McKinsey R1 cases

Wildcard/nonprofit cases appear in R1, not just R2. most offices mix them across rounds to test thinking over sector knowledge.

R1 strucutre: Two interviews with Associates/EMs focusing on core mechanics - framework building, math execution, chart reading. Cases stay contained with some interviewer guidance. PEI is lighter, straightforward behavioral questions.

R2: Two-three partner interviews shifting to full ownership - vaguer cases where you drive direction, make crisp judgment calls, synthesize without prompts. PEI probes deeper into decision-making and reflection. Tests client-ready autonomy, not just problem-solving ability.

key difference in my view is is autonomy whereby R1 tolerates recoverable stumbles while R2 expects zero partner intervention - any mid-case rescue signals you're done. 

Hi there,

For McKinsey London, you can absolutely get wildcard or non-profit cases in R1 as well. They’re not reserved for R2. McKinsey cases are often less “textbook corporate” than other firms, and public sector, non-profit, or unusual contexts can appear in either round. The skills being tested are the same: structure, logic, prioritization, and synthesis — not industry knowledge.

Difference between R1 and R2:

R1

• Typically 2 interviews
• Strong focus on core case mechanics (structure, math, exhibit reading)
• PEI is tested, but often more straightforward
• Interviewers may guide you slightly more

R2 (final round)

• Usually with more senior interviewers (often Partners)
• Cases may feel more open-ended or conversational
• Greater emphasis on judgment, decisiveness, and synthesis
• PEI is probed more deeply and reflectively

In R2, they’re less concerned with whether you can do a case and more with whether they would trust you in front of clients.

For London specifically, expect a fairly balanced approach in both rounds, but with higher expectations on clarity and maturity in R2.

Best,
Evelina

Yes. There is no rule that unusual cases are saved for R2. Each interviewer has their own set of cases and they do not coordinate between rounds. I have seen non-profit and public sector cases come up in R1 at London. So prepare for anything from day one.

What is the actual difference between R1 and R2?

The format is the same. PEI plus a case in each interview. The difference is what they emphasise.

• R1 leans more heavily on core problem solving, structuring, and math. They are testing whether you can break down a problem logically and handle the numbers under pressure. Essentially filtering out people who cannot do the job.
• R2 is similar in format but interviewers are more senior, usually Partners or Associate Partners in London. The expectations shift towards synthesis and communication. Can you pull the pieces together, land a clear "so what," and articulate your thinking in a way that would work in front of a client? This is where they separate the good from the great.

What this means for your prep:

Do not change your case prep between rounds. Prepare for all case types for both R1 and R2. But as you move from R1 to R2, sharpen your ability to synthesise and communicate your conclusions clearly. Being structured and getting the math right will get you through R1. Being sharp, concise, and insightful is what gets you through R2.

Good luck with London. Feel free to reach out if you want to practice some of the less typical case types.

Hello,

For McKinsey London, you can get non-profit / public sector / “wildcard” cases in both R1 and R2. They’re not reserved for final rounds. McKinsey tests structured thinking — not industry familiarity — so sector variation can appear at any stage.

R1 vs R2 differences:

Round 1

• Usually 2 interviews
• Focus on core skills: structure, math, clarity
• More standardized evaluation
• Interviewers often Associates / EMs

Round 2 (Final)

• 2–3 interviews, often with Partners
• More conversational and judgment-heavy
• Greater emphasis on business intuition and synthesis
• PEI tends to go deeper and more personal

In short:
R1 = “Can you do the job?”
R2 = “Would I trust you with my client?”

Case type (incl. non-profit) is less important than how well you structure, think, and communicate.

As a coach, I’m here to help you — we can simulate London-style McKinsey cases (including public sector), refine your PEI, and ensure you’re fully prepared for both R1 and R2 expectations.

Hi there, 

I've worked with multiple candidates for McK London's office, so happy to answer that. 

In short, there's no pattern that R1 or R2 is more 'wild card' regarding the case. You should always expect a wild card because by now the interviews are aimed to be stray away from framework 'memorisation'.

The difference between R1 and R2 is the interviewer, not the type of cases. Because the interviewer is more senior, they tend to to pay attention to other things and weight them heavier (e.g., a R2 interview typically cares less about how quick you are with the computations, but cares more about how you present your thinking e.g., top down comms). 

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to reach out directly. 

Best,
Cristian

That’s a classic candidate question, and it speaks to the anxiety of preparing for non-standard case types. Here’s the reality for how McKinsey structures its rounds, especially in competitive offices like London.

The fundamental difference between R1 and R2 is not the difficulty of the cases, but who you are talking to and what they are evaluating. R1 is primarily about assessing your baseline structural thinking, your core data interpretation skills, and whether you can handle commercial problems with logical flow. The cases are usually mainstream commercial—pricing, market entry, cost reduction—because the goal is a rapid pass/fail on core competency. R2, however, is almost always with a Partner or Senior Partner, and they are assessing judgment, ambiguity handling, and personal impact.

This distinction directly influences the case types. While it’s possible to encounter a pro-bono or atypical wildcard case in R1 (especially if they are using experienced BAs or Engagement Managers to interview), these complex, high-ambiguity cases are overwhelmingly reserved for R2. The Partners need to see how you react when the metrics aren't clean (e.g., measuring the ROI of a vaccination program vs. the ROI of a pricing structure). That judgment call is what they stake their hire/no-hire decision on.

Your best strategy is to become fluent in the core commercial cases first. If you spend 80% of your prep time perfecting your market entry framework, you will be well-equipped for R1 and have a strong base for R2. Only once you are consistently hitting a clean pass on those should you pivot to practicing ambiguous, non-standard cases, focusing less on the framework and more on structuring the objective and defining success metrics.

All the best with your prep.

hey there :)

In London you can get non profit cases already in R1, not only in R2. Topic is random, they mainly test your structuring and thinking.

R1 is more about core problem solving and math. R2 is similar but more senior, with higher expectations on synthesis and communication.

Happy to help if you want to prep this specifically.

best,
Alessa :)

Hi there,

Wild card cases can also be given in R1, but is often more seen in R2. It really depends on the interviewer. The expectations in terms of performance are the same for both rounds, but R2 with Partners may just be more focused on brainstorming and seeing how you think.