For context, I've just started learning frameworks and only have 6 days until my interview (Yikes, I know). I would say I'm naturally good at problem-solving but am having a really hard time using frameworks for cases. I have found that I can analyze a case best by determining every potential factor, identifying the most important ones, and grouping like factors together and presenting it that way. With that method, I'd say my topics align with the answer about 80% of the way, but they are definetly presented very differently. I know strcture is very big deal, so my question is is that structured enough or should I put more effort into understanding frameworks?
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
Be the first to answer!
Nobody has responded to this question yet.
Hi there,
It’s not a bad idea at all: in fact, what you’re doing is exactly what frameworks are meant to teach. The point isn’t to memorize “profitability” or “market entry” buckets, it’s to show that you can structure a messy problem into clear, logical areas. If you can naturally break issues down, prioritize, and explain why you’re looking at certain factors, that’s already structured thinking.
That said, in the next 6 days it’s worth practicing a handful of common frameworks so you’re fluent in the language interviewers expect. Think of them as training wheels — you don’t have to use them verbatim, but they help you stay MECE (mutually exclusive, collectively exhaustive) and make your approach easier to follow.
Hope this helps!
You are doing it the right way.
By the way, one watch out regarding materials - most materials out there don't provide a good answer (and have terrible structures), i.e., aligning with the suggested answer doesn't necessarily mean your answer is good. Most likely, it guarantees your answer is quite weak. Exception here being preplounge - cases are not always realistic and tend to be overly quantitative, but in general at least the answers and approaches make sense.
You are thinking independently - that means you are already ahead of everyone who tries to use frameworks in a systematic way. Additionally, you won't sound like everyone else. Which will confirm to the interviewer that you are not just mindlessly reciting some framework you read on a book.
Congratulations!
So I don't know exactly where you are and how well you handle structuring, but based on your description, yes, I would throw them out the window.
First, frameworks are like training wheels that mostly get in the way. I always warn people about using them in interviews nowadays.
Second, it sounds like you already have a sense of how to structure based on first principles and just your own common sense. This is a great toolkit to rely on. You might want to think though, if you still have the frameworks at the back of your mind, whether anything from those frameworks would be useful to bring into your current structures. That's as useful as they can become.
You might also want to read this:
Best,
Cristian
Hi there,
You don’t need to memorize frameworks to succeed. In fact, McKinsey and other top firms prefer when candidates build tailored structures rather than force-fitting a “4Ps” or “profitability” model. What interviewers really care about is:
- Are your thoughts structured and MECE (mutually exclusive, collectively exhaustive)?
- Can you group drivers logically so it’s clear how you’ll tackle the problem?
- Do you prioritize the most relevant areas instead of listing everything?
The method you describe—laying out all possible factors, grouping them, then focusing on the key ones—is actually exactly how strong candidates approach cases. If you can communicate it clearly (3–4 top buckets with sub-bullets), it will look structured to the interviewer, even if it doesn’t follow a textbook framework.
With 6 days, focus less on memorizing frameworks and more on practicing how to:
- Break down problems into 3–4 buckets
- Label those buckets clearly and top-down
- Tie them back to the client’s objective
That will feel natural, keep you structured, and avoid the risk of sounding robotic.
Happy to help you prep – feel free to reach out!
Best,
Evelina
Hi there,
It's really hard to know whether your style is structured "enough" without actually witnessing how you put your framework together and present it...
Either way, 80% is a very good number. I suggest you work with 1-2 coaches and ask them whether they would pass you to be more sure.
I'd spend the time making sure that your logic is strong and you are demonstrating good business judgment when building out your own framework.
Whether or not to 'throw frameworks out' - if you can only use existing 'frameworks' without tailoring it or applying your thinking on the spot, then yes it's better not to memorize or read up more.
But if you can use existing frameworks to help you think of ways to structure your own answer (and apply thinking on the spot), it may not be a bad way given you have limited time.
Consulting firms use frameworks all the time - every practice/topic area has an approach or framework... BUT in reality you never use it straight out of the box so to say and have to always tweak certain aspects to the client context. No different here.
hey
Your approach, listing factors, grouping them, and prioritizing, is structured enough if you clearly communicate your logic. Frameworks are helpful but not mandatory; focus on clarity, prioritization, and hypothesis-driven thinking. Signpost your process to show structure.
alessa
Sign up for free to read all answers.
Sign up for free to read all answers.
