See Later + Keep In Touch repeated across 3 McKinsey recruiting cycles — headcount issue or profile gap?

Question

Hi everyone, I'd really appreciate your perspective on this situation.

I've been preparing myself to work at McKinsey since 2021 — I took on bigger and more complex projects in my former job, got an MBA with honors, and switched jobs to work on higher-impact projects (currently at an environmental regulatory agency). But somehow I think I'm missing something, because I've applied three times for a Jr. Associate role and haven't made it to interviews:

2024: didn't reach Solve, but was enrolled in the Keep In Touch (KIT) program. After this, I reached out to a partner who is involved in recruiting for my target office — he confirmed the See Later and my KIT enrollment.
2025: passed Solve, but remained "See Later." The same partner forwarded my CV internally for this cycle, so I think he saw some potential in me.
2026: passed Solve again (decile 7), same result — See Later, still in KIT. I didn't wrote to the partner this time because I didn't want to annoy him with the same thing three years in a row.

I have a STEM background and experience in technical consulting, both as team member and project manager.

I'm currently trying to network more with people at the firm, but beyond that I'm not sure what else I can do. A few specific things I'd love to hear your thoughts on:

Does repeated See Later + KIT mean "no headcount right now" or "something specific is missing in your profile"?
Is decile 7 on Solve competitive enough?
Any experience with STEM profiles breaking into MBB without a top-tier global MBA?

Really appreciate your time in reading this — and even more if you share your thoughts. Thanks!

Answer 1

Hi,

Honestly, from what you describe, I would read this much more as a supply / headcount issue than a fundamental “you’re not good enough” signal.

A few reasons:

First, getting kept in Keep in Touch repeatedly is not how firms treat profiles they have clearly screened out. The fact that you:

stayed in KIT multiple cycles
passed Solve twice
had a recruiting partner engage with your profile

all suggests there is interest.

Second, decile 7 on Solve is solid. Maybe not a “blow the doors open” score, but certainly not something that explains repeated non-progression by itself.

Third, “See Later” often literally means what it says — timing, pipeline management, headcount, office needs. People sometimes read it as a hidden rejection; often it isn’t.

Could there still be something in the profile positioning to improve? Possibly. There almost always is. But I would not conclude there is some major hidden gap.

Also yes — I’ve seen many STEM candidates break in without a top global MBA. That is absolutely possible.

My honest read:

your profile seems close
this may be more about timing than fit
I would keep pushing, not interpret this as a dead end

If anything, I might actually consider reconnecting with that partner at some point. Politely and thoughtfully. It’s not “annoying” if done well.

And one last thought: sometimes after several cycles, an external perspective on positioning can help a lot. Small things in CV narrative or application strategy can matter more than people think.