this across all case types? and what is the best way to communicate it ?

Thanks

3
< 100
0
Be the first to answer!
Nobody has responded to this question yet.
Top answer
Julia
Coach
on Aug 09, 2025
30% OFF 1st Session in August | Ex-McKinsey Engagement Manager in US and Europe | 3 years+ interviewer | Columbia MBA

Hello!! You should do 1 & 2 together for the best answer for any case type. I like when candidates start with one big-picture hypothesis and then sharpen it as they dig in each bucket. 

The key is that when new data changes the story, it us important to realize so and link it back to the original thread.

This shows you’re structured and flexible (what MBB likes to see!) :)

Pallav
Coach
on Aug 09, 2025
Non-target expert | Ex-BCG | >200 cases

Use both — start with one overarching hypothesis, then adapt and refine sub-hypotheses within each bucket as you gather data.

Why:
 

  • Overarching hypothesis: Shows direction from the start (“We should/shouldn’t enter Market A because of X, Y, Z”) and frames the case around a clear goal.
  • Sub-hypotheses: Keep your thinking dynamic. Each bucket in your framework (e.g., market size, profitability, capabilities, risks) should be tested with its own working hypothesis.
  • Iterative refinement: BCG loves hypothesis-driven thinking, but that also means being comfortable evolving your hypothesis as new evidence emerges.
     

Example:
 

  • Start: “My initial hypothesis is that entering Market A could close the profit gap due to cross-selling opportunities and strong demand.”
  • Bucket level: “Within market sizing, my sub-hypothesis is that the addressable segment is large enough to meet our revenue target.”
  • As you get data: “Given the high competitor saturation, my initial hypothesis may no longer hold — I’d like to pivot to exploring profitability levers in the existing business.”

Best practice for communication:

  1. Lead with a clear initial hypothesis.
  2. Explain your structure/framework.
  3. Test each bucket with sub-hypotheses.
  4. Update your overarching hypothesis out loud when evidence contradicts it — this shows flexibility, not indecision.
     

Tip: Treat your hypothesis like a working theory, not a fixed conclusion. They want to see you actively prove or disprove it, just like in a real client engagement.

Kevin
Coach
on Aug 09, 2025
1st session -50% | Ex-McKinsey | Ex-BCG | MBB Germany | PEI Expert | CV & Cover Letter Review | FREE 15min intro call!

Hi there,

In most cases, you’ll get the strongest impression if you treat hypotheses like a zoom lens: start with a wide shot, then tighten the focus as you move through your framework.

  1. Start broad — Frame a single high-level hypothesis at the outset to give direction (“I believe X is happening because of Y and Z”).
  2. Drill down — For each bucket, form a targeted sub-hypothesis that tests one key driver. This keeps your analysis anchored while allowing flexibility.
  3. Link back — Whenever you confirm or disprove a sub-hypothesis, explicitly connect the finding to your main hypothesis. This turns your case into a coherent story rather than a list of disconnected analyses.
  4. Evolve openly — If the evidence shifts your main hypothesis, state that pivot clearly and explain why. This shows adaptability and active problem-solving.

In interviewer-led cases, the next step is usually guided for you, so you’ll focus more on sharpening sub-hypotheses within the path given. In interviewee-led cases, you control the navigation — choosing which hypothesis to explore next, in what depth, and at what moment. The core skill is to keep both the big picture and the bucket-level thinking alive regardless of format.

Practicing this nested approach builds the reflex of keeping the “big picture” alive while still thinking critically in each bucket. That is exactly the balance MBB interviewers are looking for. For more info or targeted practice, please feel free to reach out via DM.

Kind regards,
Kevin

Similar Questions
Consulting
CraftingCases: Hypothesis Testing (Case Interview Fundamentals Course)?
on Sep 19, 2024
Global
4
2.1k
52
4 Answers
2.1k Views
Consulting
After joining MBB, should I continue casing to sharpen my consulting skill?
on Oct 04, 2024
Global
6
1.2k
74
6 Answers
1.2k Views
Consulting
Any Tutors That Follow the CraftingCases Methodology?
on Oct 17, 2024
Global
5
1.3k
56
5 Answers
1.3k Views
Show more