Mckinsey PEI

Question

Hi! I wanted to get your advice on preparing my PEI stories for an application to Orphoz, Mckinsey.

I have around 3.5 years of experience in management consulting and am preparing one main story for each of the four PEI dimensions: Connection, Leadership, Drive, and Growth.

For Connection, I've already prepared a story based on a recent professional experience. However, I'm wondering how much I should prioritize professional experiences versus academic and extracurricular ones for the other dimensions.

I actually passed McKinsey's generalist screening process around four years ago, when I was still a student. At the time, I had a strong academic profile, with challenging projects at a top business school, as well as substantial extracurricular involvement, particularly in competitive sports.

For example, for Leadership, I could use a master's project in which I led a diverse group of students in a major company-sponsored competition. For Drive, I could draw on my experience as a professional athlete and the ambitious goals I pursued alongside my studies.

Given that I am applying now as an experienced hire, would it still make sense to use some of these earlier academic or extracurricular experiences for my PEI stories, or should I prioritize professional examples across all four dimensions?

I'd really appreciate your perspective on how best to strike the right balance!

Answer 1

Hi! I would not force all four PEI stories to be professional, even as an experienced hire.

With 3.5 years of consulting experience, I would expect your overall story set to reflect who you are professionally today, so professional examples should probably be the default. But that does not mean every single story needs to come from work.

For me, the key question is: which story gives you the strongest evidence for that specific dimension?

A few practical rules I would use:

Story strength matters more than story category. A strong academic or extracurricular example is better than a weak professional one.
Recency still matters. The older the story is, the more distinctive and powerful it should be to justify using it.
Your full set should still feel senior enough. If 3 out of 4 stories come from university despite several years of consulting experience, that could feel slightly unbalanced.
Different contexts can actually help. A mix of consulting, university leadership and competitive sport can make your profile more memorable than four very similar client-project stories.

In your case, I could absolutely see the professional athlete example working well for Drive if it clearly shows ambitious goals, discipline, setbacks and persistence. Similarly, your master’s project could still work for Leadership if you genuinely led the team through difficult decisions, conflicting views or pressure.

I would probably aim for something like:
2–3 professional stories + 1–2 older but highly distinctive stories, rather than trying to make all four professional at any cost.

One more point: I would also prepare at least one backup story per dimension. In PEI, the exact wording of the question can make one example much easier to use than another.

So overall, professional examples should become the default, not an absolute rule.

Best,

Carlos