Time vs accuracy

Question

My questions concerns mainly interviewer led style.

Both in quantitative and qualitative parts I can come up with more detailed/accurate solution if I take more time to communicate my approach and findings. However, when doing so I also tend to rush myself as I feel that I wont have enough time to finish the question.

What is the good balance between time and accuracy. Are consultuncies looking for people that can solve the problem very quickly, or is it more about the process of getting to the anwer (explaining each step, forming structured followable arguments etc).

thanks!

Answer 1

Hi A,

It depends on the interviewer and the question asked. In my experience, most interviewers would would be ok with an estimation upfront and then would allow you more time to come to the actual number, if that is what they want.

If things are simple multiplication/addition/etc, and you know you can calculate it within 15-30 sec, just take your time and then walk the interviewer through your calculation.

If you think you will need longer, do an estimation up front and then ask the interviewer if they want a more precise number.

Does this help?

Best, Aws

Answer 2

In my experience, more often than not, interviewer is looking at your approach rather than getting the right answer. This stems from the fact that In consulting, the problems are often vague and there is no one correct answer. so what matters more is how you think about problem in a structured way and prepare a convincing reasoning

So coming back to your question, i would prioritize reasoning over speed. To convey to the interviewer that you can think fast, during the interview, jot down all the drivers in your hypothesis tree on paper so that even if you can't talk about it, interviewer can see that you thought of several possibilites.