For McKinsey, are clarifying questions only meant to be around explanation of terms or case background/context you didn't understand from the long prompt they read out? I feel there's no point in asking questions about goals, targets, timelines etc. before structuring since its always about “what factors to consider…” They're not withholding or hiding any information that they will only give if you ask the “right” clarifying question, correct? (unlike BCG/Bain type cases)?
McK clarifying qs


Hi there,
This is an important aspect of McKinsey cases and you're generally right. From my perspective, the following makes for a good case flow immediately after the prompt:
DO:
- If needed, ask anything that is unclear from the prompt and will help your general understanding of the situation
- If needed, clarify the overall objective, which is sometimes less explicit and worth confirming
- Great and therefore few candidates manage to paraphrase the situation and confirm missing details in one go and in a very natural and conversational way
AVOID:
- Fish for data e.g. “do we have revenue numbers for this”, “do we have cost data for that”, etc. - especially before answering Q1, which is usually equivalent to an opening framework at other firms
- Poor/average candidates have a very disengaging routine of robotically repeating the prompt (not even paraphrasing) and then asking forced questions because they feel like they have to, which they don't if everything is clear
There may be different opinions about this and it all depends on the case and the interviewer/interviewee dynamic. However, as a general guideline, this should help you.
Best of luck!

Hey there,
You should definitely ask questions for three reasons, even in a McKinsey case:
- Make sure you have properly understood the case with all details (especially in times of virtual interviews)
- Clarify if something is unclear or unknown to you (terms, phrases, keywords)
- Get a better understanding of the client and the situation + the goal and timeline
Why the 3rd?
Even though the first question might be very specific and deviate from the case prompt, the more information on the client business and the clearer you are about the goals, the more targeted your initial structure can be.
For instance, if you have a goal that needs to be solved within 3 months, factors that would be relevant only after a year (e.g. large investments) would not be appropriate for your initial structure.
If you fail to ask about the goal and the timeline, you might miss that part
- spend time on the wrong answer
- provide a partially wrong answer
Hope all is clear! :-)
To learn more about the McKinsey case approach with all its details and intricacies, check out my article on it here: https://www.preplounge.com/en/mckinsey-interview
Cheers,
Florian

Hi there,
I believe you have to start from why you should ask clarifying questions in the first place for a logical answer.
The goal of the clarifying questions is to:
- Clarify what is not clear in the prompt and
- Get the relevant information needed to properly structure an answer for the question asked (eg clarifying the goal if that’s not clearly defined)
If the interviewer provides the points in (2) in the prompt, you don’t need to ask for it. If they don’t, you need to ask. It is irrelevant from that point of view if the firm is McKinsey, BCG or Bain. You cannot properly solve a case if you don't know what the goal is, irrespectively of the firm.
As a side point: it is risky to assume that the interview will be conducted in only one specific way and therefore mechanically apply a scripted method without flexibility. Most interviews at McKinsey are interviewer-led, provide complete information in the prompt and don’t have conclusions. However I helped candidates that had interviews – in particular in final rounds – that were interviewee-led, with limited initial information and where they did ask for conclusions. So if you are scripted on a “McKinsey style” type blindly, you risk to be unprepared for those situations.
Hope this helps,
Francesco

The fact that the interviewer is not withholding any information, doesn't mean that you are interpreting the information correctly, nor that you have all the information you need for YOUR individual approach.
There are hundreds of alternative structures that can make sense to a particular case - for some of them, having additional information to narrow down the scope can be extremely useful.
Of course, if you don't feel that you need to clarify anything… then don't. Asking clarifying questions does not have value in itself.

Very simply, the questions should be focused on the biggest gaps (about the company- customers, channels, products, processes, technology etc) and external factors- market, geography, region, competition etc) that you want to fill to move towards your framework/structure successfully.

Hi there,
Clarifying questions are about 1) Better understanding the situation (asking about things you don't understand) and 2) Narrowing the scope.
Essentially, it's defining your box and making your box smaller.
“Generic” goal, targets, timeline question are generally not useful.

First, clarification questions do not change from one MBB to the other.
Second, interviews are just like any other conversation you have in life. Therefore, clarification questions should help you better understand the prompt, clarify the objective, and reduce complexity.
Every question that does not go in that direction is redundant.









