Should I refine my hypothesis/framework/issue tree in the middle of the case? (If I find it off-track by myself or based on the information that the interviewer give) And what would be the appropriate way to say this definition.
“Actually I would like to change the branch of the issue tree a little bit based on what you have said, from xxxx to xxx.” - Is this ideal?
Yes, this is fine! Nothing wrong about it. Make sure you acknowledge this and align with the interviewer- I realise the new information steers the analysis in a slightly different direction outside of my initial framework. So, I would like to adjust my framework, if thats okay?
If you realise this, its essential you adjust & improve the original structure. This is what happens in real consulting work. You constantly iterate and improve.
Yes, you should do it. In a real project you constantly adjust your hypothesis, workplan and storyline according to the findings you have.
So while in some cases you have new insights but do not need to change the structure as it still works, in other cases you find you need a slightly different approach and you should do it.
It is also fine to do it once you have more context / understanding of the problem and you realize you had some gaps in your structure. So while we would all prefer to have the perfect structure in the beginning, what really matters is how you “recover” and incorporate what you learn during the case.
How to phrase it: your suggestion misses one thing. You have to be clear on WHY you are changing the structure. It is not enough to say that you have XYZ fact or insight, you have to explain WHY that new insight implies changing your initial structure. So you need to add “…because XYZ” to your suggested phrasing.
Hello,
Yes this is absolutely fine - and a good way of showing the interviewer how flexible and adaptable your thinking is. Many times you will have a solid structure to begin with but will find that it didn't exactly encompass the specific direction the case was headed in, so adapting your approach as you go is a great idea. I think the way you suggested of handling it is fine, I would also just justify why you are changing it, not just “based on what you have said” but “because X implies Y” or “because now we know Z”.
Yes! More often than not this is required!
It's very important to update your view/framework/thinking throughout the case as you get more information.
You need to figure out “where” you are, and what areas need to be looked at as a result.
This is hard and takes a lot of practice. Best way to learn? Review old cases to think about what possible turns they could have taken!
Hi!
It is absolutely fine to change your hypothesis during a case. It is also fine to change your structure based on your intuition or a prompt from the interviewer.
The important issue here is that your structure should be MECE and therefore should allow you to solve the case.
Hope this helps.
Best,
Anto
Expert case by