To elaborate or leave it up to interviewer’s preference

Question

If I'm trying to develop a structure on whether a company should enter a new market and I want to capture these aspects: 1) check if it's financially viable 2) see if they can execute against it 3) look at any risks they may face.. it makes sense to check the financial viability first (so prioritize this) and then if that looks fine, look at the remaining two factors.

so my question is 1) is it fine if I list the 3 factors to the interviewer, in 1 line explain what each means and then say that I want to prioritize factor #1 and deep-dive into drivers? I could say that I can elaborate on the other 2 factors if the interviewer would like but logically it makes sense to dive into the details of what I would explore in the first bucket.

2) if I leave it up to interviewer and they ask me to elaborate on the other 2 buckets..is it ok to ask for a few seconds to further structure this (and develop drivers)? Or would I have been expected to have the details written down from the start?

Answer 1

Hey there,

It depends a bit on the firm format. The answer will be different for McKinsey cases vs. BCG/Bain/others.

Similarities:

For both, you would need to create a structure, consisting of several top levels and then dive deeper to list concrete drivers.

Differences:

While for McK it is important to create a structure that is broad, deep, insightful, and elaborate on each individual point in a bit more detail, then prioritize afterward what you would look at first, for candidate-led interviews it is more important to briefly mention your points and then drill down into the structure to figure out where the solution of the case is buried.

If you want to read more about the differences in structuring for McK vs. BCG/Bain, have a look at my answer in this thread: https://www.preplounge.com/en/consulting-forum/mckinsey-vs-bcgbains-framework-styles-10020

Cheers,

Florian

Answer 2

Hi there,

A few reactions here:

Yes, you should always signpost your buckets (i.e. give a summary sentence for each one and what you're hoping to figure out from it)
Yes, you can say "This area would be my focus" or "I think this is the most likely area"
You should never have a risks bucket. Risks are embedded throughout
"Is it financially viable" is literally the answer...be careful with this kind of bucket. Rather, you should have a bucket of "Is the market attractive overall", then "Is the market attractive for us", then "Can we execute against this and does it provide a good ROI"

Answer 3

I would say you want to strike a balance between prioritising and driving the case vs. discussing with your interviewer and allowing them to guide you to where they want to focus. On your specific question about double-clicking on certain buckets, it's ok to pause for a few seconds but you would hav been expected to have developed sufficient depth in your structure at the beginning, irrespective of whether you had written it down or not.