McKinsey PEI Questions

Question

Question on PEI question phrasing.

When interviewers test attributes like Leadership or Connection, do they typically stick to the exact wording on the website, or do they / can they layer on additional requirements?

For example:
– “Tell me about a time you worked effectively with people from different backgrounds”
vs
– “Tell me about a time you worked effectively with people from different backgrounds despite having limited authority.” or "with strong disagreements"

Asking as if so, how do we prepare for additional requirements that might discount our prepared stories?

Answer 1

Speaking from the interviewer side: we do not stick to the website wording. The website describes attributes, not scripts.

In real interviews, PEI questions are often layered or tightened to introduce complexity. This is intentional.

Examples like:

limited authority
strong disagreement
senior or difficult stakeholders
time pressure or ambiguity

are very common follow-ups, even if not stated upfront.

Why we do this:

Many candidates prepare clean, polished stories that work only in ideal conditions
Layering helps distinguish real leadership and influence from title-based or low-friction situations
It also tests adaptability, judgment, and honesty under pressure

How strong candidates prepare:

Do not prepare one story per attribute
Prepare a small set of genuinely complex stories that can be flexed
Each story should work even when:
- you had little or no formal authority
- there was disagreement or resistance
- the outcome was uncertain

If a constraint is added and your story is not a perfect match:

Do not panic or try to switch stories mid-answer
Acknowledge the constraint and frame how you influenced despite it
Interviewers care more about the quality of your actions and reasoning than perfect semantic alignment

PEI really is about showing that you have repeatedly demonstrated leadership and influence when it was hard, messy, and uncomfortable.

Answer 2

As someone who's conducted these interviews at Bain, let me tell you how it actually works.

The format is similar across MBB. We're testing the same things: leadership, teamwork, handling conflict, driving results. The specific phrasing varies by interviewer.

I don't read from a script. I might start with something simple like "Tell me about a time you influenced a team" and then dig in based on what you share. Or I might add a constraint upfront: "Tell me about a time you led through a difficult situation where people disagreed with you."

Here's what I'm actually looking for:

Depth, not polish. I can tell when someone has memorized a story versus actually lived it. If I push on a detail and you freeze or give a vague answer, that's a red flag. If you can go deeper and show real reflection, that's what I want.

Self-awareness. I'll ask what you learned or what you'd do differently. Candidates who say "nothing, it went perfectly" aren't being honest. I want to see you can reflect and grow.

Flexibility. If I add a constraint and your story doesn't fit, don't force it. Just say "that situation didn't have that element, but I have another example" and pivot. That's fine. What's not fine is making things up.

Your specific role. Tell me what you did, not what your team did. If you keep saying "we" and I can't figure out your contribution, I'll keep pushing.

My advice: know your stories well enough to tell them from any angle. If you actually did what you're describing, the follow-ups shouldn't scare you. Don't over-rehearse to the point where you sound scripted.

McKinsey's PEI works the same way. The themes are similar. Just be ready to go deep and stay genuine.

Answer 3

Hi there,

Short answer: interviewers do not stick rigidly to the website wording, and yes, they often add constraints.

In McKinsey PEI, the attribute is fixed (Leadership, Personal Impact, Drive, Growth, etc.), but the prompt is flexible. Interviewers frequently layer in conditions like limited authority, disagreement, pressure, ambiguity, or senior stakeholders. That is intentional. They want to see whether your story shows depth, not whether you memorized a script.

How to prepare so you are not thrown off:

Have 2 to 3 core stories per attribute, not one
Choose stories that naturally include tension: conflict, resistance, tradeoffs, or uncertainty
Practice reframing the same story depending on the angle the interviewer asks for

A strong PEI story should survive follow-ups like:

What if you had no formal authority
What if people disagreed strongly
What if you failed at first

If a story only works when told in one very specific way, it is usually too narrow. So don’t optimize for perfect wording. Optimize for rich situations that let you demonstrate the trait from multiple angles. That’s what McKinsey is actually testing.