McKinsey PEI - Drive vs Growth

They feel similar because both involve hard situations

Drive
What we look for:

• Sustained effort under pressure
• Personal ownership when quitting or lowering the bar was an option
• Endurance and discipline over time

Signal:

• The situation stays hard
• You do not fundamentally change skills or approach
• Success comes from persistence, not insight

Litmus test:

• Remove the learning and the outcome still happens → Drive

Growth
What we look for:

• A real initial gap in skill, knowledge, or mindset
• Fast learning under stakes
• Clear change in behaviour or approach

Signal:

• You start unprepared
• You adapt meaningfully mid-stream
• Success comes because you learned, not because you worked harder

Litmus test:

• Remove the learning and the outcome collapses → Growth

Why candidates get downgraded

• Drive stories with a one-time insight
• Growth stories that are just brute force effort

Bottom line:

• Drive = endurance
• Growth = self-upgrade

Great questions. 

I've actually built a course specifically on the PEI that you're likely to find useful. You can find more about it here:

• Video Course: Master the McKinsey PEI

To address your question directly:

Growth is about you closing a learning curve. There was a big gap between where you were and where you needed to be and the time was tight. So we get to understand how you then self-managed in order to surmount this learning curve. 

Drive, by comparison, is about you setting a goal / or being given a goal and then working hard to achieve despite facing challenges along the way. It's about you creatively problem-solving and making the most of your strengths in order to get there. 

This might help you understand the difference. 

It's also worth noting that you could have a story that, if well-adapted during the interview, could be used to answer both questions. 

Best,
Cristian
 

They do overlap, but there's a real difference in what interviewers are testing.

The core difference:

Drive is about perseverance and pushing through when things get hard. The challenge is external: tough circumstances, obstacles, high stakes, pressure. The question is: did you keep going when most people would quit?

Growth is about learning and adapting quickly. The challenge is internal: you didn't have the skills or knowledge you needed. The question is: how fast did you close that gap and apply what you learned?

What makes a strong Drive story:

• A genuinely difficult situation with real obstacles
• High stakes or pressure
• You showing persistence, resilience, and determination
• Evidence that you went above and beyond when it would have been easier to give up
• The outcome matters, but the effort and mindset matter more

Example angle: "I was leading a project with an impossible deadline, the client changed scope twice, and half my team got pulled off. Here's how I pushed through and delivered anyway."

What makes a strong Growth story:

• A situation where you lacked knowledge or skills you needed
• Evidence of rapid learning, not just slow improvement over time
• How you adapted your approach based on what you learned
• Showing self-awareness about what you didn't know
• The learning itself should be central, not just the outcome

Example angle: "I was thrown into a project in an industry I knew nothing about. Within two weeks, I had to lead a client workshop. Here's how I got up to speed fast and adapted my approach."

The interviewer's lens:

For Drive, I'm listening for: Did this person face real adversity? Did they show grit? Would they push through when things get tough on a client project?

For Growth, I'm listening for: Can this person learn fast? Are they self-aware about gaps? Will they adapt when thrown into unfamiliar situations?

A simple test for your stories:

Ask yourself: what was the main challenge?

• If the challenge was "this was really hard and I had to push through" → Drive
• If the challenge was "I didn't know how to do this and had to learn fast" → Growth

Some stories have both elements. That's fine. Just know which angle you're emphasizing and be ready to pivot if they push you toward the other.

Hey there,

Here are some notes that might help:

1. Drive: You can think of Drive as more of an entrepreneurship story, a story about something you drove and the challenges you went through when doing that (e.g., when you started/led a new initiative/project)
2. Growth: This is more about a time when you have to change yourself (i.e., grow) to adapt to new circumstances (e.g., you were suddenly put in a new role you were not familiar with and had to quickly adapt, something suddenly changed in your life/job and you had to learn new skills to adapt to that change)

Best,

Maria 

Great question! And a very common one lately, especially with the rewording of the dimensions.

I’ll give you the short version first, then unpack what interviewers are actually listening for.

Drive vs Growth

• Drive = You pushed yourself to achieve something extremely difficult.
  • The challenge may have been known upfront.
  • What matters: sustained effort, sacrifice, persistence, and smart problem-solving.
  • The interviewer is listening for: “Did this person show extraordinary ownership and resilience, even when no one was pushing them?”
• Growth = You faced disruption, and turned it into a step-up opportunity.
  • It usually starts with a plan that gets derailed (change in scope, team, external shock).
  • What matters: your ability to reframe, adapt fast, stay calm under pressure, and bring others along.
  • The interviewer is listening for: “Can this person thrive in uncertainty and help others do the same?”

How interviewers differentiate a strong story in each

For Drive, a strong story shows:

• A goal that most people would avoid (because of time, difficulty, lack of structure).
• Tangible challenges across several fronts, logistical, psychological, intellectual.
• Clear decisions that you made to push forward despite setbacks.
• Sacrifice (time, energy, comfort), not just “I worked hard.”

If it sounds like: “I just did more than expected, for weeks, and made it happen” - you’re on the right track.

For Growth, a strong story shows:

• A moment of real disruption (e.g. a plan falling apart, scope changing suddenly, key people leaving).
• That you didn’t freeze or panic, you thought through what needed to change.
• You re-aligned others, not just yourself.
• Bonus: you emerged better, maybe even stronger than before.

If it sounds like: “I thought the game was over, but I found a new way forward, and brought others with me”, it’s likely a Growth story.

A common trap

Many candidates confuse the two because both involve adversity. But the source and response are different:

I would suggest you ask yourself:

• “Was I mostly pushing through something hard?” → Likely Drive
• “Was I mostly responding to unexpected change?” → Likely Growth

Both are strong. Just don’t blend them. McKinsey cares deeply about precision of thinking, and that starts with knowing what kind of story you’re telling.

Hope this helps!

Sidi

__________________

Dr. Sidi S. Koné

That confusion is totally warranted—these two traits often feel like they bleed together, but in the context of McK’s recruiting machine, they serve fundamentally different screening functions. You must treat them as distinct buckets.

The crucial difference lies in the source of the challenge and the resulting mechanism of your success. Drive is about demonstrating grit and relentless execution in the face of persistent, external resistance (time constraints, difficult stakeholders, lack of resources). The interviewer is listening for proof of sustained effort and stamina—that you pushed through the pain barrier to achieve excellence, typically when the path forward was already known.

Growth is fundamentally about intellectual humility and rapid iteration. The challenge here stems from an internal deficit—you lacked the necessary skill, knowledge, or familiarity with the situation. Interviewers want to see the learning curve and the pivot: you recognized your inadequacy, quickly sought out new information (via mentors, training, or self-study), and successfully applied that new capability to solve the problem. A high-scoring Growth story cannot be successful without the deliberate learning step.

To differentiate them in practice: If you remove the learning component from your story and it still makes sense (meaning you succeeded purely through hard work and long hours), it's a Drive story. If the learning component—the acquisition of a new framework, skill, or mental model—was the only reason you were ultimately successful, you have a strong Growth story.

All the best!

They often feel similar because both are tested in demanding situations, but interviewers are listening for different mechanisms of success.

Drive focuses on pushing through difficulty.
The challenge remains intense throughout, and progress comes from commitment, consistency, and personal standards, not from learning a fundamentally new skill or changing direction.

Growth focuses on evolving to meet the challenge.
You begin without everything you need, pick up new capabilities quickly, adjust how you operate, and succeed because your approach improves along the way.

A simple way to tell them apart:

• If the result would still be achieved without learning something new → Drive
• If the result depends on learning and adjustment → Growth

What matters most to interviewers is what unlocked progress, not just that the situation was tough.

Hi there,

Drive = you demonstrated grit and determination.

Growth = you demonstrated willingness to grow, be coached, and change.

Those that score high would showcase strong self awareness and EQ in the situations.